Developers posts on forum

Subject: Die Lags waren Schuld: 4 Arties mit 0 Schaden
Link on message: #14813137

Subject: Raduno della Comunità Italiana a Roma - Domande e Risposte
Link on message: #14813117

zenzo83, on 18 September 2017 - 06:34 PM, said:
Perdonami seal volevo sapere quando mi confermate l'invito così mi posso organizzare con il lavoro e la famiglia!!!! Cordialmente Lorenzo

Subject: shishx' den of all animals, amazing randomness welcomed
Link on message: #14812829

Subject: Time for something a little more positive perhaps.
Link on message: #14812708

gunslingerXXX, on 26 September 2017 - 11:49 AM, said: Spontaneous teamplay. Where a stranger understands your idea (or the other way around) and cooperates.

Subject: Unbalanced Games
Link on message: #14812647

Subject: ¡Os esperamos en la Barcelona Games World 2017!
Link on message: #14812492

jjtanks, on 25 September 2017 - 07:48 PM, said:   Hombre Delhroh, ¡cuánto tiempo! ... te has dejado bigote, jajaja, ¡qué lejos queda la gamescon!  

Subject: Type 5 Heavy review - why this tank is extremely bad for the game, very poorl...
Link on message: #14812401

Cobra6, on 25 September 2017 - 09:30 PM, said:     It's pretty simple; If competent players like us can tell you something is broken without even having to play it whoever is in charge of "balancing" these tanks should maybe be replaced with people like us for some reason seem to have the magical insight which they lack. Making armour completely invulnerable to regular ammo is terrible for gameplay but you have to do that because you insist on keeping premium ammo a thing in this game. You can not properly balance armour for regular 250mm pen ammo and 330mm pen HEAT at the same time, this is impossible. The solution is not to make it invulnerable to regular ammo, it's to get rid of the factor that consistently throws a spanner in the works (premium ammo) and then at the same time rebalancing armour against regular ammo.   If the balancing department had run tanks like the Defender past us it would never have been released in the broken state it was released in either.   There really indeed seems to be no other reason to these balancing changes and tanks than to make money and damn the long term consequences on this game (which we all love I might add).   Cobra 6


Gkirmathal, on 25 September 2017 - 10:30 PM, said:   Just few ideas, if possible, besides your goal to become more visible in individual discussions.   Do some weekly/monthly summary update, in a new special pinned thread. Give TL:TR's on what feedback has been send and how it was received. What kind of feedback would they like to see, which topics, etc. Give the player base (EU/NA/SEA) a thick thumbs up by some dev (in name), if feedback from a 'discussion' was received and really helpful for very well received by said dev and was useful for them. Share that.   Or, start a weekly/monthly "developers diary" thread on general (for all regions, separately written), with some developers who might be interested in such a thing. A bit like how the development team of Helion or KSP does it in their blogs.   This could show this player base that Minsk is actually listening, taking EU/NA/SEA feedback and proposed solutions actually serious. A lot can be gained here.     On point 2/3. You don't have to take risks in order to generally better inform folks. It just depends on how you bring it, plain upfront honesty will currently go farther I recon then a prefabbed PR explanation.    Taking your two examples above. Let Minsk share what 'the technical reason was' (without getting too technical ofc), or 'which tested solution didn't work out for issue X' and what other solutions are still being considered by naming them. Like if they have tested solution X (gathered through player feedback) for problem A and solution X made their local test hamster die....but with B, H and T the furry critters lived. This is good, insightful and interesting information (albeit a bit gruesome). It shows us, Minsk has actually listened and is actually acting upon received EU/NA/SEA feedback (...and that player solution X has killed a hamster).   Laughs aside, such info can be so helpful to increase the following: it builds customer confidence, in ones development process and company.   Feedback on feedback, well Q&A's are a bit like that. Be it the translated ones or not. In my opinion their current quality is below par (be it the chosen question or trolling non answers) and this leads players not taking those guys serious or actually getting to thinking they are inept.     Yeah I noticed and I think it is positive Ph3lan! Though (I hate thoughs), try to make it a new way of working that will last!  You know as well as me (and many others who added to this discussion), that we have been on this road before a couple of times.   About the MM you mentioned above. This will be a very good case to start that development diary thing I talked about. A good way to proactively show what is being considered/tested/etc!     P.s damn this went off topic fast....

Subject: Another pointless rating
Link on message: #14811913

Subject: Opinemos: ARTILLERIAS
Link on message: #14811859

Subject: qpranger's smart tactics talk no. 1 - Overlord
Link on message: #14811258

Subject: Let's give WG a signal!
Link on message: #14810804

Subject: Type 5 Heavy review - why this tank is extremely bad for the game, very poorl...
Link on message: #14810446

Gkirmathal, on 25 September 2017 - 05:10 PM, said:   The issues is in my opinion, and has been for years (!), that WG Minsk has no communication coming back, via you, WG EU staff, on loads and loads of player feedback/suggestions you guys collect and all the nagging issues that this game still has.   For example: the current template MM system and it's issues. The sticky thread here is what...is 73 pages long and just 1 month old. There have been countless single threads on general, some non constructive but the last few which have been locked contained very constructive information and idea's by players. In light of said mountain with feedback, what have the folks at Minsk actually said regarding that mountain with feedback? Do they agree, don't they agree, what are their idea's on that subject, is there and ETA of sorts.   Has Minsk actually replied to any player feedback you (EU staff) send them? Yes? No? What was their reply? Where can we read this reply? "Minsk replying to you, on player feedback you send and you then relaying Minsk their message on the forums in a sticky" When was the last time we had proper communication back and forth, relayed via EU staff, over our given feedback? Rubicon and perhaps Foch.   So two occasions I remember. The rest of the time (2 years since Rubicon) the player base has gotten the impression that their feedback falls on deaf ears and they see changes being "pushed" to release that they simply don't understand. Changes that don't reflect any feedback given by EU and NA. That gets folks pumped up and cynical.   So better you  staff communication and if that is not possible....be honest about it! 

Subject: AMX 50 B now the 2nd worst tier X heavy
Link on message: #14810189

brumbarr, on 25 September 2017 - 01:28 PM, said: You reap what you sow. There will be positive posts if there is positive change.

Subject: Type 5 Heavy review - why this tank is extremely bad for the game, very poorl...
Link on message: #14810149

CheatingFishMonk, on 25 September 2017 - 01:08 PM, said: i agree that things like this are a two-sided thing, but if you as a person think that they're not listening you might become less civil, though i do not approve of it, i can somewhat relate, however Ph3lan, Would you mind as a sign of goodwill tell us some ideas you have yourself with regards of the type-5?


Aikl, on 25 September 2017 - 01:31 PM, said:   I have little trouble believing you, but if you asked me two days ago, I would not have guessed that it was, apparently, a primary concern for the staff (outside of the 'pure' mods) to collect feedback.   As for which sections to use, I guess it makes sense to use the ones you mentioned. Still, there's even a pinned thread in this subforum for suggestions. I'm guessing that one's viable as well?
A 'template' might make little sense, but quite literally the point is to filter out simple whining topics - even though from what I understand, large parts of the playerbase are most comfortable expressing themselves with grunts and insults on sexual orientation rather than eloquent sentences. Anyway, duly noted, might gather up some of the focused rants from the last few months and repost them in the CU forum (which I was under the impression was to changes made rather than what should be improved in the future).   It's good that the staff, or most likely rather the higher-ups, have realized that a forum presence is a good idea. The same goes for general interaction with the players. Something like the 'sneak peek' on missions would work nicely for what WG is working on. Nowadays we seem to get some peaks at things coming wa-ay in the future, with no real status. Like, HD maps are coming soonTM, according to MrConway. We've seen them - but have no idea on the ETA, or if they are even coming in the first place. Kind of reminds me of certain other projects, like the Havok physics.   Anyway, interaction with the players is good. Hopefully your efforts on the forum is a sign that WG wants to improve that outside the forums as well, though I have a sneaking suspicion that this was a EU staff initiative rather than some order from Minsk:  


WunderWurst, on 25 September 2017 - 02:35 PM, said:   I am sorry and I guess I went overboard a bit and maybe did not make it clear enough I am by no means "critizising" you as a person, or your work but criticise WG as you are in this case representing WG for me and most of the community. I am also not questioning your work here. I am pretty certain that you are doing a good job and forward all the things which make sense to be reported to the devs.   However I would like to discuss that last sentence and I just cannot belive that is happening. Maybe thats a lack of communication. However as a decent player it is EXTREMELY hard to understand the decisionmaking of the balancing department. Much and more just seems not to make ANY sense in my eyes but also the eyes of pretty much any other decent player I came across and talked to. I would like to know the reasoning why certain balancing changes are done the way they are. And would it hurt to show statistics on which base these decisions are made? I am well aware of the fact that complex problems often require complex solutions and cannot be done "with an easy fix". Its just not how it works.   Yet I truely must wonder who came up with certain balancing decision on what base and for what reason or purpose. Lets pick the Type 5 for an example - kinda also makes sense because of this thread I can only interpret the changes done to the line in one way, as for me there is not a single other reasonable explanation for what is going on: The Type 5 (and its line) were designed to promote the gold spam hence indirectly the pay2win aspect gold ammo is. All that is done to increase the sales of WG products only obtainable via real money (Gold / Premium time / Premium Vehicles). For me it very much looks like balancing is abused (in this case) to make more money rather than ensure the quality of the product. Understand please that I cannot see another reason for the changes they made happen to the Type 5. Maybe there are reasons other than what I just said but I just cannot see (maybe due to a lack of information).   Now lets go further and look at the latest adjustments the addition of "weakspots" to that tank. I dont even want to go into to much detail but the so called "weakspots" are obviously non. Its an "empty" change. A competent balancing department (! Again I am well aware that you have nothing to do with balancing!!!) would have understood that from the get go. Its their job to know that and frankly if they did not know that, maybe they are not the right guys for the job. All that will make me belive that this "change" was soloe done to pretend that WG is listining to their players, while they are actually not willing to do so.   I hope I brought my point across a bit better now.

Subject: Klan TR4P - rekrutujemy aktywnych graczy
Link on message: #14809997

Subject: Stop crying about 3/5/7 match making - a mathematical examination
Link on message: #14809978

Subject: PVS-A - przestroga przed dołączeniem :)
Link on message: #14809968

RevenGeePL, on 09 September 2017 - 06:42 PM, said:     Spokojnie, temat uważam za zakończony. Miał on na celu naświetlenie tylko sytuacji   Moderatora proszę o zamknięcie, gdyż przeciwnej stronie skończyły się argumenty. Pozdrawiam

Subject: Preguntas/Respuestas del Staff (Especiales, Tienda Premium...)
Link on message: #14809892

cagapinos, on 24 September 2017 - 09:06 PM, said: Una consultilla para el staff......¿ el Kanonenjadpanzer, estará en la 9.20.1, con el cañon de 105mm?  gracias de antemano por la respuesta.

Subject: Aggiornamento 9.20.1 Test Pubblico - Feedback generale
Link on message: #14809681

Subject: WT aut E 100
Link on message: #14809676

Bez_Gumki, on 24 September 2017 - 09:14 PM, said: X do robienia statystyk Rozumiem, że spotowanie, defowanie bazy, dobijanie luf i robienie 3100dmg średnio na bitwe to nabijanie statystyk i graie pod wn8  Dobre dobre, czego te boty już nie wymyślą... Grasz na niskich tierach, jestes lamus, grasz na lajtach, jestes lamus, grasz tylko na X też jestes lamus Logika zółtego sabotażysty   Dlatego uwielbiam to konto, jest idealne żeby podnosić ciśnienie zółtym mądralińskim a przyczepić sie nie macie do czego 

Subject: Aggiornamento 9.20.1 Test Pubblico - Cambiamenti ai veicoli inglesi
Link on message: #14809675

Subject: Aggiornamento 9.20.1 Test Pubblico - Nuovo carro: il Super Conqueror
Link on message: #14809674

Subject: Aggiornamento 9.20.1 Test Pubblico - Cambiamenti ai veicoli americani
Link on message: #14809673

Subject: Aggiornamento 9.20.1 Test Pubblico - Cambiamenti agli altri veicoli (URSS, Ci...
Link on message: #14809672

Subject: Aggiornamento 9.20.1 Test Pubblico - Cambiamenti alle Missioni Personali (Con...
Link on message: #14809671

Subject: Aggiornamento 9.20.1 Test Pubblico - Miglioramento del Matchmaker
Link on message: #14809669

Subject: Aggiornamento 9.20.1 Test Pubblico - Guadagno dei Titoli
Link on message: #14809668

Subject: Aggiornamento 9.20.1 Test Pubblico - Miglioramenti al Campo d'Addestramento
Link on message: #14809666

Subject: Aggiornamento 9.20.1 Test Pubblico - Nuovi veicoli HD
Link on message: #14809665

Subject: Aggiornamento 9.20.1 Test Pubblico - Segnalazione bug
Link on message: #14809663

Subject: What is your real lifes IQ?
Link on message: #14809643

Subject: Test Server / Hesap Karışıklığı
Link on message: #14809531

Subject: Ban the person above you game!
Link on message: #14809485

Subject: reroll account
Link on message: #14809476

Subject: AMX 50 B now the 2nd worst tier X heavy
Link on message: #14809464

commer, on 25 September 2017 - 12:09 PM, said:   What are you? A XVI century russian noble? Sweet and Salt in one dish?

Subject: ★ [G-X-B] Grizzly Bear ★ 1700 WN8 ★ Twierdze ★ Bonusy ★ Gold ★
Link on message: #14809450

Piotrek1WoT, on 24 September 2017 - 05:07 PM, said: i takie małe ogłoszenie każda osoba co będzie pisała cokolwiek na temat tej dramy będzie miała usuwaną wiadomość ponieważ ten wątek jest do rekrutacji a nie do waszej dramy 

Subject: shishx' den of all animals, amazing randomness welcomed
Link on message: #14809445

Subject: Type 5 Heavy review - why this tank is extremely bad for the game, very poorl...
Link on message: #14809427

WunderWurst, on 25 September 2017 - 11:26 AM, said: Eks Deh.... I know its not your job you are about as far away from the actual development of the game as I am but eks to the deh.   A billion Dollar company (BILLION!!111!1one!!1Eleven!) which cannot handle balancing to an at least decent level is something new. Oh wait I forgot... WG abuses the balancing to make the game more pay2win so we can finally get SerBs moon base. If you dont have anything usefull to say how about dont say anything at all and dont make a fool out of yourself as you most certainly wont be able to back up your claims, even though that is most certainly not your fault but the fault of the Devs. A competent and not as greedy company as WG would have understood the problems certain aspects of the game cause. They would have pulled the plug of these problems a long time ago. Not so much WG.


Aikl, on 25 September 2017 - 11:31 AM, said:   Feedback reports? This sounds new. I'm sure it isn't, however.    Jokes aside, I'm sure it would benefit both the forum users taking the time to write extensive essays on gameplay elements and WG staff writing reports on them to have a more systematic approach. Maybe a template and a dedicated section? At least some way of setting a 'minimum requirement' for a submission, keeping it away from the Gameplay subsection, and perhaps a voting system. Maybe a Yes/No poll with no comments might suffiice for feedback, not too sure. A separate system for filtering users in the forum might also help. Minimum account age, battle requirements, separate 'banning system' for the subsection... endless options.   As for the general 'tone' and language of the post in question: That is the result of long-lasting issues with the game that aren't addressed properly - and having a forum where we're told that our opinions are considered, but with no real proof (until recently). Yes, the Japanese heavy tanks have undergone changes, but ultimately changes that don't fix the real problems with them. They're still slow bricks with a huge derp gun and armor largely impervious to standard ammo. While Maus is far from a weak tank even now, it at least got a nerf addressing what seemed to be the main problem with it - the insane DPM.

Subject: shishx' den of all animals, amazing randomness welcomed
Link on message: #14809400

Joggaman, on 25 September 2017 - 11:34 AM, said:   Isn't this a half-wrapped tomato?

Subject: [AKA0S] Academia KA0S
Link on message: #14809361