Developers posts on forum

Subject: Contests & Competitions\World of Tanks Tournaments\IGN Prime World of Tanks Tournament Discussion\misplaced members
Link on message: #974048

Subject: Contests & Competitions\World of Tanks Tournaments\IGN Prime World of Tanks Tournament Discussion\Are we supposed to register our reserves/alternates?
Link on message: #974039

Milsco97, on Oct 04 2011 - 22:34, said: Hello General, I had the same problem I didn't know that we had to apply reserves to the team, can you add one for me to the team.
He is Sabres_2011, how does he apply or get on the team?? Are you able to add him?

Subject: Contests & Competitions\World of Tanks Tournaments\IGN Prime World of Tanks Tournament Discussion\REGISTRATION DEADLINE?
Link on message: #974020

kizarze, on Oct 04 2011 - 20:32, said: From Tournament Rules
So since everyone has been having so many problems with registering for this tournament, and by appearance no "public" (non-IGN) teams have been accepted yet.......
Q1. What is the new registration deadline?
Q2. Do battles still commence today as previously stated?

Subject: Contests & Competitions\World of Tanks Tournaments\IGN Prime World of Tanks Tournament Discussion\IGN Prime Tournament Start Delayed Until October 5th
Link on message: #973982

Corben27, on Oct 04 2011 - 22:49, said: My team is still in the "approving" stage needs to go back to forming.

Subject: Contests & Competitions\World of Tanks Tournaments\IGN Prime World of Tanks Tournament Discussion\IGN Prime Tournament Start Delayed Until October 5th
Link on message: #973960

Corben27, on Oct 04 2011 - 22:36, said: well I, like many others, hit apply today without making changes for fear of not getting it done in time. So since your changing the days I will need to re-do my teams since it takes A LOT to gaurentee 5 people can all be online for 6 days in a row.
In the future it would be nice if tournaments didn't have to run for a week straight, I have some amazing players I play with that will just never be able to play in these due to real lives.
So if you could unlock my team so I can add and remove a few people due to the date changes that would be awesome.

Subject: Contests & Competitions\World of Tanks Tournaments\IGN Prime World of Tanks Tournament Discussion\IGN Prime Tournament Start Delayed Until October 5th
Link on message: #973890

Subject: World of Tanks Game Discussion\Gameplay Discussion\Probleme with selling back tank..
Link on message: #973591

Ironmonger69, on Oct 04 2011 - 21:04, said: 5 a day is the limit

Subject: Clans\Ultimate Conquest\How and why NASA was started
Link on message: #973062

Skeeves, on Oct 04 2011 - 15:00, said: rising from the deep, a forum warrior is born...

Subject: World of Tanks Game Discussion\Gameplay Discussion\Time expired...with 45 seconds left.
Link on message: #972979

Gruenweld, on Oct 04 2011 - 17:42, said: I just got out of mines and the game ended in a draw with 45 seconds left. Both sides had players still alive, so is this a new bug or is it pretty common? Pretty frustrating since we almost capped.

Subject: World of Tanks Game Discussion\Gameplay Discussion\The Developers Fail To Listen...Again.
Link on message: #972854

Garbad, on Oct 04 2011 - 17:04, said: The translation on this was a bit hard to understand, but I think you are saying this:
- winner tanks will be locked for 24 hours
- the defender only needs to defend one round per day (like now)
- Losers lose tanks for longer (24 hours?)
- so eventually attackers run out of tanks
But this misses the point. The problem is that even if they win, a smaller clan will get overwhelmed eventually.
Imagine if MLP attacks Dragon Knights of Ascalon, a small clan who holds 2 pieces of land but has only 15 good tanks. We have enough t10 tanks to field competitive teams forever, regardless of lock times. We attack, but DKA wins...so we attack again...in both places. DKA heroically wins, but we come back again...and this time they lose one...and then all of their tanks are locked, so we walk all over their territory because they no longer have the tanks to stop us, even if they are better.
The bottom line is that this change rewards those with many tanks/players, which inevitably favors hardcore, large clans. If your goal is to encourage small, causal clans to compete, you are moving in exactly the wrong way.


HighPitch, on Oct 04 2011 - 17:04, said: What does this mean? What regions are included in the Pacific region? Asia? North America? Or provinces actually in the Pacific Ocean? And by earlier, one can only assume Q4 of 2011.

Subject: The Developers Fail To Listen...Again.
Link on message: #972854

Garbad, on Oct 04 2011 - 16:04, said: The translation on this was a bit hard to understand, but I think you are saying this:

- winner tanks will be locked for 24 hours
- the defender only needs to defend one round per day (like now)
- Losers lose tanks for longer (24 hours?)
- so eventually attackers run out of tanks

But this misses the point. The problem is that even if they win, a smaller clan will get overwhelmed eventually.

Imagine if MLP attacks Dragon Knights of Ascalon, a small clan who holds 2 pieces of land but has only 15 good tanks. We have enough t10 tanks to field competitive teams forever, regardless of lock times. We attack, but DKA wins...so we attack again...in both places. DKA heroically wins, but we come back again...and this time they lose one...and then all of their tanks are locked, so we walk all over their territory because they no longer have the tanks to stop us, even if they are better.

The bottom line is that this change rewards those with many tanks/players, which inevitably favors hardcore, large clans. If your goal is to encourage small, causal clans to compete, you are moving in exactly the wrong way.



HighPitch, on Oct 04 2011 - 16:04, said: What does this mean? What regions are included in the Pacific region? Asia? North America? Or provinces actually in the Pacific Ocean? And by earlier, one can only assume Q4 of 2011.

Subject: The Developers Fail To Listen...Again.
Link on message: #972854

Garbad, on Oct 04 2011 - 16:04, said: The translation on this was a bit hard to understand, but I think you are saying this:

- winner tanks will be locked for 24 hours
- the defender only needs to defend one round per day (like now)
- Losers lose tanks for longer (24 hours?)
- so eventually attackers run out of tanks

But this misses the point. The problem is that even if they win, a smaller clan will get overwhelmed eventually.

Imagine if MLP attacks Dragon Knights of Ascalon, a small clan who holds 2 pieces of land but has only 15 good tanks. We have enough t10 tanks to field competitive teams forever, regardless of lock times. We attack, but DKA wins...so we attack again...in both places. DKA heroically wins, but we come back again...and this time they lose one...and then all of their tanks are locked, so we walk all over their territory because they no longer have the tanks to stop us, even if they are better.

The bottom line is that this change rewards those with many tanks/players, which inevitably favors hardcore, large clans. If your goal is to encourage small, causal clans to compete, you are moving in exactly the wrong way.



HighPitch, on Oct 04 2011 - 16:04, said: What does this mean? What regions are included in the Pacific region? Asia? North America? Or provinces actually in the Pacific Ocean? And by earlier, one can only assume Q4 of 2011.

Subject: World of Tanks Game Discussion\Gameplay Discussion\The Developers Fail To Listen...Again.
Link on message: #972807

Garbad, on Oct 04 2011 - 04:35, said: You couldn't be more wrong. Do you think MLP will be hurt by tank locking? Most members already have 5+ endgame tanks. Lockout won't hurt us a bit. But it will hurt small fish. Suppose we hit you one night, you win and defeat our best tanks. Guess what, the next night we bring in a fresh 15...and you don't have the tanks anymore.
And to hold dirt you need to win tournaments. That means winning a game of skill. Why would making the game reward those with more top tanks promote equal fights? It doesn't, its yet another barrier to casuals competing on equal terms.
UC NEEDS lower tier limits on cheap property. None of this locking crap that is a waste of resources that makes the game worse.


Zedzded, on Oct 04 2011 - 06:44, said: Gyarados, you're always rather reasonable when you post, so I'm a bit surprised that you decided to resurrect Deathtouch's thread.
The lockout will have no net effect on the competitiveness of small clans vs large clans. They can't compete now, nor will they be able to after this change is implemented. The only thing that will help small clans get onto the Global Map is the addition of new territories. If you want to be constructive, lobby WG for the expanded Global Map. Even if the full NA map isn't ready yet, they could at least give you all of Saharan Africa, the Middle East and/or Russia beyond the Urals to the Pacific (what we have on the RU server).
And just who are they failing to listen to? A small select group? Out of the hundreds of thousands of active players, I'm just not seeing the level of rage regarding this feature that you seem to attribute to it.


dr_fruitloop, on Oct 04 2011 - 10:56, said: Lets see how much number of clans on map changes after these changes to UC.

Subject: The Developers Fail To Listen...Again.
Link on message: #972807

Garbad, on Oct 04 2011 - 03:35, said: You couldn't be more wrong. Do you think MLP will be hurt by tank locking? Most members already have 5+ endgame tanks. Lockout won't hurt us a bit. But it will hurt small fish. Suppose we hit you one night, you win and defeat our best tanks. Guess what, the next night we bring in a fresh 15...and you don't have the tanks anymore.
And to hold dirt you need to win tournaments. That means winning a game of skill. Why would making the game reward those with more top tanks promote equal fights? It doesn't, its yet another barrier to casuals competing on equal terms.
UC NEEDS lower tier limits on cheap property. None of this locking crap that is a waste of resources that makes the game worse.



Zedzded, on Oct 04 2011 - 05:44, said: Gyarados, you're always rather reasonable when you post, so I'm a bit surprised that you decided to resurrect Deathtouch's thread.
The lockout will have no net effect on the competitiveness of small clans vs large clans. They can't compete now, nor will they be able to after this change is implemented. The only thing that will help small clans get onto the Global Map is the addition of new territories. If you want to be constructive, lobby WG for the expanded Global Map. Even if the full NA map isn't ready yet, they could at least give you all of Saharan Africa, the Middle East and/or Russia beyond the Urals to the Pacific (what we have on the RU server).
And just who are they failing to listen to? A small select group? Out of the hundreds of thousands of active players, I'm just not seeing the level of rage regarding this feature that you seem to attribute to it.



dr_fruitloop, on Oct 04 2011 - 09:56, said: Lets see how much number of clans on map changes after these changes to UC.

Subject: The Developers Fail To Listen...Again.
Link on message: #972807

Garbad, on Oct 04 2011 - 03:35, said: You couldn't be more wrong. Do you think MLP will be hurt by tank locking? Most members already have 5+ endgame tanks. Lockout won't hurt us a bit. But it will hurt small fish. Suppose we hit you one night, you win and defeat our best tanks. Guess what, the next night we bring in a fresh 15...and you don't have the tanks anymore.
And to hold dirt you need to win tournaments. That means winning a game of skill. Why would making the game reward those with more top tanks promote equal fights? It doesn't, its yet another barrier to casuals competing on equal terms.
UC NEEDS lower tier limits on cheap property. None of this locking crap that is a waste of resources that makes the game worse.



Zedzded, on Oct 04 2011 - 05:44, said: Gyarados, you're always rather reasonable when you post, so I'm a bit surprised that you decided to resurrect Deathtouch's thread.
The lockout will have no net effect on the competitiveness of small clans vs large clans. They can't compete now, nor will they be able to after this change is implemented. The only thing that will help small clans get onto the Global Map is the addition of new territories. If you want to be constructive, lobby WG for the expanded Global Map. Even if the full NA map isn't ready yet, they could at least give you all of Saharan Africa, the Middle East and/or Russia beyond the Urals to the Pacific (what we have on the RU server).
And just who are they failing to listen to? A small select group? Out of the hundreds of thousands of active players, I'm just not seeing the level of rage regarding this feature that you seem to attribute to it.



dr_fruitloop, on Oct 04 2011 - 09:56, said: Lets see how much number of clans on map changes after these changes to UC.

Subject: All About Armoured Vehicles\"In Game" German Vehicles\Heavy Tanks\Löwe's credit earnings
Link on message: #972738

ArmoredCorps, on Oct 03 2011 - 15:33, said: There is NOTHING to see here, there was no stealth nerf.

Subject: World of Tanks Game Discussion\Gameplay Discussion\Crew retrain?
Link on message: #972693

jankar, on Oct 04 2011 - 15:52, said: I can understand the reason behind it, but it sounds pretty unrealistic to me. The difference in handling SU-85 and SU-100 cannot be so big that once you move to the latter vehicle, you forgot what you learned on the former one. Besides, in real warfare there are many more tanks that crews, so it is almost a must to move a crew from one vehicle to another, often of a different type.

Subject: Crew retrain?
Link on message: #972693

jankar, on Oct 04 2011 - 14:52, said: I can understand the reason behind it, but it sounds pretty unrealistic to me. The difference in handling SU-85 and SU-100 cannot be so big that once you move to the latter vehicle, you forgot what you learned on the former one. Besides, in real warfare there are many more tanks that crews, so it is almost a must to move a crew from one vehicle to another, often of a different type.

Subject: Crew retrain?
Link on message: #972693

jankar, on Oct 04 2011 - 14:52, said: I can understand the reason behind it, but it sounds pretty unrealistic to me. The difference in handling SU-85 and SU-100 cannot be so big that once you move to the latter vehicle, you forgot what you learned on the former one. Besides, in real warfare there are many more tanks that crews, so it is almost a must to move a crew from one vehicle to another, often of a different type.

Subject: World of Tanks Game Discussion\Gameplay Discussion\Fix for "rage quitting" apparently coming in 7.0
Link on message: #972681

Wazzaby, on Oct 04 2011 - 03:48, said: well at least its something, but sadly this isnt a mayor fix, with this instead doing the typical exit button will be change by Alt+F4


Panther2NZ, on Oct 04 2011 - 05:06, said: about time... at least these people will have cred deducted once they get killed
AFK & rage quitting was rampant last night.

Subject: Fix for "rage quitting" apparently coming in 7.0
Link on message: #972681

Wazzaby, on Oct 04 2011 - 02:48, said: well at least its something,  but sadly this isnt a mayor fix,  with  this instead doing the typical  exit button  will be change by Alt+F4  


Panther2NZ, on Oct 04 2011 - 04:06, said: about time... at least these people will have cred deducted once they get killed  
AFK & rage quitting was rampant last night.

Subject: Fix for "rage quitting" apparently coming in 7.0
Link on message: #972681

Wazzaby, on Oct 04 2011 - 02:48, said: well at least its something,  but sadly this isnt a mayor fix,  with  this instead doing the typical  exit button  will be change by Alt+F4  


Panther2NZ, on Oct 04 2011 - 04:06, said: about time... at least these people will have cred deducted once they get killed  
AFK & rage quitting was rampant last night.

Subject: World of Tanks News and Information\You Ask - We Reply!\You Ask, We Reply: Clans and Ultimate Conquest Answers
Link on message: #972641

ijazR, on Oct 04 2011 - 15:06, said: i think a important question is missing
if im right tank freezing is not implemented to the landing battles
so small clans will not get effected
i dont know i may be wrong

Subject: World of Tanks Game Discussion\Gameplay Discussion\The Developers Fail To Listen...Again.
Link on message: #972598

andyraptor, on Oct 04 2011 - 14:40, said: Making it even more "exclusive" to established big clans and alliances when the servers are combined is a backwards step in this respect.

Subject: World of Tanks News and Information\You Ask - We Reply!\You Ask, We Reply: Clans and Ultimate Conquest Answers
Link on message: #972576

NoblePlatoon, on Oct 04 2011 - 03:40, said: SO...monopolies continue. Alliances between monopolies continue. And a clan cannot compete unless they have several dozen Tier 10's. Great job, W.o.T.


FaustianQ, on Oct 04 2011 - 04:01, said: So basically, they want large alliances, a stagnant map as people are punished for battling, do not care or are utterly blind to smaller clans, and only want people with multiple T10 tanks to compete in UC.
That's what I took away from this.


Drakenred, on Oct 04 2011 - 04:58, said: I dont know, maybee the plan is for tanks that are frozen can only be repaired at the rate of 1 tank per owned productive provice per day and the que placment is autmatic based on when your tank gets hit or something.(Ie Eventualy even the mega clans will run out of repaired tanks)


GeneralGeorge, on Oct 04 2011 - 08:01, said: YOU NEED to REVISE your thinking on #12 & #13
10pm EDT start of a battle for 2/3rds of the USA is to late!! Then expect to goto 1am next day is outragious.
People DO WORK and goto school...................
8pm EDT is more reasonable


xamichee, on Oct 04 2011 - 12:15, said: In regards to the alliance situation that dominates the current map, the issue is that it's far too easy to control large areas due to the limited number of landing spots. You are planning to address part of that issue by not allowing clans that own territories from applying for landing applications. I expect the clans which are part of the current alliance can overcome this change by creating ghost clans to monopolize the landings as they are currently doing. Why not simply make every coastal territory available for landing? At present, it's far too easy to control large territories with a very small group of players. The control of large numbers of territories, should require large numbers of clans, which isn't the case at present. Without some changes that make it harder for a relatively small number of players to control large sections of the map, clan wars--which is the only real reason to play WoT in the longer term--will become a joke. Unfortunately, clan wars isn't competitive at all, which will be an issue that plagues the continued growth of the player base.

Subject: World of Tanks Game Discussion\Gameplay Discussion\The Developers Fail To Listen...Again.
Link on message: #972537

Gyarados, on Oct 04 2011 - 05:28, said: The reason I had high hopes for the tank freezing changing was because they spoke about it to the clans, and their opinion was 100% against the idea of tank locking.

Subject: World of Tanks Game Discussion\Gameplay Discussion\The Developers Fail To Listen...Again.
Link on message: #972496

Gyarados, on Oct 04 2011 - 04:09, said: http://game.worldoft...onquest-answers
Big and small clans will be affected in the same manner? Are you kidding me? This absolutely devastates small clans and reinforces the power of large clans. People have mathematically proven this and yet the developers still do not listen. This will effectively obliterate small clans off of the map within just a few weeks. This is not only irritating but downright wrong. Clans like mine and many, many others will simply not be able to partake in UC effectively because the developers failed to listen to the players.

Subject: World of Tanks News and Information\You Ask - We Reply!\You Ask, We Reply: Clans and Ultimate Conquest Answers
Link on message: #972464

CaddoPuma, on Oct 04 2011 - 04:15, said: Quote 2 seems to contradict Quote 1. For clarification: Will CW schedule for US time zones ever be different than it is now? Will CW schedule for Asian time zones ever be different than it is now? I think I am beginning to understand: It appears the CW schedule will depend upon the timezone in which the contested province lies, not upon the timezone in which the contestants reside. I still feel more clarification is needed, please.
P.S.: It was I who voted -1 to all of the above replies. Reason? All they do is whine about the information instead of actually adding anything substantive to the conversation.

Subject: World of Tanks News and Information\Discussion of News Articles\Announcing the IGN Prime World of Tanks Tournament
Link on message: #972203

Subject: Contests & Competitions\World of Tanks Tournaments\IGN Prime World of Tanks Tournament Discussion\Team pending aproval and I cannot delete it and make a new one.
Link on message: #971962

Subject: Contests & Competitions\World of Tanks Tournaments\IGN Prime World of Tanks Tournament Discussion\Team pending aproval and I cannot delete it and make a new one.
Link on message: #971897

aquabat, on Oct 04 2011 - 05:51, said: Actually, it went right to pending aproval without ever being in "forming" status. And yes, I want to leave but I can't since I'm the capitan. Won't let me delete either. I guess I won't be in the tourney =/. Thanks for replying General.

Subject: Contests & Competitions\World of Tanks Tournaments\IGN Prime World of Tanks Tournament Discussion\IGN Prime World of Tanks Tournament Page Now Live
Link on message: #971892

Subject: Contests & Competitions\World of Tanks Tournaments\IGN Prime World of Tanks Tournament Discussion\IGN Prime World of Tanks Tournament Page Now Live
Link on message: #971890

Subject: Contests & Competitions\World of Tanks Tournaments\IGN Prime World of Tanks Tournament Discussion\IGN Prime World of Tanks Tournament Page Now Live
Link on message: #971846

Subject: Contests & Competitions\World of Tanks Tournaments\IGN Prime World of Tanks Tournament Discussion\What are you guys gonna bring
Link on message: #971841

Subject: Contests & Competitions\World of Tanks Tournaments\IGN Prime World of Tanks Tournament Discussion\Team pending aproval and I cannot delete it and make a new one.
Link on message: #971839

Subject: Contests & Competitions\World of Tanks Tournaments\IGN Prime World of Tanks Tournament Discussion\Are we supposed to register our reserves/alternates?
Link on message: #971837

macg1991, on Oct 04 2011 - 05:19, said: OK my alts applied and are on my team but when I apply my team for the tourney I get this message:
Невозможно изменить состояние: количество игроков в команде не удовлетворяет требованиям регистрации.
EDIT: After getting the message I even deleted the IGN person thing and it still doesn't work. Also, I won't be online tomorrow night and HerrDuck will be leading the team, how will the tourney be handling that?

Subject: Contests & Competitions\World of Tanks Tournaments\IGN Prime World of Tanks Tournament Discussion\teams are on the list?
Link on message: #971822

Subject: Contests & Competitions\World of Tanks Tournaments\IGN Prime World of Tanks Tournament Discussion\teams are on the list?
Link on message: #971632

Subject: Best and worst trolls in wot
Link on message: #971573

Tzimon, on Oct 03 2011 - 21:08, said: Aye, you are the "A" team after all.  We in C company, we strive every day to be better than the third string benchwarmers that we are.  At least the pay is good