World of Tanks: Reddit Q&A – Part I
9 min readRecently, Reddit World of Tanks Community was asked to put questions forward and today we got all the selected ones answered. I’ve decided to split these questions into two, the first one will have all the European Community questions, while the second will have all the North American Community questions.
Q: Will there be more tier X cosmetics like the ones we got in the Christmas boxes? They are a great way to monetize the game instead of op premium tanks.
A: Yes, we are working on many more of those, you will see quite soon
Q: Considering how some older premiums have already received buffs (Pz 58 Mutz, STA-2 as the latest examples) is there anything planned to say AMX CDC, T34, Löwe and so on? These tanks are surpassed by a lot of tanks in their performance and statistics already, like comparing the Progetto M35 46 and the CDC there’s really no contest or T34 to any other high alpha heavy tank.
A: We are constantly working on actualizing premiums to the current metagame. Currently, we are running sandbox tests of new balance for all tiers and vehicles. Whatever the outcome of the tests is: we will balance all the vehicles up to a new scheme. If it doesn’t go to prod, we will do a balancing up to a current scheme.
Q: Nobody likes to have three SPG in one battle. Are there any plans for reducing the max number of artillery pieces in one match?
A: With current MM we are trying to make sure that three SPG battles, as well as zero SPG battles, happen with predictable regularity. No plans to change the limit from three to two at the moment.
Q: With the new ammo changes introduced, are we going to see the super heavies with non-existent frontal weak spots (cupolas/lower plates) added weak spots to them?
Answer: If new balance changes to ammo and HP goes live, we will have to look into all the vehicles and their behaviour in the new meta. We cannot give a definite answer at the moment.
Q: Are there any plans to reintroduce 9.22 maps which were removed in 1.0, such as Pearl River and Swamp?
A: Right now, we are looking what maps should be next, Pearl River is one of the candidates.
Q: At the moment it is very one sided with only Russian players. Will there be a chance we get once again a Supertest with tankers from different nations? It could lead to a more balanced tank and less of the so-called ” Russian bias” and might sooth the community a bit. Over the last couple of years, Supertest info’s went from ” Someone had to be a mole and leak the info” to WG straight up posting almost all new things on their forums themselves.
And as a follow-up question. When the Supertest would open up, will WG allow for example YouTubers and Streams in to let them make videos and opinions on it? I like what the Sandbox server is doing in the sense of that it is basically a no-NDA environment, and everybody can see what is going to happen to World of Tanks. ?
A: As you probably know, our main production force is based in Minsk, Belarus. And lots of our employees with limited English skills. So, it is much more effective to organize and support ST in the Russian language. However, we understand that we definitely need to hear the voice of the community, thus we have a different testing instrument. Supertest is used more for our internal tasks. As for SB, we use it lastly to test major changes that affect all the regions and players, you will see quite a few SB launches this year. For example, wheeled vehicles were tested on actual production servers.
Q: Are you planning on fixing invisible textures on edges of terrain, rocks, buildings etc. that make you peek a little more when wanting to take a shot behind them? They are transparent but shots don’t go through them. This problem has occurred since the introduction of HD maps, and since hasn’t been resolved.
A: Definitely yes. There is a problem with matching Havoc body with our terrain. We are working with Havoc team to solve it.
Q: Since now all the tank models were ported to HD can we expect an in-game armour model viewer for the game like it’s in WoWS or in that other tank game?
A: This feature is in pipeline.
Q: Have you ever considered a separate class for super-heavy tanks (Maus, E 100, Japanese heavies etc.)?
A: We do not consider to make a separate class for those. However, we understand that these tanks are different from other heavies, so Matchmaker has special rules for those tanks, and we are working on communication system improvements that will allow players to tell allies “Achtung! Maus!” much easier than it is now.
Q: Since WG has teased us with changes to the E-100 line, it is implied that changes to Tiger I and Tiger II are in sight. What kind of parameters of said tanks does WG plan to change? If you can’t answer that question, at least tell us how soon can we expect the rebalancing of the E100 branch. Don’t touch E-75. It’s good as is.
A: Currently we are running sandbox tests of new balance for all tiers and vehicles. For now, we are holding back some changes but definitely will apply them when new balance appears. Or in case it does not go live, we will make them to the current scheme.
Q: Now that Type 4/5 Heavies got rebalanced and are far less toxic to the game, are there any plans for a tier VIII Japanese heavy premium?
A: We are researching other JP branches, however no plans for tier 8 heavy so far. But thanks for the idea.
Q: Is there any chance serious action is being taken against bot users soon?
A: We have a system that detects abnormal behaviour based on server data. So, we have two ways at the moment: continue to do periodical ban waves or just close the client for any modifications. The latter is quite effective but can be compared to decapitation to cure a headache. So, we are sticking to the first way for now.
Q: Do you consider adding a mini-map indicator for flipped vehicles for allies to know (and help)? Maybe the F7 ‘Help!’ command could be changed to ‘Help, I’m flipped’ when the player emitting it is flipped.
An: This is in the plan for communication system improvement.
Q: Regarding new player retention: Have the devs thought about splitting the low tier player base into two parts? 1 newbie and 1 veteran up until Tier V-VI? You could use battles played for the requirement to become a veteran and when there is a time period when the newbie player base is low you could add bots to fill up their battles.
A: It actually works as you described already – new players are playing only vs players under 100 battles played in total. this system is quite old, and we want to improve that, maybe by adding more special rules to Matchmaker.
Q: The forums contain lots of interesting material, from new branch proposals (leggasiini’s IJA TD line & HT rework) to new maps (grizly1973’s Arad, Ghioroc and Warsaw proposals). Are the devs using the forums to get any kind of information or they’re there just for players to change opinions? To me, it looks like the feedback from the forum is very rarely, if ever, taken into account.
A: We are working with many sources of information and forums are one important of those. We have a weekly digest from forums gathered and pay a lot of attention to it. As for the tech trees, we try to rely on hard evidence like actual archive documents, letters and other historical material only. As for the maps, we have a lot of prototypes inside, however, not all of them are getting even to Supertest stage. Our level design team reads forums like the rest of the team.
Q: Is the WoT timeline now expanded from the mid-’60s to the mid-’70s, since the release of the Swedish mediums? If yes, will it be possible to bring new German tanks, since the Germans had a “development gap” in the 50-60’s?
A: We try to operate not within the period but more within a certain tech stack (up to the spread of composite armour, smooth barrel guns, automated fire control systems etc.) due to it completely changes the tank battle paradigms. New German tanks were designed in this new paradigm.
Q: What are the plans with IS-4? Is it getting reworked, or maybe replaced in the near future? Recently got back into the game and I feel so bad about the state of IS-4.
A: If the rebalance we are currently testing on Sandbox goes live, we will see whether it needs any tweaks
Q: Have you considered taking steps for real balance in all tiers, for example with frequent patches only making small incremental changes each time?
Answer: That is why we are running Sandbox balance experiment which in case of success will be a single whole rebalance.
Q: Is it part of some idea/meta-design new tanks stronger than ever? For example, impenetrable monsters like Obj.279 and Chieftain. Why don’t you just do reasonable buff to forgotten tanks like E100? And why does it take so long to make adjustments? Between, add more checkboxes to ban maps – at least 6.
A: All the tanks that we introduce have their weaknesses and a part of the design is to make players find and use those. For example, 279 does not have a lower plate, which means that over its tracks it has gentle belly, just go figure how to use this tip 😉 In case rebalance experiment which we run at the moment on Sandbox goes well, we will definitely give some love to all vehicles, E100 included. As for the maps, we picked the number of slots to banned maps to make sure all players are getting as comfortable Matchmaker time as possible.
Q: Why are recoilless rifles, high tier autocannons and small calibre smoothbores such a no but tanks that’s have an insane amount of armour and agility (430U) is fine?
Answer: This is no for a reason: new tech makes all current tanks obsolete without exceptions. For example, a late 16th-century knight in full gothic armour was a king on the battlefield at some point, but a rifle has kicked him straight out of a saddle. So yes, 430U is a powerful vehicle in its habitat, but in a smoothbore gun world, is not that useful.
Q: Is there any chance of WG working together or at least helping out the developer of tanks.gg? Since the game was ported to the new engine the dev at tanks.gg has issues properly exporting the armour models of tanks. As the site was helpful before, it would be nice if it could work properly again.
A: Well, that’s weird since the new engine did not touch models. We will try to get more info on that case. (Note from Harkonnen: This has to do with Havok and licensing as far as I know. WG is currently working on getting this sorted so sites like tanks.gg can have the armour models back correctly.)
Q: Bonds shop (vehicles for bonds) you promised us at the end of 2018, why was it delayed and when is the ETA?
A: The functionality is ready, however, during the test stage we’ve encountered some tech issues and are currently fixing those.
Q: Will there in game Finland tech tree?
A: If we get enough content to compile at least one full branch not being formed from clone tanks, we will definitely introduce it. Sorry to say, but we do not have any evidence of an original Finnish tech tree existence.
Q: Would it be possible to make Girls und Panzer styles and emblems, for example for the StuG III Ausf G? As far as I know, WoT Blitz has a few GuP premiums, so there shouldn’t be any copyright issues, right? GuP is what got me interested in tanks, and therefore brought me to WoT, and other people as well probably.
A: We are negotiating to continue our cooperation with GuP brand and if everything goes right, sure we will do that.
Q: Will there be an additional British heavy line with Chieftains as top tiers?
A: Not planning to do that.
Q: Any plan on improving/upgrading the game menu. It looks really “old/washout” if you compare it to the WoWs for example.
A: When we introduce an update to a feature, we usually update the UI for it, so eventually, all the interfaces will be updated with time.
About Author
So still no tanks for bonds with 1.6. Such lies now its more then one technical issue lol liars release tanks for bonds as you promised already mid spring well its summer. So it looks no changes players want like is 4 e 100 and the mk 6. Again ignoring the forums. Good questions really bad answers.
Still holding on to 3 spgs per side make the game interesting. 8 years people wanted major aetu changes still nothing. And still cancelled nerfs on 430u. Still no changes to supertest. Sandbox is a joke. The supertest is broken and they do nothing. Only thing wargaming does is release premium tanks. Really a shame if they would listen to the player base things might get better . This proves across the board the devs still have no clue.
I call bs on the technical issues with tanks for bonds. The only reason it hasnt been released is wargaming is looking for a way to make money tanks for bonds. Enough is enough its been 3 months what technical issues take that long to fix?? And now its more then one technical issue was one before.
The tanks for bonds thing is simply that they can sell tanks for money. “Technical issues”…really. They also dodged the 430u at least ten times in the reddit ama, dodged the Leopard 1 questions without even acknowledging a person wrote the question that they promised us the fastest tank in the game and that it is routinely outpaced by other meds and heavies. Wheeled vehicles are “played by the best players” and theres no plan to adjust the stupid black hole wheels. No plans to balance or fix light tanks at tier 10.
This was a very frustrating ama.
Fix the mm done on player rating. Some games are so one sided as to make the game result certain before a shot is fired. You can have and certainly do have very low rates players facing Unicom ranked players in the current mm system. Doing it in player ratings means a much more level playing field and mean less players leaving the game due to frustration. I would certainly play more, but sometimes I can’t face the mismatch of ratings. If it was fir example 0 to 1000 rating, 1000 to 2000, 2000 to 3000 etc. Would solve so many issues and make the game much more playable for all exept maybe the stst padding seal clubbers
They said that the Cheiftain was “too OP to be added into the game”.
Meanwhile, they added a downright monstrous***y that is a Object 279, and the T95/Cheiftain that’s better than an actual Cheiftain in almost every way.
What the hell, WG?