Developers posts on forum

MrVic: Nice post


always tempted to put the infrared on a tank but due to bad resolution skipped it.  That and once the first shot was fired it would sun burst blank usually.
Tho would help with early warning some

Jeremy Taylor: You are more than welcome .

Jeremy Taylor: I second this. Very nice.

Jeremy Taylor: In World of Tanks recoil is visualized.

Jeremy Taylor: Terrain does affect the vehicle's turning speed as well as top speed and acceleration rates.

Jeremy Taylor: The absence of collision momentum when two tanks bump into each other is historically correct.

Jeremy Taylor: The rules concerning ingame nicknames will be introduced by us a bit later. In World of Tanks , fighting vehicles will not have personal names. However, players will be allowed to use some custom features that will distinguish tanks from each other (e.g. drawings and insignias on panzer hulls).

Jeremy Taylor: 1. At the moment we can't reveal all the factors affecting a player's XP growth rates. In outline, experience is assigned for destroyed enemy vehicles, damage caused to the enemy vehicles, successful battle reconnaissance, active participation in battle and team victory.
2. All fighting vehicles of one specific nation are divided into ten levels. In the German tank tree LeichteTraktor refers to the 1st level tank and MAUS refers the 10th level tank respectively. Have a look at the German tank tree to get the idea of leveling in World of Tanks
3. The crew upgrading is completely under the player's control. The player is free to spend his experience on crew members the way he wants.

MrVic: Vreith: Good entry. Only thought are with breyd971 brought up. You might have to go to another turret design with that kinda standard chassis or modify the hull some. Good first pass tho.
I have had to do a ton of passes on a tank before I catch the minor stuff all the time.
Tyrud Nice first entry only 2 things I would consider. turret with that size pushed far back have 2 issues to overcome. First one being throws the gun out of balance to the hull that can create a huge rocking of the tank when it fires. The other is I assume you engine would be mid tank? That works but I would note its exhaust is routed out behind the tank. Exhaust coming up from the deck even the intakes/radiators at times makes smoke/clouds which can block your view to a target.
Just some things to toss into your design planning/description
Also remember they plan for tech mid 1940 or earlier. hate to have someone waste their work just a reminder
Just my thoughts tho. Looking good tho!
you got your speed about right on it looks.
I always wanted to see how it worked out on the elephant but alas think there is only 2 in the world and neither have been restored to working engine level
Tyrud if you run into issues in with the drawing might be able to help ya

MrVic: Vreith: Good entry. Only thought are with breyd971 brought up.  You might have to go to another turret design with that kinda standard chassis or modify the hull some.  Good first pass tho.
I have had to do a ton of passes on a tank before I catch the minor stuff all the time.

Tyrud Nice first entry only 2 things I would consider. turret with that size pushed far back have 2 issues to overcome. First one being throws the gun out of balance to the hull that can create a huge rocking of the tank when it fires.  The other is I assume you engine would be mid tank?  That works but I would note its exhaust is routed out behind the tank. Exhaust coming up from the deck even the intakes/radiators at times makes smoke/clouds  which can block your view to a target.  

Just some things to toss into your design planning/description
Also remember they plan for tech mid 1940 or earlier. hate to have someone waste their work just a reminder

Just my thoughts tho. Looking good tho!

you got your speed about right on it looks.

I always wanted to see how it worked out on the elephant but alas think there is only 2 in the world and neither have been restored to working engine level
Tyrud if you run into issues in with the drawing might be able to help ya

MrVic: Vreith: Good entry. Only thought are with breyd971 brought up.  You might have to go to another turret design with that kinda standard chassis or modify the hull some.  Good first pass tho.
I have had to do a ton of passes on a tank before I catch the minor stuff all the time.

Tyrud Nice first entry only 2 things I would consider. turret with that size pushed far back have 2 issues to overcome. First one being throws the gun out of balance to the hull that can create a huge rocking of the tank when it fires.  The other is I assume you engine would be mid tank?  That works but I would note its exhaust is routed out behind the tank. Exhaust coming up from the deck even the intakes/radiators at times makes smoke/clouds  which can block your view to a target.  

Just some things to toss into your design planning/description
Also remember they plan for tech mid 1940 or earlier. hate to have someone waste their work just a reminder

Just my thoughts tho. Looking good tho!

you got your speed about right on it looks.

I always wanted to see how it worked out on the elephant but alas think there is only 2 in the world and neither have been restored to working engine level
Tyrud if you run into issues in with the drawing might be able to help ya

MrVic: I am not out to defunct (think thats a word hehe) anything really. if ya take a stab at something it it seems to work out go for it
Yeah bet that would be easier. hehe gotta love the thin armored tanks. "So what if a 8.8 can go through both sides of my tank with one shot! atleast the explosion happened outside my tank" not so famous M4 sherman driver saying

MrVic:
I am not out to defunct (think thats a word hehe) anything really. if ya take a stab at something it it seems to work out go for it

Yeah bet that would be easier. hehe gotta love the thin armored tanks.  "So what if a 8.8 can go through both sides of my tank with one shot! atleast the explosion happened outside my tank" not so famous M4 sherman driver saying

MrVic:
I am not out to defunct (think thats a word hehe) anything really. if ya take a stab at something it it seems to work out go for it

Yeah bet that would be easier. hehe gotta love the thin armored tanks.  "So what if a 8.8 can go through both sides of my tank with one shot! atleast the explosion happened outside my tank" not so famous M4 sherman driver saying

MrVic: Some good posts above for sure Figured there were more people more knowledgeable in this dept haha.
I tend to lean more towards the armor and weapon sides of things and only really dig into engines mostly in space usage concerns.
Side note: Yeah Bredy971 made our funny signature since we have pestered each other about design details and info over way to many tank ideas lol. I think after our profile pic competition he made that up and it was hilarious.

MrVic: Some good posts above for sure    Figured there were more people more knowledgeable in this dept haha.
I tend to lean more towards the armor and weapon sides of things and only really dig into engines mostly in space usage concerns.

Side note: Yeah Bredy971 made our funny signature since we have pestered each other about design details and info over way to many tank ideas lol. I think after our profile pic competition he made that up and it was hilarious.

MrVic: Some good posts above for sure    Figured there were more people more knowledgeable in this dept haha.
I tend to lean more towards the armor and weapon sides of things and only really dig into engines mostly in space usage concerns.

Side note: Yeah Bredy971 made our funny signature since we have pestered each other about design details and info over way to many tank ideas lol. I think after our profile pic competition he made that up and it was hilarious.

Jeremy Taylor: We are working on this concept and considering various options. It's quite possible that 1st and 2nd level tanks will be fighting on their own separated from "tougher guys" .

Jeremy Taylor: In World of Tanks the targeting is free. It means that the player is aiming manually at the enemy fighting vehicle and the vehicle’s modules. Right-clicking is used to lock on the already selected motionless target for camera rotating purpose.

Jeremy Taylor: One tank on the battlefield refers to one player.

Jeremy Taylor: The crew consists of 2-7 members depending on the type of a vehicle. The crew includes gunner, radio operator, loader, mechanic and commander. Each crew member will be leveled up individually and can be knocked out.

Jeremy Taylor: The player can purchase the premium account and premium tanks. Game credits, custom and extra-items are also purchasable. We believe that the absolute majority of players will get tons fun without investing a dollar.

Jeremy Taylor: The fighting vehicle is the main character in World of Tanks. You may level up your tank individually and level up a number of fighting vehicles at the same time. Your garage may contain up to five fighting vehicles of different nations.

MrVic: 601N is good to just found 3 original scans of specification sheets. 1939 design
the 601E is better tho with 1331 hp converted. 601N packs 1258.2 HP max
Both are good Tho best clean out the attic for that sucker and its cooling
you can bump off road up a bit I usually estimate decent bit low to be safe. General rule of thumb is half it for offroad epically the higher you speed goes tho. you run into more issues with traction at that speed ect. example is a 16 ton UK cruiser tank with 320hp does 48/23 km/h. And with HP Vs Speed, speed drops off in a curve its not 1 for 1.
Kinda funny how hard that info was to find. Seems there was a ton of varying reports from WW2 german documents on that line of engines performance specs after the 601.
Engine espically aircraft are my bad area. Think Breyd971 is probably better on this info then me. Always best to bounce info off everyone you can find too

MrVic:
601N is good to just found 3 original scans of specification sheets.  1939 design

the 601E is better tho with 1331 hp converted.   601N packs 1258.2 HP max

Both are good   Tho best clean out the attic for that sucker and its cooling

you can bump off road up a bit I usually estimate decent bit low to be safe. General rule of thumb is half it for offroad epically the higher you speed goes tho. you run into more issues with traction at that speed ect.  example is a 16 ton UK cruiser tank with 320hp does 48/23 km/h.  And with HP Vs Speed, speed drops off in a curve its not 1 for 1.



Kinda funny how hard that info was to find.  Seems there was a ton of varying reports from WW2 german documents on that line of engines performance specs after the 601.

Engine espically aircraft are my bad area. Think Breyd971 is probably better on this info then me. Always best to bounce info off everyone you can find too

MrVic:
601N is good to just found 3 original scans of specification sheets.  1939 design

the 601E is better tho with 1331 hp converted.   601N packs 1258.2 HP max

Both are good   Tho best clean out the attic for that sucker and its cooling

you can bump off road up a bit I usually estimate decent bit low to be safe. General rule of thumb is half it for offroad epically the higher you speed goes tho. you run into more issues with traction at that speed ect.  example is a 16 ton UK cruiser tank with 320hp does 48/23 km/h.  And with HP Vs Speed, speed drops off in a curve its not 1 for 1.



Kinda funny how hard that info was to find.  Seems there was a ton of varying reports from WW2 german documents on that line of engines performance specs after the 601.

Engine espically aircraft are my bad area. Think Breyd971 is probably better on this info then me. Always best to bounce info off everyone you can find too

MrVic:
601N is good to just found 3 original scans of specification sheets.  1939 design

the 601E is better tho with 1331 hp converted.   601N packs 1258.2 HP max

Both are good   Tho best clean out the attic for that sucker and its cooling

you can bump off road up a bit I usually estimate decent bit low to be safe. General rule of thumb is half it for offroad epically the higher you speed goes tho. you run into more issues with traction at that speed ect.  example is a 16 ton UK cruiser tank with 320hp does 48/23 km/h.  And with HP Vs Speed, speed drops off in a curve its not 1 for 1.



Kinda funny how hard that info was to find.  Seems there was a ton of varying reports from WW2 german documents on that line of engines performance specs after the 601.

Engine espically aircraft are my bad area. Think Breyd971 is probably better on this info then me. Always best to bounce info off everyone you can find too

MrVic: Think I found the HP discrepancy issue partly varying original german reports (some doctored in WW2) and bad conversions
Okies converts out at 1258.2 hp sea level at max rpm
my above speed "probably" is close then but daaammn that things going to take space
601E should be within the time frame. The 601N not sure but maybe

MrVic: Think I found the HP discrepancy issue partly varying original german reports (some doctored in WW2) and bad conversions

Okies converts out at 1258.2 hp sea level at max rpm

my above speed "probably" is close then but daaammn that things going to take space

601E should be within the time frame. The 601N not sure but maybe

MrVic: Think I found the HP discrepancy issue partly varying original german reports (some doctored in WW2) and bad conversions

Okies converts out at 1258.2 hp sea level at max rpm

my above speed "probably" is close then but daaammn that things going to take space

601E should be within the time frame. The 601N not sure but maybe

MrVic: Think I found the HP discrepancy issue partly varying original german reports (some doctored in WW2) and bad conversions

Okies converts out at 1258.2 hp sea level at max rpm

my above speed "probably" is close then but daaammn that things going to take space

601E should be within the time frame. The 601N not sure but maybe

MrVic: Yeah its hard to nail down. Seeing as the DB 601F was made from Dec 1941 and later. But remember those are in essence a burst rpm number aka redline.
Guessing at 30 tons running a 601E best guess. But that suckers going to eat a ton of room 68" long compared to 72" on BMW 801 heh
78km road
32km off road

MrVic:
Yeah its hard to nail down. Seeing as the  DB 601F was made from Dec 1941 and later. But remember those are in essence a burst rpm number aka redline.  

Guessing at 30 tons running a 601E best guess. But that suckers going to eat a ton of room 68" long compared to 72" on BMW 801 heh
78km road
32km off road

MrVic:
Yeah its hard to nail down. Seeing as the  DB 601F was made from Dec 1941 and later. But remember those are in essence a burst rpm number aka redline.  

Guessing at 30 tons running a 601E best guess. But that suckers going to eat a ton of room 68" long compared to 72" on BMW 801 heh
78km road
32km off road

MrVic:
Yeah its hard to nail down. Seeing as the  DB 601F was made from Dec 1941 and later. But remember those are in essence a burst rpm number aka redline.  

Guessing at 30 tons running a 601E best guess. But that suckers going to eat a ton of room 68" long compared to 72" on BMW 801 heh
78km road
32km off road

MrVic: DB601
Manufacturer: Daimler-Benz
Type: Supercharged 60° inverted Vee piston engine
Cylinders: 12
Bore: 150 mm (5.91 in)
Stroke: 160 mm (6.30 in)
Displacement: 33.9 L (2,070 in³)
Length: 1,722 mm (68 in)
Dry weight: 590 kg (1,320 lb)
Performance:
Power output:
– 865 kW (1,175 PS - 1,160 hp) at 2,500 rpm for takeoff
– 735 kW (1,000 PS - 985 hp) at 2,400 rpm for maximum
continuous power
Specific power: 25.5 kW/L (0.56 hp/in³)
Compression ratio: 6.9:1
Specific fuel consumption: 0.27 kg/(kW·h) (0.45 lb/(hp·h))
Power-to-weight ratio: 1.44 kW/kg (0.88 hp/lb)
With the Max RPM and Max continuous power your after the max continuous as that is it operating below redline
Nice engine tho still large in size but usable. I still trying to sort out what model 601 boosted from 1000hp to 1300hp due to conflicting reports.
all in all good engine tho it looks
Added I would probably put it around 1000 hp due using a supercharger heat becomes harder to manage and without the hp drops some. good engine but you will lose alot in space/heat still I think. could get the HP just gotta watch the space Just my 2cents tho

MrVic: DB601
Manufacturer: Daimler-Benz
Type: Supercharged 60° inverted Vee piston engine
Cylinders: 12
Bore: 150 mm (5.91 in)
Stroke: 160 mm (6.30 in)
Displacement: 33.9 L (2,070 in³)
Length: 1,722 mm (68 in)
Dry weight: 590 kg (1,320 lb)

Performance:
Power output:
– 865 kW (1,175 PS - 1,160 hp) at 2,500 rpm for takeoff
– 735 kW (1,000 PS - 985 hp) at 2,400 rpm for maximum
   continuous power
Specific power: 25.5 kW/L (0.56 hp/in³)
Compression ratio: 6.9:1
Specific fuel consumption: 0.27 kg/(kW·h) (0.45 lb/(hp·h))
Power-to-weight ratio: 1.44 kW/kg (0.88 hp/lb)

With the Max RPM and Max continuous power your after the max continuous as that is it operating below redline
Nice engine tho still large in size but usable. I still trying to sort out what model 601 boosted from 1000hp to 1300hp due to conflicting reports.
all in all good engine tho it looks

Added I would probably put it around 1000 hp due using a supercharger heat becomes harder to manage and without the hp drops some. good engine but you will lose alot in space/heat still I think. could get the HP just gotta watch the space Just my 2cents tho

MrVic: DB601
Manufacturer: Daimler-Benz
Type: Supercharged 60° inverted Vee piston engine
Cylinders: 12
Bore: 150 mm (5.91 in)
Stroke: 160 mm (6.30 in)
Displacement: 33.9 L (2,070 in³)
Length: 1,722 mm (68 in)
Dry weight: 590 kg (1,320 lb)

Performance:
Power output:
– 865 kW (1,175 PS - 1,160 hp) at 2,500 rpm for takeoff
– 735 kW (1,000 PS - 985 hp) at 2,400 rpm for maximum
   continuous power
Specific power: 25.5 kW/L (0.56 hp/in³)
Compression ratio: 6.9:1
Specific fuel consumption: 0.27 kg/(kW·h) (0.45 lb/(hp·h))
Power-to-weight ratio: 1.44 kW/kg (0.88 hp/lb)

With the Max RPM and Max continuous power your after the max continuous as that is it operating below redline
Nice engine tho still large in size but usable. I still trying to sort out what model 601 boosted from 1000hp to 1300hp due to conflicting reports.
all in all good engine tho it looks

Added I would probably put it around 1000 hp due using a supercharger heat becomes harder to manage and without the hp drops some. good engine but you will lose alot in space/heat still I think. could get the HP just gotta watch the space Just my 2cents tho

MrVic: DB601
Manufacturer: Daimler-Benz
Type: Supercharged 60° inverted Vee piston engine
Cylinders: 12
Bore: 150 mm (5.91 in)
Stroke: 160 mm (6.30 in)
Displacement: 33.9 L (2,070 in³)
Length: 1,722 mm (68 in)
Dry weight: 590 kg (1,320 lb)

Performance:
Power output:
– 865 kW (1,175 PS - 1,160 hp) at 2,500 rpm for takeoff
– 735 kW (1,000 PS - 985 hp) at 2,400 rpm for maximum
   continuous power
Specific power: 25.5 kW/L (0.56 hp/in³)
Compression ratio: 6.9:1
Specific fuel consumption: 0.27 kg/(kW·h) (0.45 lb/(hp·h))
Power-to-weight ratio: 1.44 kW/kg (0.88 hp/lb)

With the Max RPM and Max continuous power your after the max continuous as that is it operating below redline
Nice engine tho still large in size but usable. I still trying to sort out what model 601 boosted from 1000hp to 1300hp due to conflicting reports.
all in all good engine tho it looks

Added I would probably put it around 1000 hp due using a supercharger heat becomes harder to manage and without the hp drops some. good engine but you will lose alot in space/heat still I think. could get the HP just gotta watch the space Just my 2cents tho

MrVic: yeah the BMW 801 is over 6' long alone and thats before compensating for its insane heat issues. Compared to the Maybach HL230P30 which was 4 feet long, 3 feet 2 inches wide and 3 feet 1 inch tall at 700hp water cooled with 4 fans going to take a peak at DB601. Bit ignorant on early war aircraft engines right now. I have avoided them as they were still crude with cooling issues usually for tank use, there were great improvements mid war and late that made them more viable.

MrVic: yeah the BMW 801 is over 6' long alone and thats before compensating for its insane heat issues. Compared to the Maybach HL230P30 which was 4 feet long, 3 feet 2 inches wide and 3 feet 1 inch tall at 700hp water cooled with 4 fans going to take a peak at DB601. Bit ignorant on early war aircraft engines right now.  I have avoided them as they were still crude with cooling issues usually for tank use, there were great improvements mid war and late that made them more viable.

MrVic: yeah the BMW 801 is over 6' long alone and thats before compensating for its insane heat issues. Compared to the Maybach HL230P30 which was 4 feet long, 3 feet 2 inches wide and 3 feet 1 inch tall at 700hp water cooled with 4 fans going to take a peak at DB601. Bit ignorant on early war aircraft engines right now.  I have avoided them as they were still crude with cooling issues usually for tank use, there were great improvements mid war and late that made them more viable.

MrVic: yeah the BMW 801 is over 6' long alone and thats before compensating for its insane heat issues. Compared to the Maybach HL230P30 which was 4 feet long, 3 feet 2 inches wide and 3 feet 1 inch tall at 700hp water cooled with 4 fans going to take a peak at DB601. Bit ignorant on early war aircraft engines right now.  I have avoided them as they were still crude with cooling issues usually for tank use, there were great improvements mid war and late that made them more viable.

MrVic: kk going to check some space reqs and try and calc the speed. but that might work tho.

MrVic:
kk going to check some space reqs and try and calc the speed.  but that might work tho.