Developers posts on forum
In this section you'll find posts from the official developers forum. The base is updated every hour and stored on a server wot-news.com. If you encounter any bugs, have suggestions or comments, write to info@wot-news.com
TheKroo
KV-2 turrets on T̶-̶3̶4̶ IS chasis?
07.11.2013 17:15:46
Subject: KV-2 turrets on T̶-̶3̶4̶ IS chasis?
Link on message: #6402287
Link on message: #6402287
TheKroo: The hulls are IS-2 hulls.
It seems someone has bought some IS-2 spare parts in bulk and decided to make replicas.
They are slightly off.
But to answer your question such tanks were not produced.
It seems someone has bought some IS-2 spare parts in bulk and decided to make replicas.
They are slightly off.
But to answer your question such tanks were not produced.
Hunter1911
Know Your Steel: KV-1
07.11.2013 17:00:43
Subject: Know Your Steel: KV-1
Link on message: #6402140
Link on message: #6402140
Hunter1911: I need to join Mister T. in these little tidbits.
Interesting fact is that early tanks such as PzI, T-26 and some British tanks had used clutch and brake steering. While the Czech and Japanese tanks were using geared steering as soon as 1930's.
The later was quickly popularized and spread into usage, while the Soviets had continued to use clutch and brake steering on their KV and T-34 series.
Interesting fact is that early tanks such as PzI, T-26 and some British tanks had used clutch and brake steering. While the Czech and Japanese tanks were using geared steering as soon as 1930's.
The later was quickly popularized and spread into usage, while the Soviets had continued to use clutch and brake steering on their KV and T-34 series.
TheKroo
Know Your Steel: KV-1
07.11.2013 17:00:43
Subject: Know Your Steel: KV-1
Link on message: #6402140
Link on message: #6402140
TheKroo: I need to join Mister T. in these little tidbits.
Interesting fact is that early tanks such as PzI, T-26 and some British tanks had used clutch and brake steering. While the Czech and Japanese tanks were using geared steering as soon as 1930's.
The later was quickly popularized and spread into usage, while the Soviets had continued to use clutch and brake steering on their KV and T-34 series.
Interesting fact is that early tanks such as PzI, T-26 and some British tanks had used clutch and brake steering. While the Czech and Japanese tanks were using geared steering as soon as 1930's.
The later was quickly popularized and spread into usage, while the Soviets had continued to use clutch and brake steering on their KV and T-34 series.
Hunter1911
Know Your Steel: KV-1
07.11.2013 16:37:34
Subject: Know Your Steel: KV-1
Link on message: #6401933
Tuccy, on 07 November 2013 - 03:12 PM, said: One interesting thing re. KV is how the Soviets managed to get
things wrong after getting things right :)
The T-28 and T-35 had already a "modern" turret crew layout - Commander, Gunner and Loader, with radio operator tucked away outside the turret. Thus they reached the "!golden standard" - actually in time when most countries had 1-2 men turret crew.
Surprisingly, though, KV-1 messed it up. While the turret crew was still 3, the roles were different. Gunner stayed, but Commander, apart from commanding the tank, also loaded the gun. No. 3 was "Assistant driver/mechanic" - weird function indeed, even weirder to have him in the turret, with generally one role - to fire rearwards machinegun. Not only he did not load the gun - he could not from his position - he had to move away from his seat when commander needed to load gun in combat, as he was getting into the way. Thus the nominally 5-man KV-1 often operated with a crew of 4 even before manpower shortages begun to show (first to go was the Assistand Driver / mechanic. Second was radio operator - in 1942/1943 KV-1 often operated with crews of only 3).
Based on these lessons, one of main changes in KV-1S in 1942 was redesigning the turret for a crew of 3 with normal functions (commander, gunner, loader), moving the commander behind gunner on the left side.
Link on message: #6401933
Tuccy, on 07 November 2013 - 03:12 PM, said: One interesting thing re. KV is how the Soviets managed to get
things wrong after getting things right :)The T-28 and T-35 had already a "modern" turret crew layout - Commander, Gunner and Loader, with radio operator tucked away outside the turret. Thus they reached the "!golden standard" - actually in time when most countries had 1-2 men turret crew.
Surprisingly, though, KV-1 messed it up. While the turret crew was still 3, the roles were different. Gunner stayed, but Commander, apart from commanding the tank, also loaded the gun. No. 3 was "Assistant driver/mechanic" - weird function indeed, even weirder to have him in the turret, with generally one role - to fire rearwards machinegun. Not only he did not load the gun - he could not from his position - he had to move away from his seat when commander needed to load gun in combat, as he was getting into the way. Thus the nominally 5-man KV-1 often operated with a crew of 4 even before manpower shortages begun to show (first to go was the Assistand Driver / mechanic. Second was radio operator - in 1942/1943 KV-1 often operated with crews of only 3).
Based on these lessons, one of main changes in KV-1S in 1942 was redesigning the turret for a crew of 3 with normal functions (commander, gunner, loader), moving the commander behind gunner on the left side.
Hunter1911:
An example that we do not always learn from our past experiences...
An example that we do not always learn from our past experiences...
TheKroo
Know Your Steel: KV-1
07.11.2013 16:37:34
Subject: Know Your Steel: KV-1
Link on message: #6401933
Tuccy, on 07 November 2013 - 03:12 PM, said: One interesting thing re. KV is how the Soviets managed to get
things wrong after getting things right :)
The T-28 and T-35 had already a "modern" turret crew layout - Commander, Gunner and Loader, with radio operator tucked away outside the turret. Thus they reached the "!golden standard" - actually in time when most countries had 1-2 men turret crew.
Surprisingly, though, KV-1 messed it up. While the turret crew was still 3, the roles were different. Gunner stayed, but Commander, apart from commanding the tank, also loaded the gun. No. 3 was "Assistant driver/mechanic" - weird function indeed, even weirder to have him in the turret, with generally one role - to fire rearwards machinegun. Not only he did not load the gun - he could not from his position - he had to move away from his seat when commander needed to load gun in combat, as he was getting into the way. Thus the nominally 5-man KV-1 often operated with a crew of 4 even before manpower shortages begun to show (first to go was the Assistand Driver / mechanic. Second was radio operator - in 1942/1943 KV-1 often operated with crews of only 3).
Based on these lessons, one of main changes in KV-1S in 1942 was redesigning the turret for a crew of 3 with normal functions (commander, gunner, loader), moving the commander behind gunner on the left side.
Link on message: #6401933
Tuccy, on 07 November 2013 - 03:12 PM, said: One interesting thing re. KV is how the Soviets managed to get
things wrong after getting things right :)The T-28 and T-35 had already a "modern" turret crew layout - Commander, Gunner and Loader, with radio operator tucked away outside the turret. Thus they reached the "!golden standard" - actually in time when most countries had 1-2 men turret crew.
Surprisingly, though, KV-1 messed it up. While the turret crew was still 3, the roles were different. Gunner stayed, but Commander, apart from commanding the tank, also loaded the gun. No. 3 was "Assistant driver/mechanic" - weird function indeed, even weirder to have him in the turret, with generally one role - to fire rearwards machinegun. Not only he did not load the gun - he could not from his position - he had to move away from his seat when commander needed to load gun in combat, as he was getting into the way. Thus the nominally 5-man KV-1 often operated with a crew of 4 even before manpower shortages begun to show (first to go was the Assistand Driver / mechanic. Second was radio operator - in 1942/1943 KV-1 often operated with crews of only 3).
Based on these lessons, one of main changes in KV-1S in 1942 was redesigning the turret for a crew of 3 with normal functions (commander, gunner, loader), moving the commander behind gunner on the left side.
TheKroo:
An example that we do not always learn from our past experiences...
An example that we do not always learn from our past experiences...
Tuccy
Know Your Steel: KV-1
07.11.2013 16:12:50
Subject: Know Your Steel: KV-1
Link on message: #6401703
Link on message: #6401703
Tuccy: One interesting thing re. KV is how the Soviets managed to get
things wrong after getting things right :)
The T-28 and T-35 had already a "modern" turret crew layout - Commander, Gunner and Loader, with radio operator tucked away outside the turret. Thus they reached the "!golden standard" - actually in time when most countries had 1-2 men turret crew.
Surprisingly, though, KV-1 messed it up. While the turret crew was still 3, the roles were different. Gunner stayed, but Commander, apart from commanding the tank, also loaded the gun. No. 3 was "Assistant driver/mechanic" - weird function indeed, even weirder to have him in the turret, with generally one role - to fire rearwards machinegun. Not only he did not load the gun - he could not from his position - he had to move away from his seat when commander needed to load gun in combat, as he was getting into the way. Thus the nominally 5-man KV-1 often operated with a crew of 4 even before manpower shortages begun to show (first to go was the Assistand Driver / mechanic. Second was radio operator - in 1942/1943 KV-1 often operated with crews of only 3).
Based on these lessons, one of main changes in KV-1S in 1942 was redesigning the turret for a crew of 3 with normal functions (commander, gunner, loader), moving the commander behind gunner on the left side.
The T-28 and T-35 had already a "modern" turret crew layout - Commander, Gunner and Loader, with radio operator tucked away outside the turret. Thus they reached the "!golden standard" - actually in time when most countries had 1-2 men turret crew.
Surprisingly, though, KV-1 messed it up. While the turret crew was still 3, the roles were different. Gunner stayed, but Commander, apart from commanding the tank, also loaded the gun. No. 3 was "Assistant driver/mechanic" - weird function indeed, even weirder to have him in the turret, with generally one role - to fire rearwards machinegun. Not only he did not load the gun - he could not from his position - he had to move away from his seat when commander needed to load gun in combat, as he was getting into the way. Thus the nominally 5-man KV-1 often operated with a crew of 4 even before manpower shortages begun to show (first to go was the Assistand Driver / mechanic. Second was radio operator - in 1942/1943 KV-1 often operated with crews of only 3).
Based on these lessons, one of main changes in KV-1S in 1942 was redesigning the turret for a crew of 3 with normal functions (commander, gunner, loader), moving the commander behind gunner on the left side.
Hunter1911
IS-7 "Autoloader"
07.11.2013 16:00:01
Subject: IS-7 "Autoloader"
Link on message: #6401585
Link on message: #6401585
Hunter1911: RL IS-7 had something like semi-autoloader.
Not a real auto loader per say. Something more similar to mechanical loading assistant as the shells were quite heavy.
The tank utilized quite a few technologies considered advanced for the period of its development.
Not a real auto loader per say. Something more similar to mechanical loading assistant as the shells were quite heavy.
The tank utilized quite a few technologies considered advanced for the period of its development.
TheKroo
IS-7 "Autoloader"
07.11.2013 16:00:01
Subject: IS-7 "Autoloader"
Link on message: #6401585
Link on message: #6401585
TheKroo: RL IS-7 had something like semi-autoloader.
Not a real auto loader per say. Something more similar to mechanical loading assistant as the shells were quite heavy.
The tank utilized quite a few technologies considered advanced for the period of its development.
Not a real auto loader per say. Something more similar to mechanical loading assistant as the shells were quite heavy.
The tank utilized quite a few technologies considered advanced for the period of its development.
Hunter1911
t44+camo net= ?
07.11.2013 15:45:14
Subject: t44+camo net= ?
Link on message: #6401452
Link on message: #6401452
Hunter1911: Cammo is always useful, but I would not really go with cammo net on
a medium tank, as T-44 is a dogfighter and you are supposed to move
a lot. So you will not be using your cammo much and it will only
use up your eq. slot.
I would recommend vertical stab, gun rammer and wet ammo rack.
I would recommend vertical stab, gun rammer and wet ammo rack.
TheKroo
t44+camo net= ?
07.11.2013 15:45:14
Subject: t44+camo net= ?
Link on message: #6401452
Link on message: #6401452
TheKroo: Cammo is always useful, but I would not really go with cammo net on
a medium tank, as T-44 is a dogfighter and you are supposed to move
a lot. So you will not be using your cammo much and it will only
use up your eq. slot.
I would recommend vertical stab, gun rammer and wet ammo rack.
I would recommend vertical stab, gun rammer and wet ammo rack.
TheyCallMeHans
t44+camo net= ?
07.11.2013 15:45:14
Subject: t44+camo net= ?
Link on message: #6401452
Link on message: #6401452
TheyCallMeHans: Cammo is always useful, but I would not really go with cammo net on
a medium tank, as T-44 is a dogfighter and you are supposed to move
a lot. So you will not be using your cammo much and it will only
use up your eq. slot.
I would recommend vertical stab, gun rammer and wet ammo rack.
I would recommend vertical stab, gun rammer and wet ammo rack.
Hunter1911
Reinforcements for The Firebase Challenger
07.11.2013 15:37:38
Subject: Reinforcements for The Firebase Challenger
Link on message: #6401380
LordofDiscord, on 07 November 2013 - 02:17 PM, said: Good luck with the new role-I look forward to reading some
interesting articles.
On a side issue regarding moderators though...we actually need MORE playing moderators at the moment...just people with power to issue a chatban for certain offences/conduct such as revealing allied positions/racist/extreme insults etc.
In addition
At present there is a plaque of these scam accounts advertising cheap gold websites(I've clocked 7 different in last couple weeks) and rarely if ever is a mod in chat when its happening to block the account.On the one occasion a mod was in chat He told me to report with screenshots(that mod was showing under 200 games?)
Those are new customers of your's for most part been scammed yet no-one seems willing to deal with it
Link on message: #6401380
LordofDiscord, on 07 November 2013 - 02:17 PM, said: Good luck with the new role-I look forward to reading some
interesting articles.On a side issue regarding moderators though...we actually need MORE playing moderators at the moment...just people with power to issue a chatban for certain offences/conduct such as revealing allied positions/racist/extreme insults etc.
In addition
At present there is a plaque of these scam accounts advertising cheap gold websites(I've clocked 7 different in last couple weeks) and rarely if ever is a mod in chat when its happening to block the account.On the one occasion a mod was in chat He told me to report with screenshots(that mod was showing under 200 games?)
Those are new customers of your's for most part been scammed yet no-one seems willing to deal with it
Hunter1911: Sadly covering battles with moderators is not possible as we have
dozens of thousands of battles happening at the same time.
Because of that we have the in game reporting feature and you can right click and report any infractions.
As for the scam accounts if the appear in the chats or on the forums moderators will deal with them. But it never hurts to report them.
Because of that we have the in game reporting feature and you can right click and report any infractions.
As for the scam accounts if the appear in the chats or on the forums moderators will deal with them. But it never hurts to report them.
TheKroo
Reinforcements for The Firebase Challenger
07.11.2013 15:37:38
Subject: Reinforcements for The Firebase Challenger
Link on message: #6401380
LordofDiscord, on 07 November 2013 - 02:17 PM, said: Good luck with the new role-I look forward to reading some
interesting articles.
On a side issue regarding moderators though...we actually need MORE playing moderators at the moment...just people with power to issue a chatban for certain offences/conduct such as revealing allied positions/racist/extreme insults etc.
In addition
At present there is a plaque of these scam accounts advertising cheap gold websites(I've clocked 7 different in last couple weeks) and rarely if ever is a mod in chat when its happening to block the account.On the one occasion a mod was in chat He told me to report with screenshots(that mod was showing under 200 games?)
Those are new customers of your's for most part been scammed yet no-one seems willing to deal with it
Link on message: #6401380
LordofDiscord, on 07 November 2013 - 02:17 PM, said: Good luck with the new role-I look forward to reading some
interesting articles.On a side issue regarding moderators though...we actually need MORE playing moderators at the moment...just people with power to issue a chatban for certain offences/conduct such as revealing allied positions/racist/extreme insults etc.
In addition
At present there is a plaque of these scam accounts advertising cheap gold websites(I've clocked 7 different in last couple weeks) and rarely if ever is a mod in chat when its happening to block the account.On the one occasion a mod was in chat He told me to report with screenshots(that mod was showing under 200 games?)
Those are new customers of your's for most part been scammed yet no-one seems willing to deal with it
TheKroo: Sadly covering battles with moderators is not possible as we have
dozens of thousands of battles happening at the same time.
Because of that we have the in game reporting feature and you can right click and report any infractions.
As for the scam accounts if the appear in the chats or on the forums moderators will deal with them. But it never hurts to report them.
Because of that we have the in game reporting feature and you can right click and report any infractions.
As for the scam accounts if the appear in the chats or on the forums moderators will deal with them. But it never hurts to report them.
Decept1on
Second Campaign Announced
07.11.2013 15:35:35
Subject: Second Campaign Announced
Link on message: #6401359
Link on message: #6401359
Decept1on: As if you lost the province.
Hunter1911
Know Your Steel: KV-1
07.11.2013 15:09:14
Subject: Know Your Steel: KV-1
Link on message: #6401135
piritskenyer, on 07 November 2013 - 01:27 PM, said: Very well put! (Pity I ran out of rep)
Link on message: #6401135
piritskenyer, on 07 November 2013 - 01:27 PM, said: Very well put! (Pity I ran out of rep)Hunter1911:
I will give him one +1 for ya :P
I will give him one +1 for ya :P
TheKroo
Know Your Steel: KV-1
07.11.2013 15:09:14
Subject: Know Your Steel: KV-1
Link on message: #6401135
piritskenyer, on 07 November 2013 - 01:27 PM, said: Very well put! (Pity I ran out of rep)
Link on message: #6401135
piritskenyer, on 07 November 2013 - 01:27 PM, said: Very well put! (Pity I ran out of rep)TheKroo:
I will give him one +1 for ya :P
I will give him one +1 for ya :P
Hunter1911
From "The Chieftain's Hatch"
07.11.2013 15:00:08
Subject: From "The Chieftain's Hatch"
Link on message: #6401043
Link on message: #6401043
Hunter1911: Inside the Chieftain's Hatch: IS-4 Part 2
Have a look at the interesting second part of the IS-4 review.
Have a look at the interesting second part of the IS-4 review.
TheKroo
From "The Chieftain's Hatch"
07.11.2013 15:00:08
Subject: From "The Chieftain's Hatch"
Link on message: #6401043
Link on message: #6401043
TheKroo: Inside the Chieftain's Hatch: IS-4 Part 2
Have a look at the interesting second part of the IS-4 review.
Have a look at the interesting second part of the IS-4 review.
IPaul72
World of BOTS - this time shamed by WG
07.11.2013 14:07:24
Subject: World of BOTS - this time shamed by WG
Link on message: #6400539
Link on message: #6400539
IPaul72: Hello all
The list (hall of fame) is available to you the community it is also available support staff who have a much more detailed one, I would say they are definitely looking at it with intrigue.
Actions will be applied if needed so no need to report bots other than in game by using the report function.
Kind Regards
IPaul72
The list (hall of fame) is available to you the community it is also available support staff who have a much more detailed one, I would say they are definitely looking at it with intrigue.
Actions will be applied if needed so no need to report bots other than in game by using the report function.
Kind Regards
IPaul72
OldFox
Удивительный английский язык.
07.11.2013 14:05:33
IPaul72
Introducing the new Hall of Fame
07.11.2013 13:54:46
Subject: Introducing the new Hall of Fame
Link on message: #6400420
MisterCro, on 06 November 2013 - 04:45 PM, said: It is imposible to play 700 games in a day! How?? That mean that he
play game every 1.8 minute, if u calculate 40 sec of fining game,
40 sec of begginig, he just enter the battle and go out, 24 h a
day, count it, day have 1440 minutes, he play 770 battles in a day,
imposible? Or he all day klick tanks and dont eat dont sleep dont
go to toilet . That must be some error in calculating
Ectar, on 06 November 2013 - 04:09 PM, said: Aw yeah rank 436,608 !
Hummus, on 07 November 2013 - 10:50 AM, said: Dear WG, please ban numbers 6 and 23 of today's "hall of fame" list
for botting.
397 games with 1 kill and a grand total of 1648 expi (that is an average expi of 4.15 per game) is an obvious bot. Make it go away please.
272 games with zero kills and 1408 expi (this guy has a frigging average expi of 5 .... for his entire tank career !!!!) is also clearly a bot.
While you are at it, why not check the top 20 every day and look into the stats of the obvious suspicious characters ?? 737 games in 24 hours is either some serious dedication ... or more likely a bot.
Link on message: #6400420
MisterCro, on 06 November 2013 - 04:45 PM, said: It is imposible to play 700 games in a day! How?? That mean that he
play game every 1.8 minute, if u calculate 40 sec of fining game,
40 sec of begginig, he just enter the battle and go out, 24 h a
day, count it, day have 1440 minutes, he play 770 battles in a day,
imposible? Or he all day klick tanks and dont eat dont sleep dont
go to toilet . That must be some error in calculatingIPaul72: 700 a day 
I can manage at
most 5 ..... Hmmmm are we sure this calculation is right, I'm
terrible at math 
I can manage at
most 5 ..... Hmmmm are we sure this calculation is right, I'm
terrible at math Ectar, on 06 November 2013 - 04:09 PM, said: Aw yeah rank 436,608 !IPaul72: Woooo closer than you Mista E .. 351,042 
Hummus, on 07 November 2013 - 10:50 AM, said: Dear WG, please ban numbers 6 and 23 of today's "hall of fame" list
for botting.397 games with 1 kill and a grand total of 1648 expi (that is an average expi of 4.15 per game) is an obvious bot. Make it go away please.
272 games with zero kills and 1408 expi (this guy has a frigging average expi of 5 .... for his entire tank career !!!!) is also clearly a bot.
While you are at it, why not check the top 20 every day and look into the stats of the obvious suspicious characters ?? 737 games in 24 hours is either some serious dedication ... or more likely a bot.
IPaul72: Hello there Hummus
The list will be looked at and appropriate actions taken if needed so there is no need to report them.
KInd Regards
IPaul72
The list will be looked at and appropriate actions taken if needed so there is no need to report them.
KInd Regards
IPaul72
Tuccy
Know Your Steel: KV-1
07.11.2013 13:36:02
Subject: Know Your Steel: KV-1
Link on message: #6400248
Link on message: #6400248
Tuccy: Regarding 8.8cm FlaK, I am afraid it is surrounded by a lot of
myths. It was not the all-killing, all-penetrating machine of death
that is often presented in popular literature and in the "KV and
T-34 crisis" of 1941, it often stole thunder from more mundane
10.5cm light howitzers firing AP and HEAT, or even 10.5cm field
guns. Similar to Tiger/Panther, it acquired an iconic status and
subsequently any "big" AT gun would be referred to as 88 in after
action reports. After all it is even easier to blame failure to
advance on enemy "superweapon"...
For antitak role, 8.8cm FlaK had a great advantage of being an accurate gun with pretty high muzzle velocity and heavy shell, that would overmatch thin armor (like T-34 glacis) and thus suffer less from slope effects. However it came with several drawbacks that proved themselves both in Russia and in Africa:
1. Ammunition. FlaK units (and army AT units hastily equipped with 88mm guns) did not use the APCBCHE PzGr.39 Tiger did (for most of its career), but originally naval APCBCHE PzGr. This shell contained more HE than PzGr. 39 - so it had significantly bigger post-penetration effect, however it was fragile, tended to deform and shatter. Great for bunker-busting, not so much for anti-tank combat. Even without this, it had less penetration than PzGr.39, roughly on par with 7.5cm PaK. Throughout the war, FlaK units used this shell, PzGr.39 was reserved for units that really needed it (heavy tanks, anti-tank specialist units). This shell was used even by high velocity 88mm guns for some time in 1943. Versus KV with ratehr thick (compared to caliber) and hard armor this shell often had issues.
2. Size. 88mm gun was huge, tall and hard to camouflage. Despite all the hype, this was reason why often in Africa significantly weaker 5cm PaK was preferred, as it can hide in the mirage )effectively masking at range anything lower than 1m over terrain), where 88mm stood like a sore thumb. Same way on the Eastern front, 5cm PaK or 10.5cm leFH can hide much easier and prepare ambush for the heavy tanks.
Both these factors limited the usefulness of 88mm guns in "KV busting". With 5cm and 10.5cm weapons the issue was, of course, penetration and effective range. This does not mean KV's were immune to them ("immunity" is rather shaky concept) - but it means they were very tough target and a fearsome beast on 1941 battlefield indeed, especially in uparmored versions of production model 1941 (both welded and cast turrets). And that 88mm gun was not a panacea.
(one funny fact: KV armor protection was based generally on the same demands as Tiger I protection)
For antitak role, 8.8cm FlaK had a great advantage of being an accurate gun with pretty high muzzle velocity and heavy shell, that would overmatch thin armor (like T-34 glacis) and thus suffer less from slope effects. However it came with several drawbacks that proved themselves both in Russia and in Africa:
1. Ammunition. FlaK units (and army AT units hastily equipped with 88mm guns) did not use the APCBCHE PzGr.39 Tiger did (for most of its career), but originally naval APCBCHE PzGr. This shell contained more HE than PzGr. 39 - so it had significantly bigger post-penetration effect, however it was fragile, tended to deform and shatter. Great for bunker-busting, not so much for anti-tank combat. Even without this, it had less penetration than PzGr.39, roughly on par with 7.5cm PaK. Throughout the war, FlaK units used this shell, PzGr.39 was reserved for units that really needed it (heavy tanks, anti-tank specialist units). This shell was used even by high velocity 88mm guns for some time in 1943. Versus KV with ratehr thick (compared to caliber) and hard armor this shell often had issues.
2. Size. 88mm gun was huge, tall and hard to camouflage. Despite all the hype, this was reason why often in Africa significantly weaker 5cm PaK was preferred, as it can hide in the mirage )effectively masking at range anything lower than 1m over terrain), where 88mm stood like a sore thumb. Same way on the Eastern front, 5cm PaK or 10.5cm leFH can hide much easier and prepare ambush for the heavy tanks.
Both these factors limited the usefulness of 88mm guns in "KV busting". With 5cm and 10.5cm weapons the issue was, of course, penetration and effective range. This does not mean KV's were immune to them ("immunity" is rather shaky concept) - but it means they were very tough target and a fearsome beast on 1941 battlefield indeed, especially in uparmored versions of production model 1941 (both welded and cast turrets). And that 88mm gun was not a panacea.
(one funny fact: KV armor protection was based generally on the same demands as Tiger I protection)
Hunter1911
Know Your Steel: KV-1
07.11.2013 13:28:26
Subject: Know Your Steel: KV-1
Link on message: #6400172
pilotknox12, on 07 November 2013 - 12:03 PM, said: did the forum freeze up again 
Link on message: #6400172
pilotknox12, on 07 November 2013 - 12:03 PM, said: did the forum freeze up again Hunter1911:
Seems to work for me.
What is the issue?
Seems to work for me.
What is the issue?
TheKroo
Know Your Steel: KV-1
07.11.2013 13:28:26
Subject: Know Your Steel: KV-1
Link on message: #6400172
pilotknox12, on 07 November 2013 - 12:03 PM, said: did the forum freeze up again
Link on message: #6400172
pilotknox12, on 07 November 2013 - 12:03 PM, said: did the forum freeze up again TheKroo:
Seems to work for me.
What is the issue?
Seems to work for me.
What is the issue?
Decept1on
Recruiting Station
07.11.2013 12:57:37
Subject: Recruiting Station
Link on message: #6399880
Link on message: #6399880
Decept1on: Hello everyone,
For those who don't often check the portal or new features, we present you the recruiting station that can be used for a simplified application and recruitment.
You can check the portal news here:
http://worldoftanks....uiting-station/
And the Guide here:
http://worldoftanks....-station-guide/
Thank you and good luck
Decept1on.
For those who don't often check the portal or new features, we present you the recruiting station that can be used for a simplified application and recruitment.
You can check the portal news here:
http://worldoftanks....uiting-station/
And the Guide here:
http://worldoftanks....-station-guide/
Thank you and good luck
Decept1on.
Hunter1911
Reinforcements for The Firebase Challenger
07.11.2013 12:45:37
Subject: Reinforcements for The Firebase Challenger
Link on message: #6399778
Boykes, on 07 November 2013 - 11:35 AM, said: Enjoy your duty as moderator. And, perhaps, you may take the
T-34-85 home for the weekend to "take care" of it, like they do
with hamsters 
Link on message: #6399778
Boykes, on 07 November 2013 - 11:35 AM, said: Enjoy your duty as moderator. And, perhaps, you may take the
T-34-85 home for the weekend to "take care" of it, like they do
with hamsters Hunter1911: LOL that would be nice
TheKroo
Reinforcements for The Firebase Challenger
07.11.2013 12:45:37
Subject: Reinforcements for The Firebase Challenger
Link on message: #6399778
Boykes, on 07 November 2013 - 11:35 AM, said: Enjoy your duty as moderator. And, perhaps, you may take the
T-34-85 home for the weekend to "take care" of it, like they do
with hamsters
Link on message: #6399778
Boykes, on 07 November 2013 - 11:35 AM, said: Enjoy your duty as moderator. And, perhaps, you may take the
T-34-85 home for the weekend to "take care" of it, like they do
with hamsters TheKroo: LOL that would be nice
Hunter1911
Know Your Steel: KV-1
07.11.2013 12:44:50
Subject: Know Your Steel: KV-1
Link on message: #6399772
Steffenximus, on 06 November 2013 - 10:13 PM, said: And please note that I said 8.8cm FlaK gun, not 8.8cm KwK, meaning
the anti-aircraft guns which turned out to be extremely effective
against tanks. You didn't say anything about the 5cm L60, did you ?
That gun was effective against KV-1, but it had problems against
T-34, so as I said, KV-1 was inferior to T-34. And I know better
than you when each gun was introduced into the war.
Steffenximus, on 06 November 2013 - 10:16 PM, said: If you took your time, let me clue you onto things. The fact is
most people are of less than average intelligence and since I'm
smart I'm mostly misunderstood - take a look at all my posts,
you'll notice that everything I say is 100% accurate and even
though it might hurt you it is the truth and if you can't handle
the truth then go ahead neg rep I don't care.
Mantelman, on 06 November 2013 - 10:23 PM, said: I wrote my B.A.-Paper about the literature about the tiger-tank,
some things I remember...
Fuks36, on 06 November 2013 - 11:29 PM, said: I didnt have the time to read the whole post!
I just reaf the neg poast,KV 1s ren with T34s and thouse thants were the battlefront line!
Everything reagarthing WoT is not important and those thanks,because THIS is a GAME!
AND WE DONT LIVE IN THE PAST!
hamstor, on 07 November 2013 - 11:08 AM, said: So... Kolobanov was one of those "gold ammo noobs"? 
Link on message: #6399772
Steffenximus, on 06 November 2013 - 10:13 PM, said: And please note that I said 8.8cm FlaK gun, not 8.8cm KwK, meaning
the anti-aircraft guns which turned out to be extremely effective
against tanks. You didn't say anything about the 5cm L60, did you ?
That gun was effective against KV-1, but it had problems against
T-34, so as I said, KV-1 was inferior to T-34. And I know better
than you when each gun was introduced into the war.Hunter1911:
I no way have I disputed the effectiveness of the 8.8cm FlaK gun versus certain tank vehicles.
I was referring to the fact that no vehicle mounted German guns of the initial war period were able to reliably penetrate the KV-1 series.
88mm was vehicle born only after the appearance of 88mm KwK gun.
I would not say that the 5 cm KwK 39 L/60 was able to reliably penetrate a KV.
5 cm Pak 38 (L/60) is another story. But even it had some issues with KV-1. While it was rather OK versus T-34.
I no way have I disputed the effectiveness of the 8.8cm FlaK gun versus certain tank vehicles.
I was referring to the fact that no vehicle mounted German guns of the initial war period were able to reliably penetrate the KV-1 series.
88mm was vehicle born only after the appearance of 88mm KwK gun.
I would not say that the 5 cm KwK 39 L/60 was able to reliably penetrate a KV.
5 cm Pak 38 (L/60) is another story. But even it had some issues with KV-1. While it was rather OK versus T-34.
Steffenximus, on 06 November 2013 - 10:16 PM, said: If you took your time, let me clue you onto things. The fact is
most people are of less than average intelligence and since I'm
smart I'm mostly misunderstood - take a look at all my posts,
you'll notice that everything I say is 100% accurate and even
though it might hurt you it is the truth and if you can't handle
the truth then go ahead neg rep I don't care.Hunter1911:
We are all gentlemen, let us keep the discussion at level :)
We are all gentlemen, let us keep the discussion at level :)
Mantelman, on 06 November 2013 - 10:23 PM, said: I wrote my B.A.-Paper about the literature about the tiger-tank,
some things I remember...Hunter1911:
If the paper is in English and you are willing to show it I would very much like to see it.
If the paper is in English and you are willing to show it I would very much like to see it.
Fuks36, on 06 November 2013 - 11:29 PM, said: I didnt have the time to read the whole post!I just reaf the neg poast,KV 1s ren with T34s and thouse thants were the battlefront line!
Everything reagarthing WoT is not important and those thanks,because THIS is a GAME!
AND WE DONT LIVE IN THE PAST!
Hunter1911:
Past should not limit us. But we should learn from history.
Especially interesting informations like those about tank.
The historical background of things is very important for us to make our tanks as accurate as possible and to transfer you the maximum experience.
Past should not limit us. But we should learn from history.
Especially interesting informations like those about tank.
The historical background of things is very important for us to make our tanks as accurate as possible and to transfer you the maximum experience.
hamstor, on 07 November 2013 - 11:08 AM, said: So... Kolobanov was one of those "gold ammo noobs"? Hunter1911:
haxor!
:P
haxor!
:P
TheKroo
Know Your Steel: KV-1
07.11.2013 12:44:50
Subject: Know Your Steel: KV-1
Link on message: #6399772
Steffenximus, on 06 November 2013 - 10:13 PM, said: And please note that I said 8.8cm FlaK gun, not 8.8cm KwK, meaning
the anti-aircraft guns which turned out to be extremely effective
against tanks. You didn't say anything about the 5cm L60, did you ?
That gun was effective against KV-1, but it had problems against
T-34, so as I said, KV-1 was inferior to T-34. And I know better
than you when each gun was introduced into the war.
Steffenximus, on 06 November 2013 - 10:16 PM, said: If you took your time, let me clue you onto things. The fact is
most people are of less than average intelligence and since I'm
smart I'm mostly misunderstood - take a look at all my posts,
you'll notice that everything I say is 100% accurate and even
though it might hurt you it is the truth and if you can't handle
the truth then go ahead neg rep I don't care.
Mantelman, on 06 November 2013 - 10:23 PM, said: I wrote my B.A.-Paper about the literature about the tiger-tank,
some things I remember...
Fuks36, on 06 November 2013 - 11:29 PM, said: I didnt have the time to read the whole post!
I just reaf the neg poast,KV 1s ren with T34s and thouse thants were the battlefront line!
Everything reagarthing WoT is not important and those thanks,because THIS is a GAME!
AND WE DONT LIVE IN THE PAST!
hamstor, on 07 November 2013 - 11:08 AM, said: So... Kolobanov was one of those "gold ammo noobs"?
Link on message: #6399772
Steffenximus, on 06 November 2013 - 10:13 PM, said: And please note that I said 8.8cm FlaK gun, not 8.8cm KwK, meaning
the anti-aircraft guns which turned out to be extremely effective
against tanks. You didn't say anything about the 5cm L60, did you ?
That gun was effective against KV-1, but it had problems against
T-34, so as I said, KV-1 was inferior to T-34. And I know better
than you when each gun was introduced into the war.TheKroo:
I no way have I disputed the effectiveness of the 8.8cm FlaK gun versus certain tank vehicles.
I was referring to the fact that no vehicle mounted German guns of the initial war period were able to reliably penetrate the KV-1 series.
88mm was vehicle born only after the appearance of 88mm KwK gun.
I would not say that the 5 cm KwK 39 L/60 was able to reliably penetrate a KV.
5 cm Pak 38 (L/60) is another story. But even it had some issues with KV-1. While it was rather OK versus T-34.
I no way have I disputed the effectiveness of the 8.8cm FlaK gun versus certain tank vehicles.
I was referring to the fact that no vehicle mounted German guns of the initial war period were able to reliably penetrate the KV-1 series.
88mm was vehicle born only after the appearance of 88mm KwK gun.
I would not say that the 5 cm KwK 39 L/60 was able to reliably penetrate a KV.
5 cm Pak 38 (L/60) is another story. But even it had some issues with KV-1. While it was rather OK versus T-34.
Steffenximus, on 06 November 2013 - 10:16 PM, said: If you took your time, let me clue you onto things. The fact is
most people are of less than average intelligence and since I'm
smart I'm mostly misunderstood - take a look at all my posts,
you'll notice that everything I say is 100% accurate and even
though it might hurt you it is the truth and if you can't handle
the truth then go ahead neg rep I don't care.TheKroo:
We are all gentlemen, let us keep the discussion at level :)
We are all gentlemen, let us keep the discussion at level :)
Mantelman, on 06 November 2013 - 10:23 PM, said: I wrote my B.A.-Paper about the literature about the tiger-tank,
some things I remember...TheKroo:
If the paper is in English and you are willing to show it I would very much like to see it.
If the paper is in English and you are willing to show it I would very much like to see it.
Fuks36, on 06 November 2013 - 11:29 PM, said: I didnt have the time to read the whole post!I just reaf the neg poast,KV 1s ren with T34s and thouse thants were the battlefront line!
Everything reagarthing WoT is not important and those thanks,because THIS is a GAME!
AND WE DONT LIVE IN THE PAST!
TheKroo:
Past should not limit us. But we should learn from history.
Especially interesting informations like those about tank.
The historical background of things is very important for us to make our tanks as accurate as possible and to transfer you the maximum experience.
Past should not limit us. But we should learn from history.
Especially interesting informations like those about tank.
The historical background of things is very important for us to make our tanks as accurate as possible and to transfer you the maximum experience.
hamstor, on 07 November 2013 - 11:08 AM, said: So... Kolobanov was one of those "gold ammo noobs"? TheKroo:
haxor!
:P
haxor!
:P
IPaul72
We found Lord_Demon in Paris!
07.11.2013 12:43:15
Subject: We found Lord_Demon in Paris!
Link on message: #6399753
Lord_Demon, on 06 November 2013 - 03:16 PM, said: It is nice that you got my good side in the picture.
And it seem I forgot to wear pants that day. Maybe that is why all the lovely ladies wanted to take their picture with me.
Link on message: #6399753
Lord_Demon, on 06 November 2013 - 03:16 PM, said: It is nice that you got my good side in the picture.And it seem I forgot to wear pants that day. Maybe that is why all the lovely ladies wanted to take their picture with me.
IPaul72:
_Quasar_
Devs Q/A - 14th session
07.11.2013 12:07:56
Subject: Devs Q/A - 14th session
Link on message: #6399444
Link on message: #6399444
_Quasar_: Dear all,
Please submit your questions below.
Best,
_Quasar_
Please submit your questions below.
Best,
_Quasar_
Decept1on
Bugs
07.11.2013 11:35:11
Decept1on
Second Campaign General Feedback
07.11.2013 11:34:42
Subject: Second Campaign General Feedback
Link on message: #6399161
Link on message: #6399161
Decept1on: It seems the battle results were not processed correctly, I am
working on it.
Decept1on
Second Campaign Announced
06.11.2013 23:50:41
Subject: Second Campaign Announced
Link on message: #6396948
Kantti, on 06 November 2013 - 10:19 PM, said: Good we avoided the defeat yesterday to watch you stream and build
counter-tactic. :)
Was totally awesome to get to play against you guys. I am not sure if I have ever seen my crew as thrilled as they were today on our TS. Kudos! That was great idea to come to meet the players.
Link on message: #6396948
Kantti, on 06 November 2013 - 10:19 PM, said: Good we avoided the defeat yesterday to watch you stream and build
counter-tactic. :)Was totally awesome to get to play against you guys. I am not sure if I have ever seen my crew as thrilled as they were today on our TS. Kudos! That was great idea to come to meet the players.
Decept1on: Hehe, we clearly saw the counter tactic here ^^
It was a good game and looking forward to more events like this in the future :)
It was a good game and looking forward to more events like this in the future :)
Decept1on
Second Campaign General Feedback
06.11.2013 23:49:15
Subject: Second Campaign General Feedback
Link on message: #6396934
Desp, on 06 November 2013 - 10:37 PM, said: GJ WG.. make competitive campaigns and then make sure some battles
wont even open (battle with owner)..
Titaniu, on 06 November 2013 - 10:38 PM, said: Battles got frozen once more....06.11.2013 - Lower Saxony...we
beated -OSE-, then H_6_H, but when we got the battle against NPC,
the battle didn't pop-up...so, gj....15chips lost for nothing..
Link on message: #6396934
Desp, on 06 November 2013 - 10:37 PM, said: GJ WG.. make competitive campaigns and then make sure some battles
wont even open (battle with owner)..Decept1on: For the Lower and Upper Austria province ?
If yes provide screenshots of chips on the province please.
For EXN0M, talked to Erwin, will check first thing in the morning.
There are probably other cases of battles against NPCs.
If yes provide screenshots of chips on the province please.
For EXN0M, talked to Erwin, will check first thing in the morning.
There are probably other cases of battles against NPCs.
Titaniu, on 06 November 2013 - 10:38 PM, said: Battles got frozen once more....06.11.2013 - Lower Saxony...we
beated -OSE-, then H_6_H, but when we got the battle against NPC,
the battle didn't pop-up...so, gj....15chips lost for nothing..Decept1on:
Tuccy
Video: Recenze bitevního módu 7vs7
06.11.2013 23:17:28
Subject: Video: Recenze bitevního módu 7vs7
Link on message: #6396704
thacid, on 06 November 2013 - 07:56 PM, said: Zatiaľ to veľa ľudí iba skúša, takže sa do 8tier hry pridáva
všetko, aj tier 1. Potom to tak vyzerá. Časom na to každý kápne a
budú sa tam voziť iba 8t premiáky. S tými sa pri výhre kráľovsky
zarába.
Link on message: #6396704
thacid, on 06 November 2013 - 07:56 PM, said: Zatiaľ to veľa ľudí iba skúša, takže sa do 8tier hry pridáva
všetko, aj tier 1. Potom to tak vyzerá. Časom na to každý kápne a
budú sa tam voziť iba 8t premiáky. S tými sa pri výhre kráľovsky
zarába.Tuccy: Praktická poznámka: Ty 2x T1 Cunningham nejsou žádná náhoda a často
mohou rozhodnout bitvu ;) Kdyby ničím jiným tak tím, že se přes ně
převalí nepřítel a víte, že je čas se vrátit ;)
Hunter1911
Know Your Steel: KV-1
06.11.2013 23:00:19
Subject: Know Your Steel: KV-1
Link on message: #6396538
Mantelman, on 06 November 2013 - 06:02 PM, said: But in the inital part of Barbarossa the german armored colums cut
fast and deep, that was only possible because they let theire
supporting units far behind, so the mighty 8.8cm gun coulnd´t
support the armored troops in AT-roles.
The Panzerkampfwagen 35 and 38(t), Pzkw III (with 3,7cm and short 5cm), IV (only with short 7,5cm) and the StugIII (7,5cm) couldn´t penetrate a KV-1. The 5cm Pak38 were rare at this time and the 7,5cm Pak40 appeared at the end of 1941.
And the MOST AA-Units stood in the Reich and didn´t have AP-Ammo.
Link on message: #6396538
Mantelman, on 06 November 2013 - 06:02 PM, said: But in the inital part of Barbarossa the german armored colums cut
fast and deep, that was only possible because they let theire
supporting units far behind, so the mighty 8.8cm gun coulnd´t
support the armored troops in AT-roles.The Panzerkampfwagen 35 and 38(t), Pzkw III (with 3,7cm and short 5cm), IV (only with short 7,5cm) and the StugIII (7,5cm) couldn´t penetrate a KV-1. The 5cm Pak38 were rare at this time and the 7,5cm Pak40 appeared at the end of 1941.
And the MOST AA-Units stood in the Reich and didn´t have AP-Ammo.
Hunter1911:
It is nice to see so many nicely argumented posts here :)
It is nice to see so many nicely argumented posts here :)
TheKroo
Know Your Steel: KV-1
06.11.2013 23:00:19
Subject: Know Your Steel: KV-1
Link on message: #6396538
Mantelman, on 06 November 2013 - 06:02 PM, said: But in the inital part of Barbarossa the german armored colums cut
fast and deep, that was only possible because they let theire
supporting units far behind, so the mighty 8.8cm gun coulnd´t
support the armored troops in AT-roles.
The Panzerkampfwagen 35 and 38(t), Pzkw III (with 3,7cm and short 5cm), IV (only with short 7,5cm) and the StugIII (7,5cm) couldn´t penetrate a KV-1. The 5cm Pak38 were rare at this time and the 7,5cm Pak40 appeared at the end of 1941.
And the MOST AA-Units stood in the Reich and didn´t have AP-Ammo.
Link on message: #6396538
Mantelman, on 06 November 2013 - 06:02 PM, said: But in the inital part of Barbarossa the german armored colums cut
fast and deep, that was only possible because they let theire
supporting units far behind, so the mighty 8.8cm gun coulnd´t
support the armored troops in AT-roles.The Panzerkampfwagen 35 and 38(t), Pzkw III (with 3,7cm and short 5cm), IV (only with short 7,5cm) and the StugIII (7,5cm) couldn´t penetrate a KV-1. The 5cm Pak38 were rare at this time and the 7,5cm Pak40 appeared at the end of 1941.
And the MOST AA-Units stood in the Reich and didn´t have AP-Ammo.
TheKroo:
It is nice to see so many nicely argumented posts here :)
It is nice to see so many nicely argumented posts here :)
Gepard_PH
Poradnik do bitew drużynowych 7vs7 - wątek zgłoszeniowy
06.11.2013 22:54:34
Subject: Poradnik do bitew drużynowych 7vs7 - wątek zgłoszeniowy
Link on message: #6396469
Link on message: #6396469
Gepard_PH: Tu należy zamieszczać zgłoszenia do konkursu na poradnik do bitew
drużynowych 7vs7.
Zgłoszenia będą ukryte do zakończenia konkursu, w związku z tym nie będzie możliwości edycji. Proszę przesyłać jedynie ostateczne wersje.
Zgłoszenia będą ukryte do zakończenia konkursu, w związku z tym nie będzie możliwości edycji. Proszę przesyłać jedynie ostateczne wersje.
Gepard_PH
Bitwy drużynowe 7vs7 - poradnik
06.11.2013 22:52:54
Subject: Bitwy drużynowe 7vs7 - poradnik
Link on message: #6396450
Link on message: #6396450
Gepard_PH: Czołgiści!
Wraz z aktualizacją 8.9 wprowadzony został nowy tryb bitew drużynowych, znany również jako 7vs7. Wciąż jednak zbyt wielu czołgistów nie wie o co właściwie w tym trybie chodzi i przede wszystkim jak grać, żeby wygrać? Dlatego ogłaszamy konkurs na najlepszy poradnik do bitew drużynowych.
Do wygrania są spore ilości złota, mianowicie: 4500 złota za pierwsze miejsce
3000 złota za drugie miejsce
1500 złota za trzecie miejsce
Napisany przez Was poradnik powinien omawiać najważniejsze rzeczy związane z 7vs7, takie jak: wstęp, czyli zasady trybu drużynowego; różnice pomiędzy 7vs7 a innymi trybami gry
obsługa, czyli jak grać w tym trybie: dołączanie do drużyny, tworzenie drużyny, wyszukiwanie graczy
strategia, czyli jakimi pojazdami grać; podstawowe i zaawansowane taktyki; różnice w stosunku do bitw losowych Oczywiście nie musicie się ograniczać do punktów powyżej. Poradnik ma przede wszystkim w przystępny sposób pokazać przeciętnemu graczowi co i jak. Co jest potrzebne? Jak zacząć? Jak wygrywać? Kiedy warto grać 7vs7 i dlaczego?
Zasady: Poradnik musi być w całości napisany samodzielnie. Plagiat będzie skutkował dyskwalifikacją z tego i przyszłych konkursów.
Zabronione jest wykorzystanie tekstu, który został już wcześniej opublikowany w Sieci.
Można dołączyć obrazki, a nawet jest to wskazane. Dołączone obrazki muszą być własnego autorstwa lub ogólnodostępne (np. mapy, obrazki czołgów lub fragmenty interfejsu). Nazwy graczy powinny być zamazane.
Wymagany język: polski. Przy tworzeniu screenshotów i pisaniu instrukcji należy korzystać z polskiej wersji językowej gry.
Termin zamieszczania prac: 20 listopada 2013.
Wszystkie zgłoszenia do konkursu proszę zamieszczać w wątku zgłoszeniowym. Proszę nie używać tagów spoiler, quote ani code. Inne formy nadsyłania zgłoszeń nie będą akceptowane. Powodzenia!
W międzyczasie zachęcamy wszystkich do spróbowania swoich sił w bitwach drużynowych. Podstawy podstaw objaśnia poniższy filmik:
Wraz z aktualizacją 8.9 wprowadzony został nowy tryb bitew drużynowych, znany również jako 7vs7. Wciąż jednak zbyt wielu czołgistów nie wie o co właściwie w tym trybie chodzi i przede wszystkim jak grać, żeby wygrać? Dlatego ogłaszamy konkurs na najlepszy poradnik do bitew drużynowych.
Do wygrania są spore ilości złota, mianowicie: 4500 złota za pierwsze miejsce
3000 złota za drugie miejsce
1500 złota za trzecie miejsce
Napisany przez Was poradnik powinien omawiać najważniejsze rzeczy związane z 7vs7, takie jak: wstęp, czyli zasady trybu drużynowego; różnice pomiędzy 7vs7 a innymi trybami gry
obsługa, czyli jak grać w tym trybie: dołączanie do drużyny, tworzenie drużyny, wyszukiwanie graczy
strategia, czyli jakimi pojazdami grać; podstawowe i zaawansowane taktyki; różnice w stosunku do bitw losowych Oczywiście nie musicie się ograniczać do punktów powyżej. Poradnik ma przede wszystkim w przystępny sposób pokazać przeciętnemu graczowi co i jak. Co jest potrzebne? Jak zacząć? Jak wygrywać? Kiedy warto grać 7vs7 i dlaczego?
Zasady: Poradnik musi być w całości napisany samodzielnie. Plagiat będzie skutkował dyskwalifikacją z tego i przyszłych konkursów.
Zabronione jest wykorzystanie tekstu, który został już wcześniej opublikowany w Sieci.
Można dołączyć obrazki, a nawet jest to wskazane. Dołączone obrazki muszą być własnego autorstwa lub ogólnodostępne (np. mapy, obrazki czołgów lub fragmenty interfejsu). Nazwy graczy powinny być zamazane.
Wymagany język: polski. Przy tworzeniu screenshotów i pisaniu instrukcji należy korzystać z polskiej wersji językowej gry.
Termin zamieszczania prac: 20 listopada 2013.
Wszystkie zgłoszenia do konkursu proszę zamieszczać w wątku zgłoszeniowym. Proszę nie używać tagów spoiler, quote ani code. Inne formy nadsyłania zgłoszeń nie będą akceptowane. Powodzenia!
W międzyczasie zachęcamy wszystkich do spróbowania swoich sił w bitwach drużynowych. Podstawy podstaw objaśnia poniższy filmik:
Реклама | Adv