Storm Q&A

Home > Ftr news > Storm Q&A

Hello everyone,

what follows are the answers from Storm’s stream he made earlier today. I didn’t link it (obviously, no point since he was speaking Russian). I gave up after a while and translated Maiorboltach’s summary instead, thanks Mario :)

– the reason the British were implemented in 9.5 is the fact that WG had the most good materials (sources, like drawings and such) for this branch
– with other nations (French, Japanese MT’s), there are big problems with data collection
– in WG concept, a branch without tier 10 doesn’t count as a branch, that’s why FV4005 was decided to be implemented
– it took long to decide whether to implement FV4005 or not
– in the end WG decided to make one of the tier 10 British TD vehicles heavily armored (FV215b) and one less armored (FV4005) to differentiate them
– FV4005 turret armor is historical, Stage 2 was implemented because Stage 1 had an autoloader and no turret
– the 9.5 branch is composed of only vehicles, that existed at least in prototype or even fought in the war

– no plans to prolong the Firefly branch from Firefly with more medium tanks for now (as an alternative to the TD’s)
– FV4202, FV215b switch is still planned – to Centurion Action X and Chieftain, they wanted to do it earlier, but much time was lost in communication with museums, much more than was planned (current ETA is first half of 2015)
– 2015 new branches – no specific info yet, but there will be several, there will also be more tank switches (lowtier US TD’s, as some TD’s were in real life arty (T18) and T57 arty was actually a TD)
– 9.5 minimap was based on XVM because various minimap mods were analysed and it was found out that tank names on minimap is the third most used mod from all the mods, it gives players some advantages, that’s why it was implemented (so players not using the mod have the same advantage as those who do)
– regarding implementing further mods (for example the viewrange circle on minimap), there are issues with performance. After the 9.0 failure (drops in performance), WG re-evaluated all its standards for performance requirements (when it comes to new feature release)
– Storm states that when it comes to various circles and such on minimap, it has to be made using vectors and vectors in Scaleform format cause lags and FPS drops. They tested these options, but it’s not viable for the entire playerbase use, because it “eats” FPS on very bad computers. It’s possible this will be reconsidered later on.
– regarding the XVM solution of minimap icons (multiple layers), Storms states that this eats a LOT of FPS on weak computers and that’s why it was not implemented. The price for making the game work for everybody is that WG cannot implement some functions they’d like to.
– there will be some additional fixes later on based on 0.9.5 feedback
– support of special color mode for people with weak sight is in the development queue
– future mods implemented to WoT will include better filters in hangar and crew operations functions (this is all from the mods planned for near future)
– Individual Missions will not be limited by time at all. Only from time to time, there will be a new set of missions (and a new vehicle) in addition to the old one. These new ones will come roughly each half a year.
– it’s possible the IM’s will be changed based on player statistics, if Wargaming finds out they are too difficult and such
– developers decided to remove the IM’s that would mess up the gameplay for other players, many missions (several dozen) will also be reviewed (and reworked)
– the developers do like the Object 260, everybody likes it
– many players reported FPS increase in 9.5, this is due to the optimizations made in the patch. Storm states that constant low FPS (like 30) is much more comfortable to play with than various FPS drops (even from much higher FPS). Statistics, collected on player computers by Wargaming indicate FPS increas in 9.5 as well and the optimization doesn’t stop there, more is in progress
– WG is working on render overhaul (DirectX 11 and multicore support)
– in one of the future patches, World of Tanks will transfer to newer Bigworld version, this will be practically unnoticeable to players (the changes are internal)
– it’s possible that the new TB map Lost City will appear in random battles as well. It wasn’t made straight away because the setting doesn’t correspond to WW2, but it’s possible this decision will be revisited. The map is based on abandoned military towns in Kazakhstan.
– developers decided to stop working on making the maps more “atmospheric” – in this stage, Ruinberg overhaul is the last one
– currently, developers are working on one historical maps (coast of France, Summer 1944)
– Severogorsk was removed from the game for good. Previous rework of the map proved to be insufficient and a complete overhaul, that would be required, would practially equal creating a new map.
– when it comes to maps, Wargaming is now focusing on removing bad maps and improving the other maps and bugs on them. There is already a list of maps to be removed, the speed will be roughly one map per patch.
– work on HD models continues. Developers will start implement several dozen HD models per patch, but this number has to be limited with the size of the patch in mind, Storm doesn’t want huge 40-50GB patches
– it was considered to allow players to select their hangar within the game, but this increases the size of the client and there is also a considerable amount of work keeping all the hangars up to date, specifially when it comes to global graphics and game settings changes
– the “Winter standoff” mode will be introduced after (Russian) holidays
– the “Confrontation” mode (AKA “national battles”) is still being discussed. It all depends on the new MM, which is being developed (this requires a lot of time). Currently, Wargaming is working on “Matchmaker 3.0″ – an entirely new concept. It’s a very complicated task, concerning all the modes, a lot of work to do.
– currently, WG is focusing on new modes, a lot of work is being done on PvE mode
– developers are working on new motion physics as well. The biggest issue is not to screw up the gameplay. Most likely for regular players it will look “the way it is now” (even though the motion system gets a complete overhaul), only with physics bug fixes, removing various temporary measures and with some new features (handbrake, it will be possible to do a “U-turn”)
– new render range is in work, instead of a 1000 meter rectangle, there will be a circle with 565 meter radius. The 1000 meter rectangle is an old Bigworld workaround to be fixed
– developers are also working on fixing the “tanks disappear in the middle of empty field” spotting issue. Currently, following mechanism is used: a tank is driving on the field, it has camo X, it stops, camo X drops to Y, it disappears. The mechanism that is proposed is that when a tank enters the field and is in direct (unobstructed) field of view and stops (or shoots), it will have no camo coefficient at all (eg. can’t disappear)
– developers are working on fixing the “shooting bush” issue as well. The mechanism, that is currently planned is that when shooting, an additional spotting point will be generated at the end of the barrel. If the gun sticks out of the bush, the tank will be spotted. There will be no “helping mechanism” to indicate this, the player will have to rely on his own eyes.
– developers are working on optimization of the visibility algorithms, as they are the most processing-heavy part of the serverside of the game. This will not influence the visibility parameters, but the current system is that the closer the tank is to you, the faster the spotting checks are. In the future, all the distances will have the frequency of the spotting checks unified. This will remove the situations that tanks can pass a road where you would normally see them within the “tick” time of your spotting checks and you won’t notice them.
– another thing that is being worked on is the increase of role of armor in the game. There is no consensus on this issue yet, but it will come soon. This issue concerns mostly only high tiers. The current solution WG is working with is a penetration nerf for guns with too high penetration
– accuracy will be changed again, specifically the shot distribution within the aim circle. This does NOT mean nerfing the accuracy to the old standard, it means more like “calibration” to separate accurate guns from inaccurate guns, so you don’t get accurate snapshots when moving by a KV-2
– the special female crew perk (“sisters in arms”) will not be transferrable to a regular crew, it’s a special perk made to make the girl crews popular
– the perk overhaul is in progress, documents are ready by now, all that’s left is to implement the agreed changes. As announced earlier, the “lightbulb” (sixth sense) will be a base skill for the radioman. It will be activated when the skill reaches 100 percent. When a radioman is missing, the crewman who fulfills radioman’s role will have it instead.
– in one of the upcoming patches, you will be able to retrain your crewmembers to different role (radioman to driver for example)
– one of the upcoming patches will also bring bonus for “tanking” (for blocking shells with your armor)
– of all tier 10 MT’s, T-62A is the best in blocking shells with its armor
– ISU-130 will be given only to moderators
– training room interface will be completely reworked soon
– Havok is ready, but it has one big issue – it drops FPS a lot when the engine is active on too many objects (SS: as in, with too many destroyed buildings for example). Developers are working on it. To implement it only on some maps would be bad, developers want to implement it as complete

Source link.

Опубликовал Feldfebel Glinka Comments Off on Storm Q&A

Нет комментариев.