Update: Pearl River changes and new Screenshots (Minimap Gifs)


Pearl River, a map that many enjoyed but was removed because according to Wargaming it was  “too linear and maze-y” is making its comeback.

I created this gift with the Old and New minimap screenshots for you to compare more easily what they changed:


• The flanks for the medium tanks were reworked as they were, as said above, too linear and maze-y. That was one of the main points for criticism.
• A safe passage has been added for the team starting from the lower base. Now it roughly corresponds to the upper base passage. Before, there were two approaches from the upper base, but only one from the lower base.


These are the official screenshots given by WG on the Pearl River map:


What do you think? I personally can only think of why Pearl River was removed but then maps like Mines was allowed years on end as an “acceptable” High Tier fighting stage.

Update: Pearl River changes and new Screenshots (Minimap Gifs)

Tech Tree Changes and Collector’s Vehicles


this is the official text given to Community Contributors on that the title says:

“Hey, tankers!

As you might remember, after the updated balance underwent a thorough Sandbox testing, it was decided to move forward with two newly introduced changes. And this iteration of Supertest will be dealing with the one involving Tech Trees.

Yes, we keep in mind that it’s the vehicles of Tiers VI-X and their transfer from tech trees to the Collectors’ category that interest you in the first place. The decisions are yet to be made here, and as soon as we are done, we’ll share the information with you. One thing is beyond doubt: all these machines will be available for purchase for credits. As for this Supertest, it’s dedicated to low-tier vehicles only.

According to this change, a number of vehicles will fall into the Collectors’ category meaning to drive them into your Hangar you don’t have to spend a point of your XP. Some vehicles will be moved to other tiers or even get assigned to other classes. Also, some brand-new tanks will enter the game for the first time! All this shuffling is to secure a more consistent progression through tech trees. The detailed list of all new vehicles and those subject to changes can be seen below.

It’s worthy to note that the test focus is narrowed to alterations related to vehicles themselves at this point, with tech trees and status changes put on the back burner. As for how these class/tier changes will be brought to life, the possible solutions are under consideration and once decisions are made, they will be shared with players.

Vehicles to be moved to other tiers (12 in total):

Cruiser Mk. I — from Tier II to Tier I
Cruiser Mk. II — from Tier III to Tier II
Cruiser Mk. III — from Tier II to Tier III
Cruiser Mk. IV — from Tier III to Tier IV
Valentine — from Tier IV to Tier III
Valentine AT — from Tier III to Tier IV
Crusader — from Tier V to Tier VI
Covenanter — from Tier IV to Tier V
BT-7 — from Tier III to Tier IV
KV-1S — from Tier V to Tier VI
А-20 — from Tier IV to Tier V
SU-76 — from Tier III to Tier IV

Vehicles to be assigned to other classes (5 in total):

Crusader (a medium to become a light tank)
T54E1 (a medium to become a heavy tank)
VK 30.01 (H) (a heavy to become a medium tank)
VK 30.01 (P) (a medium to become a heavy tank)
Type 97 Chi-Ha (a medium to become a light tank)

Vehicles to be added to the game (3 in total):

BT-5 — Tier III Soviet light tank. Gameplay-wise it shares a lot with the BT-2 that’s been long on the game’s vehicle roster.
T6 Medium — a Tier IV American medium. To keep it simple, it’s the famous Sherman and it plays accordingly.
Cavalier — a Tier V British medium bearing strong resemblance to the far-famed Cromwell.
It goes without saying that all the vehicles mentioned will be balanced, and for this purpose they will enroll into Supertest. Please keep in mind that none of the changes are set in stone and the stats may be subject to further tweaks.”

Tech Tree Changes and Collector’s Vehicles

Official screenshots: Cavalier, T6 Medium and BT-5


here is the WG’s official given screenshots for…


T6 Medium


Official screenshots: Cavalier, T6 Medium and BT-5

Cavalier: Why is it so hard to receive concise, constructive criticism WG’s WoT?

Cavalier: How difficult it is for Wargaming to Follow blueprints?

Cavalier: WG’s employee attempted stealth in Status Report


Greywind, also known as Sergey Chmeluk, Wargaming’s Head of Military History for World of Tanks also left another comment on my Cavalier article:


Edit: I missed this comment at first as it went straight into “For moderation” I believe because of language reasons, I noticed it today, a day later while fixing another reader inability to comment on the blog, usual WordPress automated sec. system being overly zealous.

Which pretty much roughly translates to “The author of the article is an amateur. A bunch of factual and real errors in the text.”

So what errors are these Sergey Chmeluk? Can you back up your claims?

Please give us the factual proof of:

  1. A Cavalier with a Vanguard Turret;

  2. A Cavalier with Cromwell track adjusting tool;

  3. A Cavalier with those bulges over the driver’s periscopes;

  4. A Cavalier with a serial number that doesn’t range between T129620 – 130119.


I will eagerly wait!

It is interesting that if was Sergey Chmeluk’s first interest was to fix the WG’s Cavalier model he could have politely, professionally and easily not just emailed me but lets also not forget that I am a WoT and even WoWs Community Contributor and the options to reach me are endless, instead this guy not only tries to discredit me who got this information from factual sturdy sources but also goes on a witchhunt implying someone leaked me information they shouldn’t.


And then Nicholas Moran aka The Chieftain, that had absolutely no need to insert himself in this subject dares say to us that Sergey Chmeluk wasn’t being malicious:


In these screenshots, not only Nicholas attempts to pull wool over people’s eyes like even himself doesn’t know how things work in the company with some very poor arguments but we once more see Wargaming taking the usual route of blaming one “persons direct personality” or “Oh well those Russians be Russians!” type of standard response as an excuse for employees bad conducts.

Very recently Wargaming EU issued a long statement pretty much inviting Community Contributors out of the program for some of the “colourful” ways they were addressing Developers on Discord which quite honestly is something that I very much agree with, ever since I started Status Report back in 2015 I have been advocating that if people want to “throw potatoes” like old Storm (WoT’s old Developer for those who don’t remember) used to say to at least be constructive about it but there was nothing in that statement about Wargaming promising to deal or even discuss how some employees have been treating us. 

An excuse that has long ago gotten old.

 I typed on the last article and I type it now, Viktor Kislyi, this needs to change! 

And to speak quite frankly, I am also known to be quite direct, I personally even welcome and love when someone else is direct, but this was more than just being direct, this was sneaky, malicious and an attempt at underhanding. 


And to you, dear reader, what other British vehicles would you like me to investigate next?  As I very much doubt Sergey will ever give us any proof to corroborate his attempt at discrediting me and my sources, he will probably file the excuse that “its NDA” or private company’s data like it is not available publicly, that’s what they usually do anyways.

By the way, all the information I used on the Cavalier not only can be easily found publicly but part of it was also from a Cavalier owner itself who is very well respected in the Armoured Vehicle community for its knowledge in Tanks, I would be very careful to discredit these people, Sergey.

Have a good day and again my email which you have not yet used if you are actually interested in fixing your tank is ritastatusreport@gmail.com !


Cavalier: Why is it so hard to receive concise, constructive criticism WG’s WoT?

Cavalier: WG’s employee attempted stealth in Status Report

Cavalier: How difficult it is for Wargaming to Follow blueprints?


After half a decade of running Status Report I have become quite experienced at noticing comments that are out of the norm of the usual ones that I get and I also particularly pay attention to those who are regular viewers, so when someone like this,


who I never saw before and who suddenly comes asking for unusual questions it always tickles my curiosity.

Mind, I have also had a long history of other blogs and even gaming companies prying and even harassing for private information out of me so ofc, one cannot be too zealous so I may occasionally verify comment’s IP (which only I have access to) and low and behold it is Wargaming Minsk!

If Greywind so likes to see confirmations on my articles so here it is, (I obviously hid most of the IP for legal reasons but showing you enough so that you can CONFIRM);


As you can see the GreyWind commented from Belarus, Minsk:


I wonder who else is in Belarus, Minsk, oh yes, that multimillion Ruble company we have heard of!



So why does this bother me?

To add context to this article, GreyWind was answering to this one comment from my Status Report Co-author Jerry:


Jerry’s comment comes from an inside joke that “this very renowned historian from Bovington” has been giving me all tank info.

Greywind, rather than contacting me at ritastatusreport@gmail.com which is plastered very much on the top right sidebar of Status Report page, in case if anyone needs it, he chose instead to go through my Co-author to try and find information which is very devious and sneaky.

I typed this before and I type now, if Wargaming or any Wargaming employee ever need something or want to offer any feedback they should do so properly by the means stated above instead of sneaking around my page.

And to Viktor Kislyi himself, this sort of behaviour from a lot of employees (a lot because there has been more to it) is not professional and something that needs to be investigated and fixed.

All the information on the discrepancies between WG’s Cavalier model and the actual tank is easily available online and I also know plenty of people in the field whether historians, museums, private owners and in this case even a Cavalier owner which very kindly provided me with the measurements of what Wargaming got wrong!

So rather than trying to shut people off from making the community concisely aware of your “own interpretation of history” maybe we could work together and get things right!

And before I finish the article, I actually bothered to ask all of my insiders if they recognised the nickname “Greywind” and turns out he is Sergey Chmeluk:


Who as you can clearly see, is not just a zealous WoT’s Moderator but the Head of Military History himself.


And Sergey Chmeluk to answer your question, that famous Tank Historian who Jerry spoke of? Say hello to Bill Bovington who has decades of experience in the field and also helps run the arena show at Tankfest every year!

This slideshow requires JavaScript.


You can tell by his grabby hands we are rather acquainted and how I got all this historical information that Wargaming got wrong from! 😂😜

You know where to find my email and have a nice day!

Cavalier: WG’s employee attempted stealth in Status Report

Cavalier: How difficult it is for Wargaming to follow basic blueprints?


like the article title says, Wargaming seems to be incapable of following simple blueprints, plans, sketches, paintshop drawings, you name it, nothing new, if you remember they even initially built the wrong Chieftain years ago but you would think they would have improved after all these years but they clearly have not which can be seen on the Cavalier which has been recently introduced in the Sandbox server.

Almost every time they push out a new model they seem to interpret data differently  (mess something up) so my team of experts, that shall not be named, and I will from now on investigate every model added and we could also investigate old models, which ones do you think need a look into?

Cavalier’s Full statistics and screenshots. 

At first glance when you look at the screenshots leaked the immediate thing that stands out is the turret:

The turret displayed in-game was a Vauxhall experimental turret tested on a Cromwell hull, it is not a Churchill turret as it looks very similar to an in-game one and like some players speculating but clearly took some influence from that as they were made by the same company. This turret was never used on the Cavalier. The model is also marginally too tall and narrow giving it an odd look. While its hard to say exactly the consensus, WG’s turret model is roughly 3 inches too tall and too narrow.


The same thing for the track tension spanner, it does not belong at all on the Cavalier but instead to a Cromwell.

The bulges bellow the driver’s periscope also do not belong on the Cavalier and this is totally a WG’s “invention” for this vehicle, as can be compared in these two images, the real Cavalier did not have protruding mounds.


Furthermore, if photo evidence of the Cavalier is not enough, measurements were taken from a real Cavalier tank and the headlights are also not quite right as they need to be roughly 3inches closer to the centre.

And to finalise, the serial number showing on the hull is also incorrect for the Cavalier series as they should range between T129620 – 130119 to be historically accurate.

This is not their most offending vehicle and is considered by some to be just good enough to be acceptable but there are some far worse tanks in this game which we will be browsing upon.

Cavalier: How difficult it is for Wargaming to follow basic blueprints?




Here’s a video from the latest Militracks where I was given the opportunity to ride in an amazing and super rare WW1 Renault FTS “tank” from The Weald Foundation.

For those attending Militracks I am excited to tell you that I will be there for this year’s show, it is going to be amazing! 😀 Hope to see you there!