Sandbox Return


The WoT Sandbox servers are now back as promised and this is what you can expect:

Besides creating a better gameplay to slow armoured vehicles they…

  • Revised shot distribution within the aiming circle
  • Tweaked penetration loss over distance mechanic
  • Reduced excessively high alpha damage of high-caliber guns
  • Balanced the underpowered 120 mm guns by increasing their alpha damage

There will be 2 phases:

  • Phase 1: Armor penetration and accuracy mechanics; normalising damage values of overpowered and underpowered guns
  • Phase 2: All-round work on artillery


Let’s get it into detail…

ACCURACY SYSTEM: Revised shot distribution within the aiming circle

“The reworked system makes hitting weak spots at range more difficult for guns with bad dispersion (0.4 and up), while aim time, armor, and gun stabilization become more important.

With fewer shots clustered around the center of the aiming circle, the number of “unbelievable” shots (hitting weak spots without taking full aim, or on the move or at great distances) is reduced. This also increases the overall survivability of well-armored vehicles (and their ability to bounce rounds):

  • Faster-aiming vehicles with decent dispersion cement their role as effective long and mid-range warfare masters
  • For less accurate guns, or when firing with high dispersion, the chances of successfully “snap-shotting” a target at long range decreases

The aim of this change is to balance tanks with either high alpha or high DPM.

Today, tanks that rely on DPM (standing and shooting) have a disadvantage. They have to stay at the line of fire and expect to get shot at in return. But this isn’t as frequent with high alpha damage vehicles. They can get out of cover, quickly aim, fire, then return to cover relatively risk-free.

We’re trying to make these types of tanks equally viable—compared to now, where a battle with alpha strikers doesn’t feature much action, and a battle with DPM dealers is chaotic and mostly unpredictable.”

DAMAGE SCALING : Revised Alpha Damage

“Currently, vehicles with very high alpha damage (the JagdPz. E 100, FV 4005, or FV 215b (183)) foster artillery-like gameplay and outperform other vehicles in their tier, thanks to downright devastating alpha damage. It won’t make your winrate increase, even if you’re shooting Gold rounds, but it’s enough to obliterate the target and hurl an unsuspecting player back to their Garage. However, long reload times also leave these tanks defenseless for an uncomfortably long time if you miss.

At the same time, the T57 Heavy, T110E5, AMX 50 B, Kranvagn and others with a 120 mm gun deal 400 alpha damage. Just compare it to 440 of 122 mm guns: the 2 mm difference in caliber results in a 10% reduction in damage.

To better balance these two groups of vehicles, we are:

  • Reducing high-caliber gun damage per shot, while also improving their reloading time
  • Scaling 120 mm gun damage to the damage rating of 122 mm guns; the reload time on all affected tanks was increased to keep their DPM intact

These are two delicate issues, and the changes we are making are just one out of a few ways to set the things right without replacing tanks or totally rebuilding them. They look good on paper, now only you can help us check if they really work.”

Tank Changes:

T57 Heavy

  • AP and HEAT shell damage increased from 400 to 440.
  • Magazine reload time increased from 25 to 28 seconds.


  • AP and HEAT shell damage increased from 400 to 440.
  • Gun reaload time increased from 10 to 11 seconds.


  • AP and APCR shell damage increased from 400 to 440.
  • Gun reload time increased from 8.7 to 9.4 seconds.

AMX 50 B

  • AP and APCR shell damage increased from 400 to 440.
  • Magazine reload time increased from 30 to 33 seconds.


  • AP and HEAT shell damage increased from 400 to 440.
  • Magazine reload time increased from 35 to 39 seconds.

PENETRATION MECHANICS: Penetration Loss Begins at 50 meters

“Penetration values of AP and APCR shells begin decreasing at 50 m (instead of 100 m), and they lose 18% and 23% of their initial values at 500 m.Changes to the way these rounds lose their pen power at range can facilitate action-packed, close-range engagements and make armor thickness more relevant.

It will be difficult to soften up targets at range—you’ll no longer have the penetration needed to get the job done. This then forces you to get up close and trade punches. Solid armor paired with smart angling to increase your relative armor thickness, will leave you undamaged while your opponent smolders.

We tested similar mechanics during the first Sandbox iteration, but that was a much higher penetration loss over distance, as well as other changes that diluted the experience. Now we’re trying a more focused test with different values.

A lower penetration loss over distance means a less pronounced impact on the battlefield, but we think we found a good balance. The revised mechanic will encourage heavies to shorten the combat distance while still not allowing them to behave recklessly.

Yet with all our internal tests and models, we can’t reliably answer the most important question: “Is it fun for our audience?” Therefore, we’re asking you to help us.”


That’s all for now folks, we will keep you updated!

Liked it? Take a second to support Rita Sobral on Patreon!
Sandbox Return

169 thoughts on “Sandbox Return

    1. Anonymous says:

      Ideally the accuracy and penetration nerf will counter this and autoloaders will miss/bounce enough shells to counter this small boost.

    2. Ideally the nerf to accuracy and shell penetration will take a bigger toll on autoloaders as they must fully aim between shots or risk wasting their shots. This is why autoloaders generally have worse accuracy stats than single shot tanks. A lot of people are getting up in arms about the sandbox because they cannot see the big picture since wargaming is trying to cram too many changes into one stage of the sandbox.

      1. actually I’m part of the sandbox server and the changes aren’t great. while the nerf to accuracy and shell pen at range would take a toll on autoloaders, it takes an even bigger toll on MTs and even more so on TDs (RIP Strv 103b).

        You have tanks that require penetration over range to snipe targets or the accuracy to snap shot because you can’t risks taying still.

        The whole point of the first iteration is to improve the playability of slow moving, heavily armored tanks… but the biggest issue for them is premium ammo.

        Premium ammo is where WG need to start looking at for changes to improve the value of armor

      2. I have yet to play the sandbox at the moment but I did say what wargaming’s ideals/goals probably were rather than what they’ve actually done. Since MT’s quite often rely on their abillity to fire on the move, this is indeed a nerf to one of the strongest tank classes in world of tanks at the moment so the focus on armor returns and heavy tanks become a more realistic threat. As for TD’s like the STRV’s they probably needed a nerf because they could easily double track a tank and there was no way to escape.

        The idea behind most mediums was not to snipe but normally to flank their targets. There is exception to this but I do recommend using your wasd keys as the risk of staying still has decreased since enemy tanks will struggle more to hit you. The universal nerf to accuracy and penetration does not only affect your tank.

        Premium ammunition is indeed a major problem, I am surprised that there was not a bigger emphasis to rebalance it during the new year but the first sandbox iteration should indeed make the broken premium shell mechanic more evident. Otherwise, more people should miss their premium shells at range so I wouldn’t be too hasty to dab that 2 key unless you could guarentee a shot.

  1. Otakuwarrior says:

    So the shell dispersion in the aiming reticle will go back to what it was years ago, before the big accuracy/ dispersion algorithm change?

    1. Enigmaticmuffin says:

      they never actually fixed that IIRC, so accuracy was much sharper years ago, they nerfed it back in 9.0 or some other patch and now they’re nerfing it again, I think. Correct me if I’m wrong

    2. What EnigmaticMuffin is saying is mostly true. These are some new aiming mechanics, a blend between shots being evenly distributed between the entire circle evenly and shells being closely clustered to the center of the aiming circle. There were buffs and nerfs to accuracy of various tank classes over the years. But tanks in general are more accurate than they were at the creation of the first three nations of tanks with exception to artillery which is still pretty random no matter how you look at it.

  2. Anonymous says:

    The idiots at wargaming are determined to screw their golden goose by making the game more frustrating for everyone except the dumbest of players.

    1. You do know that most of the players in WoT are people who don’t have a clue about game mechanics, rarely look at the minimap, and don’t go beyond “I lik tankz and cheeze”? WG aren’t shooting their “golden goose”, because for every good / stat oriented player, two or more ‘casual” players come in.

    2. it is too early to say if these changes are good or bad which is why a sandbox was created to experiment with these new mechanics before any kind of test server or in-game implementation. For the most part, these changes are well intentioned and are probably part of wargaming’s new year plan to make major rebalances. They certainly do not help players who like snipping with inaccurrate tanks and there is more of a focus on brawling so as to discourage camping unless your tank was designed for it.

  3. “With fewer shots clustered around the center of the aiming circle, the number of “unbelievable” shots (hitting weak spots without taking full aim, or on the move or at great distances) is reduced.”

    It also massively increased the RNG factor in possibly one of the worst areas in the game imaginable…

    1. Fraggy says:

      Distance shots will get greater RNG, larger caliber guns will gain damage potential, corridor maps and close up brawling appears to be being pushed as the method of dealing damage. Highly sloped thinner armour becomes less effective. Strikes me they are changing WoT into and arena style game, more suitable for mass audiences. The battle tiers and match making are the biggest gripes of the majority of players yet WG see fit to tweak everything else first, its disappointing.

      I’ve grinded 26 lines of tanks up to tier 7 or 8 now, so from my point of view (15,000 games) making the individual tanks effective would draw more people into playing up the lines of the more difficult to win in tanks. The current corridor map designs and their relatively small size have a big part in this.

      The perception is that WG are going in a MoBA direction, that perception if it grows will kill WoT.

    2. What Fraggy is saying is true with questionable remarks to a MoBA direction because there is no such thing as a bad game mechanic, it is really down to a matter of implementation. Most developers don’t understand what a MoBA is before implementing it and do a flat copy which does hurt their game. That is besides the point.

      Shade01982, RNG has certainly increased but RNG is not necessarily a bad thing. I like referencing RNG to physical sports like soccer/football where there is RNG in gusts of wind and precision in kicks. That said, RNG is really only visible at long distances where these factors really grow because of the distance of travel. To put this in perspective, wargaming is trying to decrease the number of times a player will score a miracle goal from across the entirety of a field and encourage players to have more exciting runs toward the goal and securring victory. Strategic players will enjoy world of tanks in particular now that there is less of a focus on tactical skill and coordination. Thus I can understand why you are upset if you value reflexes over strategy but world of tanks should be able to reach a wider audience as a thinking man’s game.

      1. Oh, on that I agree. RNG isn’t necessarily a bad thing in general, but the question is, is it the right way to fix this issue. Right now, in my opinion, they are only increasing player frustration by increasing the number of misses even on perfectly aimed shots. A better solution would be to implement an algorithm which increases the RNG factor in a linear link to the tank’s speed and aiming circle, instead of a flat dispersion factor. So, if a tank is standing perfectly still and is perfectly aimed with minimal aim circle, the RNG factor should also be minimal. But a tank moving at full speed would endure max RNG. That way you somewhat fix both issues.

  4. just stupid with the accuracy nerfs have do they expect the td’s that rely on range because they have poor armor to hit heir targets? overall it is a big nerf to sniper tanks only thing good about it is the artillery rework

    1. TD’s at tier X generally have 300mm of penetration and an absurd premium ammunition penetration. On top of this, they are still the most accurate tank class many of them have .3 accuracy so they can still brute force their way through many of their targets. The role of TD’s is not being replaced or removed, you simply cannot pennetrate the face of an E100 or Maus at 500 meters reliably anymore and you will waste ammunition if you camp at the back. Still, theow enough shit at the wall at a wall and some of it will stick so it’s not impossible to sit at the back still if you’re into that. TD’s like the T110E4, JgPz E100, Foch 155, and T110E3 have recieved a substantial armor buff and can risk playing more upfront now. Even tanks like the STRV 103B will find fewer tanks snipping its commander hatch so this isn’t much of a nerf to the role unless you like masturbating to anime at the back of the map. Maybe a nerf to the Grille 15 but that tank is stupidly fast and flexible and needed a nerf.

  5. andrebellons says:

    That new dispersion system is stupid… it’s way better to get shot once in a while by a moving KV2 than missing well aimed shots cause of idiot dispersion mechanics… I’d rather laugh sometimes when i get hit by amazing snapshots than keep swearing for aimed shots going off target!

    1. I don’t really understand your logic. Yes it is more frusterating to not penetrate as many of your shots at long range as you might be used to but at the same time it is more satisfying to bounce more shots than you’re used to. This extends to armored tanks in any class, E50 and M48 will have their weak points snipped less, Jgpz E100 and T110E4 armor will actually mean something, etc. I recommend you stop driving tanks like the Grille to enjoy the armor buff rather than sulk in the loss of red line camping.

      1. “E50 and M48 will have their weak points snipped less” — how is that remotely skillful, when you hit their weakpoints by PURE RNG and not knowledge? Sit down.

      2. You must have a poor understanding of what pure RNG means. Perhaps you should read a dictionary but last I checked, shots still deviated around the center of your screen where your aiming reticle is. That is not pure RNG, not even sitting at a slot machine is pure RNG because they rig the system so a controlled number of slots still win. If you don’t know how to aim, there really isn’t much that anyone can do to help you out. Maybe go play the tutorial again, watch some guides, or look at websites like to help you better understand what you’re up against. It takes a lot of experience to make your way to tier X, ideally, you should have learned a thing or two on the way up rather than auto aiming everything you see.

  6. Rocketeer Rockstar says:

    This Changes show just 1 thing: Make Russia great again!
    How the fkin Hell should other Meds than Russian be Played when they do this changes?
    Im long time 100% sure, nobody of the WG concern has ever played this game. 100% sure.

    1. Well, you could sidescrape in the E50 with fewer people blitzing through your turret, the tumors on the M48, STB-1, and AMX 30B will get snipped less, low armored auto loaders like the Czechs and batchat won’t be so dominant. I do feel sorry for the Leopard but that tank has been poorly balanced for a long time. Otherwise, your sarcasm was fun humor haha.

  7. cobra_508th says:

    The only problem in World of Tanks is that Heavies and Mediums have the same view range as Light tanks. Fix that and you fix the game. Let lights have around 420 base view range, mediums and TDs up to 380 and heavies no more than 350.

    1. Lights are already planned to get a view range buff when they lose their +3 mm as well as some other debatable rebalances. I recommend you keep more up to date with news on rita’s blog but hopefully this helps answer your comment. Happy tanking 🙂

      1. cobra_508th says:

        Yeah a tier 9 light tank will have 420 view range while the Patton has 410 at tier 9 and 420 at tier 10. This is what I was referring to.

      2. Hmm I can see that, keep in mind light tanks have better camoflauge than a Patton so although a patton has equalish view range for spotting enemies that are firing their guns, a scout can out spot a Patton by upwards to 100 meters using its camoflauge alone. Now that you’ve got me thinking about it, a small general nerf to view range probably wouldn’t be a bad idea, scouts do need the extra edge. Hopefully we don’t jump the gun and over buff light tanks is really what I’m worried about (granted probably not that big of a concern).

  8. Uuuhhh says:

    WG can never just do what the players ask for. We want better match making. Why can’t they get this through their thick skulls? It’s the 3+ arty battles or the 8 heavies on a team against 8 TD’s or the same three maps in a multi hour gamig session that need to be fixed. They’re going about it all wrong. I don’t think I’ve seen a single concept from the sandbox that I think will improve the game play experience. I’ve played games where they’ve done major changes like this, and it made me quit the game. I don’t understand why they’re taking one of the most popular online games out there and trying to change its formula. It’s already a winner, they just need to fix the broken MM.

    1. You must have been fed from a silver spoon and now think world of tanks is your game and not wargaming’s baby. Arty will be rebalanced in the second iterration of the test and wargaming promised they had plans to fix mm. It really is down to your own opinion whether they are allowed to test things on a sandbox or not but any information they gather is helpful. Note: this is not a test server. These changes are simply to gather data and feedback. It’s not a god damn test server haha.

  9. Pangzhu says:

    there is not a single thing about these ideas that i do not find appalling.

    – More RNG due to the new dispersion
    – weaker penetration at distance (tanks that have to rely on distance because they have no armor will suffer)

    Just as with the last iteration of the sandbox… they are trying to shove stupid changes down over throughts. they are not trying to find out what the players want and what works, but only how they have to tweak the changes they have planned all along.

    1. Your forgot to mention heavy tank armor will actually matter and redline camping is no longer profitable. Why aren’t you guys celebrating that spamming heat at the back of the map is no longer profitable? Scouting is even better because fewer people can bs snap shot you.

      1. I did not realize they had removed the guns off of ever tank in the game. Jk. It will take more time to rack up assistance damage but if you are properly scouting for your allies and not just yourself, people will hit and pen the enemy. Your allies don’t have to camp in the back so much because of the accuracy changes because they will take less damage in return. In the sandbox, you should not be able to fight at extreme ranges as you might be accustommed to in the live server without bleeding out your wallet.

  10. Anonymous says:

    why reduce there alpha damage for reload? I’m currently in tortoise grinding my ass off for the FV215 and next thing you know they’re nerfing it for the damage?

    who cares about reload in these tanks, when you expect to grind a high-calibre gun, don’t you think your going to get a short reload in these?, no obviously, we get the tanks for the alpha and banish all these unicum medium drivers straight to the garage for the fun,but ‘duuhhhh wee ned to increase playr stats & winrat for jge100 and fv215b becus there bad tenks! (or a little suspicion, don’t you think they’re nerfing it for the upcoming light tanks?)’ and this is the problem, these tanks don’t need to be grille 15’s or t110e3/4’s with there 3.5 – 4 rounds per minute, they also even made a video of how to play FV215 & FV4005 effectively

    1. ALpha damage is being increased for 120mm guns from 400 alpha to 440 alpha. I think you misread the article. Autoloaders will miss more of their shots despite their clip boost. If you miss even one shot, your clip potential becomes 1300 dmg and that isn’t really as broken as those autoloaders unloading a reliable 1600 dmg every clip.

  11. If the E5 and the 215b’s guns are getting a reload nerf, by extension that would mean the M103 and the Conqueror would also get reload nerfs. If this is implemented expect the M103’s reload time to climb up to 10+ seconds with vents and rammer equipped. The Conqueror’s reload time goes up to 9+ seconds when it reloads every 8+ seconds at the present. The 120’s aren’t feared because they can hit hard. They’re feared because they can hit often.

    1. You and me have different fears about tanks. The fear isn’t being hit often by these tanks but their devastating DPM is what players worry about in a fight. If you do the math, there isn’t much of a significant change to any of the DPMs of the 120mm guns. Higher alpha also means you will be less exposed for return fire and take less damage in return. Rate of fire is more of something for mediums and light tanks.

    1. There really isn’t a solution for seal clubbing at the moment but low and mid tiers aren’t popular enough to get a large player base into a sandbox. Certainly would be nice if they could. T67 probably does need a nerf but I worry that players would just go to a different tank to seal club in and no solution is found.

  12. The sad thing is, that WG are trying to solve some of the main problems of WoT not by directly addressing them, but by going around them… Accuracy nerf?… cool… but it will affect tanks that already had problems with hitting stuff at mid to long range, and can only hope for luck and rng to help them out… at the same time, tanks with good accuracy, won’t be affected as much, so we will still see soviet meds hitting snap shots at 300+ meters while going full speed… Another thing: Making armor relevant once again…. Great idea. I love to play in my heavies… but the problem is, that the thing that screws HT more than anything else is… prem ammo… especially on (who would have thought) soviet meds… Sure, not just there, but HEAT spam is the biggest game breaker for heavies… and the increased penetration reduction over distance doesn’t solve this, because HEAT shells retain their penetration at any distance.
    A MUCH better idea would be to make a hard cap on how better premium ammo is in terms of penetration. Give it a +20% MAX penetration over standard rounds. Then it will still be useful, but it won’t be a skill substitute. Your mouse is bouncing off 212mm pen from my T-54? Let me load my 320mm pen “skill”… LOLPEN. Last thing… I get that the “historical period” of tanks available in WoT ends at when MBT’s (Mail Battle Tanks) started popping up…. but these were far from actual “universal” vehicles… and yet, in WoT we get nerfs to heavies, arty and destroyers… but mediums (especially 9-10 tier) are more powerful than any other class… again, especially the soviet ones, not not exclusively.. you get tanks that are fast, agile, have great spotting range, good camo, quick firing, highly accurate guns with penetration rivaling many destroyers (especially after loading prem ammo), and able to bounce / absorb many shots (that is if you manage to hit them at all)…. So in many ways they outclass scout tanks… outperform destroyers at long range… are able to wreck heavy tanks at almost any range, and if played by even semi-competent players, are next to impossible to hit by artillery…. But this is one problem that WG fail to address, instead make it even worse by indirectly and directly affecting how the various classes interact… We’re one step from getting “World of medium tanks”…

    1. To be fair, as a player base, we don’t normally have a complete perspective of what world of tanks really is except for the people directly collecting statistics from their own game. It’s like a customer commanding a chef how to cook. You can distrust the chef all you like but the best you can do is give back feedback and show a little faith the guy in culinary arts knows what he’s doing.

      Premium shells do need to be nerfed. At the moment, they just bleed your wallet out faster than most people are accustomed to. Maybe this is a counter to inflation? I honestly don’t know. If anything, this sandbox will give valuable feed back to divert attention to how broken premium shells are at the moment. Sandbox is intended to test new ideas wargaming has, it is not a test server saying these changes will be implemented.

      Also, wargaming has mentioned rebalances to light tanks, artillery, and so forth already. The articles are already on rita’s blog and require only a little back scrolling. I hope this helps 🙂

      1. Hooli_Gun says:

        Lucasgreencheese,i’ve read all your posts and it is amazing how hard you try to back sad-box server and WGs stupid ideas up.You “dont know” if prem ammo is broken and stupidly unfair for the receiving end like all community is shouting for years,but you know for sure that involving more rng,making skill actuall irrelevant in this game,is sooo much better……You swear by WGs holy intentions to give us a “balanced” gameplay,when at the same time they do all they can to ignore their players,and when they actually listen to them (arty),its after 2-3 years……you want us to believe that their goal is to “make armor more rellevant”, when at the same time they introduce bs op premiums with absurd amounts of penetration for their tier,or even introducing new tanks with 300mm+ pen (or 288 at freakin tier 8)… want to emphasise that through these changes every tank class will have a specific role again?…really? So what is going leo1 or amx30b role be ,or every tank which relies on a accurate gun to snipe to deal damage? Hit every shot but pen 1/4?(meanwhile russian meds pawning hull down spamming gold to E-100 turrets cuz….” skill-balanced”)…..or wouldyou suggest they should simply “flank” in those shitty 600m-700m-1000m corridor maps?

      2. Hello again Hooli_gun, just responding to comments from bottom up. It’s difficult to explain but if you’ve played MMO’s you will know credit inflation is a problem because there isn’t any economic sink especially when a player collects all the tanks they might want. This is probably the second biggest source as to why some players have millions of credits to spend on nothing but premium rounds. It is hard to say what to do with premium rounds. For a game play balance perspective, they are overpowered. From a financial point of view, it is a very powerful credit sink. In theory, if firing premium rounds becomes too expensive that you burn through your entire wallet, there will be no more premium rounds left to be fired. I don’t think this is a practical solution in practice since there are a lot of wallet warriors and premium tanks in the game but there are also an extensive number of solutions to rebalancing premium rounds besides penetration and damage nerfs especially if you’ve read wot forums on player suggestions.

        Maps will be less corridor like with the accuracy and penetration drop off nerfs. They are not as bad as you are refferring to them, certainly could use some fine tuning but really, I can only recommend you try and fight at shorter ranges since you cannot hit your opponents at extreme range and neither can they hit you. It’s a fundamental rethink of your standard engagement range. I tried to give this example to Havoc but think of our current mode being that everyone has airsoft guns and can fight at 100 meters. Now our guns have been replaced with paintball guns. They are more innaccurate at 100 meters but the relative effective combat range for everyone is now more of 50 meters. Nothing has changed except the sizes of maps without forcing people to have better computers. It’s rather ingenious if you sit and think about it. I certainly do feel sorry for their PR person though, that guy needs to have soviet steel balls to face the world of tanks community.

      3. Nocomment says:


        Prem ammo.(HEAT especially) you assume Wg actually recognise there is a problem with it. They don’t, As they refuse acknowledge it. When has it been mentioned once by them in relation to any changes being made?

        They see it as a good thing because it makes them lots of money and they couldn’t give a rats ass if its game breaking or not. Hence the ridiculous SB proposals to get around it.

      4. @NoComment

        I think we have two fundamental understandings of the people that live in this world and we are just having the casual pessimist vs optimist argument. It’s fine, nothing wrong with that. Saying that wargaming cannot read feed back is a very fair assumption to make if you never read their patch notes or never tried to design a game. In respect to the disagreement, understand that I am also allowed to say that game designers are entitled to experiment with their game in their own image.

        That said, I can still agree with you that premium ammunition in its current form is very broken. Maybe they have plans to fix this, I don’t know. But if you believe there are many things wrong with world of tanks, then you should also be able to comprehend these guys are up and over their heads with all these changes that they are making. Game design is not so simple as a single line of code is what I would like to point out.

        On the other hand, wargaming is a business and not a charity. At the end of the day, every player is just free content to them. It’s one of the consequences we must pay for playing a Free2Play game. There are solutions to this, but frankly I don’t see them as being anywhere near as profitable.

        As for this proposal being BS, it is certainly unpolished as expected of a very primitive testing environment like the sandbox. The bigger picture is always difficult to keep in mind. For example, decreasing accuracy and increasing penetration drop off does artificially expand the size of a map without forcing players to buy new computers. I can certainly agree this is probably not the most important thing for world of tanks but you need to remember wargaming has multiple branches dedicated to the work of every aspect of the game. Just because an alpha test server was released does not mean that is the only project in the works. Probably a bureaucratic nightmare in wargaming offices but I don’t work there so I wouldn’t know haha

        Anyways, great reply to read NoComment. Always a pleasure to hear a fairly polite opinion.
        Keep voicing it, and don’t let me stop you haha. I’m just enjoying the conversation 🙂

    1. You are referring to the sandbox, right? A place for testing out new ideas and getting feedback? Look, I don’t want to get on another person’s case for not being constructive but really dude? How dense can you be?

      -scouts get hit less
      -armored HT’s, MT’s, and TD’s don’t have to camp the back of the map because their armor matters
      -redline camping is less profitable
      -less likely to be permanently tracked

      These are just a few of the possible improvements. Keep an open mind and don’t get bogged down, it’ll turn out alright 🙂

      1. – when you do scout no one can hit or pen what you spot.
        – armoured td, heavies etc will camp even more because they will live even longer while doing it. The increase to rng will also means that sitting still and letting the enemy come is massively superior than making plays and getting stuff done because shots will fly off in random directions.
        – certain tanks are designed to relined camp. They are utter shit at everything else. New swedish high tier td and grille are just a couple of examples. These tanks will become even more worthless in the brawling corridor meta that is getting even worse.
        – not really. Most bad players don’t aim for the tracks but will aim dead centre or autoaim. Increased rng means that it is more likely for them to hit your tracks causing a critical hit which will annoy them and a tracking shot for you. On the other hand good players who actually aim properly for tracks will get fucked by this retarded rng because WG wants to make this world of rng and no skill.

      2. -Once again, the guns in world of tanks still work. You do have to stop camping in the back to hit something of course but it seems your small tiny brain is stuck that accuracy nerfs only affect your own team.
        -armored td’s and heavies will not camp in the back because they won’t be able to hit anything. It’s so silly that you’d sit at ranges where you can’t hit things and complain about not having wasd keys. Use your head dude, why would you sit somewhere where you can’t get damage?
        -certain tanks designed to redline camp no longer can redline camp, how is that a problem? They still have their camo values. Now they have to play at ranges where if they fire, they will be lit and be forced to move. You must like getting killed by invisible tanks.
        -lol you’re saying by decreasing accuracy, people will repeadetly track their targets with impeccable accuracy because they are not aiming to track their targets. How does an accuracy nerf = better accuracy? You’re quite literally making this stuff up to disagree with me. Worse accuracy does not magically mean better accuracy, there is something called reality and just because a shell does not hit a tank where you wanted it to does not mean that the shell magically goes to somewhere beneficial anyways. You can test this by trying to throw something into a trash can during the day and night. Throwing something at night does not mean you have an increased chance of hitting the rim of the trash can.

      3. Hooli_Gun says:

        Oh pls tell us in which maps you can camp red line pls,and how much that helps you or your team…cuz in my experience (a LOT of games and 2200Wn8),its not your so called red line camping that racks up damage,but more going hull down (with russian meds preferrably) on advantegous forward positions,which will also provide assistance damage,who win the games
        Wtf is wrong with you dude?Wg employee or something?…..

      4. Username: Bajicoy, I play on the NA server, over 30k games played and 2125 Wn8. I don’t really gauge players by Wn8 anymore since it’s too easy to boost it by playing the T67. When I refer to redline camping, I also refer to base camping.

        Redshire: North or South, take your pick, very effective on the 1-3 lines but camping on the mid hills is also effective before you fall back
        Elhaluf: either side of the canyon
        Sandriver: in particular to assault, south redline camping is very viable and north campers throw the game because they get out snipped otherwise
        Cliff: anywhere on the backs of the 1-6 lines
        Ensk: in particular to encounter, 8 9 0 lines you can fire with impunity
        Prohkerovka/fiery saliant: 1-3 lines or 8-0 lines north and south. You will find heavies camping there very frequently.
        Fisherman’s bay: 1-2 line you’ll find pretty heavy stalemates and those defensive positions have a lot of open ground to their east, perfect camping.
        Fjords: peninsula at J0 and K0 are very strong camping locations, you will see TD’s sit there all game
        HighWay: East/west camp off
        Karelia: base camping in standard battles or hill camping on assault
        Lakeville: snipping heavies across the lake and general camp off. Stalemates across the valley.

        An accuracy nerf just means much more of the map is more available to players and hitting weak points like the commanders hatch will be more difficult. It really is quite hilarious when I destroy an E75 sometimes just by shooting his commander’s hatch 3 or 4 times. Hopefully if this system is implemented over all tiers that would be more of a rarity than a go to tactic.

        Not a wargaming employee, I design my own games in my free time so I can understand what they are trying to do. Most people are complaining about autoloaders getting a clip buff and forgetting that moments ago they were complaining about a accuracy nerf so I’m just pointing out simple things like the two balance each other out. Sandbox is far from perfect, many flaws, yes, but it’s a step toward good intentions.

      5. Nocomment says:

        Also these Long range engagements you keep talking of. How many maps actually let you engage at more than 300m these days?

        Same goes for spotting give LT’s 400+ view range to spot on maps like starlingrad, mines, himmlesdorf etc and how much use is 400m view range on these maps?

        The game is already focused on short range peek-a-boom and it will just get worse with these proposals. Tanks are designed to engage at range not nose to nose…Really they may as well fit bayonets to the guns and let people me-lea.

      6. Hi again NoComment 🙂

        I provided a list up above of maps that you can engage at more than 300 meters these days. If you’re not sure what are good places for fighting at long range I recommend you play lightly armored TD’s with high camo like the swedish or german TD’s. They should really help your understanding of maps. Otherwise keep an open eye on your minimap and you’ll see that there it is not unusual for over half your team to camp in the back.

        Lights are very effective on maps like starlingrad, mines, himmelsdorf and etc. not as powerful on a map like prohkerhovka but they are not useless. In particular to mines, lights are some of the best tanks for securing the central hill or flanking around the light house. They can extend vision across the map without being counter spotted so long as you are careful to not fire or get proxy detected from the base of the hill. As for playing on thick city maps, stalingrad is very open on the 7-0 lines so I would recommend you play there to extend your vision. On himmelsdorf, the hill or running along the tracks are very effective for light tanks to out spot enemy tanks since most vehicles will be out in the open and the light tank will still have their camouflage value. Other tactics you can use in your light tanks is a support and harrassing role by using your allies as shields and either snipping weak points or tracking your opponents. Some light tanks like the T-54 ltwt can even side scrape and hold a line if they find a strong hull down position to peekaboom from like the donut in the south west corner of kharkov. A good light tank does not solely rely on their viewrange but makes use of all the tools they are given like mobility, camoflauge, and dpm. Sitting invisibal with complete impunity in a bush is frankly not engaging gameplay. These are just a few reasons why light tanks are the most challenging tank classes to play.

        Also, world of tanks maps are just too small for long range engagements and a large majority of computers sadly cannot handle anything bigger. Long range engagements are really more of a focus of warthunder but you can still force it in world of tanks by making use of mechanics like staying out of max view range of your enemies but still within render range. world of tanks fundamentally is still a brawling game of high action and arcade fun. You’re free to disagree with me and say world of tanks is supposed to be a realistic battle simulator but frankly that’s a different genre of gameplay. You might be exagerating realities of the accuracy and penetration changes in the sandbox. I’ve been playing on the sandbox server and my hit ratio has been above 70% still. Just keep the game mechanics in mind and be patient while you learn the trades of the game ^^b

      7. Anonymous says:

        You miss my point. The stated aim of WG is to give Lt’s their role back. Ie as spotters. How is this going to work when the maps are not designed for that role and the tanks being corralled into short range corner poking. I was not saying you cannot do well on small corridor maps but where is the scout role? At best you can tell your team that the enemy is concentrating at hotshot A rather than hot spot B which will be some small benefit to your team but of no benefit to the Lt driver. On the few open maps that are left the reduced fighting distances means you can light up the enemy so your team can ding them at range (apart from arty and the HEAT spammers that is)

        I applaud the sentiment.. The implementation is sadly as per usual awful.

      8. Nocomment says:

        I would suggest as a far far better solution than the one on offer would be to either have different dispersions based on the tank/gun/class/role or based on the tanks actions when firing… I. E still and aimed shots cluster around the center of the reticle, snap shots on the move should be spread round the outside edges. Then snipers could engage at range (map allowing) and brawlers would need to actually brawl.

      9. Oops, this conversation did get pretty long, um.. I put my response down below, I didn’t want to spam, we could continue our discussion down below since it’s easier to find the reply button haha ^^

    2. Sounds like something that could work, I’ve been playing on the sandbox and snipping is still viable especially in my Leopard and Grille. Tried to snipe with my E100 and that didn’t really work out. The main problem I can see with your design is the multi-role problem. What defines a tank that should snap shot? snipe? brawl? Tanks like the 113, T110E4, Foch 155, E50, and so forth are multi-role tanks so your mechanics would have to switch mid-game for whatever they were doing. How would you detect or determine a change? how would you protect the system from being cheated? If you’re asking to apply individual rebalances to each and every tank rather than a universal balance then the challenge of balancing tanks has increased ten fold. Think of this in terms of school kids, you are distributing pencils or anything they might use and now you’re asking to pick and choose which kids should get more and some get less because some of them are scholars and some are athletic. The challenge has become become enormously more difficult than evenly distributing everything and keeping a relative balance.

      Your solution is still viable, I would recommend you put this in their forums, it’s not one that I see in their suggestions all that much so some more attention is fairly due 🙂

      1. Nocomment says:

        Tried that and it was ignored. There is is no real added complication its just one more number to use to tune tanks to a role like ground resistance. For instance if you gave the L7A a really good shot dispersion in other words tightly clustered around the centre the tanks that use the l7a become good snipers.

        Give the BL10 horrible dispersion and it fits tanks carrying it into the brawler (shotgun in this case) category. Now something like the the Leo1 while moving would have mediocre accuracy and be lasergun while sat sniping. While something like an like an ISU-152 would not hit the side of a mountain on the move but would be about as good as it is now or even slightly better while filling its role as a td.

        Multi-role vehicles would have around average dispersion (something like the current setting) so not bad while sat still and fairly bad while on the move. etc.

        But I firmly believe WG is not interested in fixing such things they just like to invent problems to fix rather than looking at the real ones. When they actually do address a problem it is in such an ass backwards approach. You have to think why are they doing that? and it all comes back to profit (short term) over customer service.

        Ps. I replied to your comments on scouting on small maps but forgot to add my user name and it has not yet been “vetted” and should appear at some point.

      2. Hard to disagree with your argument or really anything said there haha, I haven’t the faintest idea what happens in their design board but it certainly does look like a pile of short term plans and experiments. Kind of reminds me of a lot of Q&A’s shown here and the thing is that everyone is generally transfixed on asking questions about up coming tanks rather than improving game mechanics like heat shells or weak points crippling tanks or how big of a problem too many corridors are and how heavily heavy tanks must rely on them. (So proud of that pun). People don’t focus on major issues enough either except for a vocal few, it’s pretty rough. Glad to have this chat with you, don’t see your username soo I don’t know what to call you haha, share your username! I feel so bad calling you the wrong name repeatedly 😛

      3. Nocomment says:

        Likewise, nice to have a civilised conversation despite my prickliness towards WG’s ideas.
        As for my user name. I don’t have one, I’m not registered with the site though I do always post with this “name”.

  13. Bantuperson says:

    So high tier 122 guns will be relatively nerfed, being less accurate than 120mm on average while having same damage?

    Up the 122mm damage too then!

    1. Maybe, but 2 extra millimeters of shell caliber wouldn’t warrant a large gap of alpha damage between 120mm’s and 122mm’s. Look at a ruler and you’ll see what I mean. Alpha damage has more to do with the shell’s length, powder, velocity, material, etc. The only two heavies that do use the 122 are the 113 and IS-4. 113 is pretty great, now it won’t get traded 2 for 1 against 120mm tanks because they will have a longer reload. IS-4 is arguable having one of the biggest armor buffs for heavy tanks because of the sheer amount of armor thickness and slopping. I can understand why you think they should be buffed but it really is too hard to tell at the moment if a buff is warranted.

  14. Bricktop says:

    Boo hoo, cancer is back. Missed ya so much. But hey, it’s here, for the second time, even more stupid than for the last time. gg no re wg

  15. Dontspill McGinnis says:

    Whilst i agree with most, if not quite all of your reservations, i applaud the fact that they (WG) are at least trialing these propositions to gauge our reaction to them, rather than just imposing them on the player-base. If you feel strongly about it, get yourself on the sandbox and give the systems a go. The whole point of the exercise is to get your feedback AFTER trying it out.
    You never know, you might actually find that you like these proposals!
    (okay, maybe not .. but work with the system, that’s why it’s there.)

    1. Type 319 Sharpedo says:

      Sadly, a large majority of WoT players mirror that of the US society: mostly idiots with a handful of intellectuals. Having that said, it makes sense why people are complaining before they even try out the new system.

      I genuinely appreciate your comment, however. It is people like you who can better offer feedback so that the rest of the (intellegent) community can thrive.

      1. Anonymous says:

        You know what makes me laugh is that people are giving their comments and concerns here and are getting shouted down , people forget not everyone will agree with each others opinions, I believe Sandbox testing is a good way for WG to test the water and get feedback either for or against the changes they implementing , but i state again each person IS allowed their own OPINION and should not be shouted down ever!!!!

    2. Pangzhu says:

      It just feels like they are trying to find a way, to make it look like WG is gauging our reactions, all the while they will still just impose these changes on us.

      they already trialed theses changes the last time and reactions, even to the idea of these changes, were mostly negative.

      now they try it again with the same ideas just a bit altered. E.G. nobody wants more RNG – it doesn’t matter if they test that 1 million times with different variations.

  16. Anonymous says:

    penetration nerf? No problem,just use gold ammo!no credits for gold ammo?No problem,just buy one of OP T8 prem tanks!Russia will win,one way or another…

  17. Type 319 Sharpedo says:

    I’m an (almost) exclusive heavy tank player, particularly the Japanese Type 5. I have to say, these changes aren’t too bad. While I didn’t find snapshotting to be quite an issue, the oversaturation of high caliber guns was a definite area in need of proper fixing. These changes seem like a step toward progress. No longer is the tier X meta skewed by medium tanks and tank destroyers with excess amounts of penetration. However, there is still one fatal flaw: HEAT shells. Since APCR sees a more significant penetration decrease at long ranges, this change would skew players into purchasing vehicle designs that carry HEAT shells. If the point of this sandbox was to improve the longevity and importance of armor, then HEAT must also be corrected. Personally, APCR should lose 50-66% of its average damage and HEAT should only penetrate armor values 66% of that of the gun’s standard kinetic shell (e.g. AP or APCR).

    1. true, since their DPM is the same, the accuracy nerf is a problem for autoloaders so there is a higher chance of missing a shot and doing 1320 alpha instead of the anticipated 1760. This is to contrast the fairly consistent damage of the usual 1600. It’s a lot more of a complicated balance but if you have the statistics, you can adjust accuracy so auto loaders miss the right number of shots so they aren’t broken. A lot of people tend to forget that a rebalance isn’t a buff or a nerf.

  18. betterdead thanred says:

    when it comes to upping the dmg of the 120mm guns, i am against it.
    clip potential went from 1600 to 1760. this is enough to kill all tier 8 tanks, and almost all tier 9 meds and td’s.

    making each tank/gun unique, with pros and cons, is good for the game.
    dont change things that ”work”

    When it comes to the big guns
    -Fv215 183 should get a slight nerf to alpha, it has some armor and semi turret.
    -Fv4005 should retain or even buff it’s gun stats, no armor and terrible camo, limited use tank
    -Jageru should remain as is, or recieve higher dpm if alpha nerf. limited use tank

    1. Autoloaders did get an accuracy nerf just like every other tank. Attempting to do 1760 alpha with a 100% penetration rate is a lot more challenging than it sounds. Imagine you miss one of those shots and now you have a longer reload. Essentially, killing an autoloader on their reload is a lot more possible.

      Unique is a matter of perspective. What is mundane to the fly is fresh opportunity for a spider.

      Jgeru had a substantial armor buff in the sandbox, wouldn’t be a rebalance if you kept its damage the same, a similar thing could be said to the Fv215 183. Fv4005 always did get the short end of stick so that’s its own independent problem. To be fair, most players don’t like getting one shot or losing most of their health and having a miserable game for the next 15 min. If you’d like to one shot tanks, go play war thunder.

      1. betterdead thanred says:

        did forget about the accuracy nerf, and other sandbox changes. sry about that.
        agree on all points except that FV4005 needs some huge advantage to remain competative.

  19. Andy O says:

    The amount of crying and whining over this is ridiculous. They are trying various changes to try and make the game better. Yet everyone is already crying about what they are doing even though all of it is just testing. Its like whining about bugs in a pre alpha build of a game

    1. The first sandbox made all these changes already. And I played in the frst sandbox for over 4.5k battles. And trust me these changes deserve every bit of whine.
      It’s so stupid that it is beyond common sense.
      The most hated parts of this game are rng, arty, corridor meta and gold ammo. WG had made 2 of them even worse. 1 isn’t being changed at all.
      And the changes to arty make no sense and way too overly complicated for no reason. We can hold off on this change bease it isn’t implemented yet but based off their last implementation of it….

      1. These accruacy changes are different to the old sandbox changes. The shells are more clustered in the center rather than an equal disperrersion throughout the entire circle. I was on the previous sandbox as well. 😛 Havoc199, normally I have a lot more respect for your comments but it seems you’re just another one of those red line camping sleeze bag that is butt hurt that you actually have to man fight tanks. RNG affects both sides so hitting targets that are breaking out of corridors is more difficult. Premium ammo is indeed a problem, 100% with you on that. Arty changes haven’t even been implemented and you’re on full throttle dude. Havoc, you need to remember that the first sandbox was for testing and feedback and this one is for feedback as well. You’re thinking too small as to the bigger picture what this means for world of tanks.

    2. Oops, sorry to throwdown with Havoc like that Andy but I normally like what he says so trying to slap some sense into him ^^b you’re a good guy Andy and what you’re saying is indeed what a lot of people here are forgetting o7

      1. ‘We can hold off on this change bease it isn’t implemented yet but based off their last implementation of it….’

        I’m not going full throttle but I have already started playing on this sandbox yesterday. As well as playing on the last sandbox. I’m not making grand assumptions here or something.

        I’m basing my opinions on how this game plays and how it will change. The simple fact is that WG aren’t addressing the issues that need to be addressed but they are ‘fixing’ things that don’t need fixing.

        Rng is never good for the game. We have ridiculous amount of it already in wot.

        I was playing my Leo 1 on the sandbox yesterday and I am telling you…0.3 Accuracy is a joke. Shells were flying all over the place and it was almost impossible to hit any weak point beyond 150m or so.

        In a tank like the Leo 1 and of course other mediums, td and possibly some lights that survives and can only do damage by sniping this is a death sentance. WG is right, it forces you up closer to fight but this isn’t a good thing. Not all tanks are designed to or able to do this.

        On top of that when my shells did hit they bounced way more often than they should even on weak points and ‘softer’ targets. Sides of t110e5 and other similar targets that normally you can pen at max range but now you can’t pen from the side at 300m.

        However I would like to add that when I load HEAT as long as the shells hit (not often) they generally penned because you know….Gold ammo isn’t broken or anything.

        This reduces diversity in tanks by a lot. Tanks with decent all round armour become the king’s of the battlefield even more so than they already are. The corridor meta has been a problem for a long time now and WG is just adding fuel to the fire.

        These changes make a few differences that I think it’s important to mention :

        1. Gold spam will become much much more common. The combination of no HEAT pen loss over distance, standard ammo becoming much less effective and poor accuracy making it harder to hit weakpoints will mean that players who spam gold will have an even bigger advantage than ever before. This leads to a pay to win style of game.

        2. Soft tanks that rely on sniping are completely useless. Even more than they aleady are. Due to the corridor meta soft tanks that rely on distance and camo are among some if the weakest in the game. By reducing their ability now not only hide or survive but also to deal damage by reducing their penetration and accuracy at distance this makes them even weaker compared to their peers.

        3. Redline camping isn’t a problem in this game at all. There are very few maps that you can do it on and it isn’t profitable even now. However players in well armoured tanks who camp the red line usually do so because they have no understanding of the game and what their tanks are supposed to do. Not because they are afraid of being shot before they get to the front.
        These kind of players will camp regardless of any changes to the game. This will be made worse because they will survive longer while camping due to the accuracy and penetration changes and this will lead them to believe that they are playing the correct way.

        ‘seems you’re just another one of those red line camping sleeze bag that is butt hurt that you actually have to man fight tanks’
        And being abusive is really going to help…but if you know anything of how I play then you should know that I play super aggressive in nearly all tanks. I don’t camp and that’s not how I get my stats. I get them by making plays and doing what needs to be done to win the game.

        My biggest question to WG is why. Why do we even need to reduce the range of engagements even further. There is no reason to do this. It throws off balance because a lot of tanks require this playstyle. It reduces tank diversity. And more than anything it benefits brawlers and Russian tanks and you know….they aren’t already good enough right…

        To fix this game fix some simple areas. Rng, arty, mm, tank balance, gold ammo. These 5 things are what causes the biggest problems in the game.

        And I’m not the kind of person who will just complain. I have done multiple write ups on the forums and explained to WG how to fix it but they just dont listen. If you want to know how I think it should be fixed I am more than willing to write it here. However this comment is already long enough as is.

      2. *Types a page long comment and says you’re not going full throttle* dude, you are very tilted haha. It’s fine, I’m pretty excited over these changes as well 🙂

        RNG can be good for any game if applied correctly. I sent you a comment already on an airsoft to paintball example but RNG is relative and quite healthy for excitement in a game. You can’t rely completely on it of course which is why you have your wasd keys to move in and out of effective firing range but the intentions wargaming has aren’t ill intended to anyone but those who like to sit back and profit at other people’s expense.

        Most soft tanks are very agile and flexible. There certainly could be some tweaking here and there but tanks like the Grille 15 are one of the best tanks in the game because you can sit at the redline and hit moving scouts from across the map and the incredible penetration blitzes through most heavy tank’s armor with relative ease. Autoloaders for example are still very agile and have devastating burst but the chance to clip your enemies in one go has decreased. It’s not fun to get permatracked by a Skoda T50 and in 3 seconds watch 1280 hp evaporate.

        Havoc, camping is a serious problem, Grille 15 has .3 accuracy and once again can hit moving scouts from across the map. STRV can perma track tanks at 500 meters. hell, I’ve dominated in my T110E4 and I can understand why players in high tier TD’s sit in the back and snipe even though they have armor and that’s because you can sit back and hit targets at long range with your TD’s and any tank really. There isn’t a reason to move up and get in the fight without seriously risking your tank to campers. Look dude, have you ever played counterstrike? That’s what you want world of tanks to be, no RNG, you know where every bullet and grenade will go precisely through brutal memorization. It works because that is the target audience of counterstrike, extreme reflex based players. That’s not world of tanks. World of tanks is about steel on steel crashing against one another, a game plan, a strategy, yes, but it shouldn’t be so rewarding to sit in the back.

        I think your ideas on how to improve world of tanks are solid, they will help but they are not the only solution. It’s really alarming to see you shoot down this sandbox because they aren’t improving the sandbox with your vision of the game. Even our conversation, we can agree we both have two different perspectives of the game. Chances are, neither of us are right because we only see world of tanks from the ground floor. We’re arguing with the architects of world of tanks. They get statistics on quite literally everything about this game and we’re bickering amongst ourselves at how these guys up top should run things instead of considering what new opportunities we might have now that there are so much fewer killzones in the game.

  20. septfox says:

    “With fewer shots clustered around the center of the aiming circle, the number of “unbelievable” shots (hitting weak spots without taking full aim, or on the move or at great distances) is reduced.”

    Ok, so you increased the maximum (aimed-in) accuracy of currently-<0.36 accuracy guns to compensate, right? Because I can tell you right now that even 0.32, fully-aimed, at moderate ranges will "fuck you, have a miss/bounce due to unintentionally hitting strong armor" with the *current* shot dispersion a fair amount of the time, nevermind one that doubles or more the RNG players will see.

    Oh wait, you're also decreasing the minimum shell penetration dropoff range to make long-range sniping less viable to begin with. Cool.
    So in summary you get more RNG, making your shots more likely to miss, further even if you hit, the shot is less likely to hit the weak armor you're aiming at, and as icing on the cake if you *do* hit exactly where you aimed, the shot is less likely to go through because your penetration has dropped off more than it used to.
    This caters excellently to heavies in general and Soviet hovermediums, sure, because they're generally in your face where the changes won't matter; what's everyone else supposed to do? Poorly-armored TDs and support mediums/heavies with "good" guns are pretty much screwed.
    Believe it or not, not everyone enjoys "action-packed, close-range engagements" that consist of effectively unarmored tanks punching each other in the dick until whoever got the first shot off wins.

    I understand trying new things, but why even bother when you know that injecting more RNG into your already RNG-laden game is a horrible, unpopular idea? The shell dropoff isn't a terrible idea by itself – it'll result in even more HEAT being slung around, but tier 10 is already pretty saturated with tryhards anyway – it just combines to make the RNG change even worse.

      1. It’s an interesting problem, I’d expect most mediums to bleed through their credits really fast firing HEAT and missing at long range, especially with their slower shell velocity. Does become a problem at close range. Hopefully the test server will show wargaming that they need to rebalance premium shells so there is no silver bullet.

      2. septfox says:

        All they have to do to balance HEAT is reduce the damage, similar to AW (though AW has it swapped, AP is the higher damage/lower pen there). Hell, that’s literally the only thing they need to do to balance out premium ammo in general. It would go from being an “I win because I spent more credits” ammo to a “I don’t necessarily win but I’ll rarely be completely useless” ammo.

        They adamantly refuse to, presumably knowing people would whine because 1) they can no longer have their cake and eat it too, especially the CW crowd and 2) that WoT is “copying off AW”…which is clearly the important thing, wouldn’t want to balance the damn game if it means being accused of being a copycat.

      3. Reducing heat damage certainly would be an easy solution. Reducing heat penetration might also be a solution and so forth. You have an excellent point Septfox. Wargaming needs to put their man pants on.

  21. Eraser says:

    +1 to the Idiot RNG argument.

    Ever since the last accuracy nerf, it’s been absurdly trolly like it was in the 8.x days. Now they’re making it even less centered?!

    It’s as if RNG picks the firing solution anywhere in the circle instead of the aim point, and then applying RNG to accuracy.

    1. I don’t believe your personal experiences speak for all of us. If you were to check statistically over the years for the number of shots that have landed on point, in recent patches accuracy has been at an all time high. On a further note, this is an armor buff patch and a nerf to redline camping. I fully recommend you trying driving toward your targets and flanking them with your wasd hacks as they will not be able to pennetrate you as easily in the sandbox. I know it’s like getting used to an entirely new game but you really should give it a shot and try the new armor meta 🙂

      1. Hooli_Gun says:

        “The new armor meta”………. LOL!
        Dont know what you’re smoking dude,but it must be good,and judging how hard you try in your last 20 or so posts beeing almost the only guy trying to defend sad-box server changes allready denied just as ideas by the community, to convince everybody in here who brings fckn reasonable arguments against more rng to the table.
        But i” say this:the general idea of giving more value to armor is good,too bad that the simple solution of nerfing prem ammo is not considered by this company cause hey…their billionaire president dont want to give anything back to the players and ultimatelly his own game…..
        And as of close range brawling,exchanging shots from 50m and screwing about 40% of the tanks existing in this game to support-snipe in maps you simply can not flank, might be your preferred game mode,but not 99% of other players.

      2. My good sir, the only reason you can’t hit anything is because you need to get good at the game and play at ranges where you can hit your target or otherwise, flank, support, harrass, etc. I am not the only person defending a sandbox that is dedicated to experimenting with world of tanks and attempting to innovate the game but many people who dislike the sandbox are very vocal for short sighted reasons. Fight fire with fire so to say and I have the typing speed capable of returning a punch and more.

        Premium ammunition is indeed a problem. Hopefully this sandbox will bring that matter more to light to wargaming. At the moment, this is an accuracy change and the accuracy change does help even light tanks survive their scouting runs more. This sandbox is not specifically a buff to heavy tanks but a rebalance of accuracy and penetration drop off. It is important to keep an open mind that every tank uses accuracy and penetration and not to get bogged down on impulsive conclusions.

  22. Patata Caliente says:

    I think increasing the alpha damage of autoloaders is not a good idea. They are devastating enough as it is. If anything, I think the burst damage needs to be reduced. Increasing the damage potential of, say, a fully clipped T57 from 1600 to 2000 seems a rubbish idea to me.

    1. Please note that autoloaders did get an accuracy and penetration nerf just like any tank. The clip potential is now 1760 and not 2000, please check your math with 4*440 alpha shells. I would like you to understand that an autoloader does not have 100% accuracy and when they do miss a shot (and by god they will miss quite a few) these autoloaders will have a longer reload to hate themselves for being scrubs as their opponent happily wrecks their defenseless face.

    1. Also sounds like a way to stop players from red line camping, you don’t have to be at brawling range to kill your opponent btw but now playing at mid ranges is more viable because your opponents will find it more difficult to hit you in return.

  23. Jordan Beaulieu says:

    It’s about time, tank guns aren’t sniper rifles. You put the aiming reticle over the tank and fire the gun, hoping that it hits a weak spot. Tanks don’t snipe cupolas like if you were playing Call of Duty…

  24. Infernal969 says:

    Nerfing the accuracy and standard ammo AND buffing autoloaders is definitely going to improve the game a lot.
    What a fucking bunch of clowns.

    1. Don’t know how they buffed autoloaders with an accuracy and penetration drop off nerf. Oh right, I forgot autoloaders have magical 100% hit and penetration so they always do 1760 alpha. Oh, what’s this? if they miss a shot, autoloaders will have a longer reload to get destroyed in? wow, what a nerf, so over powered.

      Sarcasm done, but please, just play autoloaders on the sandbox, they really don’t do that 1760 alpha as much as you think they would. They really did nerf the accuracy on ALL tanks so the autoloaders are not broken.

      1. Infernal969 says:

        Look at all the fucks I give:

        Considering that the most minor change of those that I menioned that got your ass crying I suggest you go back to wanking in your very fair and balanced T57 before they drive this game into the ground.
        Also, thanks for the suggestion, but I’d rather get a lobotomy than be a free lab rat for those greedy belarusian shitheads in their retarded tests.

      2. good job complaining about a game you don’t play haha, you also gave enough fucks to give a shitty response dude, just saying. Anyways, the size of a change is a matter of perspective, those that play high tiers for example will keep a closer eye on new competition than those that play mid to low tiers. But it’s alright, wargaming has made a lot of changes to the sandbox so it’s hard to keep an eye on the big picture. You are right a lot of players are being free lab rats, in return they get to send wargaming the feedback of their own choosing instead of yours so you’ll just dislike the game more and more because wargaming will give less consideration to how you think the game should be. Everyone has their bad days, sorry for the sass 🙂

  25. mngx says:

    Penetration and accuracy nerf at distance for medium range support tanks and especially for tds is one of the most retarded things ever. What, you want turretless tds to fight in close quarters? isn’t it bad enough that they don’t have a turret? There are three critical problems in WOT: Matchmaking, Arty and Premium ammo and this first phase doesn’t solve either one.

    1. You must never have heard of teamwork. Those green players driving around are good meat shields, distractions, and covering your rear even when you don’t notice. I would also recommend you platoon with people you trust or use xvm so you stick close to players with decent statistics. If all you’ve ever known was sitting back and snipping, this is a pretty rude awakening that top tier tanks can’t sit at the back all game. Also, those are indeed some major problems. Hope these tips help you even on the live server, good luck out there 🙂

    1. I suppose, kind of because on the live server, bouncing shots is pretty rare so people don’t have much of an appreciation for it but if you’ve ever tried to complete a difficult HT-15 I think you can find some appreciation for the accuracy changes in both your armored tanks and when you try to scout tanks outside of cooridors. Fv4005 definatly needs a buff, the turret is too squishy to justify the tank.

  26. Mikosah says:

    That sigma change, please Lord almighty, let this be a joke. The complaint was never that the derpy guns were too accurate. The complaint was always that the so-called ‘accurate’ guns miss too often. RNG is the problem, not the solution. And having shots eat dirt was never fun for anyone.

  27. “The reworked system makes hitting weak spots at range more difficult for guns with bad dispersion (0.4 and up).” So, only artillery and the KV-2? 😉

    Someone mentioned this being a huge nerf to all medium tanks. From tier 8 to 10, there are only four mediums with .4 or worse accuracy: T-34-2, T-44. M26 Pershing, and T-34-3. If the proposed accuracy alterations only affects anything with .4 dispersion and worse, that should leave most mediums alone, right? That should mean firing on the move should still be a viable tactic.

    And if we look at tier 8 to 10 TDs, again, only 4 would be affected: Strv 103-D, FV215b (183), Object 704, and ISU-152. That means that every other TD will still be able to snap off fairly accurate shots if they aren’t completely aimed in.

    1. The accuracy affects all tanks, mostly tanks with .4 or worse accuracy like the IS-3 but you are right most high tier tanks didn’t need that extreme of a rebalance. I recommend you try and play in the sandbox and see for yourself how well those guns snap shot 🙂 Your speculation is admirable, but the diagrams wargaming have provided don’t really match your reasoning that this is a negligible change.

      1. You’re probably right. I was interpreting the .4 and up comment differently but re-reading it now, I can see where I made an assumption.

        The next question, then, is does this worsening dispersion still take place if you’re fully aimed in? Or only if you’re firing while the targeting reticle is still collapsing?

      2. All good dude 🙂 and Havoc’s comment down below is right, the dispersion is consistent for any size of the aiming circle. To be frank, a lot of people are upset that it’s not what they’re accustomed to and they have to relearn the game but RNG was applied equally and universally so it is still relatively the same. I’ll go slap Havoc with the longer story if you’re interested ^^

    2. This change in the disperson effects all tanks. 0.25 accuracy or 0.6 accuracy alike. And being fully aimed or not doesn’t change the sigma.

      Basically you will miss more. More rng to your shots.

      WG have worded it like so as not to cause a massive upset in the community but it’s a lie.

      1. TL;DR RNG is a RELATIVE variable for ANY environment.

        What is accurrate for throwing something across a room is awful accuracy for a sniper. The problem with world of tanks is that the game used realistic tank stats in the fighting space of a small room and that meant heavy tanks like the swedish heavies needed unrealistic armor values to be effective and makes tank balance an overall nightmare.

        To further this analogy: Imagine you and a friend play airsoft at ranges of 100 meters effectively. Then there is a slow fat kid that’s really easy to hit because his reflexes at 100 meters cannot compete. Now everyone had their guns replaced with paintball guns. If you continued to fight at 100 meters then everyone would complain that paintball was more random. But if everyone scales their engagement range to 50 meters then relative accuracy is maintained. The slow fat kid can play with the other kids now and you and your unicum friend can dance in and out of effective firing range to hit the fat kid and each other while retreating to not get hit back.

        Another example is pretty familiar to java and c# programmers but the actual random number generator code calls the computer to return a value between 0 and 1. The programmer then takes this value and scales it to whatever he/she is working with. If the scaling is applied universally then the level of RNG use remains constant relative to its new environment. RNG is increased, yes, but it remains relative nonetheless.

  28. Not that I play a lot of artillery – I have two lines as opposed to about 30 of everything else – but wouldn’t this RNG change make SPGs close to unplayable? It’s hard enough to hit anything as it is. Of course I realise a lot of people will see that as a bonus 🙂

  29. SkaerKrow says:

    It really feels like World of Tanks is in a death spiral at this point. With every change, skill gets edged out for dumb luck. These accuracy nerfs could completely soil the game for everyone, depending on how severe that they are in practice. The argument that they’ll appeal to the casual fanbase is flawed: casuals don’t like it any more than skilled players when their shots don’t go where they aim them. Between these changes and the proposed AP changes that thankfully got delayed, things are looking grim for World of Tanks in 2017. Honestly, World of Warships is shaping up to be the better tank game (and yes, I appreciate the irony of that).

    1. Dontspill McGinnis says:

      These aren’t changes, they are just testing proposals.
      Get in the sandbox and have a go, then share your opinion with WG.
      That’s the whole point of the Sandbox….

    1. Haha, you could look at it that way if the accuracy nerf applied to every tank other than the E5. They really did rebalance the E5 with a nerf to the E5’s accuracy and penetration over distance as well as its reload so now it can’t fire twice for every shot in return as much.

  30. Brett Brakefield says:

    Having played Sandbox 1.0 and 2.0, even I must say, the accuracy change has got to stay a pipe dream. I’m expecting that Lucas shill to shove “facts” down my throat, but hear me out first. And don’t forget, I have a RNG-free gun.

    Accuracy has always been somewhat problematic for some tanks, artillery, I’m looking squarely at you. (RIP arty fun grinds since 8.6) Even when fully aimed, RNG grabs the shot and either flings it where you want to or ends up in the dirt or rock not where you aimed at. Even the pinpoint sniper tanks like the E 50M, Grille 15, and Strv 103B Siege will miss the occasional shot. Now, beforehand, 90% of the time, it’s user error, either leading moving targets too far or misjudging where to fire.

    With the accuracy changes, even to sniping tanks, that number suddenly jumps to 70%. And thanks to the penetration drop off, even long distance shots aren’t meaningful anymore. Thankfully, Sandbox 2.0’s penetration fall off is far more forgiving than 1.0 and I don’t bounce off the sides of weak armoured tanks over and over again in a Grille 15. (Foch 155 is a good example, but naturally, there are others) I’m expecting Lucas to jump in saying “Well, not always about red line camp!” and that’s where I point the gun at his face and say “Those shots are mid range, find a new sucker!”

    …anyway, the accuracy change must never be implemented. If it ever did, it will put a bullet hole into a game I’ve played for 5 years. The change was aimed for dispersion tanks at 0.4, but more RNG never solves any problems, and every tank will suffer because of it.

    Lucas, yes, it’ll make armour meaningful, but as I bury you six feet under, let me remind you; “They chose poorly.” That’s not how you fix armour, that’s not how you fix anything.

    Find a new sucker.

    1. Brett Brakefield says:

      By the way, if you make out any of this to be serious, aside from the accuracy change not being a good one…you’re an idiot. Canadians don’t have firearms, and the ones that do just hunt with them.

  31. Could they make accurate guns to be accurate and inaccurate/not aimed guns to be not accurate instead of make all of them inaccurate? It could be done by increasing overall dispersion and change scaling of accuracy value, not like this.

    1. I think is was to test how to close the distance of the current engagement range ^^ for instance say everyone in the game have airsoft guns: sniper rifles, assault rifles, and shotguns. Everyone fights at 100 meters. Now everything gets swapped out with paint ball guns. More innaccurate and everyone has to learn new viable positions for each weapon. Everyone still fights the same, shotguns had a nerf so they can’t shoot mid range, assault rifles had a nerf so they can’t snipe, and sniper rifles will need a lot of luck to snipe someone half way across the map. Essentially just that you have to play at a shorter 50 meters.

      1. Hooli_Gun says:

        more like a shorter 100m…….which would make tanks relying on camo and distance(LTs,Paper-armor support MTs)useless cuz insta-spotted…..right?
        but who needs vision-games right?We cant let our noobies get sniped from 300m cuz after all they have a right to waltz down middle-map and not get penned untill they actualy know whos hitting them ….lets just all hop in the ”spotted-in-20sec-and-then-i-kick-your-ass-and-you-kick-my-ass” pan…yeah sounds very strategic and challenging…………..

      2. Hi again Hooli, not exactly an airsoft pro so I probably got the average fighting distance wrong in my example. I don’t really see an argument for lights and mediums to not fight at distances greater than 100 meters especially when camouflage and vision have been unaffected in the sandbox. Tracking is still very viable, abusing bushes by backing away 15 meters is still viable, flanking isolated tanks is still viable, hitting your targets is still viable, and so forth. You really need to understand the game mechanics and work together with your team mates in order to play vision games, it’s not supposed to be easy which is why tier X is the most difficult tier in the game since it takes your understanding of mechanics to the extreme.

        Accuracy has been changed but no where near the degree in the first sandbox, hitting a suicide scout is still very viable if they do not know how to use cover even at 300 meters. Honestly I don’t know what to say Hooli, world of tanks relies on players having a lot of experience. I really recommend you shadow players, watch more videos, and get out there and just play more. The only consistent variable is yourself in games, if you can’t handle the thought that you need to learn how to play, I recommend you play a less competitive game.

  32. Albert says:

    Increse dmg on autoloaders…wtf is that? Back my waffentrager e 100!!! Any news of buffing pen on e100? 235 is sucks… löwe dpm?

    1. Yup, they did buff the clip potential, good luck hitting and penning all your shots like you’re used to though ^^b an E100 pen buff would be lovely, hmm not sure if the Lowe should get any better than a Tiger II than it already is but there are rumors that the Tiger II, Tiger I, and jagtiger might move down a tier and a regular version of the Lowe might entire the tech tree o. O

  33. CAPIRAGE says:

    I do think these changes would be good for the game only if they increased the overall size of the maps taking the corridor brawling meta out of the way and also established a hard cap on the ammount of prem shells one could take into battle, much like in the “Historical battle” mode that was abailable long ago.This way, heavy tanks can still rely on their armor, and mediums and lights actually have space to flank around. Viewrange and signal range would also become important, since as it is right now at higher tiers one can almost spot the whole map in a medium by going just a little to the center.

    Anyway, interesting stuff here, let’s see how it develops.

    1. Hmm interesting point, at the current moment, most people’s computers can’t handle bigger maps I’m assuming, so to make maps larger, they scaled down the effective combat range of all tanks. Should eliminate a number of killzones since people can’t snipe you on daring runs as easily anymore so maybe that was wargaming’s way to open some of the maps up? You’re right view range does seem a bit too high for it to all work out. This sandbox needs a lot of polish.

      Putting a cap on premium ammunition would be a lifesaver, good idea Capirage! 🙂

  34. The dispersion change is a definite buff to people using auto-aim, while it is a nerf to people aiming at weak-spots.

    Why, you might ask?

    Most of the weakspots are on the “edges” of tanks, so with the dispersion change it is guaranteed more shots will miss the target tank altogether if aiming at these. Using auto-aim aims dead-center at tanks, where usually their toughest armour is -> with the dispersion change auto-aimed shots will still hit the tanks, but have a higher chance to hit something which isn’t that well armoured.

    WG probably are well aware of this however, and it very likely is the very intention. People who always use auto-aim (note, autoaim has its uses, like when in a fast moving light or in a derp tank who wants to shooot HE at targets far away and behind an obstacle) will thus feel like they do accomplish much more, and the feeling of accomplishment is one of the greatest motivating factors. It would be cool to know how big portion of tier 10 players always shoot with auto-aim, as my gut feeling is the percentage is *very* high.

    1. This is the argument that you are more accurate not aiming for weak spots than you are aiming for weak points. You’re not the first one to suggest this theory, sure wish there were a way to test it. The accuracy though is still generally clustered around the center so it might be hard to sell that if you aim for a tank’s center of mass that most of your shots will be guided into your target’s commander hatch. This is just my speculation that if you had two marksmen with broken rifles, the drunk one will not be more accurate because two weaknesses do not equal a strength.

      1. I think you missed the point. Currently 50% shots hit the inner 25% of the dispersion circle, and the rest 50% the outer 75% of the dispersion circle. To put it in math, if dispersion is r then the dispersion circle area is (r^2 * π) and 50% of the shots do hit the inner 25% of the circle ( (r/2)^2 * π) ie the inner 25% of the dispersion area, and the remaining 50% of shots hit the outer 75% of the dispersion area. This actually is the current dispersion formula at use in World of Tanks.

        The new dispersion formula (which I haven’t seen yet as a formula) seems to spread all shots evenly inside the dispersion circle (as can be seen in the above picture). This means in future 25% of shots will hit the inner 25% of the dispersion circle, which is essentially a cut in half of the current situation. Conversely, 75% of shots will in the future hit outside the inner 25% of the dispersion circle. Unlike you suggest, it doesn’t matter if you are sober or drunk.

        Currently a person shooting with autoaim sees 50% of his shots hit pretty much dead on centre of where the autoaim is locked on, usually where the toughest armour of the target is. With the new model autoaimers will see 75% of their shots deviate decently far away from this locked on point, but still very likely to hit the tank they are aiming at.

        In short, it *does* mean more shots from autoaimers will hit something else than the toughest armoured part of the target in the future. This *is* a buff to people using autoaim. Conversely, it *is* a nerf to people aiming at vulnerable parts on the edges of the tank. However, it is totally up to opinion if this change is good or bad; it will definitively help people who use autoaim, and it very likely is the very intention of WG (I would be willing to bet the amount of people using autoaim (and perhaps just shooting premium ammo) is the main-source of real-world money to WG).

      2. I don’t know where you got your math but shots rarely deviate outside the aiming circle even if they ever did. You are probably making the common misunderstanding that when you zoom into sniper mode that the aiming reticle only gets as large as your screen which is why it hangs a bit before shrinking. It is fairly deceptive but when a shot flies out of your reticle in sniper view, the matter is more down to not fully aiming your shot or even server lag when you make snap shots. This is because world of tanks servers calculate whether your shot hit while the shell was still in the air. Initially your own computer calls a shot on your screen and the wargaming server miles away calculates where your target was in relation to when you fired. This is also the source of the mythical ghost shell (more commonly my shell dipped under the tank and only hit the tracks). It is one of the many problems with online gaming. You don’t notice this happening in battlefield or cod because there are so many shots flying through the air that it is really difficult to notice.

        I had to go to a training room to test this with various tanks but fully aimed shots do not have any of the deviations that you tried to fantasize. Even if you look at the diagrams up above, they are not lies, none of the shots are outside the aiming reticle.

        Look, if you don’t aim shots, there will always be some luck that you hit somewhere beneficial. If you were throwing darts and aiming for the outside circle while blindfolded, sure, if you throw enough shit at the wall, some of it will stick. On the other hand, dispersion are not miraculously as bad as you put it. Play the sandbox, aiming is still a thing, this is quintessentially why you can still get out traded. A player that kills you doesn’t normally kill you because he was relying on luck and you are a perfect god of world of tanks but really it comes down to yourself for putting yourself in the most advantageous position to succeed. If all you do is track your opponents through auto aim then they will just aim in at you and kill you because you don’t know how to use the game mechanics. It’s not called RNG, it’s called not being a bloody idiot.

      3. Ok, you are totally missing the point (oh the irony 😀 ). I have never claimed shots don’t hit the aiming circle, they do. In current dispersion model 50% of shots hit the inner 25% of the dispersion circle, 50% hit the outer 75% of the dispersion circle. But every single shot *does* hit inside the dispersion circle.

        This is the issue you LUCASGREENCHEESECO do not seem to grasp. There are no ghost shells, like you claim. It doesn’t matter if you are fully aimed in or not, like you claim, the dispersion formula stays exactly the same.

        The new dispersion formula at use on Sandbox changes that. The shots on SB are evenly dispersed inside the dispersion circle. Again, it doesn’t matter if you are fully aimed in or not, the formula stays the same.

        Please try to read what I have written above with a thought. And please stop pretending there are ghostshells or shells going outside the aiming circle in WoT, because there are not. And please stop pretending the dispersion formula somehow magically change whether you are fully aimed in or not.

      4. I actually put an argument against ghost shells, Swuul, saying that people generally believe there are ghost shells when in reality that the shell just passes under neath a tank only hitting the tracks or lag in their internet. You will know that I never said ghost shells were real and only condoned people that believed they were real were making a perceptive mistake. My reply was fairly lengthy so misreads are expected but understand that if I thought that you were referring to ghost shells and disagreed with you, I would not go on to such lengths to encourage the existence of ghost shells, that would be illogical.

        Upon a further reread of your comments I have concluded that you are thinking of a dispersion circle in multiple rings which is a bit out of the ordinary since I only really see one ring during game play. It only occurred to me upon reviewing the diagram up above that that may have been what you were referring to originally. I apologize for misreading your comment when you said “the rest 50% the outer 75% of the dispersion circle” I interpreted outer as outside the dispersion circle.

        The original reason I got up in arms at you in the first place was because you said, “The dispersion change is a definite buff to people using auto-aim, while it is a nerf to people aiming at weak-spots.” Therefore, I disagreed with you that if you nerf accuracy, that inadvertently does not make you more accurate if you don’t aim for weak points because shots still are clustered around the center of the reticle. Perhaps situationally your argument would be valid if you auto aimed and fired at a 110 at a distance of 200 meters where the tank would take up the entire size of the dispersion circle and hit the weaker pike cheeks on the edge of the tank but at the same time, if you auto aimed at an IS-6 at 200 meters you might hit the IS-6’s hull cheeks which are stronger than the frontal plate.

        I don’t wish to be hostile when pointing this out, but the dispersion circle size has remained unchanged despite the change in where shots land within the circle so when you are auto aiming at 50 meters the circle will generally never be outstandingly large that it encapsulates the entire tank. At least at tier X where accuracy is the best tier for tier. It just seems like too much luck to rely on. But hey, if you think that the pros in competitions might start auto aiming more as their bread and butter, more power to you. I look forward to facing you on the battlefield 🙂

  35. Jurrunio says:

    – AP and APCR lose more pen over range

    Then pen and accuracy of dedicated snipers will have to be buffed. No way an M4A1 Revolver is going close to its enemies just because WG wants more “action-packed, close-range engagements”.

Leave a Reply