Happy Monday everyone, will be streaming for the next hours.
Have tank request planned for today, have 175 Tanks from all tiers, types and nationalities.
http://www.twitch.tv/ritagamer2
Monday, 23 March 2015
Armored Warfare: Painful Birth of the BMP-2 -Part 2
The second part of SilentStalker's BMP-2 article is now available, even if you are not into Armored Warfare I do still recommend it as a good tank read: http://aw.my.com/us/news/general/painful-birth-bmp-2-part-2
23.03.2015 Q&A
Here it is:
- Somua SM (which was planned as a French premium vehicle) will not be introduced due to the fact that Wargaming didn't manage to obtain enough information on it from French sources;
- Overall, 9.7 Test 2 saw the FPS drop from test 1 fixed;
- Storm investigated the sizes of the Conqueror and E-100 models - they do not fit and by a LOT (what that means is one of the model or both definitely have the wrong size);
- According to Storm, the thinnest part of the HD IS-4 turret front has effective thickness of 285mm;
- Apparently frontal part sides of IS-4 in HD might not have the correct thickness, but Storm states it's a small thing and it won't be fixed;
- IS-4 in HD will get a collision model rework: the track licks attached to the sides of the frontal armor will become a part of the collision (24mm extra armor);
- Storm confirms: yes, the 9.7 test 2 removal of some vehicles from the ingame shop is intentional. Following vehicles will be removed from all sales: M10/Panther, FCM 36 Pak 40 and TOG II* (perhaps S35 739 (F) too) (RG: The "Frenchies" are worth getting).
- Somua SM (which was planned as a French premium vehicle) will not be introduced due to the fact that Wargaming didn't manage to obtain enough information on it from French sources;
- Overall, 9.7 Test 2 saw the FPS drop from test 1 fixed;
- Storm investigated the sizes of the Conqueror and E-100 models - they do not fit and by a LOT (what that means is one of the model or both definitely have the wrong size);
- According to Storm, the thinnest part of the HD IS-4 turret front has effective thickness of 285mm;
- Apparently frontal part sides of IS-4 in HD might not have the correct thickness, but Storm states it's a small thing and it won't be fixed;
- IS-4 in HD will get a collision model rework: the track licks attached to the sides of the frontal armor will become a part of the collision (24mm extra armor);
- Storm confirms: yes, the 9.7 test 2 removal of some vehicles from the ingame shop is intentional. Following vehicles will be removed from all sales: M10/Panther, FCM 36 Pak 40 and TOG II* (perhaps S35 739 (F) too) (RG: The "Frenchies" are worth getting).
RU Social Network Group Rejects Wargaming Ultimatum
Hello warriors,
this post is a followup on the recently published issue, where Wargaming threatens social network groups with bans, if they publish content from other games (specifically Armored Warfare).
The large group (145k subscribers) in question in the wake of this incident announced they would not submit to Wargaming pressure and that they will rename the group not to include the words "World of Tanks". Other such groups (with 770k subscribers total) have joined this effort, announcing that next step is on Wargaming.
As someone who can see the scars of no freedom of speech, that has many familiars that were alive and struggled during Portuguese dictatorship when they could not even talk their minds at their own table, including my great-grandmother who I had the pleasure to have near until her 90's and who had to raise 6 kids by herself because PIDE (International Police and State Defense) hunted down her husband for information, yeah, I do support this group decision at 100%.
I understand Wargaming is a company and has to protect their interests, I respect that, but this is not the way to do things.
Source.
this post is a followup on the recently published issue, where Wargaming threatens social network groups with bans, if they publish content from other games (specifically Armored Warfare).
The large group (145k subscribers) in question in the wake of this incident announced they would not submit to Wargaming pressure and that they will rename the group not to include the words "World of Tanks". Other such groups (with 770k subscribers total) have joined this effort, announcing that next step is on Wargaming.
As someone who can see the scars of no freedom of speech, that has many familiars that were alive and struggled during Portuguese dictatorship when they could not even talk their minds at their own table, including my great-grandmother who I had the pleasure to have near until her 90's and who had to raise 6 kids by herself because PIDE (International Police and State Defense) hunted down her husband for information, yeah, I do support this group decision at 100%.
I understand Wargaming is a company and has to protect their interests, I respect that, but this is not the way to do things.
Source.
Tanks in the Antarctic
This article is inspired by Yuri Pasholok's article on the same matter. When we say WW2 and Antarctic, many people will immediately start thinking about crazy theories about nazis secret bases under the ice, experimental weapons and whatnot. This is naturally a nonsense (hopefully), but the topic is not that far from the truth. Between 1939 and 1941, the Americans actually sent an armed expedition to the Antarctic, called United States Antarctic Service (also known as Third Byrd's Expedition). The unit was led by a former polar explorer, Admiral Richard Byrd, consisted of 59 men and some equipment, transported to the Antarctic by ships. It was an exploratory expedition, charting previously unknown coastlines for over two years. Now, that is all well and good but what makes it really interesting is this:
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)