Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Azdule

IN DEVELOPMENT: KORNET-D1 - Why powercreep 1 tier 10 premium, when you can do it to two at once?

Recommended Posts

On 5/5/2021 at 1:19 PM, Silentstalker said:

Yes, that is an element of the game that I like to call "core narrative" - it's a topic I was trying to explain to the developers and producers for two years now. So far without success. It seems really simple at first glance, but it isn't, there are a lot of underlying nuances, some of which I am not at liberty to explain. Suffice to say, the way things are done currently do work. We are not morons (contrary to what some simpler players believe - Dunning Kruger and all that), we see the results of our actions and what works and what does not. The most I can say right now is that it's an ongoing discussion.

excuse me but you are saying that "we are not morons" please care to explain why obsidian AW 5 years ago was so much better then ? And when you hate so much wot non existing tanks irl, why is AW more like wot by every year ? 

thank you 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, EbenezerScrooge said:

excuse me but you are saying that "we are not morons" please care to explain why obsidian AW 5 years ago was so much better then ? And when you hate so much wot non existing tanks irl, why is AW more like wot by every year ? 

thank you 

Because they like money, and they think they need to go sleazy to get you to pay real money on the game. The thing is, they are not entirely wrong, it works. Some of that is on the game dev's for being sleaze bags, but the rest is on us for falling for their sleaze. 

Share this post


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

excuse me but you are saying that "we are not morons" please care to explain why obsidian AW 5 years ago was so much better then ? And when you hate so much wot non existing tanks irl, why is AW more like wot by every year ? 

thank you 

"Better for the player" is not necessarily the same as "better for making money". It's very much possible to do both, but that often requires planning long-term and sacrificing short-term profits... which isn't what AW seem to be going for. Remember, the entire exstence of this game now is all about squeezing money out of its players before shutting down.

On 5/5/2021 at 4:12 PM, Silentstalker said:

Yes. This basically slipped me by. The devs wanted a tracked Kornet and added it to their plans and when I was looking at it, I totally assumed it was real because it had some render next to it which looked like a photo. A year later, here I am on my old blog ranting about fake Wargaming tanks and how I hate this shit. Boom, two days later, I find out that this is fake but the model is already made (at least it's realistic and designed by a guy who actually understands tank design, unlike the WG shit, but that's just cope), so too late to change anything (and they probably wouldn't anyway since the objective was "tracked Kornet").

So.... sorry.

I'm strongly on the side of not caring about "real vehicles" as long as the gameplay is good, especially when the game lore has already given a free pass to fantasy elements by virtue of being set in the future. The gameplay is already about constantly being outnumbered, pitted against overwhelming odds, physics-defying airships, and recently fighting a UFO using Cold War tech. Realism got thrown out of the window long ago, there is no need to cling onto the idea of playable vehicles must exist in real life.

 


Spoiler

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
On 5/8/2021 at 11:36 PM, Haswell said:

I'm strongly on the side of not caring about "real vehicles" as long as the gameplay is good, especially when the game lore has already given a free pass to fantasy elements by virtue of being set in the future. The gameplay is already about constantly being outnumbered, pitted against overwhelming odds, physics-defying airships, and recently fighting a UFO using Cold War tech.

I second this bit. I don't really care if a vehicle is "real" or not as long as my suspension of disbelief is not broken. I am willing to make relatively minor concessions for gameplay purposes (e.g. the 30 ATGMs that the wiesels get), but the design of the vehicle itself must at the very least be plausible (and somewhat sensible).

To this end the Kornet D1 is perfectly fine imo, since it takes two existing systems and combines them in a way that would probably be functional in real life. I have no issues with this kind of thing in the future if the devs want to add some of the more obscure vehicle designs or proposals that never made it to the mock-up stage (as long as the designs would have been functional had they reached the prototype stage, designs without room for the crew or with no way to load the gun are a no-no).

The only vehicle in the game (that I've seen, I haven't done SH ch4) that breaks my suspension of disbelief is the airship, which continually takes any suspension of disbelief that I might have and throws it out the window whenever I so much as look at it. There is no way that such a contraption would be able to fly, let alone carry several hundred tons worth of armoured vehicles, and yet every time we see one of these offences to aerospace engineering it manages to do both. I'm not going to get into the details about how much thrust you need in order to lift take off and land vertically with several hundred tons of cargo, but it should suffice to say that the airship's lift fans wouldn't be able to provide the required thrust (which is probably comparable to the first stage of a Saturn V rocket).

As long as the vehicles (playable, and preferably non-playable) are nowhere near as egregiously physics-defying as the airship, I have no issues with them.

Edited by MK_Regular (see edit history)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/9/2021 at 5:36 AM, Haswell said:

I'm strongly on the side of not caring about "real vehicles" as long as the gameplay is good, especially when the game lore has already given a free pass to fantasy elements by virtue of being set in the future. The gameplay is already about constantly being outnumbered, pitted against overwhelming odds, physics-defying airships, and recently fighting a UFO using Cold War tech. Realism got thrown out of the window long ago, there is no need to cling onto the idea of playable vehicles must exist in real life.

As enlightened as this might be (and as dumb as various things like ufos are), yours is not the majority community opinion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Silentstalker said:

As enlightened as this might be (and as dumb as various things like ufos are), yours is not the majority community opinion.

Sadly, I believe this to be the case as evidenced by the amount of post / issues we see with models being out my .5cm on the tread angle and the 3rd sprocket along being the slightly different shade of metal and the 37th rivet on the side looks like it was .2nm off.

 

I for one play AW for fun..it's not a mil-sim, it's a far more casual / arcade game and I feel it should kinda be like that....fun!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/9/2021 at 2:25 AM, MK_Regular said:

I'm not going to get into the details about how much thrust you need in order to lift take off and land vertically with several hundred tons of cargo, but it should suffice to say that the airship's lift fans wouldn't be able to provide the required thrust (which is probably comparable to the first stage of a Saturn V rocket).

I was thinking the airships were using some kind of gravity propulsion device for lift - these have been researched IRL since the 1950's [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_gravity_control_propulsion_research]. Perhaps a century later someone finally found a breakthrough. The fans could just be for trim / attitude / forward propulsion, which is why they don't kick up much dust.

Hopefully a clone of Austin Harper has been created from his DNA and been cryogenically preserved, so Hana gets to rescue him again someday...

On a different note, it is useful to have the RL vehicle characteristics to justify their parameters.... like why I still believe the NM142 should have a 7.62 MG to fend off infantry. The real vehicle does, so why shouldn't the AW vehicle??

DVC, QR

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Azdule said:

Sadly, I believe this to be the case as evidenced by the amount of post / issues we see with models being out my .5cm on the tread angle and the 3rd sprocket along being the slightly different shade of metal and the 37th rivet on the side looks like it was .2nm off.

:snrk:

I mean community clearly wants stuff like OPhelia or Alisas main skills. Totally realistic and justified in any way. So why only keep using stuff that exists irl? Really wouldn't mind laser cannon tanks or EMP bursts tbh as long as it's balanced the right way and is fun to play.

Needless to say I don't mind this science fiction Kornet. It looks plausible and should fit into the game in that regard so I'm totally fine with it even though it will probably be useless according to the stats provided comapred to our Kornet Jeep.


Spoiler

fdassdaas.jpg.c709df3e98adc5265f232fe9458a3043.jpg

 

Share this post


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

As enlightened as this might be (and as dumb as various things like ufos are), yours is not the majority community opinion.

I just don't understand people.  The XM1A3 doesn't exist, either, even on paper.  Neither does the Leopard 2AX.  But those are okay while the Kornet D1 isn't?

The D1 is a logical mishmash of parts in the same vein as the MTLB or Sabre.  To me, that makes it realistic and that's all I really care about.

SMH.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Updoot. https://aw.my.games/en/news/general/developer-diary-kornet-d1-changes

Quote

We’ve been carefully monitoring your feedback regarding the recently published article about the upcoming Kornet-D1 Tier 10 Premium Tank Destroyer. Since we do listen to your input and take it into account as much as possible, we have internally made some changes to the vehicle based on the criticism you’ve given us.

scr1

One of the issues mentioned was the “double launch” module and its desirability over other camouflage-reducing modules. In the current iteration, this module is one of two alternative upgrades with the second upgrade giving you access to thermobaric ATGM (the same type the T-15 uses). We have also reduced the double launch reloading penalty from 50 percent to 40 percent, but the time between single shots was increased from 2.7s to 3s.

Another alternative module set for the vehicle will give you a choice between reducing the camouflage penalty for launching by 50 percent, and reducing your camouflage penalty for moving to zero. The overall camouflage factor was reduced to 31 percent.

The goal here is to give you two optional play styles – a passive one with less mobility and more camouflage, which would use the single launch mode, and an active one where you get to move more often without fearing being detected – the mobility will not increase in this mode, nor will your spotting, but you’ll get to stealthily drive out of cover, fire a massively powerful double shot and retreat.

One last controversial point is the presence of Sniper, which, as you have noted, boosts the vehicle’s spotting capabilities. We decided not to remove the Sniper because we consider this advantage to be relatively low. The presence of a Sniper does not equate a constant boost to viewrange – the Sniper can die easily if discovered, and she gets discovered quite often. Furthermore, you may remember that we have reduced her statistics in one of the previous updates. Only truly clever players will get to use her to her full potential by hiding her in a spot where she won’t be found quickly. And with that kind of skill and terrain knowledge, players are entitled to such an advantage.

Please let us know what you think about those changes and, as always:

 


Spoiler

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Either way it seems like russian vehicles are bringing money and are introduced all the time, be it as a reward for BP or for missions or anpremium one. I'm kinda sad that we won't have nothing to grind in regular tech tree, as that is the reason I don't play anymore and having so many tanks from various BP's plus all tech tree tanks simply means that I won't be interested to use real money, therefore to support AW "development" because there is basically none. Sad thing that I went back to that rng fest wot after years of playing AW and all that, only because I have still possibility to grind something and to increase crew skills and none of this is possible in AW anymore. Worst part is that I'm not the only one here and AW has become the game for wot noob players lately, which is the biggest paradox here because it used to be the opposite with obsidian AW as it wasn't so noob friendly as is now. Most of the time I'm reading in game chat that players aren't ever comming back to wot as they are happy with pve, which is fine as long as you have something to go for I guess :) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/10/2021 at 5:04 PM, knutliott said:

I just don't understand people.  The XM1A3 doesn't exist, either, even on paper.  Neither does the Leopard 2AX.  But those are okay while the Kornet D1 isn't?

The D1 is a logical mishmash of parts in the same vein as the MTLB or Sabre.  To me, that makes it realistic and that's all I really care about.

SMH.

I am one of the ones that are not okay with the 2AX.  I  was the 2A7 and I had a blast with it while the 2A7 existed.

However, I'm willing to negotiate.


 

"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

I present you some nice statistics: 

IP0bjrk.png1RF1Zfu.png

 

r4X2MzS.png

Zx369M1.png

rMtQehd.pngvPFPLzM.png

In short, imo it looks like quite a crapbox, then again I haven't played it... It wouldn't surprise me if it is worse than the regular kornet actually. Apparently it also doesn't have partial reload (after a test in the testing grounds) but who knows. Then again it totally kills the aft, so a mandatory meme:

e9f.thumb.jpeg.bd4bae20bc1877460153084139340734.jpeg

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.

Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...