Azdule

I believe SS's presence here is not in his official company capacity so his words are his own, not that of the company. My understanding is that if we report issues, like broken things, this may enable him to review it further or put on the company radar, but not in the same way as support tickets for example

Well...I still stand by my comments - by leaving in the MBT progress is reset when taking damage...is a bit silly...because chip damage is real. MBT campers will be abound. Players are generally unhappy with this kinda of counter playstyle. Also the large damage farms on low tier tanks are nothing but a face grind & time sink

Yea I have that, seems to be if 4 auto cannons are firing at the same time, it screws u my sound. This happened on both stages of PTS as well. Really sucks. Also does it tank your frame rate at the same time?

Yea the extra damage is a bug and will be fixed 'shortly'

I like em. They are fun and different. Do they fit the game, not really. Are they realistic, not really. Are they fun, for me yes

I think it performs ok from a limited play run - it's just..a meme missile boat? I mean hitting for 1k+ with ATGMs is fun and all, but you have to run / stay behind cover and use the 'eye stalks' to fire over things for it to be truely effective. Also it could be that the ATGMs are very mobile, but it does seem to perform well firing over hills / down - by this I mean angle your tank up a hill, aim down at something and they seem to fire straight at them.

Is this a case of auto bounce being removed, or over pen being brought in without patch notes?

Ahh ok, sad times. I liked the skin.

Oh that sucks & is worrying. I thought this was just a streamer list that was given out and was old. A quick questions related to Alienware stuff, there used to be a Fox skin for them (or Razer) that I had, but one update it disappeared. Does that ring any bells with anyone? It was bright green

I mean, it's two premium tanks that I already owned, some gold (not massive amounts and gold is relatively redundant now) and credits. The tanks aren't great so it's not a massive loss? And there have been cases where things have been given out on accident before and left for players to keep - I want to say something that happened recently, extra gold? Was given out, players could abuse it or not. Those that did, got to keep what they got. Just saying the above as a precedent has been set on things like this..

Or...let us keep them as long term players who still stick with the game? :)

To confirm, I went down the list line by line until a code from each worked. I think I got to around code 10 on each

First worry is that with MBT mobility, the write of the map is wrong. And TD's shooting things in the flank..unlikely as their AP is bad. Will be interesting to see it when it comes out, found out which team rushes which direct around the map and then just zerg train like every other map

Further to this - there seems to be an issue with the aimpoint - in 1st person it can hit around 50m, in 3rd person it seems to go to around 100m min. If you go 1st person, aim and fire, then go 3rd person, you can fire a few ATGMs off for the correct distance, then it will be odd - one launcher gets 50m, the other gets 100m. It's really inconsistent

Overall I thought it was a good Q&A - got some decent answers to a lot of questions. To be clear, when I was reading the pre-patch notes, I was hopeful. It seemed that the class roles were being double downed on. MBTs had more armor, but shit at range meaning they needed to get close. TD's would be stealthy MBT killers from range, AFVs would be speedy vision monsters, LT would be speedy burst machines. The way it's come out....simply put I feel it is play MBT or your a detriment to your team. They are mobile, heavy armored beasts that can chase down EVERYTHING else. In a 1 on 1 with any other class - the other class is dead. Sure their spotting was nerfed, but does that really matter when they charge at you at 70-80km/h when you can only go 55? I think the biggest questions I have remaining are about the armor changes to tanks. Really not sure why the changes to the hulls of tanks to made them different over the tracks. It basically doesn't really make sense from any realistic thought process, but from a balance perspective it is just dumbing it down. While SS's comment that 'elite veterans of the game' may not like, it's more welcoming to new players...is strange. I understand the idea of wanting more players in the game, but to alienate the existing fanbase of the game is strange. I can only imagine somebody is sat in the background going 'Hey if we make the game more casual, we'll get like...5k more players!' Somebody responds 'But we may lose 7.5k and those new players may not like the way the game plays and leave shortly after...' and is ignored. Also the fact the chally was advertised as a heavy armored MBT in the .33 pre-patch notes, then to be advised 'Oh that was a mistake or the devs changed their mind' is kinda shitty. Feels very much like a bait and switch. It's not like the chally line had ANYTHING else going for it. Lowest DPM, slow as a bunker so it had armor. Now it has PISH, which is likely going to be nerfed due to a large amount of people using it and doing well in it, so it will end up with nothing. At the moment the chally line fills a PISH/HESH niche with the same (or worse) armor than any other tank with lower DPM. And Chip damage (yes I keep bringing this up) was introduced in this update, a PVP based balance, as a reward for those using ATGMs so it's not all or nothing. But to then advise that it isn't rewarding in PVP kind of baffles me. If it's not rewarding for any players, then why was it brought it? For newer players, do peeps think that they will charge forward and risk taking a little chip damage to get to the target, or sit behind something wondering why they are taking damage all of the time? If a new player thinks they have a tank with armor, but takes damage all the time for playing well, why would they stick around? It feels like this will promote a more camper play style for newer players rather than incentivising them to push forward. Feels odd to introduce changes for around 7% of the player base, but introduce things that will have negative impacts to the rest of the playerbase (PvE)

It seems bad to me that I find this kinda shocking. I'm happy that it'll be relatively easy to do as I'm feeling a bit of burn out from the BP and like raid upcoming. Too many grindy events will burn out more and more peeps

These are amazing! I love each one as they just look fantastic. Keep up the great work

For me it would be progress it as both PvE and PvP. As I've made clear previously I feel there need to be more 'end game' stuff like heroics or spec ops mission for the long term player. I know that these aren't generally viewed as viable to produce due to amount of work required compared to the outcome, which I think is a shame. I do have more of a lean towards the PvE modes as I can sit down, play and not get stressed over others in my team being idiots (can solo carry more often and consistently than in other modes) I like to jump into Glops games to scratch my PvP itch as I feel this is a more 'relaxed' PvP mode compared to just straight forward PvP. I tend to enjoy high tier glops games as I feel they are rewarding and I can play in a more care free approach. For 'normal' PvP, I tend to play tier 6-8 as I get the most enjoyment of these tiers - there is a nice balance between skill and reward at that tier. If I play tier 9/10 I just tend to get stomped into the ground with a single mistake because most games are decided by which team rushes which way. Or because you get caught slightly out of position and suddenly you're dead because 9 enemies were pre-aiming that spot and suddenly 4k hp really isn't that much.

With renumbered point 1, I found that the T-14 wouldn't take chip damage from T-15. I'm not sure if this was a T-14 exclusive, or the T-15 didn't have chip damage? The 2 games I played with the ATDU they were either nuked down before they could fire on me, or just simply penned my side. Renumbered point 2- I take it that would be the standard AP round? At this moment I can't really see the use of AP when the ATGMs are in game, but interesting how a 152 has a 7sec reload, but other tanks with 140 have a longer reload.... I heard there was some interesting issues with the HE shell doing more damage than it should / being able to pen a few x00mm of armour - like the Abrams line, you could shoot the front on top of the tracks to nuke down the turret, gun, ammo and crew. I believe SS said something about planned HE changes that weren't meant to be brought in, were in the test.

Ahh yes, stats = brain. PvP WR 57.5% (solo play) 3704 games Glops WR - 56.8% (solo play) 1286 games PvE 89.9% WR (been throwing matches recently for farming damage missions) 5161 games Yours and his?

My thoughts on the PTS: Please provide additional feedback to Tier 7-10 MBTs in 0.33. What would you improve? What seem to be the problems? The mobility and vision changes feel good. I like the fact that MBT should have less spotting than spotting vehicles. The Mobility changes are nice because you feel like you can get to the front lines quickly and be in positions you need to be in to perform the role that you're designed for. However, the nerfs to armour profiles makes them pretty silly. I'm really not sure why the armour profiles were changed so much. Making MBT side armour almost paper thin (200-500) seems a strange balance to me. I can only assume that making every tank bland, and basically the same, is an error or oversight. Giving every tank the same weakspots and making them larger (bar 1 case) seems like it removes skill and knowledge of the game and reduces rewards for long term players who have knowledge of all the other tanks weakspots and what pen is needed for each case. This is not a rewarding gameplay experience, this feels like it's pandering to make the game an arcade shooter which doesn't reward skill and knowledge, rather who can fire quicker. The T-14 now is a powerhouse. It has amazing armour (best frontal armour of any tier 10), mobility and firepower. Sadly, EVERY other tank on the PTS just pales in comparison. It has better frontal armor than the Chally, it has better DPS than the Merk, it has better speed than the Leo. In it's current state, there is simply no reason to play ANY other tank. If the PTS changes get released on Live, I think there would be a strong argument for "Russian Bias" being actually true. The T-14 can perform EVERY role in one tank, where as all other MBT's are shadows of their former selves where they don't really fit any role well. The ATGMs on the tank now take over the role of the PISH shells as they will, frequently, destroy several internal components of a tank and have over 1000mm of heat pen. If anything slightly angles against you, you can wreck it through the sides, or simply track it, flank and wreck the target with a 2nd ATGM in 5 seconds. If it stays at a distance, then you have a topdown ATGM. It fills front & back line roles and can kill anything it faces with relative ease while remaining relatively safe due to unmanned turret, great armour and a rapid fire gun. The reduction in damage to the ATDU Pish shells is strange, it's a niche shell that performs 1 task well and allows the ATDU to perform some what decently. Adding 10mm of pen, but reducing damage by 33% is a crap trade off. It can't disable things with 1 shots anymore, often requiring 2 or 3 shots do knock out a turret ring or ammo rack, so it doesn't really fill any role. By the time you've done 1800 damage, it's piers can dish out around 3-5k. Combined with the "slow" reload (of around 8 seconds) makes it a weak choice to play in any map. It's armor is now crap and you can't angle at all as you WILL be penned. The Leo, while having a high damage shell, is weak frontally and will get killed quickly. I always imagine it to be more of a "support" MBT, slightly behind the front line providing fire support. Now with the mobility changes, I feel it won't really be able to perform that role as it will be playing catch up all the time. The Merk is interesting as having a 4 second re-arm on it's shots is pretty silly! Highest DPM and great frontal armour. Not sure if this was intended or a mistake I did not test the Abrams line as it was clearly inferior to every other line. As it stands, there is little (if any) point in picking any shell other than a gun fired ATGM. AP can bounce, Heat has been nerfed, so you run with ATGMs as if they can pen, they hit harder than any other shell. If they don't pen, they'll still deal damage. Please provide additional feedback to Tier 7-10 AFVs in 0.33. What would you improve? What seem to be the problems? The limited play of AFVs I performed left them feeling somewhat lacking. With the mobility buffs to MBTs I didn't really see a need to test them extensively as they would be overtaken by MBTs with similar / higher effective DPS and better armour. If a MBT is infront of you already spotting and dealing large amounts of damage, why would you be sitting behind them trying to spot for them and not be able to deal damage? Please provide additional feedback to Tier 7-10 TDs in 0.33. What would you improve? What seem to be the problems? The only TDs that stood a chance at keeping up with MBT dps were ATGM based ones, or if it wasn't ATGM based, then equipping full ATGM loadouts. They still fell short. The mobility and vision range nerfs on TDs felt like it wasn't needed. They are designed to get to a spot and sit there for a while, while being stealthy and wrecking things from a distance. Now it feels like the best TD is the T-14. It has better / the same damage output with higher mobility & armour. With dedicated ATGM based TD's, I'm not sure the reason for longer intra-shot delays. They have, in most cases, worse performance to MBT's. The AFT for example, can hit hard with it's ATGMs, but it fires a salvo of 8 ATGMs with ~4 seconds intra-shot delay. Once it has shot 8, it'll than have to reload for ~30 seconds. Replace the AFT with a T-14 and suddenly you have similar / better performing ATGMs on a ~5 second reload, with no long reload, with the advantage of Top Down attacks at high range. The reintroduction of 'chip' damage is concern as now, even if your opponent plays their MBT well, they can always be damaged. If, for example, an AFT can unload all 8 ATGMs into the enemy tank, even if you don't pen they will be taking around 1700 damage (1 ATGM blocked by APS). This will not give MBT's a good player experience as it doesn't reward skill, it rewards lobbing ATGMs at a target and getting rewarded for it. While yes, it won't kill the MBT, it will knock nearly half of it's HP off. Now if you platooned up with somebody else who owned the AFT, you now have 16 ATGMs and can do around 3600 damage - enough to cripple or kill most MBTs, without scoring a penetrating hit. This is not rewarding gameplay, this is making ATGMs the ONLY choice in any tank, on ANY platform. Please provide additional feedback to Tier 7-10 LTs in 0.33. What would you improve? What seem to be the problems? A less armoured version of MBTs, with worse mobility. It felt like they were outperformed in their role. Edit: As if feels, if PTS changes went live, it would kill the game. It would become Armoured Warfare T-14 ATGM Edition, or simply just be called Project Armarta, with the removal of all other tanks from the game, just different tiers of the T-14

OS: Windows 10 Home, 64bit Game Version: 0.32.7221 (Current version ) Brief Description: The HE shells of the Object and T-14 152 have more pen than listed on their HE shots. It's listed as 51mm but can pen the chally tier 9/10 in the rear (listed at 158mm of armor) Steps to Reproduce: Take out one of the 152mm tanks, load HE and aim at enemies - specific note is that the HE can pen the rear of most tier 10 MBTs for full damage Result: Larger than expected damage results Expected Behavior: Non pen or minor splash damage Fixes/Workarounds: Has been reported and is being investigated Other Notes: Slightly silly that it slipped past QA?

The way I am reading from the description it would just mean that you would have +1 / -2 MM so I think it would be mainly aimed at tier 8's so they don't fight tier 10's. Maybe tier 7 but I'm not sure they get matched to tier 9 often

I have to say, some of these changes make no difference to me - the camo, avatar or title things don't really change much. The BH tanks making them +1 rather than +2 MM, as it currently stands I can see it being a cash grab rather than any meaningful change. Not quite sure what the decision was to introduce this but as it stands, I'd like to see the other changes being brought in with .33 to see if those have different MM criteria. For all we know, .33 will change the MM based on a number of different factors that we have 0 clue about atm. It could also be that it changes nothing. It could mean that standard PvP does become about playing the OP tank for it's tier, as it's normal counter would be +2...but I'd argue that if the balance means that a tank has a counter that's 2 tiers higher, something is wrong with it. From the theory, I can't see that this will be game breaking at present. I'd like to see how the other rebalances work out before confirming my stance on it. There is also the part that I suspect a lot of players will simply just play tanks to progress - for those long time players, we might dabble in BH a tank or 2 for when we want less stressful games. Regarding the fuel tank fire's - I've had a quick look through at tanks that I could see this being a major factor. I know Has advised the Bradley has it's fuel tank in the front. I know the Mercs have theirs in the front but with both of these tanks, the engine is right there next to it. I can't really think of any times I would look at a tank that I can pen and think 'Oh I should aim for the fuel tank because it could start a fire if I destroy it'. Most of the time, if I can pen it destroy a competent I'll either aim ammo rack, for likely large explosion and fire, or slowing reload times or the turret ring so I can then take it out of the fight for a short time. Perhaps if somebody could give me examples to consider?