Haswell

This mod touches up on all the Merkava models in the game to make them fit the "armoured beast" stereotype better while keeping things believable. Given how the Merkava series are already very well armored, the major improvement is to give them frontal entrenching tools (mine plows) to allow them better versatility in urban combat, as well as other minor changes.

Vehicles modified:

• Merkava 1 (and the upgraded Merkava 2 model)
• Merkava 2B
• Merkava 2D
• Merkava 3
• Merkava 4
• Merkava 4M

Mod download: https://mega.nz/file/JQoiQBIL#jokTKelcm2uA3jzSbUrJ1l-wi3uJNiVvJLpvvPMpClQ

Side skirts are also touched up on, with the addition of rubber strips to marginally improve protection to the road wheels.

The Merkava 4 and 4M also received a new RCWS on the turret roof to engage soft targets without rotating the whole turret.

Last but not least, all the the previously empty turret bustles now also hold personal equipment for the crew.

Mod download: https://mega.nz/file/JQoiQBIL#jokTKelcm2uA3jzSbUrJ1l-wi3uJNiVvJLpvvPMpClQ

Installation instructions: this mod will persist across any future game updates and patches, there is no need to modify any other files.

To uninstall, simply delete the mod files.

Legalese and stuff:

You may freely use and redistribute this mod and perform any additional modifications as you see fit. Please attribute the author (me) when redistributing the mod, and provide the address of this thread as the source of the mod.

You may NOT monetize this mod or any part thereof.

https://aw.my.games/en/news/general/development-zbd-04a

Quote

Previous articles:

• Part 1: Wartime China
• Part 2: Building the PLA
• ZTZ-20 – Tier 10 Premium MBT
• Part 3: Rapid Development
• ZTL-11 – Tier 9 Premium TD
• Part 4: Marines
• VN17 – Tier 8 Premium AFV

Commanders!

Today, we’d like to tell you more about the final vehicle prize of the Rise of the Dragon Battle Path – the Chinese ZBD-04A Premium Armored Fighting Vehicle.

 

ZBD-04A

 

The ZBD-04A is a modification of the original ZBD-04. If you’re familiar with the previous articles, you already know what the name means – Armored Vehicle (Z), Infantry Fighting Vehicle (B), Tracked (D) and accepted in service in 2004. The letter A signifies it’s the first service upgrade of the said machine.

The ZBD-04 is the main tracked IFV of the People’s Republic of China. It was developed in the mid-1990s as a replacement to the (even at that time) utterly obsolete ZBD-86 (which was a direct copy of the Soviet BMP-1 without significant improvements). In the 1990s, during the “fire sale” years, advanced Soviet technology was available on an open market as a result of the size and budget reduction of the Russian armed forces, China acquired the BMP-3 technology and it all pretty much went all from there.

The ZBD-04 is most definitely not a BMP-3 copy, but it was heavily influenced by it and carries the same weapon system – a 100mm 2A70 low-pressure rifled gun paired with a long 30mm 2A72 autocannon (designated ZPT-99 in Chinese service). The turret is, however, not similar to the BMP-3’s Bakhcha-U. It is welded and allegedly co-developed with Russia.

The body is made of thin welded steel and aluminum alloy plates with its front protruding heavily, allowing the vehicle to actually swim. Unlike with the BMP-3, however, the idea wasn’t here to cross rivers and lakes but to deploy these vehicles from landing ships during amphibious operations against islands. To that end, the ZBD-04 is fitted with water jets.

The vehicle has a crew of three and carries 7 troops. It weighs roughly 20 tons and is powered by a 600hp diesel engine allowing it to move as fast as 65 km/h on land and 20 km/h in water.

 

ZBD-04

 

Despite its designation, the early prototypes (under the name ZBD-97) actually saw some use as early as in 1997. According to the Chinese sources, however, the vehicle was developed only between 1997 and 1999 with the following four years being spent ironing out the issues that inevitably emerge with each new design. In 2003 the vehicle officially passed the state trials successfully, becoming a service model in the process under the name ZBD-04. It was first shown to public in 2007 during a special exhibition celebrating the 80th founding anniversary of the Military Museum of the Chinese People's Revolution. By then the production was in full swing.

As durable as it was, the ZBD-04 (mass-produced since 2003) had a number of flaws, most notably its poor protection that no longer matched the requirements of modern battlefields. That was why, in 2011, the production switched to a modified and improved model designated ZBD-04A.

Very simply put, the ZBD-04A sacrificed the ability to operate on an open sea (by getting rid of the water jets) for additional protection. The vehicle can mount a composite armor set that allows it to withstand 30mm autocannon fire from the front and 14.5mm machine bullets from its sides while still being partially amphibious. The ZBD-04A can use its tracks to ford rivers and lakes.

The turret was also improved by the addition of cage-type stowage baskets and a laser warning system. Its Fire Control System also underwent an overhaul and the vehicle received the hunter-killer capability (thanks to commander’s independent stabilized optics) as well as a new thermal imager. The gunner received a new set of optics as well, similar to those used on the ZTQ-15 Light Tank.

As a result, the weight of the vehicle increased from 20 to some 24-26 tons. To compensate for that, the Chinese copy of the Russian 6V150 diesel was up-tuned from 600hp to some 670hp, which made the vehicle actually faster (its maximum speed grew from 65 km/h to 75 km/h).

 

ZBD-04A

 

The production of this vehicle is ongoing. Between 2003 and today, roughly 2400 vehicles of the ZBD-04 series have been built, including:

• 400 ZBD-04 IFVs (2003-2011)
• 1400-1900 ZBD-04A IFVs (2011 and ongoing, estimates vary)
• 100 AFT-10 Tank Destroyers
• Other models such as recon and command vehicles

It is a modern vehicle that’s expected to serve for many more years. Export models exist as well, they haven’t found a buyer yet though. The ZBD-04 or ZBD-04A IFVs haven’t seen combat either, although they participated in numerous exercises.

 

Click the image to open a larger version

 

In Armored Warfare, the ZBD-04A will be a Tier 7 Premium Armored Fighting Vehicle.

Similar to the BMP-3, the ZBD-04A will be a medium weight class AFV with a decent set of frontal armor capable of withstanding 30mm autocannon fire. Unfortunately the vehicle will not carry any ERA or NERA, nor will it come fitted with APS.

 

Click the image to open a larger version

 

On the bright side, it will be fast (75 km/h) and relatively agile and, most importantly, aside from the troops it will carry, it will also be able to lay down considerable firepower in the form of a 30mm and 100mm combo. Both weapons will come with the same properties as the BMP-3/3M weapon system.

And last but not least, there’s its decent camouflage (30%) and view range (460m when driving, 495m when standing).

 

Click the image to open a larger version

 

Once again (much like the VN17), the ZBD-04A will be a fairly universal vehicle, not a one trick pony. Thanks to its maneuverability and firepower, it’ll be suitable even for the players who are new to Armored Warfare.

Regardless of what it is IRL, in the game it will still be effectively a BMP-3M reskin. Not very interesting, no mortar mode either.

Also still no mention of overprogression. I'm just going to assume nothing in the BP will have overprogression, otherwise it wouldn't have been omitted from all the articles so far.

Reposting questions from Discord (and PanzerSofa's VK comments).

Imya Familia:

• Are new players learning the game mechanics comfortably? The current training mission is far from adequate and doesn't translate well into actual gameplay, because the player controls a god-mode T-72 against tier 1 bots.

Fuschin Pfeffer:

• The fuel tanks were taken out due to the stupidly easy method of just wiping them instantly and causing fires, however, is there an intention to readd them while utilizing a different destruction effect?  E.G. destroying fuel tanks for a Hybrid will allow it to actually have a chance to catch fire with engine damage, or for more volatile fuels the chance is exponentially higher? I ask this since there is still missions in game requiring fire and ammo fire damage/kills, and difficulty in ensuring one or the other is not ludicrous, but inconsistent.
• Is there plans for other Story characters to become commanders as well?  E.G. Grimm, Fedor, and whatnot?  Or is it still limited to a certain criteria such as them being actually referenced as driving the tank itself like Vadim?

Asriel:

• Are there any plans to optimise the game's performance? Or such thing wouldn't be possible due to CryEngine's limitations?

Pesa:

• Can we get the time it takes for a damaged wheel to be repaired on the hud? ATM we only got a timer when they get destroyed. Plus, we got only one timer for a single wheel, not when multiples are repairing, is there any way to have separate timers, or just get the timer for the wheel that will take the most time to repair, so we can have a visual display of when we will be able to move again?
• What about the 490 having 0% chance of being set on fire, but it get lit anyway from the lfp engine hitbox?
• Is there a possibility to buff Arjun somehow? Like faster reload.

Data-Zero:

• Any plans to rework Ophelia in PVP scene?

https://aw.my.games/en/news/general/development-samurais-honor

Quote

Aside from the Rise of the Dragon Battle Path, we’re working on a summer event that’s going to be free for everyone, Japan-themed and called “Samurai’s Honor.”

 

The event will work much like the previous one – you’ll advance through a number of stages to win the main prize, which – in this case – will be the Type 74 Tier 5 Premium Main Battle Tank.

This vehicle was previously available during the Enigma’s Legacy Battle Path and if you have it already, you’ll receive its price in Gold instead.

But that’s, of course, not the only prize of the event. The following items also await you:

• New historical skin for the Type 74 MBT
• 5 epic Japanese camouflages
• 3 Japanese unit decals
• Badass samurai avatar
• Premium Time, Loot Crates and boosters

As you can see, we’ve ramped up the amount and quality of prizes. Not to worry though – the rules will remain the same. You’ll still only need to complete a daily objective by winning 3 matches in any standard mode (while driving a Tier 3 vehicle or higher) in order to receive a reward, as usual.

And that’s pretty much it. We’ll show you the camouflages in the near future and are looking forward to your feedback.

Also short roadmap of what is to come:

Questions only here please, thank you.

Late thread because I'll be honest, the VN17 is so unmemorable I forgot about it.

https://aw.my.games/en/news/general/development-vn17

Quote

Today, we’d like to tell you more about another prize of the Rise of the Dragon Battle Path – the Chinese VN17 Premium Armored Fighting Vehicle.

 

VN17

 

As its name suggests, the VN17 Armored Fighting Vehicle is intended primarily for export and was first shown to the public during a NORINCO military exhibition that took place in the August of 2017 in Inner Mongolia in front of 230 guests from 50 different countries. Indeed, such shows are intended to pitch modern Chinese vehicles to foreign customers, mostly from Asia, South America and Africa. The star of the show was the VT-5 Light Tank to which the VN17 is related.

Simply put, the VN17 is based on a modified VT-5 hull. Instead of putting a flat engine to the back of the vehicle (as is the case in older Soviet and Russian IFVs), the developers have reversed the VT-5 hull and put the engine to its front with the driver sitting next to it. The rest of the vehicle is fairly conventional and it meets all modern battlefield standards. The vehicle weighs roughly 30 tons, has a crew of 3 men and carries 7 troops inside. Its basic hull is made of steel but the IFV is quite well-protected thanks to additional armor elements. Its frontal part can very likely withstand the fire from 30mm autocannons. The vehicle is also fitted with what is presumably ERA, and cage armor.

 

VN17

 

The turret is unmanned (the crew is sitting under it) and is armed with 30mm ZPZ02 autocannon (a copy of the Russian 2A72) as well as a pair of HJ-12 (Red Arrow 12) ATGM launchers (one on each side of the turret). The missiles are 127mm thick and weigh 17kg. They are fitted with a tandem warhead and can penetrate 1100mm of armor.

The FCS is also based on the one from the VT-5, as are other electronics – most of them cutting edge, giving the vehicle (for example) the hunter-killer ability. The commander has a panoramic sight at his disposal, the gunner station is equipped with a current generation thermal imager.

 

VN17

 

It is powered by the same engine as the VT-5, the FX0012 diesel producing 1000hp, allowing it to go as fast as 70 km/h. According to other sources, however, the vehicle is only powered by an 883hp copy of a MTU turbodiesel engine due to size restrictions (the MTU diesel is more compact). It’s unclear which version is true. It’s also worth noting the vehicle cannot swim.

Unfortunately, since its debut, the VN17 has been unable to find any customers. The reasons for it can be speculated about but they are likely connected to the high cost of the system compared to what an average third world country can afford. At this moment, it remains a prototype only, its status unknown.

 

Click the image to open a larger version

 

In Armored Warfare, the VN17 will be a Tier 8 Premium Armored Fighting Vehicle.

As IFVs go, this one will be on the heavier side and will feature decent armor. The IFV will share the armor values with the VT-5 Light Tank so if you’re familiar with that one, you’ll feel right at home here. The same will go for the mobility – our version will be powered by an 883hp diesel, giving it decent agility (46 deg/s), acceleration (2.92s from 0 to 32 km/h) and the maximum speed of 85 km/h.

 

Click the image to open a larger version

 

The weaponry will match its Tier, especially the missiles:

• 30mm autocannon firing APFSDS rounds (370mm penetration, 55 damage per shot and the damage per minute value around 15000)
• Tandem HEAT ATGM (1100mm penetration, 750 damage per shot)

As for the utility values, this IFV will feature 30% camouflage factor, 460m view range on the move and 495m view range while standing. It will of course be able to deploy Mechanized Infantry or mark its targets with the Designate Target active ability.

 

Click the image to open a larger version

 

In summation, the VN17 will be a reliable and tough IFV that will also be able to deal decent damage even to heavily armored targets thanks to its powerful missiles. Its toughness combined with the ease of use will make it a viable vehicle even for the players who are new to Armored Warfare. We hope you will enjoy it and, as always:

Uninspired, boring, yet another dakka at tier 8. There is really nothing to look forward to.

Interestingly enough, none of the announced BP vehicles so far were described with overprogression mechanics. Either they are going away, or SS didn't/couldn't put them on the articles.

https://armoredlabs.net/index.php?/topic/62151-july-8-qa-with-ss-answers-and-discussion/

If your question didn't get answered this time or you would like to ask more questions, feel free to submit them here!

As described in the Q&A questions thread (https://armoredlabs.net/index.php?/topic/59785-qa-with-ss-post-your-questions-here/), here are the first round of answers provided by SS.

If your question didn't get answered this time or you would like to ask more questions, feel free to submit them in the questions thread.

Quote

Are there any new mechanics that SS or the developers would like to see added to the game in the future?

That’s a super-broad question. We’d like a ton of things – full vehicle rebalance, more modes, more story, more story impact etc. Sadly, wanting and making are different things and in game development, there’s never enough resources around to do EVERYTHING you want to do. In fact, not editing enough is one of the most common rookie mistakes that prevent many a great game from being born. In our case, we’re focusing on the achievable. One specific thing we are working on is a new crew and commander system that is currently in the concept stage. As for me, I’d like more synergy – more integration of various elements with each other.

 

Where do you (Silentstalker or the developers) see the game going in the coming years?

Forward? Again, a super-broad question, so let me answer a bit differently. For the foreseeable future, we’ll be doing what we did for the past couple of years. We’ll be introducing Battle Paths as well as new PvE and PvP maps and, of course, Special Operations, in which we’ll be returning to the story roots of the 2017 Storyline Campaign (this is probably an unfamiliar thing for the Russian players so we’ll have to start working on an introduction). In parallel, we’ll be running Perihelion with some exciting new prizes and ideas that I hope you’ll like.

But that’s the current status quo. As you may or may not know, our team underwent significant changes recently. One of the things that it offers us is the opportunity to review the game in its entirety, including its core concepts such as balance, modes and lore integration. And that’s pretty much what we are doing right now, starting with one of the spots we have long wanted to address, our new player experience (how well are new players eased into the game), which we hope to significantly improve in the future.

 

Are very recent vehicles planned to be added? Like Challenger 3. And if yes, how would they be implemented in the tech tree? Tier 10's? Tier 11's?

Adding them is quite possible, although at the moment we are not planning to do so, at least not this year. Their main problem is as follows – what do they bring to the game? The coolness factor and some tiny PR bonus aside, they are basically “mutations” of existing tanks. What new does the Challenger 3 bring to the table? The answer is: nothing by default. It’s just a Challenger hull with a different shaped turret and a different gun that is in the game already as well. In real-life terms, it is definitely an interesting upgrade, but gameplay-wise, it’s just “another MBT.”

To make them interesting would require some unique mechanics that are, at the same time, useful but not overpowering. Typically, the more interesting they get, the harder they are to implement to the point of the idea not being viable (usually due to various quirks of CryEngine). An example would be the Pereh with its first-person-guided-missiles. We tried to do that years ago and the estimate for the feature was 6 months’ worth of development (and that was without the programmer doing anything else). Well that – and the feature would be pretty toxic, but that’s another matter. Adjustable terrain would also be pretty much impossible. However, that is not to say we won’t ever do anything complex. We have some good ideas (we think) for vehicle abilities, some of which you will see in the next few vehicles.

As for further Tiers, at the moment we aren’t planning to introduce Tier 11, although there have been various ideas floating around for a separate “cutting edge” competitive Tier consisting of tanks with unique abilities each that would introduce a new system of circle-like balance. Nothing concrete though, and certainly no “plasma tank” Tier 11. There’s no need. Anything developed in the next couple of years will be suitable for Tier 10.

 

What sort of feedback has been acquired on the Perihelion rewards so far?

Rewards specifically? Fairly decent actually, roughly 6.5/10 (slightly better than the BP reward pack using a similar scale). It’s clear that it would be better to have more unique rewards such as skins, colors, avatars, decals and such.  At the same time, the event offered many players a LOT of valuable prizes and a LOT of Gold, at least in our eyes. The fact players think otherwise is a problem with the game’s expectation creep, which is also a major issue of the game as a whole.

 

How has player sentiment been across the Raids held so far? Was the last one considered a success? Will we actually see another one in the future?

Difficult question. On one hand, yes – interest-wise, it wasn’t terrible. On the other hand, we aren’t deaf to the negative feedback caused by copycat camouflages and other “cheap” content. We really don’t want to make you guys unhappy with further such “experiments” and would like to change our ways. As such, the Raid format is shelved for the time being pending a full review. We’ll deal with it as a part of our future considerations.

 

I understand there was a 54 “for” and 46 “against” vote for the Perihelion plot for EU/NA, while the Russian side had roughly the opposite vote. Are there any details as to what factors resulted in the for/against votes?

Well, this one is pretty simple. Players in general are conservative by default. When you ask about game balance for example, most votes would always be for fixing the current system, not for creating something brand new. As such, Perihelion – which is a radical departure from the current narrative – was always at a disadvantage. Another factor was the fact that the event had a lot of issues such as the lack of a tracking mechanism, the repeated payouts caused by incorrect internal documentation and such, which likely caused a halo effect. On the other hand, the story arc ended with the best story rating of all previous polls and story arcs, so in this sense, I take it as a huge win for me personally :)

 

Are there any plans to introduce skins from the community into the game? Is it possible with the current modding that's going on to have some sort of events or voting to have some of these modded items (for example camouflage and skins) added to the game?

Possibly. The issues here aren’t strictly technical (although the skin would have to undergo a check from our artists), but also legal. How do we transfer the rights? What would be the price for it? Or would it be free? What other terms and conditions would apply? And so on. Some skins we’d be interested in, some we definitely wouldn’t be (talking to the guy who attached boobs to an Abrams). Each case would have to be solved on an individual basis. If any author has a suggestion about such skin’s introduction, he or she should come forward and discuss it with a community manager. No results guaranteed, of course.

 

Are there any plans to have an overhaul of balance to older tanks?  Currently they seem to be left behind with the constant increase in abilities and features of the new shiny premium tanks, making tech tree tanks either very niche or obsolete (and other balance-related questions).

At this moment, fixing everything would require a total balance overhaul. It’s something for the distant future – in the near future, we’ll focus on fixing some truly nasty outliers (Type 99 series ammo rack, T-15 firepower and others) as well as not breaking anything before we put together a full balance overhaul plan, which is something we want to do for the distant future.

 

When can we stop having to actually double check every patch to see what errors have slipped in (stealth changes)?  Is there something we can do to highlight these issues, other than reporting to you, you escalate, we then get told we are wrong?

We have taken steps to improve the situation. It is, however, worth pointing out that the reality of game development is that you’ll always have some margin of error – the more changes you implement, the more problems you will encounter. That’s a matter of statistics. The game went through two major balance overhauls recently, followed by several major patches that corrected what left was there to address – and some things simply fell through the cracks. In some cases, the “hidden changes” reported weren’t even hidden, just some things that had been implemented months prior and forgotten. Either way, things should be better now. 

 

If you could go back in time and change a single 'thing' in the game (rebalance patch, decision, idea, lootboxes etc.) what would it be any why?

That’s not how it works though. There hasn’t been a single decision where you could with confidence say things would have been better had it not taken place. Even the dreaded lootboxes once saved our budget and subsequently the game. What would I personally have made differently? Probably take everything easier, be more chill :)

 

Some of the documentations on game mechanics are like armor and ammo are either somewhat hard to find or are outdated on the official website, and given that there's probably no relevant developers around to ask due to changes in developer teams, is it still possible to go over them again in the future? Some of them are not fully understood by players, and it feels like it's up to us to figure them out ourselves.

As far as I know, the video guides on Youtube and the written guides on the portal are fairly up to date. The video series was concluded last year. There may be some obsolete bits, but guides in general aren’t generally supposed to contain every single equation that takes place upon pressing the mouse button. Either way, right around Christmas, I am taking the time to generally review the Guide section. This year, I’ll probably do that sooner because we are expecting an influx of new players at one point (no, can’t tell you about THAT) so everything should be in top shape.

 

How did the current commander leveling system originate? Was it more or less labor intensive to develop than other systems we haven't seen or weren't used?

As far as I know, it started as an old Obsidian design, but that was (like everything old Obsidian) just written down as a rough idea. The system was fully developed by the Allods Team and I am not really aware of any alternative solutions or prototypes. Certainly there were some discussions as to how should it all look, what skills should there be and so on, but the core idea was pretty straightforward. With that being said, it is a very labor-intensive system, that’s why there haven’t been that many commanders recently. We are working on a more practical solution to this problem, although I am not ready to give you any ETA or details on that one.

 

In the longer term, how committed is the current team to maintaining the Wargaming-style tier-grind-ad-nauseam model, where there's little goal of the game besides reaching an arbitrarily high number of games in a given period of time? Do they have any ideas on what else they could try with the game that are at least on a drawing board? Or building it into a new title if necessary?

That is an extremely good question. The lack of purpose has been a problem for a long time now. Unfortunately, there isn’t a consensus regarding this matter, even on the player side – many players are fairly content just turning the game on, play a few matches and that’s it. Such casual players have no desire to immerse themselves in a game world. I too share this concern but to be fair, even my opinion is biased and mostly based on the fact that such loyal players (“retained” is the term used in the game industry) are far more inclined to... you guessed it, support the game with their hard-earned cash. In my personal opinion, it’s definitely something we should improve and an ongoing immersive storyline is my preferred tool of choice.

 

In the short term, are there any plans or 'drawing board ideas' to revisit AI issues?

As was stated many times, the AI is currently an Obsidian era black box that we have no documentation for. Quite literally, it’s just lines upon lines of code. That’s not to say we can’t ever understand it – of course we can, it’s simply a matter of research and manhours. The issue is – the programmer that’s working on this issue (and we are talking about many months of work) is not doing something else, something that would potentially add more value to the game (for example, new mechanics of some kind).

So the real question is – is it worth it? Would somewhat better AI improve the game significantly for the majority of players? The answer is, probably not. Some of the more pressing PvE issues such as spawn composition or placement have literally nothing to do with the AI code, that’s map design. The only issues that I can think of right now is the infamous “showing the butt” behavior (which was already mitigated by the Allods Team developers), the “ATGMs targeting turret rings” (also largely resolved) and the defense from enemy ATGMs (also known as “APS doesn’t work in PvE”), which admittedly should be looked into.

Either way, this is one of the “big” questions that we’ll get to and ask ourselves eventually.

 

In a similar vein, are there any plans to update and revamp the PvE missions that have remained untouched since their original iteration in 2015-2016? Including mission structure, objectives and side objectives, size of the maps used, and the quality of the maps themselves?

Well, as you can imagine – not easily. A map overhaul (so that it is noticeable – not just moving a few things around) is a huge and expensive endeavor and, once again, a developer working on an old map is not working on a new, fresh map. When the resources required are comparable, why not create a new map?

There are other serious considerations as well. Different maps were made by different people using different techniques and, internally, they can be quite different. We encountered this with the Wages of Sin PvE map that was originally supposed to use a lightly modified American Dream Arizona map and was supposed to be released for the conclusion of the Arizona arc of the Perihelion event (a month ago, that is).

In reality, what started as a straightforward task ended with a massive overhaul because the map’s coding simply required it (and we didn’t know in advance). We got it running properly only recently. I’d like to take the opportunity to congratulate and thank our level designers and programmers for their effort because this was an incredibly difficult task and internally we fully considered scrapping the map altogether. Now it thankfully looks like we won’t have to and the lessons learned will be used in future maps as well.

 

After the successes regarding various Air Defense vehicles being added, and especially due to two being tier 9 and a single tier 10 (not forgetting the various low tier ones), is it within the potential future plans for trying to look into additional Air Defense vehicles e.g. Gepard, Marksman, and etc.

Absolutely. Seeing the positive feedback its unfinished model received, we’d like to add the Gepard in the (somewhat distant) future. The Marksman is pretty much indistinguishable from the Gepard in game terms (they use the same guns and similar turrets) so it is quite likely that both of them would be mutually exclusive.

 

Are there any plans with SPG's/artillery in general?

Not at the moment. One of those “big” questions we need to discuss in the future. This class has been a pain in the butt for seven years now (longer, if you count the initial development). As you can imagine, it got into the game because World of Tanks had it. There’s a certain niche of players that just enjoy either griefing others (for which this class is perfect in PvP) or just sit back and click with a mouse.

Even the first alpha tests showed that adding it wasn’t that great of an idea, but the code was by then firmly embedded in the game – at least it got nerfed after the first testing rounds. Guided artillery shells such as “Krasnopol” were not fun to play against and were just obnoxious. From that point, over the years, the class received a series of direct (splash damage) and indirect (improvement of the incoming shell warning symbol) nerfs until it was finally relegated to PvE and left there.

The way we see it, the only really viable course of action (without making it toxic) would be to turn them into some kind of super-heavy tank destroyers with thin armor but big guns – in another words, getting rid of the indirect fire ability. It is not unprecedented in real life for artillery to fire over “open sights” (directly at the enemy), but it’s certainly not its primary modus operandi and some players still enjoy artillery in PvE as it is, so this is nowhere near a clear-cut case.

 

Any plans to change/update/add to the weekly/daily missions?

That’s yet another system that needs an overview in the future. But this one isn’t as complicated so the chances are pretty good. But everything like that will happen after the Battle Path release.

This is a bonus cringy comment for sladjan.

Broken images.

  https://aw.my.games/en/news/general/rise-dragon-battle-path-part-4-marines

Quote

This segment technically contains the ZTL-11 as well since it is a vehicle used by the Chinese Marines, but this vehicle will very likely be only available via blueprints instead of standard level progression.

We are again at the conundrum of a tier 9, even if a shitty tier 9, being very likely cheaper than a tier 7 and tier 8.

I will also note that this will again be the cheapest and easiest way to get into heroics.

https://aw.my.games/en/news/general/rise-dragon-battle-path-part-4-marines

Quote

Previous articles:

• Part 1: Wartime China
• Part 2: Building the PLA
• ZTZ-20 – Tier 10 Premium MBT
• Part 3: Rapid Development
• ZTL-11 – Tier 9 Premium TD

Commanders!

In our previous Battle Path articles (linked above), we have unveiled the basic concept behind the upcoming Rise of the Dragon Battle Path – to implement various rewards related to different eras of China in chronological order, starting from the pre-war period. In this part, we’ll divert a bit from that concept because the next prize section will be dedicated to the Chinese Marines forces.

 

PLAN marines of the 1st Marine Brigade, 2006

 

The Chinese Marines have a rather interesting (albeit short) history. This branch of the Chinese Navy was established in the April of 1953 as a reaction to the Nationalists keeping the control of several islands even after the end of the Chinese Civil War in 1949. The idea was to have a well-armed and elite force capable of storming the beaches of these islands, meeting the best the Nationalists had to offer head to head. Their baptism by fire followed soon afterwards when a force of roughly 200 Marines reinforced by a thousand militiamen defended the island of Dongshan against a Nationalist attempt to invade. The Nationalists had lost the island three years prior and in the July of 1953, they decided to take it back.

 

Battle for the Yijiangshan islands

 

The plan was fairly simple – the island was protected by light infantry only and the attackers would overwhelm them with regular infantry, armor and an elite paratrooper division. During the initial phase of the conflict, the island’s port was destroyed by Communist mortar fire but the defenders continued being pushed back by the onslaught. The advance was finally halted by the Chinese fortifications of the Eight Feet Gate stronghold manned by the Marines. The elite paratroopers suffered extremely heavy losses while attempting to take the fortifications, marking the high point of Nationalist advance during the battle.

The reinforcements from the Chinese mainland would force them to retreat, leaving over 2500 dead behind. Another such battle, just reversed, took place in 1955 during the Communist invasion of the Yijiangshan islands. While the losses on both sides were lower, the fighting was incredibly brutal with flamethrowers being deployed en masse and melee combat commonplace.

 

Chinese marines in the 1960s

 

During both engagements, the PLA Marines displayed uncommon heroism. Nevertheless, the branch was disbanded in 1958. The reason for that was fairly simple – they were no longer needed as the invasion of Taiwan was not seen as a viable prospect. Instead, the Chinese Navy would retain several infantry and tank regiments. These were technically Marines but weren’t organized so. They participated in the successful seizure of the Paracel Islands from South Vietnam in 1974.

 

Chinese marines in the 1980s

 

The Marines were re-activated as a separate branch under the People’s Liberation Army Navy (PLAN) in 1979 with the 1st Marine Brigade becoming active in 1980 on the island of Hainan as a response to the increasing tensions between the People’s Republic of China and Taiwan. Another motive was the launch of Chinese expansion attempts into the South China Sea where several small islands and atolls had their status disputed by multiple parties (including Vietnam and the Philippines). One such dispute escalated into an armed skirmish when the Vietnamese and Chinese Marine forces clashed over the Johnson South Reef, a part of the Spratly Islands.

 

People's Liberation Army Marine Corps, 164th Marine Brigade, 1990s

 

Our first prize of this segment is an early PLANMC camouflage likely introduced back in the early 1980s on both vehicles and uniforms. It consists of blue, grey and white spots and, as usual, will be available for all environments.

 

Click the image to open a larger version

 

The PLAN Marines would once again be re-organized in the 1990s. The Iraqi defeat by the Americans caused a worldwide shock in the countries armed with Soviet-era equipment and the PRC was no exception. Modern arms programs were accelerated and a great re-arming process took place. For the Chinese tankers, this meant the launch of the successful Type 96 and Type 99 series MBTs, but the Marines only had lighter armor at their disposal. Currently, the PLAN Marines are armed with the following armored vehicles:

• Type 15 Light Tank
• ZTL-11 wheeled FSV (amphibious)
• ZBL-08 wheeled IFV (amphibious)
• ZSL-10 wheeled APC (amphibious)
• ZBD-05 tracked IFV (amphibious)
• ZSD-05 tracked APC (amphibious)

In total, the PLAN Marine Corps use several hundred armored vehicles of the abovementioned types. If you’ve seen the photos of these vehicles in a bright blue digital camouflage – those belong to the Marines. We have a version of this camouflage in the game already (on the Type 99A2-140 MBT) and we’re happy to let you know you’ll be able to use this modern Marine camouflage for all your vehicles!

 

Click the image to open a larger version

 

Despite the garish palette, this digital camouflage is fairly effective as it’s not supposed to blend with trees or grass, but with the sea. Amphibious vehicles are at their most vulnerable when performing a landing since you can’t dodge or hide in water. It is therefore extremely important to have any advantage you can during this perilous phase.

 

ZBD-05

 

And that’s where we are right now in history – the camouflage is still in use, the list of vehicles posted above is the current one and the entire branch is currently roughly 20 thousand men strong. After the 2017 military reform, it is divided into 8 brigades. Aside from China, a PLANMC force is currently permanently stationed in Djibouti, the first Chinese overseas base of its kind. A Marine contingent is also taking part in anti-piracy missions in the Gulf of Aden.

 

Beijing military parade, 2015

 

And that’s it for the main prizes. Other prizes of this segment include:

• Flag of the PLA Navy
• PLAN Marine Corps crest decal

This segment technically contains the ZTL-11 as well since it is a vehicle used by the Chinese Marines, but this vehicle will very likely be only available via blueprints instead of standard level progression.

Next time, we’ll talk about the VN-17 IFV that is also a prize of this Battle Path. Until then:

I don't like the blue too much even if it made sense IRL, bright blue camo just looks gnarly in the game.

First rounds of questions are closed, second round begins now!

Questions selected for the first round:

Quote

1. Are there any new mechanics that SS or the devs would like to see added to the game in the future?

2. Where do you (SS or the devs) see the game going in the coming years?

3. Are very recent vehicles planned to be added? Like Challenger 3. And if yes, how would they be implemented in the tech tree? Tier 10's? 11's?

4. What sort of feedback has been acquired on the Perihelion rewards so far?

5. How has player sentiment been across the raids held so far? Was the last one considered a success? Will we actually see another one in the future?

6. I understand there was a 54 for/46 against vote for the Perihelion plot for EU/NA, while the Russian side had roughly the opposite vote. Are there any details as to what factors resulted in the for/against votes?

7. Are there any plans to introduce skins from the community into the game? Is it possible with the current modding that's going on to have some sort of events or voting to have some of these modded items( for example camouflage and skins) added to the game?

8. Are there any plans to have an overhaul of balance to older tanks?  Currently they seem to be left behind with the constant increase in abilities and features of the new shiny premium tanks, making tech tree tanks either very niche or obsolete

9. Are there plans to actually bring the balance of the game to be consistent across the board, or was it intended that the game balance is split between low and high tier?  Examples of this are tier 5/6 tanks being better armored, higher dmg/pen, top speed, VR than tier 7/8's.  Also things like fast switch being applied to all lower tier tanks, but only a few types of tank at high tiers

10. When can we stop having to actually double check every patch to see what errors have slipped in (stealth changes)?  Is there something we can do to highlight these issues, other than reporting to you, you escalate, we then get told we are wrong?

11. If you could go back in time and change a single 'thing' in the game (rebalance patch, decision, idea, lootbox etc) what would it be any why?

12. Do you think the game will get to a point where there are tier 11 & 12 ?

13. Some of the documentations on game mechanics are like armour and ammo are either somewhat hard to find or are outdated on the official website, and given that there's probably no relevant devs around to ask due to changes in dev teams, is it still possible to go over them again in the future? Some of them are not fully understood by players, and it feels like it's up to us to figure them out ourselves.

14. How did the current commander leveling system originate? Was it more or less labor intensive to develop than other systems we haven't seen or weren't used?

15. In the longer term, how committed is the current team to maintaining the Wargaming-style tier-grind-ad-nauseum model, where there's little goal of the game besides reaching an arbitrarily high number of games in a given period of time? Do they have any ideas on what else they could try with the game that are at least on a drawing board? Or building it into a new title if necessary?

16. In the short term, are there any plans or 'drawing board ideas' to revisit AI issues? Such as the AI spawn tables (e.g. the presence of the 'fragile' and 'superior' vehicles breaking tier balance and no longer serving the original purpose of providing target variety, as the game has more than enough vehicles now), AI spawn locations and objective priorities (e.g. where they appear, where they move to), AI movement behavior (e.g. spinning and turning in place for no particular purpose), AI targeting behavior (especially regarding ATGMs), the quantity and characteristics of "Lieutenant" spawns (e.g. Ghost Hunter...)?

17. In a similar vein, are there any plans to update and revamp the PvE missions that have remained untouched since their original iteration in 2015-2016? Including mission structure, objectives and side objectives, size of the maps used, and the quality of the maps themselves?

18. After the successes regarding various Air Defense vehicles being added, and especially due to two being tier 9 and a single tier 10 (not forgetting the various low tier ones), is it within the potential future plans for trying to look into additional Air Defense vehicles e.g. Gepard, Marksman, and etc.

19. Are there any plans with SPG's/artillery in general?

20. Any plans to change/update/add to the weekly/daily missions?

SS is looking for some feedback regarding commanders.

https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSdlYE3J2hqtZ4DFErTzOjXlIytkcGD5-3Pna-0eUdW0hB8DJg/viewform

To give a full design doc on the poll would be way too long, so I just summarized some of the key issues I see with the current commander system:

1. Too many useless skills. Their effects are either too minor to make any significant gameplay difference for their investment cost, or are overshadowed by other commanders with better skills entirely. All skills, even with different tiering, should have some noticeable effects and significant use cases.

2. Too many commanders overlapping each other and competing in the same niches, and subsequently powercreeping each other. All commanders should be useful in their intended roles, and there are more than enough roles still unfilled in the game for the currently less useful commanders to be overhauled towards.

3. The grid-based skill system is littered with the illusion of choice, despite the many possible skill builds on each commander there are very few variations for useful builds. This relates to the problem of too many useless skills. Consider adopting a more linear skill system, with limited branching for skill build variations while keeping the variations also practical and competitive.

4. Commanders take a very long time to progress through their levels, costing just shy of 19 million XP to fully level up. This makes the commander system the longest, most tedious and potentially most expensive grind in the game. Shorten the grind, reduce the number of skills on each commander but also make them more significant.

5. The chain of command mechanic, when operating in tandem with the already extremely long commander progression, only serves to make the initial grind to fully level two commanders even longer. If you want to keep players invested in the game, try a different mechanic that doesn't force such long grinds on players while giving very minimal return.

https://aw.my.games/en/news/general/development-ztl-11

Quote

Previous articles:

• Part 1: Wartime China
• Part 2: Building the PLA
• ZTZ-20 – Tier 10 Premium MBT
• Part 3: Rapid Development

Commanders!

Today, we’d like to tell you more about another prize of the Rise of the Dragon Battle Path – the Chinese ZTL-11 Premium Tank Destroyer.

 

ZTL-11

 

As usual, a bit of history first. The ZTL-11 is, as its name suggests, a wheeled tank destroyer. It is a variant of the eight-wheeled platform that’s also present in Armored Warfare in the form of the ZBL-08 IFV. The development likely started around the year 2000 with a platform prototype appearing in 2006, although this information is mostly speculative. The idea here was to provide China with a modern wheeled platform similar to the American Stryker that would be available in multiple configurations, including a self-propelled gun and a tank destroyer. And that’s what the ZTL designation actually means for the Chinese military:

• Z – Armored
• T – Tank Destroyer
• L – Wheeled

It’s worth noting that some Chinese sources refer to the vehicle as ZLT-11. It’s currently unclear which name is official but the ZTL one is far more widespread and we’ll therefore stick to using that one.

The vehicle was first seen in public in 2013 but was only officially revealed in 2015 during a military parade commemorating the 70th anniversary of the victory over Japan. That means it’s still relatively new and not much information is actually available as most of it is classified. What we do know, however, is that the hull (which is similar to the ZBL-08) carries a new aluminum turret.

The vehicle weighs some 23 tons and has a crew of four. Three crewmembers sit in the turret and one in the hull as usual.

 

ZTL-11

 

The armor of this vehicle is very basic – a steel welded hull with 20mm to 30mm plates, the turret consists of aluminum alloy plates of roughly 40mm thickness. The vehicle can therefore in its basic form frontally resist heavy machineguns only. Additional modular armor can be mounted on it, but it only consists of relatively thin composite plates, likely increasing the frontal protection to resist 25mm autocannons with the rest of the vehicle being protected against 12.7mm bullets. No ERA or APS is available to this vehicle, only a basic smoke grenade system.

The ZTL-11 is armed with the ZPT-98A 105mm low-recoil rifled gun as the main 125mm caliber would be a bit too much for the light platform. The gun is manually loaded and was likely developed from the famous British Royal Ordnance L7, although this weapon does have a muzzle brake to tame that wild recoil. It can fire the following rounds:

• DTW-2 APFSDS (6kg penetrator flying at 1530 m/s, capable of penetrating roughly 160mm of RHAe at 2km at 71 degrees)
• BTA2 APFSDS (5.9kg penetrator flying at 1540 m/s, capable of penetrating roughly 220mm of RHAe at 2km at 66 degrees)
• DTP1A HEAT with tandem warhead (can allegedly penetrate 460mm to 500mm of armor)
• GP105 gun-launched missile (it is allegedly based on the Russian Bastion and it is said to be capable of penetrating 550mm to 600mm of armor at up to 5 kilometers)

The vehicle carries approximately 30 rounds. Its fire control is modern but lacks panoramic optics for the commander and therefore the hunter-killer ability. On the other hand, it is fitted with a Chinese Battlefield Management System, making it easy to integrate into modern Chinese formations.

The ZTL-11 is powered by a Deutz BF6M1015C 440hp diesel (or rather its local licensed copy), allowing it to go as fast as 100 km/h. It’s worth noting that this vehicle is amphibious and can swim as fast as 5 km/h. The eight-wheeled suspension steers with the front two wheels, making the ZTL-11 relatively agile. It’s worth noting that some Chinese sources also claim that on the later-produced vehicles, the engine was replaced with the Shanxi 132HB 883hp diesel engine – however, this is most likely not true.

 

ZTL-11

 

You sometimes see the same vehicle under the designation ZTL-09 since that’s when it allegedly entered service, but it’s quite likely this designation is not correct. The ZTL-11 uses a rather obsolete caliber that’s usable only when firing at softer targets as its ammunition typically cannot defeat modern MBTs frontally. As a fire support vehicle, it has its merits though and can be quite deadly against anything short of a frontal MBT onslaught.

The ZTL-11 Tank Destroyer was allegedly produced in large quantities and up to 950 vehicles of this type might be currently in service in what’s essentially an equivalent of the American Stryker brigades that are supposed to combine extremely high mobility (including water-crossing and off-road capabilities) with some serious firepower. Ironically, the Americans are withdrawing from the concept already due to the issues connected to it – whether the Chinese will follow suit remains to be seen.

 

Click the image to open a larger version

 

In Armored Warfare, the ZTL-11 will be a Tier 9 Premium Tank Destroyer.

Unlike the ZTZ-20 with its new mechanics, the ZTL-11 will be quite straightforward. This is a classic wheeled Tank Destroyer with all the advantages (and drawbacks) of this vehicle’s class. It will have thin armor protecting it against autocannons only without any additional protective measures. It will also have limited agility due to its eight-wheel suspension.

 

Click the image to open a larger version

 

However, it will be fast (99 km/h maximum speed) and rapidly accelerating thanks to its low weight and relatively powerful engine. And, most importantly, it will have a powerful 105mm gun on par with the ZTQ-15 Light Tank – it’s not the same weapon but the performance will roughly be similar.

 

Click the image to open a larger version

 

Add to it its decent viewrange (400 meters), camouflage (30 percent) and the Zero In active ability and what you’ll have is a decent gun-based Tank Destroyer that will be deadly at long distances. We hope you’ll enjoy it and, as always:

It's basically the ST-1 at tier 9, very very bland and boring.

No really, even if the ZTL is somehow a monster at DPM it will still suffer due to the rest of the vehicle being average to subpar. View range and camo looks middling at best, not to mention it has wheels which automatically makes it less mobile than the ZTQ-15 and Ghost.

Meh.

Reposting from Discord:

TheGreenTank:

• In the short term, are there any plans or 'drawing board ideas' to revisit AI issues? Such as the AI spawn tables (e.g. the presence of the 'fragile' and 'superior' vehicles breaking tier balance and no longer serving the original purpose of providing target variety, as the game has more than enough vehicles now), AI spawn locations and objective priorities (e.g. where they appear, where they move to), AI movement behavior (e.g. spinning and turning in place for no particular purpose), AI targeting behavior (especially regarding ATGMs), the quantity and characteristics of "Lieutenant" spawns (e.g. Ghost Hunter...)?
• In a similar vein, are there any plans to update and revamp the PvE missions that have remained untouched since their original iteration in 2015-2016? Including mission structure, objectives and side objectives, size of the maps used, and the quality of the maps themselves?
• How possible is it, if at all, that the physics modeling in the current game engine will be revisited, improved upon, or even redone if necessary to reach a higher standard?
• In the longer term, how committed is the current team to maintaining the Wargaming-style tier-grind-ad-nauseum model, where there's little goal of the game besides reaching an arbitrarily high number of games in a given period of time? Do they have any ideas on what else they could try with the game that are at least on a drawing board? Or building it into a new title if necessary?

Fuchsin Pfeffer:

• After the successes regarding various Air Defense vehicles being added, and especially due to two being tier 9 and a single tier 10 (not forgetting the various low tier ones), is it within the potential future plans for trying to look into additional Air Defense vehicles e.g. Gepard, Marksman, and etc.
• And more specifically did you expect them to have done as well as they have, or did you expect them to add little to nothing?

Data-Zero:

• Are there any plans with SPG's/artillery in general?

Object 640 HEAT shells also got penetration buffs, from the former 870mm to the current 950mm. Occurred some time in the past two months.

Some questions copied over from the AL Discord:

Fuchsin Pfeffer:

• In Regards to ATGM systems such as the TOW and MILAN systems on turreted vehicles, is there a distinct difficulty in having a secondary moving turret on the first?  E.G. Milan launcher moving up or down with the gun ala Terminator turret system

Stratzi:

• Did the last raid perform as expected? How did it perform and will we actually see another one in the future?

IvoDS:

• How many levels is the new BP going to be (like the T-15K or the previous BPs)?

Simolens:

• What vehicles are gonna be added in the BP shop?

Azdule:

• Are there any plans to have an overhaul of balance to older tanks?  Currently they seem to be left behind with the constant increase in abilities and features of the new shiny premium tanks, making tech tree tanks either very niche or obsolete
• Are there plans to actually bring the balance of the game to be consistent across the board, or was it intended that the game balance is split between low and high tier?  Examples of this are tier 5/6 tanks being better armored, higher dmg/pen, top speed, VR than tier 7/8's.  Also things like fast switch being applied to all lower tier tanks, but only a few types of tank at high tiers
• When can we stop having to actually double check every patch to see what errors have slipped in (stealth changes)?  Is there something we can do to highlight these issues, other than reporting to you, you escalate, we then get told we are wrong?
• If you could go back in time and change a single 'thing' in the game (rebalance patch, decision, idea, lootbox etc) what would it be any why?
• If you could add any single tank to the game, no questions asked, fingers clicked and it's done and as you imagine it, what would it be any why? *And why is it a tier 11 Maus*
• Do you think the game will get to a point where there are tier 11 & 12 ?

Qbicle:

• Some of the documentations on game mechanics are like armour and ammo are either somewhat hard to find or are outdated on the official website, and given that there's probably no relevant devs around to ask due to changes in dev teams, is it still possible to go over them again in the future? Some of them are not fully understood by players, and it feels like it's up to us to figure them out ourselves.

So... this is something that probably came way too late, but here is going to be a hopefully productive project for the AW community. In collaboration with SilentStalker, I've decided to start a regular Q&A feature between the community and the AW staff.

The rules are simple: post questions here that you would like SS to answer, every month (or sooner if there's high demand) I will select 20 questions to forward to SS for him to answer and I shall publish his responses. Everybody are free to ask and/or repeat as many questions as they like, and I'll try to select the questions that would give us the most informative and discussion values. If you find some interesting questions from various Discord servers, feel free to repost them here too.

Tips: don't ask closed-ended, yes or no question. It's boring to see a bunch of "will X be added to the game?" questions.

----

The cutoff for the first round of questions will be July 11, or sooner if we get a ton of questions. I will post in this thread to indicate the cutoff for this round and the start of the next.

https://aw.my.games/en/news/general/rise-dragon-battle-path-part-3-rapid-development

Quote

Previous articles:

• Part 1: Wartime China
• Part 2: Building the PLA
• ZTZ-20 – Tier 10 Premium MBT

Commanders!

In our previous Battle Path articles (linked above), we have unveiled the basic concept behind the upcoming Rise of the Dragon Battle Path – to implement various rewards related to different eras of China in chronological order, starting from the pre-war period. In this part, we’ll tell you more about the prize bloc dedicated to PLA’s rapid development.

 

Type 59

 

As a result of the Soviet help with Chinese arms industry, China received a large number of T-34 tanks (designated Type 58 in Chinese service) followed by a large number of T-54A tanks, which served and were later license-produced under the name of Type 59. By the time they reached China, these tanks were hardly the most powerful ones in the world, but were still quite sufficient for their purposes and taught the Chinese engineers valuable lessons in tank design, influencing the Chinese tank industry for decades to come.

 

Camouflaged Type 59

 

The Type 59 was first introduced to the public during the great Chinese national parade in 1959. The original model production, however, only took place between 1957 and 1960 in Baotou (located in the Beijing military area), although more advanced models were in mass production ran until the 1980s, with an estimated 10 thousand vehicles with various modifications produced, becoming the most numerous tank in Chinese service for the next few decades. Originally, these tanks were painted in the usual Green color, but later on the factories switched to the three-tone camouflage that became extremely common in the PLA.

 

Click the image to open a larger version

 

This camouflage will be the first of the prizes introduced in this Battle Path reward part. It consists of black, sand and olive green stripes and was applied until the dawn of digital camouflages in the 1990s. You’ll be able to apply it to all vehicles as usual.

But let us get back to the story of China. In the late 1950s, clouds started gathering over the two great allies. Due to their ideological differences, the relations between China and the Soviet Union deteriorated in the 1960s practically to the point of open conflict. A side-effect of this situation was that the Chinese were left in a bad place, unable to get access to advanced Soviet technologies while being alienated from the west at the same time due to their support of communist regimes in Asia and the Vietnam War. For the Chinese armor industry, there were several pivotal moments, most notably the Damansky Island incident and, the Vietnam War with all its lessons.

 

T-62 "545"

 

Let us stop here for a short moment though – the Damansky island incident. In the March of 1969, the Chinese and the Soviets were practically in a state of open warfare around the Ussuri river border. Skirmishes were relatively commonplace and the events culminated on March 2 in nearly a two-week-long full-scale conflict over a river island called Damansky (or Zhenbao in Chinese).

 

T-62 "545"

 

The battle involved APCs, tanks and even heavy artillery and resulted effectively in a draw with both sides claiming victory. Both sides lost roughly 60 men, but, more importantly, one of Russia’s relatively new T-62 tanks was disabled in the fighting and despite the best Soviet efforts to retrieve it, it was captured by the Chinese and brought back to Beijing. This T-62 No.545 then became a valuable source of research information as it was taken apart and studied extensively by the Chinese military and scientists. Afterwards, it ended in a museum.

Which brings us to the second prize of this segment – the T-62 No.545 will be a skin for the T-62 Tier 3 progression Main Battle Tank.

 

Click the image to open a larger version

 

It’s a simple skin consisting of the Soviet khaki color and the white tactical number “545” along with its battle-worn surface. As the tank was so important for the Chinese development, we couldn’t have passed the opportunity to introduce it to Armored Warfare in this form.

The lessons learned from the T-62 as well as the Vietnam War and the 1979 Sino-Vietnamese war unveiled a number of issues with the tactics and armor the Chinese deployed and led to the rapid development of both. Even though the Chinese military industry tried to get their hands on modern technologies however they could, the isolation left some Chinese technology branches a decade or more behind their Soviet and western counterparts. During this era, China mostly focused on upgrading what they had, especially the Type 59 tank.

 

Type 79

 

This would only change during the Thawing era as the relations between China, the Soviet Union and the west improved Especially the late 1970s and the 1980s saw a military development boom with more and more advanced technologies becoming available to the Chinese, both from Europe (105mm NATO standard gun) and from Russia (125mm smoothbore). The development ran in two directions:

• Upgrades of existing tanks (Type 59 upgrades leading to the popular Type 69 export tank)
• Design of new weapons (wheeled tank destroyers, modern domestic tanks such as the Type 88, modern export tanks such as the Type 85 and Type 90-II)

During this period, China became a major armor exporter with massive amounts of tanks sold across the world.

 

Type 99 prototype 9910, experimental camouflage

 

But let us get back to the prototypes because the third phase we want to tell you about is the Chinese Experimental camouflage as seen on a Type 99 prototype called 9910.

 

Click the image to open a larger version

 

While not historically valuable (this type of camouflage never went into mass use), we hope that you find these gorgeous spots of sand color over a green surface as pretty as we did.

And that’s it for the main prizes. Other prizes of this segment include:

• Flag of the PLA Ground Forces
• Decal with the name “Dong Cunrui”, another mythical soldier figure of the Chinese Civil War

Next time, we’ll continue taking a look at more vehicle prizes as well as the prizes of the next prize segment called Chinese Marines.

The camos look nice, but I'm starting to see a trend here with the skins: they are literally just flat base paints with some decals baked in.

I have to question why the "545" isn't just a decal, even if the default decal placements are very shoddy.

Probably identical to the 99A2-140. Not terribly exciting to be frank.

https://aw.my.games/en/news/general/development-ztz-20

Quote

Today, we’d like to tell you more about the top prize of the Rise of the Dragon Battle Path – the Chinese ZTZ-20 Premium Main Battle Tank.

This is an exceedingly rare tank that was imported from China by Perihelion – a true masterpiece of engineering that can only be found serving with Chinese elite units guarding Beijing. How did Murdoch’s people get their hands on one is a mystery but a quick examination showed it was made using advanced technologies, some of which are not available at all in the United States of America of 2028.

So much for Armored Warfare lore, now for the real history – let’s address the elephant in the room. The ZTZ-20 Main Battle Tank does not exist. It is a vehicle made-up by a Chinese internet user who posted a full fictional history along with its technical descriptions on the internet. It’s unclear when the original post appeared; the estimate is around 2016-2017. The idea was to create a “future MBT for the Chinese armed forces” and the author was clearly inspired by the Russian Armata.

The hull bears a strong resemblance to it and the design features a number of elements taken directly from the T-14, such as the unmanned turret design and the armored crew capsule. On the other hand, there are some relatively strange solutions in there as well, such as the ATGM launchers in the turret that are retractable but cannot be loaded without someone doing it manually from the outside. The carousel loading mechanism is a bit strange as well and there are a myriad of other details betraying the fact the author of the vehicle wasn’t an actual tank designer. Nevertheless, the concept has gained a lot of popularity on the Chinese internet over the years and we’ve decided to give it a try and introduce it as a playable vehicle.

As we posted before, in Armored Warfare, the ZTZ-20 is going a Tier 10 Premium Main Battle Tank with a rather unique twist.

The overall concept of the tank will resemble that of the other Chinese MBTs in Armored Warfare, such as the Type 99B. Unlike the others, however, this MBT will be protected by the following elements:

• Unmanned turret taking reduced damage
• NERA armor making it quite durable during the initial stages of fighting
• Full smoke grenade cover (360 degrees)
• Advanced hard-kill APS

On the downside the basic armor will become quite thin once the NERA elements are spent. Not to worry though, the ammo rack weakspot the Type 99 series is famous for in the game will not make an appearance (on the contrary, we’ll fix the issue on the other vehicles of the Type 99 series).

Mobility is a staple of Chinese MBTs and this one will be no exception. We’re looking at something similar to Type 99A2 despite the weight of 59 tons. The ZTZ-20 will be powered by a 1630hp diesel engine giving it the maximum speed of whopping 90 km/h with the following additional values:

• Acceleration from 0 to 32 km/h: 4.81s
• Hull traverse: 44.7 deg/s

As you can see, it will be one of the most agile and fast-accelerating Tier 10 MBTs in the game. Additionally, two of the three Active Abilities available to it will also make it move faster: Override and Top Speed.

And, finally, we come to the firepower. The tank will allow you to choose between two weapons:

• 125mm smoothbore cannon
• 140mm smoothbore cannon

The 125mm gun is mostly intended for PvE. Performance-wise, it’s on par with the Type 99A2’s gun, including its famous HEAT rounds with 1000mm penetration and 930 damage per shot. The reload time and the subsequent damage output will be roughly similar to the Type 99A2, although the gun-launched ATGMs are missing here.

The 140mm gun is, on the other hand, intended for PvP, trading the damage per minute value for increased damage per shot and APFSDS penetration. This gun will fire both APFSDS (835mm penetration, 945 damage) and HEAT rounds (950mm penetration, 1181 damage).

Both guns will be able to elevate to +14 degrees and depress to -7 degrees. But that’s still not all as the tank will feature a unique system – Phosphorus Missiles.

That’s right; those ATGMs at the back of the turret are no ordinary ATGMs. You have four of them in your launcher – they can be fired once per 3.5 seconds followed by 25 seconds of reload. The way they work is relatively simple. They fly either into a target directly or over a target (much like the overflight attack missiles do) and explode, dealing meager damage but covering a wide area around the impact point with white phosphorus.

White phosphorus works the same way as it does in WP artillery rounds:

• The camouflage of hostile targets in the affected area will be reduced to zero, which will cause them to become immediately spotted
• Anyone in the affected area will take damage over time (260 damage over 10 seconds)
• The damage over time can disrupt the base-capturing process

The first point is the true purpose of these missiles – they can be fired at suspected enemy locations to get rid of those pesky scouts hiding in the bushes or “hero” MBTs “supporting” their lighter comrades from behind the lines. It’s worth noting that these missiles behave just like other ATGMs and are therefore susceptible to hostile APS.

Utility-wise, the tank will have access to the two abovementioned Active Abilities as well as the Rapid Fire one. It’ll also feature solid camouflage (22%) and viewrange (365m) for its class.

In summation, the ZTZ-20 will be a highly practical and versatile MBT with two configurations and a unique ability. Thanks to the combination of solid armor, excellent mobility and adequate firepower, it’ll have a chance to succeed on any battlefield and in any mode. We hope that you’ll enjoy it and, as always:

I have the strangest feeling right now, that the still unreleased 99B will end up powercreeping the ZTZ-20 or compete very heavily with it.

ZTZ-20 looks very much like a PvP-oriented tank since WP does very little in PvE, but at the same time it just looks so... boring. I just have so little excitement at the prospect of another 99A2 clone.

What's this, a vehicle review? After so long? Yes, because the 225 actually interested me enough to review it. The 225 could be obtained through the 3 week long mini marathon event, where you had to achieve 3 wins every day in any game mode for 17 days (out of 21 days allotted). It's a fairly easy task and a lot of people already got the 225.

As of the time of this post there are still 4 days remaining, if you haven't had time to play for the past three weeks... you might be able to get the 225 in the BP coin shop hopefully.

Forgive my potato graphics.

Firepower: very competitive

With 880 alpha HEAT and 680 alpha AP, the Object 225 sits at the higher end of tier 6 MBTs in terms of single shot damage just above the usual 125mm guns. What sets the 225 apart is its very fast reload even with the higher alpha, barely 0.2s longer than the T-72B and pushes its DPM to a very competitive 7.7k with my config. This is even comparable to the Merkava 2B and XM1, both of which do boast higher DPM but with far lower alpha.

In terms of gun handling, the Object 225 has the usual Russian depression and elevation angles, more than enough to handle most terrain in the game and not restricting at all. Its accuracy is slightly lower than its peers (possibly a mild attempt at balancing), but not enough to make any significant difference in practice. The long aim time on the other hand is very noticeable, but it looks worse on paper than it actually is in practice. I personally don't feel the need to improve the aim time any further beyond the usual gunner skills, but you do you.

Tip: if you feel cheeky you can also load some HE shells for rear shots and high damage memes, since the 225 also has the mobility to take advantage of flanking tactics.

Protection: good enough even for aggressive play

Frequent players of Chinese MBTs will be no stranger to the frontal armor profile of the Object 225. Decently strong upper plate, weak lower plate, keep wiggling and try to seek hulldown positions. Or you can just use your overwhelming firepower to remove enemies before they can damage you too much.

Upper plate resistant up to 750mm pen AP, somewhat weak turret ring against 900mm pen HEAT. Keep in mind these are already some of the highest penetration values you will face at tier 6, so the armor is actually very reliable in practice against most enemies.

Lower plate starts being iffy against 450mm pen AP and 750mm pen HEAT, just try not to get shot at there. Note the ammo rack on the right lower quadrant.

Mobility: pretty good for something with such a big gun and armor

Thanks to its gas turbine engine, the Object 225 has excellent mid-range acceleration compared to vehicles using diesel engines. While the performance on paper doesn't look too impressive compared to the T-80B and XM1, the 225 also includes the Override ability for a short but very significant acceleration boost. This is most useful in short sprints and allowing the 225 to gain a flying start over its peers in drag races.

Smart use of the Override ability can make the 225 one of the most mobile MBTs at tier 6.

Vision control: there shouldn't be any reason why I should be commenting on this, and yet here we are.

The Object 225 matches the Merkava 2B for having the highest view range out of all the tier 6 MBTs, but that's not the reason I'm talking about vision control here. The camo is why I'm here.

That's right, you can play the 225 like a grown-up Sheridan if you want to. Obviously it won't be the most effective at this role, but there are PvP memes to be made here.

Misc. recommendations:

Commander: whichever MBT commander you prefer. Cortez for 1k alpha memes. Erin for camo memes.

Crew skills:

• Driver: terrain resistance, hull traverse
• Gunner: aim time, turret traverse

Consumables: gas, repair kit, med kit. The usual.

Retrofits: breech, filters, optics. Also the usual.

Conclusion: a very good tier 6 MBT that is also strangely well-balanced in this day and age.

https://aw.my.games/en/news/general/community-survey-armored-warfare

Quote

In our effort to improve the game, we'd like to ask for your feedback regarding several aspects of the game. Please take a few minutes to fill the survey below:

https://survey.alchemer.com/s3/6902012/AW

I wonder what good the survey will do this time...

This mod upgrades the T-62 chassis to the T-62M1 standard (basically T-62M without missiles) by adding applique armor to the hull front and sides. Rear fuel tanks are also added to the existing mounting points for better eye candy.

Mod download: https://mega.nz/file/cBhW0STR#qLd-qis_sZgOkdBTpW4D0WMyik9c7tpJsAOyV1FvPRE

The base T-62 model also receives the turret greebles from the Tiran 6, enjoy your extra storage and non-functional dakka!

Because the Tiran 6 already has ERA covering the front hull, I decided not to add the applique armor on it as to not cover the ERA. Instead it receives a set of Storm-styled mine plows (taken from the Type 99B) to differentiate it better from the T-62M1:

The actual T-62M also received fuel tanks, because why not?

Vehicles modified:

• T-62
• Tiran 6
• T-62M
• IT-1

Mod download: https://mega.nz/file/cBhW0STR#qLd-qis_sZgOkdBTpW4D0WMyik9c7tpJsAOyV1FvPRE

Installation instructions: this mod will persist across any future game updates and patches, there is no need to modify any other files.

To uninstall, simply delete the mod files.

Legalese and stuff:

You may freely use and redistribute this mod and perform any additional modifications as you see fit. Please attribute the author (me) when redistributing the mod, and provide the address of this thread as the source of the mod.

You may NOT monetize this mod or any part thereof.