Jump to content


NA got a Q & A - 25th April 2020

This time in English well American

  • Please log in to reply
2 replies to this topic

arthurwellsley #1 Posted 29 April 2020 - 11:04 PM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 55914 battles
  • 4,338
  • [-MM] -MM
  • Member since:
    05-11-2011

Source = https://thearmoredpa...-qa/#more-82779

and the full interview = https://www.youtube....h?v=9Xr51aW3gFs

World of Tanks NA Q&A – 25 April 2020 with Andrey Biletskiy and Maksim Chuvalov

A collection of the most important info from an NA server Q&A done on the 24th of April. Transcription from here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Xr51aW3gFs

Wheeled vehicles will be rebalanced – we’ll start from increasing the effectiveness of destroying wheels, and if that won’t help, we’ll increase terrain resistance. If that fails, we’ll focus on debuffing other aspects.

Fire mechanics – does a fire go out faster if a tank is stationary? No, a fire doesn’t change depending on such parameters as movement. Maybe it was so at the beginning. A wiki error.

Game balance – why does rebalancing OP tanks take so long? Sometimes it takes a quarter of a year, or two. A timespan of 3-6 months is too short, because if we do something haphazardly, it might need another change. We check how the WR changes depending on the player, e.g. if 50% of the players have a 48%-52% WR then the tank is fine. If 50% of the players have a 65% WR on a new machine then it’s probably overdone.

New collector tanks – there are a lot of ideas, but there are a lot of more important things to do. We need to think about the criteria of adding them, and then unlocking by the player, such tanks as Argentinian ones, or Hungarian ones. Last year there was the idea of an international tree, but thanks to the “Collector tanks” tab, there are now new ways to realize such an idea, and many similar ones.

Sandbox tests and shell changes – there’s a lot of them, and it’s complicated, thus, it was decided to cut them into parts and implement in stages, with new patches, previewed with Sandbox tests. Shell changes were rated very high, however HE and arty changes weren’t that popular. At this moment we don’t want to change one without the other. They have to be done at the same time. We rolled back the changes, and we’re planning to integrate big changes to shells in the future.

Speed, normalization, and RNG changes for shells – we don’t plan to change those values now. We want for each type of shell to have its purpose, and not complicate it further by making parameter changes.

Constantly playing on the same map – we didn’t change anything, besides making sure people won’t see the same map in the span of seven battles. Almost all complaints disappeared regarding map repeating.

Why do premium shells cost more – the way in which we determined the cost is realistic DPM, the chance of doing damage times the damage value. Special rounds have a higher effective DPM, thus the higher cost. One of our tasks is adjust future prices, because the amount of standard damage will be higher.

The Leopard 1 and STB-1 changes were well received. Changes in E-50M, AMX 30B, T-62A? What about an Object 430U? We do plan to find them a niche. The sandbox tests for the E-50M should start this year, definitely. The 121 is in a harder spot, and we’ll think about a place for it. Maybe a higher DPM than the 430U?

Better changes for the T110E5, so it won’t be behind the Super Conq in almost all ways? The information will be passed on higher. We don’t have enough info on the E5, but we’d like to change the current play style. Removing the “tumor”? Not possible, since that’s how the tank looked.

Chieftain and Obj 279e changes so they won’t impact the gameplay as much as other tanks? MM changes give the possibility to exclude Rank Battle tanks, or to put them in teams symmetrically. We don’t want to anger players who took their time and put a lot of effort in getting them.

 

Ranked Battles and Clan Wars – maybe it would be a good idea to impose limitations on provinces, tiers, or countries? The long-term plan regarding the evolution of CW is handled by a separate team. This is an interesting idea.

CW in 7 vs 7 or 9 vs 9 format? We have another idea for CW, but we want to include smaller clans in the global map. Maybe shift it towards Crusader Kings, adding politics and more depth.

T-34-85M – maybe antenna physics or some interactive parts on tanks? We like to test new functionality on a smaller scale, before we implement them globally. We are working to implement those. The flag on the T-34-85M is just a test.

Are Minsk changes coming? Yes, we are ready for changes. It passed tests, but we still have problems with historical elements, which we’ll try to resolve first. Pearl River will come soon.

Slippery rocks – any updates? Yes, we are trying to fix this using the Havoc engine, but it has a lower resolution than our own physics engine, thus we are actively trying to improve it. Before 1.0 we didn’t model rocks individually, but now we do, which is the cause of the problems.

Redoing maps like Ensk or Mines so they work well on higher tiers? Old map restoration plans? It’s hard to imagine another Ensk or Mines. This is not an easy task, and now we’re focusing on restoring maps, afterwards we will either make new maps, or remake and restore others. Berlin and Pearl River will appear this year. The Steel Hunter mode will get a new map too. More plans regarding maps are left for 2021.

Plans to add more sounds to tanks, engines etc.? Yes, there are plans. Nothing much for now, but the sound designers are planning on improving the sound engine which was added in version 1.0.

The Battle Hits mod added to the game, or an armor viewer? Mods are not as stable as our client, and they use a lot of shortcuts. Some mods are hard to implement. We are working on adding some mods, and it probably will be Battle Hits. Maybe armor viewing too, but that’s for 2021. This is our 3rd attempt at this topic. So far we found problems, which caused our client to know more than it ought to, which would enable making better bots and cheat mods. We have to implement it in a way which won’t cause problems.

Include all mods? Why can’t you just buy them from the creators? We want to make them from scratch, as to make them more stable and work better, before they’re implemented into the client, and work on all supported systems. It’s about bug testing and security.

Plans to add LatAm tanks or from other countries with less tanks? Yes, as collector tanks which for new nations that don’t fit any tree. Three nations this year. The rest iss a secret, also Japanese TDs not now.

Any plans on expanding Twitch Prime? Yes, there are plans to add more packs, but only after we finish talks with Twitch.

Ten years anniversary event. We plan something really special in August, but we won’t spoil anything. Cosmetics, camos and additional gadgets later for now, and much much more later.

How was the anonymyzer received? We are very satisfied with its implementation, streamers love it.

Battle Pass – is there a chance that in future editions players will be able to progress using different game mode besides the usual 15v15s?

Most games with Battle Passes don’t have premium accounts or any form of subscription. Did WG think about integrating their Battle Pass with WoT premium? It’s not easy to implement, but we will try to add different paths to progress through other modes. Not in modes with special tanks, but in modes like Grand Battle etc.

The price – we’re thinking about expanding the event and adding other purchase options. We will see how that ends up. Battle Pass 2 will be the same but with small fixes. Battle Pass 3 will have more improvements, and in 2021 there will be more substantial improvements than in this year.

Adding the ability fo rent premium tanks for credits? Maybe changing normal tanks into prems? Xmas 2019 allowed people to add bonuses to tanks, and in reality, it was a test of such a function. The community didn’t react as well as we did, so the priority isn’t that big, but we are thinking about premium conversion. Try before you buy? We have that option in Frontline, where you can rent a tank and buy it later with a discount. We want to add the option to try a tank before laying down any money.

News about Italian heavies? Not yet.

A lot of players are disoriented with the changes in the crew system, which are going to be tested in the Sandbox at the end of the year. Can you give us more info about how commanders, units, and mentors/special units work? We explained the mechanics during another stream. We want an overhauled perk tree, and one commander per tank. We also want this commander to be able to be able to handle more tanks without relearning. A mentor will be someone unique, like Santa Claus (or someone like George Patton). These mentors will have special points for specific skills, so you won’t have to train some of them. There will be a lot of builds for the same commander, and easy to swap, so you’ll be able to adjust a tank to your play style. We abandoned the idea of units, as it was too complicated.

How will we transition into Crew 2.0? We will make sure the transition is smooth, everyone is compensated, and satisfied.

Fun fact regarding crews – only slightly above 1000 people have 11-perk crews. Congrats.

Any word on the third set of missions and campaign? Not quite now. No plans.

Will we see some changes to arty? No changes before the next Sandbox. They will be implemented in the round after that so players can test changed arty before the planned implementation.

 

When will EU get a Q & A ???????????



shikaka9 #2 Posted 30 April 2020 - 09:30 AM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 78403 battles
  • 2,404
  • [-SJA-] -SJA-
  • Member since:
    02-27-2013
so much and just in 3 years, cant wait :honoring:

_Carpaccio_ #3 Posted 30 April 2020 - 10:16 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 38936 battles
  • 996
  • Member since:
    12-09-2012

Game balance – why does rebalancing OP tanks take so long? Sometimes it takes a quarter of a year, or two. A timespan of 3-6 months is too short, because if we do something haphazardly, it might need another change. We check how the WR changes depending on the player, e.g. if 50% of the players have a 48%-52% WR then the tank is fine. If 50% of the players have a 65% WR on a new machine then it’s probably overdone.

 

Are they serious? Even braindead chimpanzee could see that bobject was OP as edit when it was released back then, 279, chieftain. Here is how they really do it: In Wargaming, we have to wait untill every bot and clueless tomato gets the tank, then we collect data for one year, then we can think of rebalance.

 

We don’t want to anger players who took their time and put a lot of effort in getting them, but we dont mind to anger players that dont carry 50 % of gold ammo on their tier X tanks when they face 279 frontally. And there is always easy to hit cupola so in WG we think it OK comrade.

 

 






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users