Murazor Q&A


finished catching up on a Q&A from Murazor:

-Thanks to Ctacello.


-What about a Polish branch? – After seeing all the data about the Polish tanks we came to the conclusion that it’s unlikely it will come anytime soon.  (Problem is that there already exist Polish tanks in game and the devs want more “individual” tech trees instead)

-We there be HTs for the CZ tree? -”Can you tell me of at least one HT CZ from correct time frame?

-Anything you heard about the E15? -What kind of tank? Maybe you mean the German E-10 with varying suspension. First, we will launch the Swedish with that feature and if all goes well then we will think about adding those vehicles.

-Murazor says that the intermediate tanks of the German HT line (Tiger I and Tiger II) need some work done during global rebalance.

-Sandbox will continue this year.

-The Devs will think about a player’s idea of rewarding point by damage assist when a player hits and damages/breaks the engine of an enemy.

-Japanese and Chinese TD and SPGs are a current priority of the devs. (They have gathered enough information on the matter)

-Why not implement a function where players can charge different type of shells in one magazine? -It’s quite difficult in terms of implementation and some players may have problems with such function.

RG: Seems like a polite way to say, “we are too lazy and we think you are too dumb for this.”


-In Sandbox, the ”Stun” ability will be a unique SPG ability for the time being.

-Murazor finds the idea of an Autoloader gun with 14 shells in the magazine and 2 minutes reload time stupid because most players don’t shoot that much in a course of a battle.

-What about missiles like in AW and WT? -Do you really want more “arties”?

– WG won’t go back to the old format of buying premium shells with gold.

-”what have you done to the Skorpion G?”  -We corrected some stats which wouldn’t make it a shitty or over buffed tank.

-The fact that WG made Premium shell purchase less P2W is one of then reasons the global rebalance is taking place. Some tanks have been power crept since.

-IS-7 will be rebalanced but it’s something that the devs will do very careful because it’s a tank that can anger a lot of players.

-What are the most interesting features of the Swedish vehicles? -Well, for TDs is the suspension but for HT I got nothing to say.

Liked it? Take a second to support Rita Sobral on Patreon!
Murazor Q&A

55 thoughts on “Murazor Q&A

      1. Ares says:

        Abusemtex, Vladceltroll

        Well, now days, muslim cut you throat in you own country. They blow bombs in your citys, use cars to kill your own people. They don’t respect your own laws, cuz Muslim law is above yours…

        We had balls to face Hitler army in field, not sit in maginot line and thinks that we are safe. Or run like cowards from beach of dunkirk. Then we fight for Allies, so show some respect to those soldiers.

        If u had no idea why Polish people are mad at WG, go back in time 4 years. WG promise Polish Tanks, tankettes etc, all for polish players. For years they did nothing, that is reason why people are mad. Don’t make promise if you can’t keep it. Simple.

      2. heldermartins1 says:

        @Wolvenworks: Damn, almost forgot about those days… *facepalm

        @Ares: do u really believe talking about muslims is the best thing to do, here? Do u have anything agaisnt muslims? Or ur just another one of those klingons (yes, KLINGONS!!) who roam around in the game, doing things God ( 🙂 ) knows what, writing things that even God ( 🙂 ) doesnt understand…


      3. abusemtex says:

        Ares, you might never have heard about the running gag about polish cavalry attacking german tanks at the beginning of WW2. – LoL!
        All I can say to people like you is – may the siemka be stronk with you. Now go and have some witam and kto PL yourself. Thank you.

  1. malkowitch says:

    “-IS-7 will be rebalanced but it’s something that the devs will do very careful because it’s a tank that can anger a lot of players.”

    Another buff to a russian tank that is already overpowered. And don’t forget that IS-7 and IS-3 and T110E5 where one of the best ballanced tanks in the game (where).

    1. kingtrygon says:

      lol IS-7 OP? It is rated lower then quite a few heavy tanks these days and it is all down to the fact that it has arguably one of the worst tier X guns in the game.

      1. GrimmReaperBG says:

        IS-7 is OP. If it wasn’t played mostly by utter tomatos (like E100 ) stats of this tank would be quite different. It has THE BEST armor in the game because it’s a russian tenk and it’s covered with Stalinium. True that it has some shitty gun, but in that vehicle you basically press RRR and that’s the strategy in it…

    2. Vincent Lee says:

      Well, according to vbaddict, the top three highest winrates for Tier 10 heavy tanks are the Object 260, the VK 72.01, and the recently-buffed 113, at 59.99%, 56.99%, and 54.58%. Now the Object 260 and the VK 72.01 are both Clan Wars reward tanks, so it is most driven by someone who knows what they are doing. Kind of like an M60. Compared to other Tier 10 mediums, the M60 doesn’t exactly shine brightly. Yet, it is probably one of the most feared tanks on the battlefield, not because it is any good, but because the driver is probably very good.

      However, the 113 isn’t so exclusive, and like every Tier 10 tank, is available for those who can fail enough to get there.

      IS-7 has in fact the lowest win rate of all the tanks, and is the second mos popular Tier 10, between the T110E5 and the E 100 as the three most popular Tier 10 heavy tanks. The T110E5, over more games, achieves a 50.69% win rate, while the IS-7 only gets 48.68%. The E 100 gets a win rate of 51.14%.

      In reality, the IS-7 has been power-creeped to death. If you wanted a Tier 10 heavy tank with good armor and mobility, one only needs to look at the T110E5, the 113, and the FV 215b. They have slightly less armor, but much better mobility, gun handling, DPS, and armor penetration. The only reason why you would have an IS-7 is because you thought any Soviet heavy tank beyond the IS-3 was any good.

      1. Chinese line is pretty poor overall. And on top of that most of the best players are the ones playing that line.
        The very fact that the IS-7 is THE most common tier 10 heavy shows that more retards are playing it (unfortunately most of the wot community have this level of brain capacity). So of course stats are bad. A goI’d player in an IS-7 s unkillable. The tank is so ridiculously broken and OP. And the gun is not the worst. It is better than the Maus gun.

      2. heldermartins1 says:

        Like ur post. 😉

        Sidenote: testing the 113 in CT (my god, those russians will eventually give me some sort of fatal disease…) and it performs like a heavy medium, with nice gun handling and poor armor. Me like it.

      1. malkowitch says:

        Are you seriously that bad that you can’t make good results on IS-7? I am average player and I’m still capable of doing above 1.0 damage ratio.

    3. Wulfe says:

      IS-7 isn’t OP by any stretch of the imagination. It’s got terrible terrain resistances, gun handling, average pen for both standard and premium rounds, and armor that’s okay as long as the lower plate is covered

      1. malkowitch says:

        It has practicly inpenetrable turret, good upper plate, APCR as a gold with 300 penetration, great top speed and side skirts. Want to hear more? If you cant handle the IS-7 I have no idea what should you play. T1? M2 Light?

    4. malkowitch says:

      Kids, why don’t you distinguish vehicles that have high WR cause of being bad from those that are average but mostly good to excellent players are playing on them. IS-7 is the second most played tank on EU server. What it means is that bad players are lowering its WR. Same goes for T110E5. Just check the results of good/excellent players on this tank and it perfectly proves my point.

  2. wheeledtank says:

    -The Devs will think about a player’s idea of rewarding point by damage assist when a player hits and damages/breaks the engine of an enemy.

    That will be very nice (I’ll assume that, say X damages the engine and Y destroys it, the both get the “Assisted Damage” from people who shoot at the vehicle later). I would also like to see some sort of “shared damage” from Fuel Tank damage (much like the above, except the 2 people who damaged/destroyed the fuel would share the damage done)

    1. OrigamiChik3n says:

      I think current model of getting assist XP is more likely. What i mean is that you don’t get assist points for damaging tracks. Only if you destroy it. I imagine the same principle might be applied to engines. Even though damaged engine decreases mobility (i.e. makes you easier target) much more than damaged tracks. I guess we’ll see when it actually happens. If ever…

    2. Phentarus says:

      Well then, same should apply to ammorack dmg. It’s quite disappointing when you see someone ammoracking enemies, whose ammoracks you’ve just dmgd, for 1k+ dmg. You should get half of their experiences for that dmg 🙂
      Then xp for tanking, exp for xxx and suddenly we earn twice as much experience as a year ago. Then wg has to rebalance how much base exp we get or how much modules/tanks cost, how fast crews get trained, how much gold you have to pay to convert free exp and so on and so on.

  3. jetcannon says:

    “RG: Seems like a polite way to say, “we are too lazy and we think you are too dumb for this.””

    If you ask me, the latter is a valid concern! 😀

    1. sir_novicius says:

      As a professional computer developer I’d say the first might very well be as well. That part all boils down to how it’s implemented in the code and we can only guess.

    2. Phentarus says:

      Rita should know by now that the later applies to at least 90% of the player base…
      I dont find that answer sarcastic. As a soft dev I’d say exactly same thing in their position. It’s not worth to waste time on a feature that would be utilised by maybe 2-3% of the users at most.

  4. -IS-7 will be rebalanced but it’s something that the devs will do very careful because it’s a tank that can anger a lot of players.

    How do you wanna rebalance a tank that has near impenetrable armor from the front (hide the LFP and you’re unkillable) and rather strong side armor, but terrible gun and cam turn from “unkillable” to “dmg pinata” in just one bad move like too much angle or simple mistakes like that.

  5. septfox says:

    “-What about missiles like in AW and WT? -Do you really want more “arties”?”

    Yes, because there are clear parallels between
    a vehicle type whose primary mode of play is to sit at the back edge of the map and lob shells at unsuspecting targets every 30-60 seconds, over obstacles and not only without line-of-sight but usually out of draw range as well
    an ammunition that requires line-of-sight and constant “painting” of a target to successfully hit

    The dumb that comes out of WG employees’ fingertips sometimes is astounding. Yes, missiles would be a pain in the ass to balance in a game where APS doesn’t exist and most tanks don’t have passive protection, but just out and say so, don’t be all “hurr it’s arty do you want more arty didn’t think so”.

    1. Mel1337 says:

      Missiles dont really exist during WW2, i think?
      What i do think is used during W2 would be unguided rockets, with examples like the sturmtiger and various rocket artillery platform, i’m the most knowledgeable about this subject, but most vehicles armed with rocket at that time dont do direct fire i think

      1. septfox says:

        High penetration, high damage, but would probably be balanced by slow flight time, the need to keep constant visual contact with the target, and sit still while the missile makes its way over. Probably a camo penalty as well, what with it being a big ol’ missile and all.

        Personally I don’t see the appeal, and the Sheridan is the only one ingame I know of that fired ATGMs. Just don’t see that it should be dismissed out of hand because “it’s arty”.

      2. Mark Bevis says:

        Regarding missiles – no vehicle mounted ones in WW2, the Germans trialed the X-7 on the eastern front in 1945 from a trailer mount. Antitank guided missiles are really post 1950, and we wouldn’t see them in WoT for one simple reason. For nearly all ATGM, they have a minimum range where they cannot be used, as it takes a second or two for the missle to settle in with the sights. Most early missiles had a minimum range of 500m, later ones reduced this to c50m. Even these were difficult to use at typical oT ranges. As WG encourage unrealistic point-blank range fighting, missiles would be useless. If we could shoot 1000m or more, then yes, they would be a gaming option.

        In addition, as WG don’t have wheeled vehicles or towed guns, the number of fully tracked TDs and tank mounted missiles is even less until the 1960s. WHich is getting towards the end of WG’s nominal 1970 cut-off date.

        Regardless of the above, missiles have HEAT warheads with penetrations of 350mm+, so would in theory be heavy hitters. Okay, the one exception was the Malkara, which had an enormous 203mm diamater HESH warhead, even more effective than FV215B 183mm HESH – Would you really want to see that?

    2. “arty is OP because it can hit you when normal tanks wouldnt be able to and does crazy damages. But missiles that can follow you thus making you unable to avoid them even if you move in funny paths, while dealing HE level of damages with AP penetration level is totaly okay, WG you so dumb lulz !!!!!1!”

      It’s people like you who make balancing the game impossible because you claim some tanks are broken and want foxing but at the same time you ask for even more broken things.

      1. septfox says:

        Since you lack reading comprehension, let me help you.

        1: I don’t know if you’ve ever actually played WoT, but contrary to the tales that players will regale you with, people will rarely sit out on open, level ground long enough for your slow-ass missile to amble its way over and hit them. The exception would be if they’re tracked and/or their engine is blown, in which case they’ll be dead before your missile reaches them because everyone else’s shells will outrun the aforementioned slow-ass missile.
        And yes, it would be slow; while WG’s balancing department makes some bafflingly stupid decisions sometimes, they would most likely take a page from AW’s book and make missiles fly very slowly. They’d probably even go a step further and make them physical objects that can be shot down; a good, if silly, reason to enable firing ranging and hull machineguns. Point-blank missiles could be prevented by adding a minimum arming distance.

        2: I didn’t ask for anything, I merely pointed out that their reason given was idiotic. Personally I could care less if ATGMs were added to the game, because a lot of the time armor can be negated as it is by someone double-tapping their 2 key and focusing the big honking “shoot me” spots that the heaviest-armored vehicles tend to have.

    3. Phentarus says:

      You guys do realise that rockets from that era would work exactly like arty? Indirect fire over obstacles, having nothing in common with AW ATM’s.

  6. -Japanese and Chinese TD and SPGs are a current priority of the devs. (They have gathered enough information on the matter)

    This pleases me greatly, I really want to see what they have for the Japanese TDs… but at the same time I can’t help but feel that it would be easier to make a Swedish SPG line since there are already obvious choices for top tier: Artillerikanonvagn and the Bandkanon1

    1. IndygoEEI says:

      Well from the thread on NA forum that does research on Swedish tanks, it’s definitely doable. However< WG probably doesn't want to make that line available until the very latest possible or if it turns out the Arty Implementation after Sandbox is successful. WG is very much trying to delay the game when it comes to implementing arty. They've only implemented 3 new arty in the last 3 years and that was due to issues in US line.

      1. yer no I can understand that and I actually agree to them. But on the other hand they can still have the model of the arty ready to be implemented as soon as they have a solid and liked arty rework ready.

  7. Stefan says:

    “-what have you done to the Skorpion G? -We corrected some stats which wouldn’t make it a shitty or over buffed tank.”

    Nobody comments about this? They changed stats of a premium AFTER it was sold… Now you can never again be sure of what you buy. Because it will (certainty here!) be very good at first, so it sells very good. Afterwards it can go back to normal, cause balancing is important. Yeah right!

    1. wolvenworks says:

      who cares i still want one and i’m pissed for being too broke now to afford it. statwise except for its height it’s an improvement over borsig ya know

      1. They already indirectly nerfed it by removing most bushes in maps, reworking maps to suit heavy tanks more, and with the new physics it overturns a lot now after stopping to aim. Accuracy is somewhat all over the place (at least from my experience).

      2. heldermartins1 says:

        You, Sir, are not allowed to touch my E25. Your, sir, you are not allowed to even THINK about mentioning my E25. Are we clear??

    2. bbmoose says:

      What have they done to it? I didn’t noticed anything, except that I get in a lot more Tier X games. But that could be a coincidence in the MM.

      1. GrimmReaperBG says:

        It might be just my imagination, but I do own that vehicle from day 1. I use to drive it in 6 perks crew, with chocolate. The first 3 days with it I had over 80% hits. Now they are down to 69.5%. Also almost half of the fully aimed shots are going straight into the ground in front of the enemy…

    3. Konstantin says:

      NOTHING was nerfed you guys, its just a bad translation. The question was, what did he (Murazor) personally do to balance the Skorp. Since he is involved in balancing and is also the one, who initiated buffs for the 112 and lots of another premium vehicles in the future.
      The answer was: he just tweaked some stats of the tank, so it wouldn’t be OP or suck balls.

    4. Nocomment says:

      Super Pershing, Kanonenjgdpanzer and Fv4202p were all changed post release. Those were off the top of my head, there are probably others..

  8. Anonymous says:

    like what autoloading gun? there is AT-7 with its 10-round 57mm clip, and reloads in 10 seconds, and he comes up with a tank with 14-rounds and reloads in 2 minutes? probably Bandkanon-1 but I doubt it would come and have a 7-round clip…

  9. The_Right_Arm says:

    I’m glad the Tiger I and II are getting some love in the rebalance. They are just not that powerful despite what they were in real life. I don’t own either tank but the Tiger I is seriously underpowered for its tier even despite its dpm, and it gets easily shat on by equal and even some lower tier tanks. The Tiger II is a little better but beyond top tier its too easy to kill, I can easily spam through its upper plate with some of the 250+ pen guns that are everywhere in its current mm spread. I say we lose the VK 36.01 H, give the Tiger I its historical armament and drop it to tier 6, give the Tiger II its historical armament (tiger I’s current gun) and drop it to tier 7, and have the Tiger II 10.5 cm at tier 8 (same as current Tiger II, but with additional tracks spread on it to help prevent its ufp from getting screwed). Alternatively the tier 8 could also be a variant of the Lowe. Do that and I think the German heavy line would be a lot more respected outside the t9 and 10.

    1. I still pity whoever who can’t make use of the fact that current Tiger I is veeeery good. Monster DPM + good gun handling for HT is not an “only”. That broken HP pool is enough to offset the lack of armor, you just need to play it as anchor unlike the “drive forward and shoot” russians…

      If you want tier 6 Tiger, play Jap Tiger. It’s also pretty good, especially after pen buff for short 88.

Leave a Reply