Jump to content
Haswell

September 17 Q&A (from Discord)

Recommended Posts

Lots of stuff, I tried to truncate the uninteresting bits but there's still a ton of mildly interesting answers.

  • MBT side armor being homogenized as steel (losing the extra armor from tracks and add-on blocks) is intended.
  • MBTs are not intended to be more mobile than lights, this is still being looked into.
  • AGDS missiles having a ~50m minimum range is intended for balance.
  • No new dealer this year. No plans for next year yet.
  • TDs not having fast ammo swap is intended because balance, and players "generally have more time" (note: MIGHT be true if said players exclusively sit at the back of the map, which brings their competency into question)
  • Vehicle balance will continue to be tuned throughout 0.33. 0.34 will feature bigger balance changes based on data and feedback.
  • 0.34 will come this year. (note: possibly November/December for the next BP)
  • MM changes did not happen with the high tier rebalancing.
  • ATGM chip damage is intended to counter long range hulldown invulnerability and reward players for hitting things. The chip damage isn't effective in PvP. (note: if it has that little effect in PvP, why add it in the first place?)
  • Excessive drifting may be bugs.
  • The next Raid will have adjusted missions, but the mechanics will be the same as the previous one. (note: which means nothing of value will be lost if people ignore the whole thing just like last time.)
  • Abrams and Challenger series having their armor characteristics swapped (Abrams having much better armor now) is intended.The
  • The current armor configuration of Challenger series is intended.
  • MBT armor being homogenized and made boring is because "the developers wish it so". Devs want to change the meta from learning weakspots to simply checking distance and swapping ammo. (note: literally removing skill from the game)
  • Custom decals in 2021, maybe. (note: just mod them in yourself)
  • Arty in PvP got shelved, at least until 0.34.
  • Move command for infantry is canned. Direct fire command is being developed.
  • No plans to monetize player avatars and titles, not worth it.
  • New PvE missions in late 2020 or early 2021.
  • HE mechanics got changed, but it's not described in the patch notes and even SS isn't sure about it. (note: what's the point of patch notes then?)
  • Skill-based gameplay "got us nowhere". (note: not sure if this is SS's opinion or fact. Either way it matches the trend of gameplay being dumbed down.)
  • No plans to accelerate account progression (ie. grinds), the progression is already fast enough as it is.
  • ATGM reload animations are expensive and complicated to develop, requiring maybe one month of work per vehicle.
  • No plans to add daily overviews (ie. WoT-style session logs). Not needed due to the low amount of matches played daily (2-5) for the typical player.
  • No plans to improve infantry movement animations, too expensive and not important enough.
  • 0.33 was deemed "sufficient" after PTS2 for release. The release is also partially forced by deadlines and milestones. (note: this confirms my suspicion of the operator holding the reins on the devs.)
  • Overall feedback for 0.33 is positive, there will be no rollbacks.
  • No plans to change SPG mechanics.
  • Abrams series will be remodeled, and possibly the T-80U next.
  • Tracked vehicles not losing much speed on turning is intended "to make gameplay more dynamic" (note: someone also said the same thing about arty in WoT promoting "dynamic" gameplay)
  • The upcoming PvP map Al Dabbah will be "really big".
  • Soft kill APS is being investigated, but the increased missile noise is intended "to make [hits] feel rewarding". (note: so literally reward mechanics based on RNG)
  • One reason for the 0.33 changes is to "make the game feel more fresh". (note: different, yes. Fresh, probably not.)
  • MBT side armor being largely invulnerable to autocannons is intended.
  • Spec ops is over, no more spec ops. (note: this is the 3rd time someone asked this IIRC, read the previous Q&As)
  • AI behavior will get tweaked. Wheeled bots soon, hopefully.
  • SS would like to see a good storyline without the Enigma stuff, more PvE and less PvP. (note: one can dream)
  • No plans for smaller team sizes in PvE (including spec ops).
  • Bradley TOW launcher never elevated. (note: false. See Salter & Morey, Bradley Infantry Fighting Vehicle Procedures Guides: Evaluation, Appendix D, pg. 34 & 46. Link below.)
  • Bradley TOW launcher never had elevation/depression in the game.
  • Some HE shells aren't tuned properly, probably related to the undocumented HE mechanic changes.
  • MBT meta is intended.
  • Some HEAT shells retaining their bonus damage are not intended, will be fixed.
  • Ranked Battles disallowing platoons of mixed battalion members are intended, in order to promote large battalions.
  • TD autocannons having double shot (ie. twin barrel Termi series) is a bug.
  • Low tiers will also be rebalanced.
  • No new heroic maps. Not worth it, maybe next year, maybe not.
  • Launcher elevation/depression in-game is only considered for vehicles that have the ability IRL. (note: didn't they say the same thing last year about the T-15 fixed launchers being intended, then added launcher movement anyway?)
  • The current contract reward lootbox is still the Eastern Crate.
  • No plans to nerf HESH/PISH.
  • The current gameplay feels more "dynamic", akin to pre-0.19.
  • Devs are not keen on adding back the Wiesel 20mm.
  • Devs prefer to add interesting vehicles, such as having multiple turrets or other interesting mechanics.
  • Each game season will become very long. Spirithaven started in February and will end later this year.
  • Infantry skins are very expensive and lack monetization potential.
  • Enigma's Legacy performed "surprisingly well". (note: if they mean more players spent money, maybe.)
  • The next PvE mission will use a modified spec ops map.

 

Raw dump:

Spoiler

12:00 AM
]
SilentstalkerFTR
:
Alright then. Let's begin.
[
12:00 AM
]
Azdule
:
Is it intended that all MBTs side armor above the tracks is now steel?  The reason I ask is because on tanks where the hull extends over the tracks, it's now classing the composite armor as steel, effectively removing large amounts of armor from them
[
12:00 AM
]
Universali
:
any news on the bradley launcher? :GWsetmyxPeepoSad:
[
12:01 AM
]
Arpalys
:
So.. how's fixing all the broken things going?
[
12:01 AM
]
SilentstalkerFTR
:

    Is it intended that all MBTs side armor above the tracks is now steel?  The reason I ask is because on tanks where the hull extends over the tracks, it's now classing the composite armor as steel, effectively removing large amounts of armor from them

@Azdule As far as I can tell, yes. Some tanks were investigated and the armor was found to be okay.
[
12:01 AM
]
Doktor Plama
:
Hi SS! Will you be playing CP2077 when it comes out in November? :slight_smile:
[
12:01 AM
]
SilentstalkerFTR
:

    any news on the bradley launcher? :GWsetmyxPeepoSad:

@Universali This is not even 0 priority task, more like -1
[
12:02 AM
]
SilentstalkerFTR
:

    So.. how's fixing all the broken things going?

@Arpalys Fine. Hotfix of some stuff next week. But not that much is broken.
[
12:02 AM
]
SilentstalkerFTR
:

    Hi SS! Will you be playing CP2077 when it comes out in November? :slight_smile:

@Doktor Plama Yes
[
12:02 AM
]
Pesa
:
is it intended for mbt to be faster than lts? because as it is now, there are no reason to play light tanks, since mbt can do everything better
[
12:03 AM
]
SilentstalkerFTR
:

    is it intended for mbt to be faster than lts? because as it is now, there are no reason to play light tanks, since mbt can do everything better

@Pesa They aren't, generally speaking. Definitely not on average. But we are still looking into some mobility tasks.
[
12:04 AM
]
Crimson Beelzebub
:
is the AGDS new atgm launch path intended? before 0.33 it has a better launch path which allow it to engage targets much closer.
[
12:05 AM
]
SilentstalkerFTR
:

    is the AGDS new atgm launch path intended? before 0.33 it has a better launch path which allow it to engage targets much closer.

@Crimson Beelzebub Yes. This was specifically investigated and the minimum range of cca 50m is intended. It is the price of having 12 missiles instead of the 4 BMPTs do.
[
12:05 AM
]
joebob73
:
Was it intended to nerf the firepower of many TD/LTs?
For example, the WWO Wilk lost alpha damage and fire rate as a result of the changes
The Zubr PSP, with the same gun, only lost alpha damage
This is because there was a global change to this module, which is 7% now but gave 13% pre-patch.
In general, this has reduced the firepower of TDs and LTs, which didn't get their fire rate adjusted in the patch.
https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/746008911861121086/756183804535898212/unknown.png module in question

Also, slow mode is set to 10min instead of 5 right now
[
12:06 AM
]
Kampfpudding / Puddi
:
When does the next dealer come into play with vehicles (e.g. more than 10 vehicles)
[
12:06 AM
]
SilentstalkerFTR
:

    Was it intended to nerf the firepower of many TD/LTs?
    For example, the WWO Wilk lost alpha damage and fire rate as a result of the changes
    The Zubr PSP, with the same gun, only lost alpha damage
    This is because there was a global change to this module, which is 7% now but gave 13% pre-patch.
    In general, this has reduced the firepower of TDs and LTs, which didn't get their fire rate adjusted in the patch.
    https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/746008911861121086/756183804535898212/unknown.png module in question

@joebob73 But TDs for example don't have the same AP decay the MBTs do. MBTs also became less capable of spotting. So is it really a nerf?
[
12:06 AM
]
SilentstalkerFTR
:
Oh and the slow mode is intended to deal with the initial question spam. I'l reduce it.
[
12:07 AM
]
SilentstalkerFTR
:

    When does the next dealer come into play with vehicles (e.g. more than 10 vehicles)

@Kampfpudding / Puddi Not this year. Plans for the next year are not set yet.
[
12:07 AM
]
[IHS]Yxlouvia
:
why mbts and Lts have fast ammo swap while  Tds dont have?
[
12:07 AM
]
knausis
:
K1A1 and Type90 had almost the same HP pool, why K1A1 with much weaker armor now have 850 HP less than Type90?
[
12:08 AM
]
TeyKey1
:
I suppose devs are now closely monitoring the performance of all the adjusted vehicles. Will there be a "bigger" patch in the near future addressing balance issues that pain 0.33 or will they just do this step by step with various hotfixes?
[
12:08 AM
]
SilentstalkerFTR
:

    why mbts and Lts have fast ammo swap while  Tds dont have?

@[IHS]Yxlouvia Because their drivers need to make split second decisions while TD operators generally have more time. Also, because of balance.
[
12:09 AM
]
SilentstalkerFTR
:

    K1A1 and Type90 had almost the same HP pool, why K1A1 with much weaker armor now have 850 HP less than Type90?

@knausis I assume it's because it has other advantages, like firepower. But I don't know their stats from the top of my head.
[
12:09 AM
]
Eisenherz
:
Will there be any additional large content updates for this year, or are we looking at small patches and hotfixes till 2021?
[
12:09 AM
]
SilentstalkerFTR
:

    I suppose devs are now closely monitoring the performance of all the adjusted vehicles. Will there be a "bigger" patch in the near future addressing balance issues that pain 0.33 or will they just do this step by step with various hotfixes?

@TeyKey1 Yes. For one, we'll be tuning the balance further throughout 0.33, but 0.34 should have some additional larger changes based on the data and your feedback. It's a process.
[
12:10 AM
]
SilentstalkerFTR
:

    Will there be any additional large content updates for this year, or are we looking at small patches and hotfixes till 2021?

@Eisenherz Yes. 0.34 will come this year.
[
12:11 AM
]
Arpalys
:
People seems to have PVP match Tier 6 facing Tier 7. I remember matchmaker will be tweaked regarding the update, and it seems to be not working.
[
12:11 AM
]
Azdule
:
Was the intention to add chip damage back into the game intended to reduce the challenge and remove skill from the game?  I phrase it as such because now you aren't rewarded for playing well in frontline tanks as you can now be punished as you take damage without penetrations.  You are rewarded for slinging as much HEAT and ATGMS from range to deal damage consistently and without skill.
[
12:11 AM
]
Last_Dutch_Hero
:
Question. I noticed there was a change is vehicle behaviour in the grip department. i am able to Tokio drift in many occansions which i did not do before. Is this a actual change or a bug, and would it be implomented further since it still feels kinda crude.
[
12:12 AM
]
Sinny's
:
Will the historically wrong machineguns models mounted on the turrets of certain vehicles be adressed ?
[
12:12 AM
]
SilentstalkerFTR
:

    People seems to have PVP match Tier 6 facing Tier 7. I remember matchmaker will be tweaked regarding the update, and it seems to be not working.

@Arpalys That does not mean Tier 6s will never see Tier 7s in battles I guess. Honestly, I don't think any MM changes happened, but T5-6 is popular enough not to make this bracket too toxic. Yesterday I played a bunch of PvP matches in my T-72B and didn't see a single T8
[
12:12 AM
]
Doktor Plama
:
About the upcoming "raid" event: will it be possible to complete it (get all the rewards) by playing PvE only or the mechanics will be exactly the same as in the last one??
[
12:13 AM
]
SilentstalkerFTR
:

    Was the intention to add chip damage back into the game intended to reduce the challenge and remove skill from the game?  I phrase it as such because now you aren't rewarded for playing well in frontline tanks as you can now be punished as you take damage without penetrations.  You are rewarded for slinging as much HEAT and ATGMS from range to deal damage consistently and without skill.

@Azdule The intention was to counter the now-nearly-invulnerable turret armor at long distances and to reward ATGM vehicle players for a successfully landed shot. Additionally, the chip damage isn't serious enough to play a major role in PvP anyway.
[
12:14 AM
]
AoToA
:
How about make some title n portrait for players who have lots of tanks. Making Special Title n portrait is no need lots of money but it can give lots of satisfaction for royal users (especially for who have tons of premium tanks include color swap versions) and ofcourse players who want that title n portrait will buy premium tanks then ofcourse it can make more money back to company too. in 0.33, title n portrait are really important for some people who want be diffrent with other. So by the ownerwhip bonus or collected tank number, give special portrait n title is good idea i think.(by levels, diffrent stage is also good like 200,250,300 vehicle)And i wish you people do make high quality portrait and sell it by market. It can be collective one
[
12:14 AM
]
di_duncan
:
Why is MBT armor still boring and homogenized across the board? It makes combat tiresome and very uninteresting, especially with the effectiveness of facehugging.
[
12:14 AM
]
SilentstalkerFTR
:

    Question. I noticed there was a change is vehicle behaviour in the grip department. i am able to Tokio drift in many occansions which i did not do before. Is this a actual change or a bug, and would it be implomented further since it still feels kinda crude.

@Last_Dutch_Hero We have changed the mobility of some vehicles, yes. That was one of 0.33's features. If some tanks drift too much, it may be a bug.
[
12:14 AM
]
zenoniations[EATER]
:
Abrams now a new Challenger and vice versa, is this change is intended?
[
12:14 AM
]
SilentstalkerFTR
:

    About the upcoming "raid" event: will it be possible to complete it (get all the rewards) by playing PvE only or the mechanics will be exactly the same as in the last one??

@Doktor Plama Some missions were adjusted (the most toxic ones were removed IIRC) but otherwise, the mechancis will be the same.
[
12:15 AM
]
Arpalys
:
Is it intended that PELE to be less effective? While I can understand autocannon PELE nerf, but Wilk PELE is kinda pointless now. Its penetration and damage are both lower than AP, and its module damage is somewhat inconsistent, especially when facing MBT.
[
12:15 AM
]
SilentstalkerFTR
:

    Abrams now a new Challenger and vice versa, is this change is intended?

@zenoniations[EATER] Apparently so. I asked specifically about the Challenger line armor and the answer was that it was all intended. Further tweaks may happen based on collected data, but it's not a bug.
[
12:15 AM
]
joebob73
:
The reload module change causes the Zubr PSP to be a better TD than the WWO Wilk, while being a tier lower, as it now has better DPM.  Is this intentional?
Another annoying change is missile vehicles receiving significantly increased between-shot and launcher reload times, on top of having a lower damage potential per shot.  This nerfs their performance against all targets, and together with the buffed soft-kill, makes them very aggravating to play.  Were missiles that overperforming?

Also, thanks for doing these things, it really helps having some information about what's coming
[
12:15 AM
]
SilentstalkerFTR
:

    Is it intended that PELE to be less effective? While I can understand autocannon PELE nerf, but Wilk PELE is kinda pointless now. Its penetration and damage are both lower than AP, and its module damage is somewhat inconsistent, especially when facing MBT.

@Arpalys I saw. Sounds like a bug but I am not sure, haven't seen it reported anywhere.
[
12:15 AM
]
Tikburg
:
custom decal locations?
[
12:16 AM
]
SilentstalkerFTR
:

    How about make some title n portrait for players who have lots of tanks. Making Special Title n portrait is no need lots of money but it can give lots of satisfaction for royal users (especially for who have tons of premium tanks include color swap versions) and ofcourse players who want that title n portrait will buy premium tanks then ofcourse it can make more money back to company too. in 0.33, title n portrait are really important for some people who want be diffrent with other. So by the ownerwhip bonus or collected tank number, give special portrait n title is good idea i think.(by levels diffrent stage is also good)And i wish you people do make high quality portrait and sell it by market. It can be collective one

@AoToA Sorry, this is almost too long to read. You don't need to post your suggestions here, it's not a question.
[
12:16 AM
]
Azdule
:
Are the devs aware that with the new changes to ammo types that AP is basically rendered useless as you can always deal damage with HEAT, through chip damage, and if AP can pen, HEAT can pen for more damage meaning that firing AP renders you less effective?
[
12:16 AM
]
SilentstalkerFTR
:

    Will the historically wrong machineguns models mounted on the turrets of certain vehicles be adressed ?

@Sinny's Yes. We have several tasks for fixing that already.
[
12:17 AM
]
Kampfpudding / Puddi
:
When will the Artys be back in PVP. There is no point in increasing them if they are part of modern warfare. You had to replace them with groups of mortars where you were only spammed. Artys can also be used in a direct fire fight with a high three charge and to fire at long targets?
[
12:17 AM
]
T-R3KT
:
Will any other ramming vehicles like the m1a1 storm ever be added?
[
12:17 AM
]
Pesa
:
like i said before, mbts have more top speed than light tanks, just check their stats in game, anyway a lot of mbts have their side armor miscalculated, like the atdu and ariete, their armor blocks are counted as 35mm even if aiming at them frontally, and bots autopen your sides even if you angle slightly, is this intended? there is no reason to be aggressive with mbt because of chip damage and heat not losing pen with distance
[
12:18 AM
]
SilentstalkerFTR
:

    Why is MBT armor still boring and homogenized across the board? It makes combat tiresome and very uninteresting, especially with the effectiveness of facehugging.

@di_duncan Because the developers wish it so. Meta is supposed to shift from "know the weakspot" to "know the distance and ammo you can use"
[
12:18 AM
]
Doktor Plama
:
Is "move" command for infantry still in the works, or was it scrapped?
[
12:18 AM
]
SilentstalkerFTR
:

    The reload module change causes the Zubr PSP to be a better TD than the WWO Wilk, while being a tier lower, as it now has better DPM.  Is this intentional?
    Another annoying change is missile vehicles receiving significantly increased between-shot and launcher reload times, on top of having a lower damage potential per shot.  This nerfs their performance against all targets, and together with the buffed soft-kill, makes them very aggravating to play.  Were missiles that overperforming?

    Also, thanks for doing these things, it really helps having some information about what's coming

@joebob73 ZUBR also has two modules, so I assume some nerfs are the price for its versatility. Not sure.
[
12:19 AM
]
EnrlichHartman
:
New standar pve misions , at least coming in next year?
[
12:19 AM
]
SilentstalkerFTR
:

    custom decal locations?

@Tikburg That's in our backlog for years now. It was actually recently brought up so maybe in 2021
[
12:19 AM
]
AoToA
:
Ok then. is there plan for making portrait n title to sell in market?
[
12:19 AM
]
joebob73
:
Zubr is a tier 7, and the WWO Wilk is a tier 8
the tier 8 is the one that got the harsher DPM nerf, making the more versatile lower tier just a better vehicle
this doesn't make much sense, no?
[
12:19 AM
]
Arpalys
:
The patch note mentions HE shell mechanic change, but how exactly its changed?
[
12:19 AM
]
SilentstalkerFTR
:

    Are the devs aware that with the new changes to ammo types that AP is basically rendered useless as you can always deal damage with HEAT, through chip damage, and if AP can pen, HEAT can pen for more damage meaning that firing AP renders you less effective?

@Azdule Chip damage is not really effective and doesn't work well in PvP. It feels you are equating "the ability to do some damage" and "doing damage" but that's for a longer discussion.
[
12:20 AM
]
SilentstalkerFTR
:
But to answer you - yes they are aware.
[
12:20 AM
]
SilentstalkerFTR
:

    When will the Artys be back in PVP. There is no point in increasing them if they are part of modern warfare. You had to replace them with groups of mortars where you were only spammed. Artys can also be used in a direct fire fight with a high three charge and to fire at long targets?

@Kampfpudding / Puddi For now, this topic got shelved, at least until 0.34
[
12:20 AM
]
di_duncan
:

    @di_duncan Because the developers wish it so. Meta is supposed to shift from "know the weakspot" to "know the distance and ammo you can use"

This is worrying. So the devs prioritize brainless play over a skilled and knowledge-based combat dynamic? Sounds like they are headed entirely in the wrong direction.
[
12:20 AM
]
SilentstalkerFTR
:

    Will any other ramming vehicles like the m1a1 storm ever be added?

@T-R3KT From the top of my head, we don't have such plans but I am not really sure. It's a really niche thing.
[
12:21 AM
]
Tikburg
:
So... did the devs give up the dialog problems especially when you Alt+Tab?
[
12:21 AM
]
xxdd
:
Question about XP/credit earnings: will be there any changes concerning those, specially XP department. Because with boosts and premium account XP grinding feels like a slog, specially on high tiers. Even on GLOPS with win, booster, premium account and daily bonuses on tier 9-10 I barely get 50k XP.
[
12:21 AM
]
SilentstalkerFTR
:

    like i said before, mbts have more top speed than light tanks, just check their stats in game, anyway a lot of mbts have their side armor miscalculated, like the atdu and ariete, their armor blocks are counted as 35mm even if aiming at them frontally, and bots autopen your sides even if you angle slightly, is this intended? there is no reason to be aggressive with mbt because of chip damage and heat not losing pen with distance

@Pesa You know raw stats do not equal actual behavior, yes? Some tanks do have issues reaching their maximum speed for example.
[
12:21 AM
]
SilentstalkerFTR
:

    Is "move" command for infantry still in the works, or was it scrapped?

@Doktor Plama Move was scrapped. Too many problems with pathfinding. But we will have directed fire.
[
12:22 AM
]
SilentstalkerFTR
:

    Ok then. is there plan for making portrait n title to sell in market?

@AoToA No. The perceived value of such a thing is really low. Not worth doing.
[
12:22 AM
]
SilentstalkerFTR
:

    New standar pve misions , at least coming in next year?

@EnrlichHartman This year or the early next.
[
12:22 AM
]
E404
:
Good day SS, How much time does the devs add those ATGM Reload animations?
[
12:22 AM
]
Kampfpudding / Puddi
:
When will we get an overview in the garage of what we have done in one day. Whether you've fallen or risen in the WinRate or how many battles you've fought.
[
12:23 AM
]
SilentstalkerFTR
:

    Zubr is a tier 7, and the WWO Wilk is a tier 8
    the tier 8 is the one that got the harsher DPM nerf, making the more versatile lower tier just a better vehicle
    this doesn't make much sense, no?

@joebob73 I really don't have the capacity to drop everything right now and go verify everything you say, sorry. That's not something I can answer right now.
[
12:23 AM
]
Sinny's
:
Is there plans to make infantry's movement more fluid and human instead of them instantly changing direction when walking or getting up ?
[
12:23 AM
]
PrinceDavi
:
Do you believe that .33 was fully tested out and approved for release or was it rushed?
[
12:23 AM
]
SilentstalkerFTR
:

    The patch note mentions HE shell mechanic change, but how exactly its changed?

@Arpalys That's something I'd like to know myself. IIRC they played around with the threshold and the thin armor detection mechanism but it wasn't really described anywhere, even internally. I'll ask.
[
12:23 AM
]
Azdule
:
With the overall feeling from the player base being that these changes aren't really great for the game, if the player base does drop are their plans to remedy these issues or revert the changes?
[
12:23 AM
]
Druxus
:
How about adding in a favorites section for Flags and Decals. If you have been here since the start you have so many decals
[
12:24 AM
]
SilentstalkerFTR
:

    This is worrying. So the devs prioritize brainless play over a skilled and knowledge-based combat dynamic? Sounds like they are headed entirely in the wrong direction.

@di_duncan Focusing on "skilled players" got us nowhere. That's a losing bet.
[
12:24 AM
]
SilentstalkerFTR
:

    So... did the devs give up the dialog problems especially when you Alt+Tab?

@Tikburg Don't understand the question.
[
12:25 AM
]
SilentstalkerFTR
:

    Question about XP/credit earnings: will be there any changes concerning those, specially XP department. Because with boosts and premium account XP grinding feels like a slog, specially on high tiers. Even on GLOPS with win, booster, premium account and daily bonuses on tier 9-10 I barely get 50k XP.

@xxdd Not that I know of. I am fairly sure we have no plans to significantly increase the game's progress. If you really want to see slog, play War Thunder. Our progression is much, MUCH faster.
[
12:26 AM
]
SilentstalkerFTR
:

    Good day SS, How much time does the devs add those ATGM Reload animations?

@E404 Anything animated is quite expensive and not easy, so I'm thinking a month or so per vehicle?
[
12:26 AM
]
B1itzdevil
:
Will there be any further changes to the Arty class in the game, such new ammo types  or stat changes in general?
[
12:26 AM
]
SilentstalkerFTR
:

    When will we get an overview in the garage of what we have done in one day. Whether you've fallen or risen in the WinRate or how many battles you've fought.

@Kampfpudding / Puddi There already is a log. Some broader overview is not really needed when a typical player plays like two to five battles a day.
[
12:27 AM
]
야채호빵(samuelchoi)
:
Which tanks will be next to be remodel? T-80U?
[
12:28 AM
]
Wodan
:
What is ideology behind making wheeled vehicles, or specifically AFVs like Sphinx, Shadow, Kornet, have trouble reaching their top speeds while MBTs slide across the map reaching speeds of 55 kph+ with no issues.
[
12:28 AM
]
SilentstalkerFTR
:

    Is there plans to make infantry's movement more fluid and human instead of them instantly changing direction when walking or getting up ?

@Sinny's Not that I know of. Infantry changes in general are REALLY expensive. Like, a lot. What you suggest is very likely not worth doing because there are much more urgent issues when it comes to the modeling team.
[
12:30 AM
]
Arpalys
:
Some vehicles with ready rack have too slow reload rate compared with others. For example, XM1A3's 120mm is only 1.8s faster than 140mm, K2's ready rack have same burst fire rate as magazine while reloading only single shot takes 2s longer than stock cannon. CATTB and TTB suffers from very long reload time.(10s and 15s each) Do you think its that worth it for burst fire, or is this going to be addressed in the future?
[
12:30 AM
]
di_duncan
:
Why do many tracked vehicles lose little if any speed while traversing, even during sharp (180°+) turns? Even wheeled vehicle speeds stagnate while turning...
[
12:30 AM
]
SilentstalkerFTR
:

    Do you believe that .33 was fully tested out and approved for release or was it rushed?

@PrinceDavi It was quite a long time in development so yes, after PTS2, the state was sufficient (or at least matching what was intended). But at the same time, we all have deadlines and milestones to meet and gaming industry is no exception. That's just business. We have some margin (we did use that, the PTS was for example delayed by like two weeks), but not an infinite amount of space.
[
12:30 AM
]
SilentstalkerFTR
:

    How about adding in a favorites section for Flags and Decals. If you have been here since the start you have so many decals

@Druxus Good suggestion.
[
12:31 AM
]
Crimson Beelzebub
:
was it intentional that the K21-XC-8 or the Wilk XC-8 has no machinegun modelled on the turret despite that both can now use one? In retrospect, despite the PLZ-05 says it can now use the MG, in game theres no option to select the MG ammo?
[
12:32 AM
]
the clay pigeon
:
Will singapore get a decal for its flag soon, so I can put it on my hunter?
[
12:33 AM
]
Kampfpudding / Puddi
:
When can we wait for bigger cards?
[
12:33 AM
]
SilentstalkerFTR
:

    With the overall feeling from the player base being that these changes aren't really great for the game, if the player base does drop are their plans to remedy these issues or revert the changes?

@Azdule But our feedback collection shows the feeling IS generally positive. You are making a mistake of assuming that everyone things the way the elite veterans do. They don't. I know it's hard to believe (and for me hard to explain) but some things (like tank X has pen Y and therefore is worse than Z because etc etc) may be serious to the elite players, but in the grand scheme of things, they are absolutely marginal. What matters is the feeling of the game. With that being said, it's not like we won't deal wth your feedback, we are in fact analyzing it every day, whole day. But it's not the end of all things and there will definitely not be any rollbacks.
[
12:33 AM
]
SilentstalkerFTR
:

    Will there be any further changes to the Arty class in the game, such new ammo types  or stat changes in general?

@B1itzdevil Not for the near future.
[
12:33 AM
]
Krieger22
:
Why was ATGM noise increased across the board? Soft kill APS on bots is now significantly more effective
[
12:33 AM
]
Qbicle
:

    Meta is supposed to shift from "know the weakspot" to "know the distance and ammo you can use"

What is the notion behind this paradigm shift? Is the concept of weakspots becoming problematic for overall gameplay?
[
12:33 AM
]
SilentstalkerFTR
:

    Which tanks will be next to be remodel? T-80U?

@야채호빵(samuelchoi) The Abrams series. After that, probably the T-80U.
[
12:34 AM
]
SilentstalkerFTR
:

    What is ideology behind making wheeled vehicles, or specifically AFVs like Sphinx, Shadow, Kornet, have trouble reaching their top speeds while MBTs slide across the map reaching speeds of 55 kph+ with no issues.

@Wodan Would have to see specific examples. As a whole, if what you say is true, it's certainly not intended. May be some bugs.
[
12:35 AM
]
SilentstalkerFTR
:

    Some vehicles with ready rack have too slow reload rate compared with others. For example, XM1A3's 120mm is only 1.8s faster than 140mm, K2's ready rack have same burst fire rate as magazine while reloading only single shot takes 2s longer than stock cannon. CATTB and TTB suffers from very long reload time.(10s and 15s each) Do you think its that worth it for burst fire, or is this going to be addressed in the future?

@Arpalys If stats show it needs to be addressed, it will be addressed. Same for any other questions of this type, really. Like I mentioned, we have further adjustments planned for 0.33/34
[
12:35 AM
]
SilentstalkerFTR
:

    Why do many tracked vehicles lose little if any speed while traversing, even during sharp (180°+) turns? Even wheeled vehicle speeds stagnate while turning...

@di_duncan This was specifically intended as one of the goals of the mobility system overhaul. To make the gameplay more dynamic for tracked vehicles, giving you more tactical options etc.
[
12:36 AM
]
SilentstalkerFTR
:

    was it intentional that the K21-XC-8 or the Wilk XC-8 has no machinegun modelled on the turret despite that both can now use one? In retrospect, despite the PLZ-05 says it can now use the MG, in game theres no option to select the MG ammo?

@Crimson Beelzebub Bug
[
12:36 AM
]
Sinny's
:
Several people have pointed the now glaring proportion differences between the new T-72B model and the older T-72s, does this make these model move higher in your reworking priority list to keep the models consistant ?
[
12:36 AM
]
SilentstalkerFTR
:

    Will singapore get a decal for its flag soon, so I can put it on my hunter?

@the clay pigeon Haven't requested it yet, we've been really busy. But I'll make a note.
[
12:37 AM
]
SilentstalkerFTR
:

    When can we wait for bigger cards?

@Kampfpudding / Puddi The upcoming Al Dabbah is really big.
[
12:37 AM
]
joebob73
:
is it really intentional for MBT side armor to be large caliber autocannon (>30mm) proof even at point blank ranges in some cases?  While I think AC effectiveness against MBT was a bit high, the way it is now they're almost immune unless you can get rear armor.  And some vehicles don't have a missile to switch to
[
12:38 AM
]
Nekrosmas
:
Right now, it seem as if many wheelies, LTs as well as some TDs accelerate slower than before (compare to .32), despite the intention of the reverse (i.e. making achieving their top speeds more reliably). Considering the general increase in mobility for MBTs, plus the narrower gap of DPM between TD/LT vs MBTs, it really seems the only thing LT has going for it is viewrange (Sure, its important, but it sacrifices everything for it)

The same also applies to AFVs, and yes I am going to mention the SPHINX again - I recognize the fact that it is suppose to be scout and shouldn't do much damage, but in .33 it:
- Lost some mobility (acceleration is CLEARLY slower than before, you barely even reach 100)
- Lost at least 50% ATGM DPM
- General Autocannon nerf to tank's sides (you really only can penetrate tanks in the ass)
Again, the only thing going for it is the viewrange - and this is also the case for many other AFVs.

The issue is of course MBT doesn't actually need that much viewrange as they have the armor to tank the damage they take even if they can't see it yet. All they need to do is go a bit forward and spot - I really don't see how viewrange is such an important stat that one has to lose everything to gain such an advantage.

My question is: Do the developers really consider viewrange that important of a stat, that a vehicle would have to lose basically all the other things that are important (Firepower, protection, and some mobility) for them to retain the best-in-class viewrange? Are they aware that LTs/AFVs are made rather redundant by MBTs' changes?
[
12:38 AM
]
B1itzdevil
:
Last time we talked about the Spec-Ops story line you said you weren't happy with the direction SH went, and you hoped to steer it in another direction. Seeing that a major patch has dropped, 1) Are we closer to a new SpecOps Story 2) A new Heroic SpecOps 3) Any serkits you can tells about the future Spec-Ops Theme, Location, Etc.?
[
12:38 AM
]
야채호빵(samuelchoi)
:
Will M1A2C have proper new model which has thicker front
 turret and hull armor?
[
12:38 AM
]
SilentstalkerFTR
:

    Why was ATGM noise increased across the board? Soft kill APS on bots is now significantly more effective

@Krieger22 Soft kill APS is under investigation following some 0.33 reports that it's too much. We should have some results in the coming weeks. But generally speaking, it's intended to have lots of anti ATGM defenses to make each ATGM hit feel rewarding (and hurt)
[
12:38 AM
]
TeyKey1
:
With 0.33 being a more "PVP focused" update, can we expect a focus on PVE content/improvements in the future, as the majority of the players is preferring PVE over the PVP modes?
[
12:39 AM
]
SilentstalkerFTR
:

    What is the notion behind this paradigm shift? Is the concept of weakspots becoming problematic for overall gameplay?

@Qbicle That's a difficult question, for which you'd have to talk to the lead designer. Some of these things were explained in the dev articles about T7-10 rebalance, but if you dig deep enough, I think the real reason was to make the game feel more fresh.
[
12:40 AM
]
Tikburg
:
There is a bug which doesnt play the dialog when you Alt+Tab.
This bug is kinda old, but still not fixed.
Will this bug fixed? Or not?
[
12:41 AM
]
Arpalys
:
There are still incoming warning for friendly artillery and mortar fire. I thought this have been fixed long ago?
[
12:41 AM
]
SilentstalkerFTR
:

    Several people have pointed the now glaring proportion differences between the new T-72B model and the older T-72s, does this make these model move higher in your reworking priority list to keep the models consistant ?

@Sinny's Not really. Of course, we'd like to update all models, but unlike the T-72B, which was simply just wrong all the way, the T-72/72A models aren't that bad. Or at least not terribly wrong. So we'll focus on "wrong" rather than "needs improvement"
[
12:42 AM
]
SilentstalkerFTR
:

    is it really intentional for MBT side armor to be large caliber autocannon (>30mm) proof even at point blank ranges in some cases?  While I think AC effectiveness against MBT was a bit high, the way it is now they're almost immune unless you can get rear armor.  And some vehicles don't have a missile to switch to

@joebob73 Yes. The side armor isn't homogenous tho - the further to the back you go, the thinner it should get. But the answer is yes.
[
12:43 AM
]
SilentstalkerFTR
:

    Right now, it seem as if many wheelies, LTs as well as some TDs accelerate slower than before (compare to .32), despite the intention of the reverse (i.e. making achieving their top speeds more reliably). Considering the general increase in mobility for MBTs, plus the narrower gap of DPM between TD/LT vs MBTs, it really seems the only thing LT has going for it is viewrange (Sure, its important, but it sacrifices everything for it)

    The same also applies to AFVs, and yes I am going to mention the SPHINX again - I recognize the fact that it is suppose to be scout and shouldn't do much damage, but in .33 it:
    - Lost some mobility (acceleration is CLEARLY slower than before, you barely even reach 100)
    - Lost at least 50% ATGM DPM
    - General Autocannon nerf to tank's sides (you really only can penetrate tanks in the ass)
    Again, the only thing going for it is the viewrange - and this is also the case for many other AFVs.

    The issue is of course MBT doesn't actually need that much viewrange as they have the armor to tank the damage they take even if they can't see it yet. All they need to do is go a bit forward and spot - I really don't see how viewrange is such an important stat that one has to lose everything to gain such an advantage.

    My question is: Do the developers really consider viewrange that important of a stat, that a vehicle would have to lose basically all the other things that are important (Firepower, protection, and some mobility) for them to retain the best-in-class viewrange? Are they aware that LTs/AFVs are made rather redundant by MBTs' changes?

@Nekrosmas I am sorry, this doesn't seem to be even working with correct assumptions and I can't answer that easily. Maybe later.
[
12:43 AM
]
E404
:
About CKEM, how's the performace of the Griffin 12cm and the MGM based on your Observation?
[
12:45 AM
]
EnrlichHartman
:
I see like the Hyperkinetic rocket ammo form griffin 120mm is weaker now , and it dont does chip damage unlike in his description says . Is it a nerf , a bug  or it was intended ?
[
12:46 AM
]
di_duncan
:
Why couldn't 0.33's many changes be implemented gradually? The radical change between 0.32 and 0.33 has been polarizing, and I don't see myself enjoying playing 0.33 (at least in its present form).
[
12:46 AM
]
IvoDS
:
On the "patch notes" for the incomming 0.33 changes, XM1A3 was suppost to be mediocre at everything, including armor, but now it has by far the best armor, while challenger 2 ATDU was suppost to have the best armor and best view range, yet the view range is on par with merkava (and few more mbts) 370 and the armor is PATHETHIC. When will ATDU's armor be fixed?
[
12:46 AM
]
SilentstalkerFTR
:

    Last time we talked about the Spec-Ops story line you said you weren't happy with the direction SH went, and you hoped to steer it in another direction. Seeing that a major patch has dropped, 1) Are we closer to a new SpecOps Story 2) A new Heroic SpecOps 3) Any serkits you can tells about the future Spec-Ops Theme, Location, Etc.?

@B1itzdevil That's another hard question. So, the Spec Ops storyline was over. After it ended, we had a discussion of what should happen to the things. I suggested some things, but they'd require some changes that... well, it's compicated. Long story short, I don't know. The next BP will still have some Enigma elements in it but no story and the next mission will take place in Enigma timeline, unlike the rest of the standard missions.
[
12:46 AM
]
SilentstalkerFTR
:

    Will M1A2C have proper new model which has thicker front
     turret and hull armor?

@야채호빵(samuelchoi) Yes
[
12:47 AM
]
SilentstalkerFTR
:

    With 0.33 being a more "PVP focused" update, can we expect a focus on PVE content/improvements in the future, as the majority of the players is preferring PVE over the PVP modes?

@TeyKey1 A new PvE mission is in development and changes will be made to AI behavior. We will hopefully have wheeled bots soon as well, so I think it's safe to say yes.
[
12:47 AM
]
Kaitlynn
:
Are there any changes you'd like to see to the game in a general sense yourself?
[
12:47 AM
]
SilentstalkerFTR
:

    There is a bug which doesnt play the dialog when you Alt+Tab.
    This bug is kinda old, but still not fixed.
    Will this bug fixed? Or not?

@Tikburg I am not aware of such a bug but maybe QA is. I don't know.
[
12:48 AM
]
TeyKey1
:
Will there be an option to join Specops or PVE matches with less than 5 players in a platoon (like heroics) for players seeking an increased difficulty level?
[
12:48 AM
]
SilentstalkerFTR
:

    There are still incoming warning for friendly artillery and mortar fire. I thought this have been fixed long ago?

@Arpalys If you have a bug to report, please do it in the bug channel, not here. Ideally with a replay.
[
12:49 AM
]
SilentstalkerFTR
:

    About CKEM, how's the performace of the Griffin 12cm and the MGM based on your Observation?

@E404 Griffin was doing fine, a bit of a one trick pony. Before unlocking this module, it's mediocre. CKEM is fine, even in 0.33 from what I can see.
[
12:49 AM
]
SilentstalkerFTR
:

    I see like the Hyperkinetic rocket ammo form griffin 120mm is weaker now , and it dont does chip damage unlike in his description says . Is it a nerf , a bug  or it was intended ?

@EnrlichHartman Sounds like a bug.
[
12:50 AM
]
Dave at Work
:
My Sphinx camo rating when stopped is 57.7, with ERIN in command + camo retrofit

When I launch a single ATGM the camo rating drops to 36.4

Unless i'm 2.5 kms away from the target, I will get spotted every time i fire :frowning:
[
12:50 AM
]
Füchsin Pfeffer
:
Since you are mentioning that we should put in the bug channels some old bugs, should we start putting in support tickets for the broken M2A3 Bradley launcher, which does not elevate or depress despite having prior done so and irl doing so?
[
12:50 AM
]
B1itzdevil
:

     the next mission will take place in Enigma timeline, unlike the rest of the standard missions.

What does this part mean. While we get no new story, by missions do you mean missions to grind for the BP or new maps to go romp through?
[
12:51 AM
]
SilentstalkerFTR
:

    Why couldn't 0.33's many changes be implemented gradually? The radical change between 0.32 and 0.33 has been polarizing, and I don't see myself enjoying playing 0.33 (at least in its present form).

@di_duncan For the same reason you are describing. A perceived shift of paradigm is sometimes a really powerful thing. Something ends, another thing begins. Also, how gradually would you like to implement a total rebalance? 5 vehicles at a time so instad of 1 broken T-72B situation we'd have one each patch?
[
12:51 AM
]
Krieger22
:
While changing penetration dropoffs was stated as intended to differentiate vehicle classes, why does the same shell now have different damage ranges across different vehicles? The K21 XC8's HE shell comes to mind

 

Salter & Morey, Bradley Infantry Fighting Vehicle Procedures Guides: Evaluation

https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/pdfs/ADA138578.pdf

See Appendix D, pages 34 and 46 for operation procedures for elevating/depressing the TOW launcher.

 

 

Edited by Haswell
Corrections (see edit history)
  • Upvote 3

Spoiler

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Haswell said:
  • ATGM chip damage is intended to counter long range hulldown invulnerability and reward players for hitting things. The chip damage isn't effective in PvP. (note: if it has that little effect in PvP, why add it in the first place?)

Because fuck you, PvE!

PvE players have gotten too good at countering/avoiding the missile spam, but rather than fixing it and using more variety of opponents they just decided to make the missiles always do damage.  Because that's totally reasonable when it's 35 vs 5!

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks a lot for this! This QnA was too long for me and couldn't be bothered after i read the first 50min of it

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Abrams and Challenger series having their armor characteristics swapped (Abrams having much better armor now) is intended.


    What the hell for?  This is dumb,  its still slow and now no armor...LOL im glad I stopped that line a while ago,  it would be frustrating to play a heavy armor tank made of paper...LOL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some of these seem weird. I never said

Abrams and Challenger series having their armor characteristics swapped (Abrams having much better armor now) is intended.

I said the Challenger armor configuration is intended. Also, I never said that Bradley launchr doesn't elevate or depress IRL, I said that it never did in the game.

 

 

49 minutes ago, Haswell said:

Skill-based gameplay "got us nowhere". (note: not sure if this is SS's opinion or fact. Either way it matches the trend of gameplay being dumbed down.)

Both TBH. This ties to the state of the game from alpha to Balance 2.0. Early AW was all about skill because this tied to the vision where AW would become the next hot competitive game because WoT was too casual. I think I mentioned this in another post on this forum. The biggest problem was:

  • For casual players, some of the early elements that were intended to promote skill-based gameplay (less forgiving than WoT, low TTK, pixel hunting) were a serious hurdle to overcome and one of the biggest obstacles to true success
  • For skilled players, who truly desired competitive gameplay, it wasn't skill-based enough, it was still too casual

As soon as the skilled players started feeling the devs were stopping listening to them (which was of course true because their demands were directly opposed to the needs of casual playerbase), they left. I warned about this in 2015, that's one of the reasons I truly hated catering to "top clans", "unicums" or whatever you want to call them. Not because I "hate unicums" (that was a Wotlabs myth about me), but because this always happens. It has always been so. In WoT too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Haswell said:

MBT armor being homogenized and made boring is because "the developers wish it so". Devs want to change the meta from learning weakspots to simply checking distance and swapping ammo. (note: literally removing skill from the game)

This pissed me off so much.

I have no idea who's in control/in charge of these changes in direction, but whoever it is clearly thinks the AW community is far stupider and lazier than they are in reality.

Ubisoft fucked up Ghost Recon in this exact same manner, severely limiting game concepts, mechanics, equipment, and even strategies to hand-hold players who just wanted an interesting, versatile, and well-executed realistic tactical shooter experience.

This opened up the game(s) to be far more accessible to a wider audience, with Wildlands selling well, despite the critical media and community feedback. But as the timeless adage goes: "fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me". Breakpoint was catastrophic for both Ubisoft and the Ghost Recon franchise, because instead of listening to valid and well-intentioned community feedback, Ubi Paris doubled-down on simplifying gameplay and adding gimmicks no one wanted.

I see AW heading down this same rabbit hole, with "Wildlands" arriving in the form of Balance 2.0 and "Breakpoint" being 0.33. Pursuing game balance is a valiant cause for sure, but implementing such a drastic and unnecessary overhaul without consulting the playerbase is negligent and reckless.

When 0.33 was announced, I'll admit I had high hopes, even excitement to a degree, as I envisioned it to be the equivalent of R6S' Operation Health update. However, as the PTS went live, the many issues and unwarranted changes immediately brought me back to reality. The postponement of PTS stage 2 was a good sign on the part of the development team, and when stage 2 launched, I found that several issues from PTS 1 were in fact fixed, while others were acknowledged with improvements promised. This brought back some of my optimism, only for it to be smothered under the oozing, bloody corpse of 0.33 as it was shortly released on live.

What's worse is that instead of these changes bringing in more players and opening up AW to become more accessible, AW's playerbase will shrivel and decline. Games such as AW, WT and even WoT are niche by nature, so player retention is crucial. There will not be any third chances; 0.33 will not attract new players, it will not improve the QoL of existing players and it certainly won't be a step in the right direction for the game as a whole. In AW's case, it was already a project on its last legs. With 0.33, I expect the game to bleed out entirely if the management are still unable to recognize and rectify their foolish decisions.

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Haswell said:

Overall feedback for 0.33 is positive...

Really?

4 hours ago, Haswell said:

0.33 was deemed "sufficient" after PTS2 for release. The release is also partially forced by deadlines and milestones. (note: this confirms my suspicion of the operator holding the reins on the devs.)

This one leaves a lot of people speechless.

4 hours ago, Haswell said:

One reason for the 0.33 changes is to "make the game feel more fresh". (note: different, yes. Fresh, probably not.)

Huh?

4 hours ago, Haswell said:

Abrams series will be remodeled, and possibly the T-80U next.

They have talked about fixing the Abrams model for years now.  I won't hold my breath.

 

These two get me:

4 hours ago, Haswell said:

MBT armor being homogenized and made boring is because "the developers wish it so". Devs want to change the meta from learning weakspots to simply checking distance and swapping ammo. (note: literally removing skill from the game)

4 hours ago, Haswell said:

ATGM chip damage is intended to counter long range hulldown invulnerability and reward players for hitting things. The chip damage isn't effective in PvP. (note: if it has that little effect in PvP, why add it in the first place?)

This seems to be an attempt to "dumb down" the game to the casual level.


 

"If you were not birthed with claws or fangs, store bought will do just fine."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Whole Q/A and no one got the skinny on how the players lost a ton of XP and Credits when the Lecerc P,  Lecerc, and Abrams were reset...LOL...Nothing huh?  https://aw.my.games/en/news/general/issues-module-compensation

 

  • AI behavior will get tweaked. Wheeled bots soon, hopefully.

    Meaning now it targets MODULES excusivly...LOL.... I have been set on fire EVERY match since the .33  lol  Got to love that....AI targeting with ZERO miss...HAHA.. Can we get the same AI Sniper shooting for our Mech Infratry?   I mean being Perm Tracked, No Gun and the chipping...LOL...its awesome to have 5 Bradly's shooting and doing about 75-100 each,  unless its into your Side ERA then its 1K...HAHAHHAHHAHA

 

Edited by CaptKingNF (see edit history)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, knutliott said:

Because fuck you, PvE!

It doesn't benefit PVP either.

8 hours ago, di_duncan said:

Games such as AW, WT and even WoT are niche by nature, so player retention is crucial.

It will be quite interesting to see what happens in the next months. I tought the core playerbase would be quite important for games such as AW but it looks like they do indeed pursue a different direction by trying to attract new players. It might work because apparently we're a minority here disliking the changes. For me the consequences are quite simple. I'll avoid PVP for the time being and in general I'll play a lot less AW and see what the next bigger patches will bring to the game.

Quote

One reason for the 0.33 changes is to "make the game feel more fresh". (note: different, yes. Fresh, probably not.)

Haven't played too much but I don't feel like the game feels more dynamic and fresh in any way. MBTs, yes definitely. ATGM and burst stuff not at all with the increases of salvo reload. Wheeled vehicles feel totally awkward, slow and sluggish. Far away from the pre 0.33 dynamics. However I like the way MBTs start to drift now, if you take a corner with high speed (because that's clearly what happens in real life).

6 hours ago, Katsumoto said:

This seems to be an attempt to "dumb down" the game to the casual level.

It's not new. However this is a major one in this regard. Attemts to dumb down the game were implemented in the last two years. Stuff like javelins or mortars for example need near zero skill to make them work. There were very minor ones too, like the tracer changes or changes to the ATGM trajectories of various vehicles. I don't mind if it helps player numbers, especially in PVP but I highly doubt that this will be the case. We'll see...

4 hours ago, CaptKingNF said:

The Whole Q/A and no one got the skinny on how the players lost a ton of XP and Credits when the Lecerc P,  Lecerc, and Abrams were reset...LOL...Nothing huh? 

They're going to fix this, so where's the problem?

4 hours ago, CaptKingNF said:

Meaning now it targets MODULES excusivly...LOL.... I have been set on fire EVERY match since the .33  lol  Got to love that....AI targeting with ZERO miss...HAHA.. Can we get the same AI Sniper shooting for our Mech Infratry?   I mean being Perm Tracked, No Gun and the chipping...LOL...its awesome to have 5 Bradly's shooting and doing about 75-100 each,  unless its into your Side ERA then its 1K...HAHAHHAHHAHA

Am I playing a different game? Haven't experienced this in the PVE games I played


Spoiler

fdassdaas.jpg.c709df3e98adc5265f232fe9458a3043.jpg

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Silentstalker said:

I said the Challenger armor configuration is intended.

The question asked was "Abrams now a new Challenger and vice versa, is this change is intended?" and your response was affirmative, if a bit vague. Will correct if that's not what you meant, my comprehension skills probably suffered since I was compiling this at 3AM.

9 hours ago, Silentstalker said:

Also, I never said that Bradley launchr doesn't elevate or depress IRL, I said that it never did in the game.

To be fair Eisen said that, not you. I don't have a source right now, but the commonly used official response to why the Bradley lack elevation/depression in-game is that it's also that way IRL. This response became common enough to circulate around regardless of its validity, the clarification now is much appreciated.

 

9 hours ago, Silentstalker said:

Both TBH. This ties to the state of the game from alpha to Balance 2.0. Early AW was all about skill because this tied to the vision where AW would become the next hot competitive game because WoT was too casual. I think I mentioned this in another post on this forum. The biggest problem was:

  • For casual players, some of the early elements that were intended to promote skill-based gameplay (less forgiving than WoT, low TTK, pixel hunting) were a serious hurdle to overcome and one of the biggest obstacles to true success
  • For skilled players, who truly desired competitive gameplay, it wasn't skill-based enough, it was still too casual

As soon as the skilled players started feeling the devs were stopping listening to them (which was of course true because their demands were directly opposed to the needs of casual playerbase), they left. I warned about this in 2015, that's one of the reasons I truly hated catering to "top clans", "unicums" or whatever you want to call them. Not because I "hate unicums" (that was a Wotlabs myth about me), but because this always happens. It has always been so. In WoT too.

I'll say here that the skill involved in AW, in PvE at least, isn't so much about learning weak spots (lower front plates were already universal weak spots before 0.33), but rather knowing how to avoid receiving damage against enemies with weaponry that allow extremely short TTK or have high alpha (ie. autocannons, missiles). Lower tiers in particular places very heavy emphasis on not getting hit by missiles, which the Swingfire is likely the most infamous example due to their high alpha missiles, fast burst and overall abundance. It's very punishing and discouraging to casual players when they attempt to advance forward, only to lose most if not all their hitpoints from a Swingfire that they couldn't spot. Higher tiers had the same issue with T-15 missiles, but 0.33 addressed that adequately I think.

If anything, I would say the barrier to casual players isn't in the skills required to perform well, it's the disproportional punishment that they suffer from making mistakes such as overextending or not exercising vision control. It only requires a middling level of mechanical knowledge to know where to go on maps and how to damage enemies; it requires a far greater degree of skill and experience to not make mistakes that would otherwise be extremely punishing. There are many ways to go about to deal lots of damage or destroy lots of enemies, but it only takes one Swingfire or T-15 at the wrong moment to send you back to the garage.

Balancing the game between casual and skill-based gameplay is always difficult in pretty much every game title, and will almost always inevitably divide players into casuals and tryhards (with all the accompanying screaming). One way to get around this is to not punish casual players while making skillful play more rewarding through mechanics that don't directly impact gameplay. Map timers for instance is a good way to start, casual players should be allocated more than enough time to complete objectives to keep it casual, and the rewarding "skill" factor could be bonuses for faster completions. This however goes directly against the current system of rewards scaling positively with mission time, the fact that you get rewarded more for being time-inefficient (especially for BP coins) boggles me to no end.

Trying to cater to every skill level using the same gameplay mechanics will only end up being balancing headaches, and leads to both casual and skilled players getting frustrated.

 


Spoiler

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Haswell said:

MBTs are not intended to be more mobile than lights, this is still being looked into.

Meh

 

12 hours ago, Haswell said:

AGDS missiles having a ~50m minimum range is intended for balance.

The vehicle was always a victim of somebody great ideas. 

 

12 hours ago, Haswell said:

Devs prefer to add interesting vehicles, such as having multiple turrets or other interesting mechanics.

Yes, no surprise here. Fixing broken stuff like inversion is boring.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A Magnus avatar is sure to restore my faith in the game by a tiny bit (at least if I can easily obtain it). :sealofapproval:


Spoiler

fdassdaas.jpg.c709df3e98adc5265f232fe9458a3043.jpg

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I could understand being exciting of getting Magnus as commander (and go with him to BSI missions). Avatar - no really.

Ohh and I could gladly get "Silentstalker-commander" too, so he could comment all in-game shenanigans with his own voice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why do I have the feeling that they are trying to keep the old adage alive.

In Armored Warfare. You do not play the game, the game plays you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Haswell said:

The current armor configuration of Challenger series is intended.

So the tank whose selling POINT I believe is, I mean was fantastic armour, now has the same armour as every other tank of the same tier, but is still way slower, and still has the crappy DPM which was to balance its fantastic armour. I can't think of a single reason why anyone would drive this now. And it was a tank i especially liked!.
... for fuck's sake.

19 hours ago, Haswell said:

The upcoming PvP map Al Dabbah will be "really big".

Glops: twice as popular as PvP - stop wasting time on 7% of your customers, to the detriment of the other 93%.
... for fuck's sake.

19 hours ago, Haswell said:

Skill-based gameplay "got us nowhere".

True or not, it does not logically follow, that zero-skill based gameplay will get you anywhere.
Skill-based gameplay may still have been your "least worst" option
:facepalmk: Oh for f....

 

PS. I do like the corner-drifting tanks. Definitely an improvement.

 

One last thing:
Custom decals? - It will only ever work, if you alone can see them, because ... I assume this game is avaliable in Germany?
Welcome to an abyss of litigation, when idiots slap a bunch of Swastikas and Gestapo shit on their tanks - a criminal offence I believe in Germany? (correct me if I'm wrong, my Teutonic friends), and AW gets its ass sued off.

 

Edited by Lenticulas
Spelling, grammar, vitriol (see edit history)

"Yog-Sothoth knows the gate. Yog-Sothoth is the gate. Yog-Sothoth is the key and guardian of the gate. Past, present, future, all are one in Yog-Sothoth."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Haswell said:

 

  • Low tiers will also be rebalanced.
  Reveal hidden contents

12:00 AM
]
SilentstalkerFTR
:
Alright then. Let's begin.
[
12:00 AM
]
Azdule
:
Is it intended that all MBTs side armor above the tracks is now steel?  The reason I ask is because on tanks where the hull extends over the tracks, it's now classing the composite armor as steel, effectively removing large amounts of armor from them
[
12:00 AM
]
Universali
:
any news on the bradley launcher? :GWsetmyxPeepoSad:
[
12:01 AM
]
Arpalys
:
So.. how's fixing all the broken things going?
[
12:01 AM
]
SilentstalkerFTR
:

    Is it intended that all MBTs side armor above the tracks is now steel?  The reason I ask is because on tanks where the hull extends over the tracks, it's now classing the composite armor as steel, effectively removing large amounts of armor from them

@Azdule As far as I can tell, yes. Some tanks were investigated and the armor was found to be okay.
[
12:01 AM
]
Doktor Plama
:
Hi SS! Will you be playing CP2077 when it comes out in November? :slight_smile:
[
12:01 AM
]
SilentstalkerFTR
:

    any news on the bradley launcher? :GWsetmyxPeepoSad:

@Universali This is not even 0 priority task, more like -1
[
12:02 AM
]
SilentstalkerFTR
:

    So.. how's fixing all the broken things going?

@Arpalys Fine. Hotfix of some stuff next week. But not that much is broken.
[
12:02 AM
]
SilentstalkerFTR
:

    Hi SS! Will you be playing CP2077 when it comes out in November? :slight_smile:

@Doktor Plama Yes
[
12:02 AM
]
Pesa
:
is it intended for mbt to be faster than lts? because as it is now, there are no reason to play light tanks, since mbt can do everything better
[
12:03 AM
]
SilentstalkerFTR
:

    is it intended for mbt to be faster than lts? because as it is now, there are no reason to play light tanks, since mbt can do everything better

@Pesa They aren't, generally speaking. Definitely not on average. But we are still looking into some mobility tasks.
[
12:04 AM
]
Crimson Beelzebub
:
is the AGDS new atgm launch path intended? before 0.33 it has a better launch path which allow it to engage targets much closer.
[
12:05 AM
]
SilentstalkerFTR
:

    is the AGDS new atgm launch path intended? before 0.33 it has a better launch path which allow it to engage targets much closer.

@Crimson Beelzebub Yes. This was specifically investigated and the minimum range of cca 50m is intended. It is the price of having 12 missiles instead of the 4 BMPTs do.
[
12:05 AM
]
joebob73
:
Was it intended to nerf the firepower of many TD/LTs?
For example, the WWO Wilk lost alpha damage and fire rate as a result of the changes
The Zubr PSP, with the same gun, only lost alpha damage
This is because there was a global change to this module, which is 7% now but gave 13% pre-patch.
In general, this has reduced the firepower of TDs and LTs, which didn't get their fire rate adjusted in the patch.
unknown.png module in question

Also, slow mode is set to 10min instead of 5 right now
[
12:06 AM
]
Kampfpudding / Puddi
:
When does the next dealer come into play with vehicles (e.g. more than 10 vehicles)
[
12:06 AM
]
SilentstalkerFTR
:

    Was it intended to nerf the firepower of many TD/LTs?
    For example, the WWO Wilk lost alpha damage and fire rate as a result of the changes
    The Zubr PSP, with the same gun, only lost alpha damage
    This is because there was a global change to this module, which is 7% now but gave 13% pre-patch.
    In general, this has reduced the firepower of TDs and LTs, which didn't get their fire rate adjusted in the patch.
    unknown.png module in question

@joebob73 But TDs for example don't have the same AP decay the MBTs do. MBTs also became less capable of spotting. So is it really a nerf?
[
12:06 AM
]
SilentstalkerFTR
:
Oh and the slow mode is intended to deal with the initial question spam. I'l reduce it.
[
12:07 AM
]
SilentstalkerFTR
:

    When does the next dealer come into play with vehicles (e.g. more than 10 vehicles)

@Kampfpudding / Puddi Not this year. Plans for the next year are not set yet.
[
12:07 AM
]
[IHS]Yxlouvia
:
why mbts and Lts have fast ammo swap while  Tds dont have?
[
12:07 AM
]
knausis
:
K1A1 and Type90 had almost the same HP pool, why K1A1 with much weaker armor now have 850 HP less than Type90?
[
12:08 AM
]
TeyKey1
:
I suppose devs are now closely monitoring the performance of all the adjusted vehicles. Will there be a "bigger" patch in the near future addressing balance issues that pain 0.33 or will they just do this step by step with various hotfixes?
[
12:08 AM
]
SilentstalkerFTR
:

    why mbts and Lts have fast ammo swap while  Tds dont have?

@[IHS]Yxlouvia Because their drivers need to make split second decisions while TD operators generally have more time. Also, because of balance.
[
12:09 AM
]
SilentstalkerFTR
:

    K1A1 and Type90 had almost the same HP pool, why K1A1 with much weaker armor now have 850 HP less than Type90?

@knausis I assume it's because it has other advantages, like firepower. But I don't know their stats from the top of my head.
[
12:09 AM
]
Eisenherz
:
Will there be any additional large content updates for this year, or are we looking at small patches and hotfixes till 2021?
[
12:09 AM
]
SilentstalkerFTR
:

    I suppose devs are now closely monitoring the performance of all the adjusted vehicles. Will there be a "bigger" patch in the near future addressing balance issues that pain 0.33 or will they just do this step by step with various hotfixes?

@TeyKey1 Yes. For one, we'll be tuning the balance further throughout 0.33, but 0.34 should have some additional larger changes based on the data and your feedback. It's a process.
[
12:10 AM
]
SilentstalkerFTR
:

    Will there be any additional large content updates for this year, or are we looking at small patches and hotfixes till 2021?

@Eisenherz Yes. 0.34 will come this year.
[
12:11 AM
]
Arpalys
:
People seems to have PVP match Tier 6 facing Tier 7. I remember matchmaker will be tweaked regarding the update, and it seems to be not working.
[
12:11 AM
]
Azdule
:
Was the intention to add chip damage back into the game intended to reduce the challenge and remove skill from the game?  I phrase it as such because now you aren't rewarded for playing well in frontline tanks as you can now be punished as you take damage without penetrations.  You are rewarded for slinging as much HEAT and ATGMS from range to deal damage consistently and without skill.
[
12:11 AM
]
Last_Dutch_Hero
:
Question. I noticed there was a change is vehicle behaviour in the grip department. i am able to Tokio drift in many occansions which i did not do before. Is this a actual change or a bug, and would it be implomented further since it still feels kinda crude.
[
12:12 AM
]
Sinny's
:
Will the historically wrong machineguns models mounted on the turrets of certain vehicles be adressed ?
[
12:12 AM
]
SilentstalkerFTR
:

    People seems to have PVP match Tier 6 facing Tier 7. I remember matchmaker will be tweaked regarding the update, and it seems to be not working.

@Arpalys That does not mean Tier 6s will never see Tier 7s in battles I guess. Honestly, I don't think any MM changes happened, but T5-6 is popular enough not to make this bracket too toxic. Yesterday I played a bunch of PvP matches in my T-72B and didn't see a single T8
[
12:12 AM
]
Doktor Plama
:
About the upcoming "raid" event: will it be possible to complete it (get all the rewards) by playing PvE only or the mechanics will be exactly the same as in the last one??
[
12:13 AM
]
SilentstalkerFTR
:

    Was the intention to add chip damage back into the game intended to reduce the challenge and remove skill from the game?  I phrase it as such because now you aren't rewarded for playing well in frontline tanks as you can now be punished as you take damage without penetrations.  You are rewarded for slinging as much HEAT and ATGMS from range to deal damage consistently and without skill.

@Azdule The intention was to counter the now-nearly-invulnerable turret armor at long distances and to reward ATGM vehicle players for a successfully landed shot. Additionally, the chip damage isn't serious enough to play a major role in PvP anyway.
[
12:14 AM
]
AoToA
:
How about make some title n portrait for players who have lots of tanks. Making Special Title n portrait is no need lots of money but it can give lots of satisfaction for royal users (especially for who have tons of premium tanks include color swap versions) and ofcourse players who want that title n portrait will buy premium tanks then ofcourse it can make more money back to company too. in 0.33, title n portrait are really important for some people who want be diffrent with other. So by the ownerwhip bonus or collected tank number, give special portrait n title is good idea i think.(by levels, diffrent stage is also good like 200,250,300 vehicle)And i wish you people do make high quality portrait and sell it by market. It can be collective one
[
12:14 AM
]
di_duncan
:
Why is MBT armor still boring and homogenized across the board? It makes combat tiresome and very uninteresting, especially with the effectiveness of facehugging.
[
12:14 AM
]
SilentstalkerFTR
:

    Question. I noticed there was a change is vehicle behaviour in the grip department. i am able to Tokio drift in many occansions which i did not do before. Is this a actual change or a bug, and would it be implomented further since it still feels kinda crude.

@Last_Dutch_Hero We have changed the mobility of some vehicles, yes. That was one of 0.33's features. If some tanks drift too much, it may be a bug.
[
12:14 AM
]
zenoniations[EATER]
:
Abrams now a new Challenger and vice versa, is this change is intended?
[
12:14 AM
]
SilentstalkerFTR
:

    About the upcoming "raid" event: will it be possible to complete it (get all the rewards) by playing PvE only or the mechanics will be exactly the same as in the last one??

@Doktor Plama Some missions were adjusted (the most toxic ones were removed IIRC) but otherwise, the mechancis will be the same.
[
12:15 AM
]
Arpalys
:
Is it intended that PELE to be less effective? While I can understand autocannon PELE nerf, but Wilk PELE is kinda pointless now. Its penetration and damage are both lower than AP, and its module damage is somewhat inconsistent, especially when facing MBT.
[
12:15 AM
]
SilentstalkerFTR
:

    Abrams now a new Challenger and vice versa, is this change is intended?

@zenoniations[EATER] Apparently so. I asked specifically about the Challenger line armor and the answer was that it was all intended. Further tweaks may happen based on collected data, but it's not a bug.
[
12:15 AM
]
joebob73
:
The reload module change causes the Zubr PSP to be a better TD than the WWO Wilk, while being a tier lower, as it now has better DPM.  Is this intentional?
Another annoying change is missile vehicles receiving significantly increased between-shot and launcher reload times, on top of having a lower damage potential per shot.  This nerfs their performance against all targets, and together with the buffed soft-kill, makes them very aggravating to play.  Were missiles that overperforming?

Also, thanks for doing these things, it really helps having some information about what's coming
[
12:15 AM
]
SilentstalkerFTR
:

    Is it intended that PELE to be less effective? While I can understand autocannon PELE nerf, but Wilk PELE is kinda pointless now. Its penetration and damage are both lower than AP, and its module damage is somewhat inconsistent, especially when facing MBT.

@Arpalys I saw. Sounds like a bug but I am not sure, haven't seen it reported anywhere.
[
12:15 AM
]
Tikburg
:
custom decal locations?
[
12:16 AM
]
SilentstalkerFTR
:

    How about make some title n portrait for players who have lots of tanks. Making Special Title n portrait is no need lots of money but it can give lots of satisfaction for royal users (especially for who have tons of premium tanks include color swap versions) and ofcourse players who want that title n portrait will buy premium tanks then ofcourse it can make more money back to company too. in 0.33, title n portrait are really important for some people who want be diffrent with other. So by the ownerwhip bonus or collected tank number, give special portrait n title is good idea i think.(by levels diffrent stage is also good)And i wish you people do make high quality portrait and sell it by market. It can be collective one

@AoToA Sorry, this is almost too long to read. You don't need to post your suggestions here, it's not a question.
[
12:16 AM
]
Azdule
:
Are the devs aware that with the new changes to ammo types that AP is basically rendered useless as you can always deal damage with HEAT, through chip damage, and if AP can pen, HEAT can pen for more damage meaning that firing AP renders you less effective?
[
12:16 AM
]
SilentstalkerFTR
:

    Will the historically wrong machineguns models mounted on the turrets of certain vehicles be adressed ?

@Sinny's Yes. We have several tasks for fixing that already.
[
12:17 AM
]
Kampfpudding / Puddi
:
When will the Artys be back in PVP. There is no point in increasing them if they are part of modern warfare. You had to replace them with groups of mortars where you were only spammed. Artys can also be used in a direct fire fight with a high three charge and to fire at long targets?
[
12:17 AM
]
T-R3KT
:
Will any other ramming vehicles like the m1a1 storm ever be added?
[
12:17 AM
]
Pesa
:
like i said before, mbts have more top speed than light tanks, just check their stats in game, anyway a lot of mbts have their side armor miscalculated, like the atdu and ariete, their armor blocks are counted as 35mm even if aiming at them frontally, and bots autopen your sides even if you angle slightly, is this intended? there is no reason to be aggressive with mbt because of chip damage and heat not losing pen with distance
[
12:18 AM
]
SilentstalkerFTR
:

    Why is MBT armor still boring and homogenized across the board? It makes combat tiresome and very uninteresting, especially with the effectiveness of facehugging.

@di_duncan Because the developers wish it so. Meta is supposed to shift from "know the weakspot" to "know the distance and ammo you can use"
[
12:18 AM
]
Doktor Plama
:
Is "move" command for infantry still in the works, or was it scrapped?
[
12:18 AM
]
SilentstalkerFTR
:

    The reload module change causes the Zubr PSP to be a better TD than the WWO Wilk, while being a tier lower, as it now has better DPM.  Is this intentional?
    Another annoying change is missile vehicles receiving significantly increased between-shot and launcher reload times, on top of having a lower damage potential per shot.  This nerfs their performance against all targets, and together with the buffed soft-kill, makes them very aggravating to play.  Were missiles that overperforming?

    Also, thanks for doing these things, it really helps having some information about what's coming

@joebob73 ZUBR also has two modules, so I assume some nerfs are the price for its versatility. Not sure.
[
12:19 AM
]
EnrlichHartman
:
New standar pve misions , at least coming in next year?
[
12:19 AM
]
SilentstalkerFTR
:

    custom decal locations?

@Tikburg That's in our backlog for years now. It was actually recently brought up so maybe in 2021
[
12:19 AM
]
AoToA
:
Ok then. is there plan for making portrait n title to sell in market?
[
12:19 AM
]
joebob73
:
Zubr is a tier 7, and the WWO Wilk is a tier 8
the tier 8 is the one that got the harsher DPM nerf, making the more versatile lower tier just a better vehicle
this doesn't make much sense, no?
[
12:19 AM
]
Arpalys
:
The patch note mentions HE shell mechanic change, but how exactly its changed?
[
12:19 AM
]
SilentstalkerFTR
:

    Are the devs aware that with the new changes to ammo types that AP is basically rendered useless as you can always deal damage with HEAT, through chip damage, and if AP can pen, HEAT can pen for more damage meaning that firing AP renders you less effective?

@Azdule Chip damage is not really effective and doesn't work well in PvP. It feels you are equating "the ability to do some damage" and "doing damage" but that's for a longer discussion.
[
12:20 AM
]
SilentstalkerFTR
:
But to answer you - yes they are aware.
[
12:20 AM
]
SilentstalkerFTR
:

    When will the Artys be back in PVP. There is no point in increasing them if they are part of modern warfare. You had to replace them with groups of mortars where you were only spammed. Artys can also be used in a direct fire fight with a high three charge and to fire at long targets?

@Kampfpudding / Puddi For now, this topic got shelved, at least until 0.34
[
12:20 AM
]
di_duncan
:

    @di_duncan Because the developers wish it so. Meta is supposed to shift from "know the weakspot" to "know the distance and ammo you can use"

This is worrying. So the devs prioritize brainless play over a skilled and knowledge-based combat dynamic? Sounds like they are headed entirely in the wrong direction.
[
12:20 AM
]
SilentstalkerFTR
:

    Will any other ramming vehicles like the m1a1 storm ever be added?

@T-R3KT From the top of my head, we don't have such plans but I am not really sure. It's a really niche thing.
[
12:21 AM
]
Tikburg
:
So... did the devs give up the dialog problems especially when you Alt+Tab?
[
12:21 AM
]
xxdd
:
Question about XP/credit earnings: will be there any changes concerning those, specially XP department. Because with boosts and premium account XP grinding feels like a slog, specially on high tiers. Even on GLOPS with win, booster, premium account and daily bonuses on tier 9-10 I barely get 50k XP.
[
12:21 AM
]
SilentstalkerFTR
:

    like i said before, mbts have more top speed than light tanks, just check their stats in game, anyway a lot of mbts have their side armor miscalculated, like the atdu and ariete, their armor blocks are counted as 35mm even if aiming at them frontally, and bots autopen your sides even if you angle slightly, is this intended? there is no reason to be aggressive with mbt because of chip damage and heat not losing pen with distance

@Pesa You know raw stats do not equal actual behavior, yes? Some tanks do have issues reaching their maximum speed for example.
[
12:21 AM
]
SilentstalkerFTR
:

    Is "move" command for infantry still in the works, or was it scrapped?

@Doktor Plama Move was scrapped. Too many problems with pathfinding. But we will have directed fire.
[
12:22 AM
]
SilentstalkerFTR
:

    Ok then. is there plan for making portrait n title to sell in market?

@AoToA No. The perceived value of such a thing is really low. Not worth doing.
[
12:22 AM
]
SilentstalkerFTR
:

    New standar pve misions , at least coming in next year?

@EnrlichHartman This year or the early next.
[
12:22 AM
]
E404
:
Good day SS, How much time does the devs add those ATGM Reload animations?
[
12:22 AM
]
Kampfpudding / Puddi
:
When will we get an overview in the garage of what we have done in one day. Whether you've fallen or risen in the WinRate or how many battles you've fought.
[
12:23 AM
]
SilentstalkerFTR
:

    Zubr is a tier 7, and the WWO Wilk is a tier 8
    the tier 8 is the one that got the harsher DPM nerf, making the more versatile lower tier just a better vehicle
    this doesn't make much sense, no?

@joebob73 I really don't have the capacity to drop everything right now and go verify everything you say, sorry. That's not something I can answer right now.
[
12:23 AM
]
Sinny's
:
Is there plans to make infantry's movement more fluid and human instead of them instantly changing direction when walking or getting up ?
[
12:23 AM
]
PrinceDavi
:
Do you believe that .33 was fully tested out and approved for release or was it rushed?
[
12:23 AM
]
SilentstalkerFTR
:

    The patch note mentions HE shell mechanic change, but how exactly its changed?

@Arpalys That's something I'd like to know myself. IIRC they played around with the threshold and the thin armor detection mechanism but it wasn't really described anywhere, even internally. I'll ask.
[
12:23 AM
]
Azdule
:
With the overall feeling from the player base being that these changes aren't really great for the game, if the player base does drop are their plans to remedy these issues or revert the changes?
[
12:23 AM
]
Druxus
:
How about adding in a favorites section for Flags and Decals. If you have been here since the start you have so many decals
[
12:24 AM
]
SilentstalkerFTR
:

    This is worrying. So the devs prioritize brainless play over a skilled and knowledge-based combat dynamic? Sounds like they are headed entirely in the wrong direction.

@di_duncan Focusing on "skilled players" got us nowhere. That's a losing bet.
[
12:24 AM
]
SilentstalkerFTR
:

    So... did the devs give up the dialog problems especially when you Alt+Tab?

@Tikburg Don't understand the question.
[
12:25 AM
]
SilentstalkerFTR
:

    Question about XP/credit earnings: will be there any changes concerning those, specially XP department. Because with boosts and premium account XP grinding feels like a slog, specially on high tiers. Even on GLOPS with win, booster, premium account and daily bonuses on tier 9-10 I barely get 50k XP.

@xxdd Not that I know of. I am fairly sure we have no plans to significantly increase the game's progress. If you really want to see slog, play War Thunder. Our progression is much, MUCH faster.
[
12:26 AM
]
SilentstalkerFTR
:

    Good day SS, How much time does the devs add those ATGM Reload animations?

@E404 Anything animated is quite expensive and not easy, so I'm thinking a month or so per vehicle?
[
12:26 AM
]
B1itzdevil
:
Will there be any further changes to the Arty class in the game, such new ammo types  or stat changes in general?
[
12:26 AM
]
SilentstalkerFTR
:

    When will we get an overview in the garage of what we have done in one day. Whether you've fallen or risen in the WinRate or how many battles you've fought.

@Kampfpudding / Puddi There already is a log. Some broader overview is not really needed when a typical player plays like two to five battles a day.
[
12:27 AM
]
야채호빵(samuelchoi)
:
Which tanks will be next to be remodel? T-80U?
[
12:28 AM
]
Wodan
:
What is ideology behind making wheeled vehicles, or specifically AFVs like Sphinx, Shadow, Kornet, have trouble reaching their top speeds while MBTs slide across the map reaching speeds of 55 kph+ with no issues.
[
12:28 AM
]
SilentstalkerFTR
:

    Is there plans to make infantry's movement more fluid and human instead of them instantly changing direction when walking or getting up ?

@Sinny's Not that I know of. Infantry changes in general are REALLY expensive. Like, a lot. What you suggest is very likely not worth doing because there are much more urgent issues when it comes to the modeling team.
[
12:30 AM
]
Arpalys
:
Some vehicles with ready rack have too slow reload rate compared with others. For example, XM1A3's 120mm is only 1.8s faster than 140mm, K2's ready rack have same burst fire rate as magazine while reloading only single shot takes 2s longer than stock cannon. CATTB and TTB suffers from very long reload time.(10s and 15s each) Do you think its that worth it for burst fire, or is this going to be addressed in the future?
[
12:30 AM
]
di_duncan
:
Why do many tracked vehicles lose little if any speed while traversing, even during sharp (180°+) turns? Even wheeled vehicle speeds stagnate while turning...
[
12:30 AM
]
SilentstalkerFTR
:

    Do you believe that .33 was fully tested out and approved for release or was it rushed?

@PrinceDavi It was quite a long time in development so yes, after PTS2, the state was sufficient (or at least matching what was intended). But at the same time, we all have deadlines and milestones to meet and gaming industry is no exception. That's just business. We have some margin (we did use that, the PTS was for example delayed by like two weeks), but not an infinite amount of space.
[
12:30 AM
]
SilentstalkerFTR
:

    How about adding in a favorites section for Flags and Decals. If you have been here since the start you have so many decals

@Druxus Good suggestion.
[
12:31 AM
]
Crimson Beelzebub
:
was it intentional that the K21-XC-8 or the Wilk XC-8 has no machinegun modelled on the turret despite that both can now use one? In retrospect, despite the PLZ-05 says it can now use the MG, in game theres no option to select the MG ammo?
[
12:32 AM
]
the clay pigeon
:
Will singapore get a decal for its flag soon, so I can put it on my hunter?
[
12:33 AM
]
Kampfpudding / Puddi
:
When can we wait for bigger cards?
[
12:33 AM
]
SilentstalkerFTR
:

    With the overall feeling from the player base being that these changes aren't really great for the game, if the player base does drop are their plans to remedy these issues or revert the changes?

@Azdule But our feedback collection shows the feeling IS generally positive. You are making a mistake of assuming that everyone things the way the elite veterans do. They don't. I know it's hard to believe (and for me hard to explain) but some things (like tank X has pen Y and therefore is worse than Z because etc etc) may be serious to the elite players, but in the grand scheme of things, they are absolutely marginal. What matters is the feeling of the game. With that being said, it's not like we won't deal wth your feedback, we are in fact analyzing it every day, whole day. But it's not the end of all things and there will definitely not be any rollbacks.
[
12:33 AM
]
SilentstalkerFTR
:

    Will there be any further changes to the Arty class in the game, such new ammo types  or stat changes in general?

@B1itzdevil Not for the near future.
[
12:33 AM
]
Krieger22
:
Why was ATGM noise increased across the board? Soft kill APS on bots is now significantly more effective
[
12:33 AM
]
Qbicle
:

    Meta is supposed to shift from "know the weakspot" to "know the distance and ammo you can use"

What is the notion behind this paradigm shift? Is the concept of weakspots becoming problematic for overall gameplay?
[
12:33 AM
]
SilentstalkerFTR
:

    Which tanks will be next to be remodel? T-80U?

@야채호빵(samuelchoi) The Abrams series. After that, probably the T-80U.
[
12:34 AM
]
SilentstalkerFTR
:

    What is ideology behind making wheeled vehicles, or specifically AFVs like Sphinx, Shadow, Kornet, have trouble reaching their top speeds while MBTs slide across the map reaching speeds of 55 kph+ with no issues.

@Wodan Would have to see specific examples. As a whole, if what you say is true, it's certainly not intended. May be some bugs.
[
12:35 AM
]
SilentstalkerFTR
:

    Some vehicles with ready rack have too slow reload rate compared with others. For example, XM1A3's 120mm is only 1.8s faster than 140mm, K2's ready rack have same burst fire rate as magazine while reloading only single shot takes 2s longer than stock cannon. CATTB and TTB suffers from very long reload time.(10s and 15s each) Do you think its that worth it for burst fire, or is this going to be addressed in the future?

@Arpalys If stats show it needs to be addressed, it will be addressed. Same for any other questions of this type, really. Like I mentioned, we have further adjustments planned for 0.33/34
[
12:35 AM
]
SilentstalkerFTR
:

    Why do many tracked vehicles lose little if any speed while traversing, even during sharp (180°+) turns? Even wheeled vehicle speeds stagnate while turning...

@di_duncan This was specifically intended as one of the goals of the mobility system overhaul. To make the gameplay more dynamic for tracked vehicles, giving you more tactical options etc.
[
12:36 AM
]
SilentstalkerFTR
:

    was it intentional that the K21-XC-8 or the Wilk XC-8 has no machinegun modelled on the turret despite that both can now use one? In retrospect, despite the PLZ-05 says it can now use the MG, in game theres no option to select the MG ammo?

@Crimson Beelzebub Bug
[
12:36 AM
]
Sinny's
:
Several people have pointed the now glaring proportion differences between the new T-72B model and the older T-72s, does this make these model move higher in your reworking priority list to keep the models consistant ?
[
12:36 AM
]
SilentstalkerFTR
:

    Will singapore get a decal for its flag soon, so I can put it on my hunter?

@the clay pigeon Haven't requested it yet, we've been really busy. But I'll make a note.
[
12:37 AM
]
SilentstalkerFTR
:

    When can we wait for bigger cards?

@Kampfpudding / Puddi The upcoming Al Dabbah is really big.
[
12:37 AM
]
joebob73
:
is it really intentional for MBT side armor to be large caliber autocannon (>30mm) proof even at point blank ranges in some cases?  While I think AC effectiveness against MBT was a bit high, the way it is now they're almost immune unless you can get rear armor.  And some vehicles don't have a missile to switch to
[
12:38 AM
]
Nekrosmas
:
Right now, it seem as if many wheelies, LTs as well as some TDs accelerate slower than before (compare to .32), despite the intention of the reverse (i.e. making achieving their top speeds more reliably). Considering the general increase in mobility for MBTs, plus the narrower gap of DPM between TD/LT vs MBTs, it really seems the only thing LT has going for it is viewrange (Sure, its important, but it sacrifices everything for it)

The same also applies to AFVs, and yes I am going to mention the SPHINX again - I recognize the fact that it is suppose to be scout and shouldn't do much damage, but in .33 it:
- Lost some mobility (acceleration is CLEARLY slower than before, you barely even reach 100)
- Lost at least 50% ATGM DPM
- General Autocannon nerf to tank's sides (you really only can penetrate tanks in the ass)
Again, the only thing going for it is the viewrange - and this is also the case for many other AFVs.

The issue is of course MBT doesn't actually need that much viewrange as they have the armor to tank the damage they take even if they can't see it yet. All they need to do is go a bit forward and spot - I really don't see how viewrange is such an important stat that one has to lose everything to gain such an advantage.

My question is: Do the developers really consider viewrange that important of a stat, that a vehicle would have to lose basically all the other things that are important (Firepower, protection, and some mobility) for them to retain the best-in-class viewrange? Are they aware that LTs/AFVs are made rather redundant by MBTs' changes?
[
12:38 AM
]
B1itzdevil
:
Last time we talked about the Spec-Ops story line you said you weren't happy with the direction SH went, and you hoped to steer it in another direction. Seeing that a major patch has dropped, 1) Are we closer to a new SpecOps Story 2) A new Heroic SpecOps 3) Any serkits you can tells about the future Spec-Ops Theme, Location, Etc.?
[
12:38 AM
]
야채호빵(samuelchoi)
:
Will M1A2C have proper new model which has thicker front
 turret and hull armor?
[
12:38 AM
]
SilentstalkerFTR
:

    Why was ATGM noise increased across the board? Soft kill APS on bots is now significantly more effective

@Krieger22 Soft kill APS is under investigation following some 0.33 reports that it's too much. We should have some results in the coming weeks. But generally speaking, it's intended to have lots of anti ATGM defenses to make each ATGM hit feel rewarding (and hurt)
[
12:38 AM
]
TeyKey1
:
With 0.33 being a more "PVP focused" update, can we expect a focus on PVE content/improvements in the future, as the majority of the players is preferring PVE over the PVP modes?
[
12:39 AM
]
SilentstalkerFTR
:

    What is the notion behind this paradigm shift? Is the concept of weakspots becoming problematic for overall gameplay?

@Qbicle That's a difficult question, for which you'd have to talk to the lead designer. Some of these things were explained in the dev articles about T7-10 rebalance, but if you dig deep enough, I think the real reason was to make the game feel more fresh.
[
12:40 AM
]
Tikburg
:
There is a bug which doesnt play the dialog when you Alt+Tab.
This bug is kinda old, but still not fixed.
Will this bug fixed? Or not?
[
12:41 AM
]
Arpalys
:
There are still incoming warning for friendly artillery and mortar fire. I thought this have been fixed long ago?
[
12:41 AM
]
SilentstalkerFTR
:

    Several people have pointed the now glaring proportion differences between the new T-72B model and the older T-72s, does this make these model move higher in your reworking priority list to keep the models consistant ?

@Sinny's Not really. Of course, we'd like to update all models, but unlike the T-72B, which was simply just wrong all the way, the T-72/72A models aren't that bad. Or at least not terribly wrong. So we'll focus on "wrong" rather than "needs improvement"
[
12:42 AM
]
SilentstalkerFTR
:

    is it really intentional for MBT side armor to be large caliber autocannon (>30mm) proof even at point blank ranges in some cases?  While I think AC effectiveness against MBT was a bit high, the way it is now they're almost immune unless you can get rear armor.  And some vehicles don't have a missile to switch to

@joebob73 Yes. The side armor isn't homogenous tho - the further to the back you go, the thinner it should get. But the answer is yes.
[
12:43 AM
]
SilentstalkerFTR
:

    Right now, it seem as if many wheelies, LTs as well as some TDs accelerate slower than before (compare to .32), despite the intention of the reverse (i.e. making achieving their top speeds more reliably). Considering the general increase in mobility for MBTs, plus the narrower gap of DPM between TD/LT vs MBTs, it really seems the only thing LT has going for it is viewrange (Sure, its important, but it sacrifices everything for it)

    The same also applies to AFVs, and yes I am going to mention the SPHINX again - I recognize the fact that it is suppose to be scout and shouldn't do much damage, but in .33 it:
    - Lost some mobility (acceleration is CLEARLY slower than before, you barely even reach 100)
    - Lost at least 50% ATGM DPM
    - General Autocannon nerf to tank's sides (you really only can penetrate tanks in the ass)
    Again, the only thing going for it is the viewrange - and this is also the case for many other AFVs.

    The issue is of course MBT doesn't actually need that much viewrange as they have the armor to tank the damage they take even if they can't see it yet. All they need to do is go a bit forward and spot - I really don't see how viewrange is such an important stat that one has to lose everything to gain such an advantage.

    My question is: Do the developers really consider viewrange that important of a stat, that a vehicle would have to lose basically all the other things that are important (Firepower, protection, and some mobility) for them to retain the best-in-class viewrange? Are they aware that LTs/AFVs are made rather redundant by MBTs' changes?

@Nekrosmas I am sorry, this doesn't seem to be even working with correct assumptions and I can't answer that easily. Maybe later.
[
12:43 AM
]
E404
:
About CKEM, how's the performace of the Griffin 12cm and the MGM based on your Observation?
[
12:45 AM
]
EnrlichHartman
:
I see like the Hyperkinetic rocket ammo form griffin 120mm is weaker now , and it dont does chip damage unlike in his description says . Is it a nerf , a bug  or it was intended ?
[
12:46 AM
]
di_duncan
:
Why couldn't 0.33's many changes be implemented gradually? The radical change between 0.32 and 0.33 has been polarizing, and I don't see myself enjoying playing 0.33 (at least in its present form).
[
12:46 AM
]
IvoDS
:
On the "patch notes" for the incomming 0.33 changes, XM1A3 was suppost to be mediocre at everything, including armor, but now it has by far the best armor, while challenger 2 ATDU was suppost to have the best armor and best view range, yet the view range is on par with merkava (and few more mbts) 370 and the armor is PATHETHIC. When will ATDU's armor be fixed?
[
12:46 AM
]
SilentstalkerFTR
:

    Last time we talked about the Spec-Ops story line you said you weren't happy with the direction SH went, and you hoped to steer it in another direction. Seeing that a major patch has dropped, 1) Are we closer to a new SpecOps Story 2) A new Heroic SpecOps 3) Any serkits you can tells about the future Spec-Ops Theme, Location, Etc.?

@B1itzdevil That's another hard question. So, the Spec Ops storyline was over. After it ended, we had a discussion of what should happen to the things. I suggested some things, but they'd require some changes that... well, it's compicated. Long story short, I don't know. The next BP will still have some Enigma elements in it but no story and the next mission will take place in Enigma timeline, unlike the rest of the standard missions.
[
12:46 AM
]
SilentstalkerFTR
:

    Will M1A2C have proper new model which has thicker front
     turret and hull armor?

@야채호빵(samuelchoi) Yes
[
12:47 AM
]
SilentstalkerFTR
:

    With 0.33 being a more "PVP focused" update, can we expect a focus on PVE content/improvements in the future, as the majority of the players is preferring PVE over the PVP modes?

@TeyKey1 A new PvE mission is in development and changes will be made to AI behavior. We will hopefully have wheeled bots soon as well, so I think it's safe to say yes.
[
12:47 AM
]
Kaitlynn
:
Are there any changes you'd like to see to the game in a general sense yourself?
[
12:47 AM
]
SilentstalkerFTR
:

    There is a bug which doesnt play the dialog when you Alt+Tab.
    This bug is kinda old, but still not fixed.
    Will this bug fixed? Or not?

@Tikburg I am not aware of such a bug but maybe QA is. I don't know.
[
12:48 AM
]
TeyKey1
:
Will there be an option to join Specops or PVE matches with less than 5 players in a platoon (like heroics) for players seeking an increased difficulty level?
[
12:48 AM
]
SilentstalkerFTR
:

    There are still incoming warning for friendly artillery and mortar fire. I thought this have been fixed long ago?

@Arpalys If you have a bug to report, please do it in the bug channel, not here. Ideally with a replay.
[
12:49 AM
]
SilentstalkerFTR
:

    About CKEM, how's the performace of the Griffin 12cm and the MGM based on your Observation?

@E404 Griffin was doing fine, a bit of a one trick pony. Before unlocking this module, it's mediocre. CKEM is fine, even in 0.33 from what I can see.
[
12:49 AM
]
SilentstalkerFTR
:

    I see like the Hyperkinetic rocket ammo form griffin 120mm is weaker now , and it dont does chip damage unlike in his description says . Is it a nerf , a bug  or it was intended ?

@EnrlichHartman Sounds like a bug.
[
12:50 AM
]
Dave at Work
:
My Sphinx camo rating when stopped is 57.7, with ERIN in command + camo retrofit

When I launch a single ATGM the camo rating drops to 36.4

Unless i'm 2.5 kms away from the target, I will get spotted every time i fire :frowning:
[
12:50 AM
]
Füchsin Pfeffer
:
Since you are mentioning that we should put in the bug channels some old bugs, should we start putting in support tickets for the broken M2A3 Bradley launcher, which does not elevate or depress despite having prior done so and irl doing so?
[
12:50 AM
]
B1itzdevil
:

     the next mission will take place in Enigma timeline, unlike the rest of the standard missions.

What does this part mean. While we get no new story, by missions do you mean missions to grind for the BP or new maps to go romp through?
[
12:51 AM
]
SilentstalkerFTR
:

    Why couldn't 0.33's many changes be implemented gradually? The radical change between 0.32 and 0.33 has been polarizing, and I don't see myself enjoying playing 0.33 (at least in its present form).

@di_duncan For the same reason you are describing. A perceived shift of paradigm is sometimes a really powerful thing. Something ends, another thing begins. Also, how gradually would you like to implement a total rebalance? 5 vehicles at a time so instad of 1 broken T-72B situation we'd have one each patch?
[
12:51 AM
]
Krieger22
:
While changing penetration dropoffs was stated as intended to differentiate vehicle classes, why does the same shell now have different damage ranges across different vehicles? The K21 XC8's HE shell comes to mind

 

Hm... so this implies the low tiers still have a balance problem... and yet the current Iron crate is offering XM247 and CATTB for anyone with a fat enough wallet.

At the same time, who would bother to buy these with RL cash if we know they are going to eventually get nerfed?

Does the left hand know what the right hand is doing?

....

I must admit the LAV-600 is much more fun now that I'm not running into walls like a drunk. Makes up for the loss of fun from my fleet of MBTs. Not sure what would make MBTs attractive anymore, aside from grinding through them to progress to something else.

QR

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, Haswell said:
  • Soft kill APS is being investigated, but the increased missile noise is intended "to make [hits] feel rewarding". (note: so literally reward mechanics based on RNG)

An interesting side effect of this is that it makes Javelins and other top-down auto-homing missiles better.  They're computer guided so are pretty close to unaffected by soft kill APS, just like all bot-fired missiles.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Qbicle said:

Two post-Q&A answers:

spacer.png

It would be funny if they add woke Magnus in the game.

https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/746008911861121086/750290962349031515/Magnus.png

 

I'm sitting here giggling a little bit about this because the statement below is why this is an issue.

On 9/17/2020 at 3:38 PM, Haswell said:

0.33 was deemed "sufficient" after PTS2 for release. The release is also partially forced by deadlines and milestones.

 

I wonder where the QA department was at.  But hey, in regards to the avatar:  GREAT IDEA!  Let's add new avatars!  Never mind the fact that the players have to face hug the screen to see what tanks are on their team....


 

"If you were not birthed with claws or fangs, store bought will do just fine."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/18/2020 at 2:56 AM, dfnce said:

I could understand being exciting of getting Magnus as commander (and go with him to BSI missions). Avatar - no really.

Ohh and I could gladly get "Silentstalker-commander" too, so he could comment all in-game shenanigans with his own voice.

They couldn't get the same voice actor for Magnus, so it would be yet another completely different voice actor.  And I seem to remember them saying that there was "No Chance" of a Magnus commander.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/18/2020 at 1:14 AM, TeyKey1 said:

Am I playing a different game? Haven't experienced this in the PVE games I played

MIght be?  LOL.  All I know is I have been set on fire,  gun dead more since .33 then the 5 years before. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/17/2020 at 10:27 PM, Silentstalker said:

As soon as the skilled players started feeling the devs were stopping listening to them (which was of course true because their demands were directly opposed to the needs of casual playerbase), they left. I warned about this in 2015, that's one of the reasons I truly hated catering to "top clans", "unicums" or whatever you want to call them. Not because I "hate unicums" (that was a Wotlabs myth about me), but because this always happens. It has always been so. In WoT too.

I don't know if you (or someone "important") will ever read that but Armored Warfare died the day it was decided to raise PVE earnings to PVP level. It has strictly nothing to do with skilled players demands or whatever.

Everyone, even those mighty high-skilled unicum pvp players, was grinding in PVE because autowin+high predictable earnings was the best way to grind. Period. Then, when you wanted to play PVP, the queue was empty because all PVP players were grinding in PVE. Rinse and repeat.

And as PVE is boring at some point, people left. Not because <insert any random reason about skillcap>.

 

You can print it and stick it everywhere.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...