Captiannemo

Speaking of pay to win...

I did use to do a weekly sacrifice of chickens to the RNJesus every Monday to help my scumbag life as an artillery player in WoT... 
I suppose its how I bounced a 50mm round off the back of the T5 Grille...

But it is a fair response. So one has to give them credit for that.

On 12/1/2020 at 5:51 AM, Haswell said:

This stage is, perhaps, the simplest and it is quite capable of being mastered by any user.

I wish this was the case... This section of work is very very difficult IF you don't have the physical access to a vehicle. If you do, its mainly very difficult.

The people who can do this sort of stuff tend to specialize in their research. They might for example only work on US vehicles... from WW2 to the 1970s...

For the MBT-70 and Kpz-70 multiple people with access to various resources had to be asked out of the UK, Germany, Canada and the US to get the details needed.
For Chieftain a combination of UK, German and Swedish information. Taking several trips to archives and physical vehicles to get even close to getting it right.

On top of this is a indepth knowledge of the vehicles development (for modules) and when you want multiple copies of a vehicle back to back. Say M1 and M1A1... how all of the R&D worked at the time and how all of the various systems and subsystems developed. You need all of this to give the developers a pool big enough that the players then have something to grind for, while being historically correct. Why make any mod up when you have no reason to?

Will most of it never see the light of day? Yes, very much so. But without the details the developers have to end up making stuff up or guessing... And this happened in concert with the Consultants on the Taifun II to sort out WHICH 120mm would be the most likely choice since no documentation on which model existed. Preventing such a situation rests with the hard research before things progress to the next step.

Nemo.
One of the ExpertVehicleConsultant.

1 hour ago, Pesa_ said:

i think the era placement was never fixed because they forgot about it, i think it was in obsidian era as well so they had a lot of stuff going on at that time 

They did know. Obsidian. But it was long kicked down the list because other things that were broken needed fixing. Which, frankly, was the right thing to do. Unless it was a severe issue it was always kicked down the to do list. Only so many things could be done in a given amount of time.

2 minutes ago, Pesa_ said:

i cant stand the era on t80b turret, its placed too high on the cheeks. its my favorite tank and i get sad every time i see it. cant wait for them to fix it

Thats because it was done wrong... How? nobody seems to be sure yet. The Devs have the corrections for it, plus the shape of the turret(rear and rear underside, and rear side), plus other things to do when it gets fixed.

T-80 is like the T-72, once the first few were in even the Devs didn't want to have 101 versions of the tanks in the game. As that would be bad for everyone.

The T-72 is getting fixes (models) and the T-80 has long been on the list to fix with the data collected a long time ago... its been waiting its turn. Much like the M1.

best part of the game is all of the behind the scenes research done on the vehicles to put them into the game...

frankly its rather easy to hit things at 100m on the move... even with the M551 which spits out 2000 fps shells and is my vehicle of choice.

I did the survey as well. Hopefully it all gets used.

There was never not a focus on PVP.  PVP has always been the goal with AW.