Developers posts on forum

Content_WG: ¡Tome ventaja de un aumento de XP de Tripulación y premios de algunos misiones mientras recordamos esta batalla sobre el deserto Norteafricano!
Texto completo de las noticias

Content_WG: Tire o máximo proveito do impulso em XP de Tripulação e das recompensas das Missões, no final de semana em que relembramos essa feroz batalha no deserto do Norte de África!

Texto completo da notícia

Content_WG: Make the most of a Crew XP boost and Mission rewards as we recall this fierce battle for the North African desert!
Full news text

dance210:   A team needs to lose by tech defeats...that's why it says something to the effect of it needs to be a complete defeat, not partial. So, theoretically, if a team were to tech out once or twice, they would be fine.   In this case, for this particular night, if a team lost to a tech defeat by a score of 2 - 3, then we would have been able to figure out that you won and just stopped showing.

Yoott: it has been handled

Yoott: it has been handled

The_Chieftain: Don't worry too much about the negreps. I would like to think that people won't negrep for simple disagreement, but that the cause was the logic behind the argument: Appeal to authority doesn't fly very well in this subforum.

dance210: Guys, please remember to be in the active side above the line, have all players as green not red and no more than 15 tier points, no higher than Tier 2 tanks.   Any of the above will cause your team to get a tech defeat, even if you think you're ready...

dance210:   Group Stage Round 1 is at 4 pm PDT; Round 2 starts at 7 pm PDT.  

dance210:   What is your team name and group? (Links to group would be beneficial) :)

The_Chieftain:   Pity. You came so close....  (FYI, when I'm Arty on that map, I often go to C8, so that blue area on the 8/9 line gets a bit smaller.)   You are one of the apparent few arty dislikers who have figured out that artillery in this game have tracks, and can move to hit places where 'traditinoal' arty-haters seem to think they're safe. I must admit to a certain satisfaction from trundling around only to hit stationary vehicles who are clinging behind a useless rock or building which is no longer in my way.   Sadly, you fail to take your analysis one step further. After concluding that it is unfeasible to stay out of the area of coverage of artillery, you do simply say 'Arty can hit me anywhere' and give up. you don't go on to think "what can I do to make me a more difficult or less tempting target for artillery." You may feel like you're caught between a rock and a hard place: Driving around erratically may get you killed by a TD, but staying still will likely get you killed by arty. Good. Being caught between the rock and the hard place makes things more interesting, forces you to constantly evaluate your choices and balance the risks to you at any moment and time.

dance210: Hey guys.   For everyone that registered via the email and haven't heard anything...I sadly have no news on that. I will ask and try to get an answer for you, but don't know when that will be :(   For everyone else, the schedule is up for the first round.   I'll be around (mostly) and I'll try and answer any questions when I can.   Good luck to everyone tonight!

The_Chieftain:   Nope, I'm far to young for that, obviously :)  

The_Chieftain:   No, mainly because I've not really had access to one with a video team. Plus, I haven't found an operator's manual. I'm sure I'll get around to one eventually, but it's fairly low on the 'near future' list.  

The_Chieftain:   I prefer to say he's unreliable. To call him a liar would be to ascribe malice, and I have no reason to believe he was intentionally setting out to deceive anyone. Intent, however, need not correlate with accuracy. The bottom line is that not everything he says is true, and the further from his own sphere of observation anything was, the less likely, it seems, his statement about it was going to be true. In either case, it will certainly be less reliable.  

The_Chieftain:   I'm slapping his book, not him. For the purposes of studying history, I don't care how many battle stars or unit citations he's earned (I only have four campaign awards, a Valorous Unit Award, Meritorious Unit Citation and two Bronze Star Medals, incidentally), his awards don't make his statements such as "Patton attended a conference and decided to prevent Pershing from being the tank for the job" true. A statement is true or false on the face of it, regardless of the intent or the valor of the person making it.   Unfortunately, though we commonly say "Perception is reality", in the field of research, this is not the true. Preception is perception, and reality doesn't care what people perceived. If Sherman crews perceived that putting sandbags on their tank was going to increase their survivability, even if was a commonly accepted practice to increase morale, it doesn't stop the engineers who knew what they were talking about with empirical evidence from saying "Guys, this actually makes matters worse." Who would be correct? The crewmen, or the engineers?   Cooper's book can be divided into what he saw, what he interpreted, and what he heard. What he saw is pretty much to be taken at face value, absent evidence that he was absolutely wrong. What he interpreted is to be given some weight, but with the understanding that he is looking at a problem from only one perspective. What he heard is to be given the least weight of all. It does not devalue his book as a memoir, but it should not be confused with a reliable source of objective information.

The_Chieftain:   In fairness to the major, yes, it does. Absolutely, the point is not conclusive and as I said, you can punch a few holes in his argument. It is possible that had the US landed in Normandy with M6 Heavies vice M4 Mediums, the war would still have been won. But his point that medium tanks which sacrifice armor and gun for better transportability, mobility and maintenance were proven to be war-winning is also correct. A conscious decision was made that the US Army did not want to try shipping heavy tanks overseas, hence the M6 snd T14s never got anywhere. That decision was made for a set of reasons, no less valid than the set of reasons that Tiger got an 8.8cm gun or Panther had 8cm of armour on the front slope. The strategic level, the bit which really wins the war, relied upon logistics and movement of armies of men and machines, not the individual tactical abilities if one tank happened to meet another. There is usually more than one way to skin a cat, and often a few one can't. The Army's choice proved to be one of those ways.    

The_Warhawk: For the folks meeting up in Nebraska today, just a reminder, we're meeting up front by the missiles out front. Specifically by the Thor and the Blue Scout.

dance210:   Teams are set to be 18 players...so not quite sure what you mean  

dance210:   It would be a temporary channel. Teams are welcome to set that up on their own :)  

dance210:  

dance210:   AFAIK the email went out late last night/early this morning. Were you able to find a team going to the tournament page? It's still early here, but I'll look in to seeing if I can find out what happened.

dance210:   It's 6 + 3. I'm guessing when the number of reserves was increased, that change wasn't reflected everywhere.   The max tier points is 30 (allowing six Tier 5 tanks, which is the maximum number of players allowed in each battle anyways).

dance210:     That would be because your team didn't participate in the Group Stage...which is the only thing that list shows.   Participation in the Playoffs (Bravo or Alpha) will only be on the tournament page.  

dance210:   I'm not sure if Playoffs have been paid out yet. I'll ask for y'all today.

The_Chieftain: Ram bows are making a comeback, though... See Zumwalt.

dance210:   We had a single day tournament at the beginning of the month (or maybe last month...?)...don't be surprised if something similar to the daily blitzes turn up sooner or later ;)  

dance210:  

dance210:   If you are logged in and go to the tournament page, in the upper right hand corner you should see the team name that you are part of. Clicking on that will take you to your team :)

dance210:   If you're still in-game do you have screenshots of the in-game notification, showing the 2 wins?  

dance210:   The first win did count. However, if the other team kept playing, you can submit screenshots showing your team with 2:x score

dance210:   It's something else.  

dance210:  

dance210:  

dance210:  

dance210:   Yes, the first win does count. No, you do not see it. However, all victories have been recorded. The current brackets will be updated with the addition of the new scores after all battles are done. No, I don't know if it will be tonight or tomorrow morning.

dance210:     Not everyone looks in Special Battles chat, which only works if you have a special battle that will open up that chat. In-game notifications take longer to get to you guys. There are 100+ teams, making in-game messages impossible.   However, all teams should go to the forums to look for responses from staff if there are every issues.

dance210:   That's bad luck, and unrelated to tonight's issue :(  

dance210:   That's a totally unrelated issue. Anything you can send in (screenshots, streaming videos) that can help us determine if the issue is on your end or computer problems would be appreciated.

dance210: Alright guys, we just found out about this.   Captain_Judo will schedule another set of battles for all teams, to start in ~30 min (the time needed to fix any tournament errors).   The first battle WIN count. The score from the first battle will be added to the next set of scheduled battles. It is still first to 3 wins.   Feel free to ask questions, but keep it civil.   Continue the discussion here.

dance210: Alright guys, we just found out about this.   Captain_Judo will schedule another set of battles for all teams, to start in ~30 min (the time needed to fix any tournament errors).   The first battle WIN count. The score from the first battle will be added to the next set of scheduled battles. It is still first to 3 wins.   Feel free to ask questions, but keep it civil.

The_Chieftain: Two short items for today. The first is what I guess can only be considered a rant, or at least some serious venting, in the Tank Destroyer Board documentation from January 1945, given that I think it unlikely that the note would ever had made it to the person being talked about. It started with this press clipping in the San Antonio Light. The Tank Destroyer Board probably got wind of it simply due to the geographic proximity to Camp Hood: It came to the attention of the President of the Board, COL Montgomery, who forwarded it to a Major Elston, also on the Board, with the simple note "Please Comment" Comment is just what the Major did: COL RCM: 1. The fact that German tanks are generally heavier than ours has evidently led some writers to the assumption that "heavier" means "better." But the biggest tank isn't necessarily the best. Carnera was bigger than Dempsey. The best tank is the winning tank.
[Chieftain's note: The above picture of Carnera and Dempsey, with a random passing female for scale, is provided by me as I presume most of you have no idea who they were. I certainly was in ignorance. I get the impression that 1940s servicemen were more up to speed on such matters.] 2. If size were a gage of worth, then German Ferdinand would be the best tank on earth. Actually, this sluggish monster seldom could make more than 8 miles an hour off roads and has now gone out of production. 3. The Tiger, weighing 56 tons, (62 tons in action) and the Panther, weighing 46 1/2 tons, both carry an 88mm gun and from 102mm to 120mm of hull armor. They are less maneuverable than either US medium tanks or US self propelled Tank Destroyers. To date in all theaters, encounters between German tanks and our self-propelled Tank Destroyers show a score which consistently favors our own equipment 4. As an example, XII Corps has just reported the overall score of their seven TD Battalions against German tanks of all sizes to 2 Nov 44. This score is: No. of German tanks destroyed by TDs - 125
No. of TDs destroyed in same actions - 25
Ratio: 5 to 1 in our favor 5. Above comparison is fairly typical of other reports. This hardly represents a "disgraceful situation of armament inferiority". Recommend that Senator Johnson stop beating his breast long enough to explain why, if German equipment is so superior to ours, it has been steadily retreating ever since El Alamein? How does he explain the ability of our "shockingly inferior" equipment to chase all German armor out of Africa, Sicily, Italy and France?

[Senator Johnson. Damage to chest unfortunately obscured] 6. Actually, medium armor was a wise choice for us, instead of heavy armor, because we had to land on hostile beaches in all four countries. Sixty ton tanks weren't practical for such landings. The Germans, being at home and with no amphibious operations in sight, were able to use their giants. Being bigger than our mediums, naturally they can mount bigger guns. Their thick armor is at the expense of mobility and would have been mill stones about our necks at Omaha Beach.
[Chieftain's Note: Not taken at Omaha Beach] 7. Note that the statement which "aroused" Senator Johnson is that German tanks are "heavier, better armored, and better gunned. In this the adjective "better" is loosely used - praises all the virtues of weight and fails to damn its disadvantages. 8. Statement that American guns are too light to knock out heavy German tanks without excessive losses is not true. (See both of the TD Brigade reports by General Ernst) 9. Statement that German 88mm gun is equal or superior to any American gun is true. Firing either their 3220 f/s with 22.4 lb. projectile (now in use) or their 3775 f/s 16-lb. cored projectile (probably still in development) this gun develops a muzzle energy of 3,500,000 ft/pds. Our own 90mm guns, firing either our existing 2840 f/s with 24.1 lb projectile or our 3900 f/s cored projectile (still in development) develops only 3,050,000 ft/pds. However, a similar comparison between our 76mm gun and the German 76.2mm gun shows a distinct superiority to our weapon. Now, one can certainly pick a few nits with the above analysis, but I think the general thrust is clear: The route that the US Army had gone, with the equipment they had, and the tactics they had, was working. This brings me to the other minor item. Death Traps, by Belton Cooper. It keeps coming up in forum threads as people keep citing it, so I figured I may as well make my position clear in a more formal manner. The book, commonly found, is well-written, an easy read, and provides good insight as to the thinkings and workings of a junior grade Ordnance officer in a field unit. I recommend reading it. That said... Death Traps is not a reliable source. Don't cite it. Or the History Channel show based on it. Here's the issue: Death Traps is a memoir, not a researched historical work. These are the recollections and perceptions as the man saw them, recited some 50 years after the fact. This leads us to two problems: Firstly, that of perception. The premise of the book, even the title, is that M4s were rolling coffins, and got destroyed a lot. He gets this impression by looking at all the M4s which got brought back to his maintenance shop for repair after getting knocked out. He did not get to see any of the German vehicles which were knocked out, as nobody brought them to him for repair. He did not get to see the M4s which won the battle, as nobody brought them to him for repair. As someone who saw nearly nothing but destroyed Shermans coming out of battles, it is not unreasonable to come to the perception that the tank was problematic.
[Which of these two vehicles do you think Cooper might have seen after that battle?] Secondly, the author makes no attempt to distinguish what he saw from what he surmised, from what he heard through the grapevine. He presents as fact things which simply were not true, demonstrably so in many cases. No attempt was made to provide a source or reference to some of the claims he makes. It is up to the reader to make his or her personal determination as to the accuracy of anything in the book. It is likely that the things he personally saw are somewhat close to fact. But statements about machinations seven pay grades higher than him and several hundred miles away are a little more suspect. Cooper's book is probably the most egregious example of citing a memoir and making more of it than one should, so I merely use it as a learning point. Less controversial memoirs, such as Carius' Tigers in the Mud or Loza's Commanding the Red Army's Sherman Tanks should be viewed just as much from the same lens, but in fairness to them, they suffer from far less overreach and can be taken far more at face value. Track me down on Facebook and sometimes I even stream on Twitch.

ElPozoleOlmeca:   Estas fotos las tomaste tu?

PollotheDestroyer:   Estas fotos las tomaste tu?

ApolloArtemis:   Estas fotos las tomaste tu?

pizzastorm: Thanks for coming out everyone!   My team got left in the dust!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! We have to tighten our belts after all that gold we just gave out =)    

ElPozoleOlmeca:   Estoy trabajando en algo como lo que paso en Sao paulo, pero por ahora no se cuando lo vamos hacer 

PollotheDestroyer:   Estoy trabajando en algo como lo que paso en Sao paulo, pero por ahora no se cuando lo vamos hacer 

ApolloArtemis:   Estoy trabajando en algo como lo que paso en Sao paulo, pero por ahora no se cuando lo vamos hacer 

ElPozoleOlmeca:    hay mis ojos.   Como alguien recomendó, trata de instalarlo de nuevo

PollotheDestroyer:    hay mis ojos.   Como alguien recomendó, trata de instalarlo de nuevo

ApolloArtemis:    hay mis ojos.   Como alguien recomendó, trata de instalarlo de nuevo

ElPozoleOlmeca:   Lo habia puesto la misma semana que se creo este hilo, pero lo hice de nuevo porque ahora tenemos una pagina de Facebook exclusivamente para Latinoamérica

PollotheDestroyer:   Lo habia puesto la misma semana que se creo este hilo, pero lo hice de nuevo porque ahora tenemos una pagina de Facebook exclusivamente para Latinoamérica

ApolloArtemis:   Lo habia puesto la misma semana que se creo este hilo, pero lo hice de nuevo porque ahora tenemos una pagina de Facebook exclusivamente para Latinoamérica