[WoT] Making Nasty Things Prettier

In response to Nasty Little Things post,

the feedback actually appeared to be more applicable for PC WoT than for WoT Blitz, since in the latter we either have done many things differently (aiming, crews, key bindings, interface, etc) or have already accounted for what was suggested (platoon restrictions, MMing spreads, vehicle filters in garage, etc).

So I have forwarded the summary below to Storm for his review, he said it was useful. Probably I can squeeze some more from him in future. Right now it's rather difficult because of the workload related to 0.8.9 (EU and NA) update which is being tested publicly at the moment. By the way how do you like the update so far?

Mechanics

It's really annoying having aimed at a tank far away with no ground behind him and shoot just a split second after the tank disappears and when your gun immediately raises itself making it a definite miss.

Aiming/reticule automatically moves up a bit when I aim at a target far away. Normally you would have to aim higher than the target, because the shell drops while it is in the air. But WoT does this automatically. At first this seems like a good way to help inexperienced players. But in the end it hinders me hitting my targets. When a target is moving and I have to aim in front of it, I would just aim a bit higher to account for shell drop and a bit the the left or right, so the target "drives into the shell".

But in WoT this happens: As soon as I move my reticule away from the target, to account for it's speed/direction of travel, the automated vertical correction no longer aims at the distance of the target but it aims at whatever I am currently aiming at. If it is a hill, or even the sky, my shot will be too high, or too low, and I can't do anything about it.

Also why are there still no tier limitations on platooning to prevent the Maus + Leichtraktor troll platoons? I can't think of a single reason for not preventing this from being possible.

My biggest bugbear in WoT is that often it's possible to peek over a bit of terrain / round a building in in sniper mode, place the reticle squarely over an enemy tank, (without that red outline showing up, but WHOLE targeting reticle over tank), fire, and just hit the terrain because the collision model doesn't match what's visible.

Also, make it possible for the red highlight around enemy vehicle when you target it, to show up when aiming at the enemy tank across a wreck of a tank. At the moment, for instance, if you aim at enemy tank through a wreck e.g. between wreck's gunbarrel and hull, you have your penetration indicator work, but no red highlight show up.

When in a rush and using hot keys for repair kits and you hit the wrong one you are basically fucked. You need to move your hand to the ESC key to close it, retype the hotkey to get it right. Very bad. 

camera's settings reset after each battle (really senseless feature)

Get rid of the forced f1 help key binding in game. I mean, FFS, who uses the help key after 100, 1000, 10,000 batles? Yet, its FORCED bound to one of the MOST useful F keys. For god sake, allow that F1 key to be rebound to something useful. 

Ability to rebind ctrl and alt

AFK tanks and bots.

The existence of premium ammo and the ability to spam it endlessly without any limitations. Every tank is designed and balanced with its armor and penetration of its gun taken into account.

Chat

I would also like a notification if someone adresses me in chat - a ping sound or something. Clanchat, whispers, etc. in battle. Chatlog.

Not being able to private message with those in my clan is annoying. I'm forced to add people already in my clan list, to my friends list, just to send them a message.

For me, lack of any indication in e.g. clan chat, that someone is AFK or in battle, it would be really nice if I could set some infos for their mates (or if I'm in battle, system would set it for me), similar you can do that on communicators like Skype.

Limited ignore list size (256?)

No counter for clan members online

Interface. Lobby

The absence of ping in garage. Not funny when you go to battle with 999 ping. 

Plane/Tank viewer. In EVE Online you can see in the market your ship in a 3D fashion (even if it in the game the shape has it no meaning.). As for WOT where shape (slope) has a meaning, it should be in the game. How? To save space add a magnifying glass symbol on the picture of the Tank/Plane details; if you click it a window opens and you can see your plane/tank and can scroll in, look it from all sides.

better indication of an invite or chat request, something should popup in the middle of the screen to get your attention, rather than the button/icon simply glowing.

Transaction logs

Interface. Vehicle Specs

how much HP the turret uprgade adds to the tank is to either buy it and find out or look on youtube at videos of upraded tanks

The horizontal gun velocity is one of the most important stats for an arty.

You can find that info nowhere ingame.

A warning on light tanks that suddenly get Scout Tiering, as in the Pz38na.

Interface. Platoons

Tank Tier in platoon window. I cannot believe your UI designers missed this out, and we have to rely on a mod such as XVM to show our platoon mates tank tiers (and battle tiers).

Special Battles, Tank Company, Platoon, Training Room interfaces (and possibly Team Battles - have not seen its interface yet). These need to show tank tier, battle tiers.

Tank sorting in TC and CW waiting room. Currently the sort is based on when the player joined the room, which is useless. It means the caller is constantly having to go down the list multiple times making sure there are enough mediums or T57s or whatever for the plan. A simple sort by tank would make this 100x easier.

If anything the platoon/TC should just transfer leadership to the last guy standing in it so he has the option to invite others again instead of making a new group.

Interface. Tank carousel

Why are there still no tier and premium filters in the tank ribbon?

Tank Tier filtering in garage - this is an absolute must, especially if you have a large amount of tanks in your garage.

Option to have few rows of tanks "portraits" instead of big useless tank

Tank Carousel. I want more then Primary markers. Tier, Grinding, Clan Wars, Tank company, and favourites are a must for me. As this list is different for each player, just let us create and name our own filters and select which tanks are in it.

Possibility to sort tanks in any order I want (according to my prefereable order of playing them

Interface. Missions

Very often the missions are simply named mission, There should be a name for every one of them.

Some missions although have measurable parameters (like damage done, XP earned etc), dont have progress bar attached to them.

Mission after battle interface could be improved so that you do not have to click to every mission to see what they are. 1 line of explanation under the mission name would be enough.

Interface. Battle

Fire notification. Especially a problem on large screen monitors, it should be a great big message in the middle of the screen.

Reload timer. Come on guys, how hard can it actually be if mod developers have implemented this in the various cross hairs for a long time. Minor UI tweak.. major usability improvement.

Interface. Crews

XVM's didn't have a crew transfer/send option and it was torture transferring crews one by one again.

Garage - send entire crew to barracks /pick best crew. Again, we have to wait for XVM to step up and give us a major usability improvement especially when loading a crew into a premium tank.

Crew manipulation. Without XVM's update it is tedious and slow to reuse crew on premium tanks. Send all crew to barracks, use own crew, use best crew, use same type crew.

Option to assign a crewmember to many different tanks at the same time - of course if a specific tanker is in battle in one tank, player is not able to play any other tank where this tanker is assigned. That way I will need absolutely no crewmemeber swapping while using the same crew on premium and normal vehicle.

Misc

Whenever you patch an existing tank you drop all equipment, consumables and stuff from him and you don'T tell us- So we login and play with stock and no modules the first time as you usually don't notice this. MARK THE TANK and force us to check equipment first when you do this. Its rude not doing so.

No automatic server change when joining CW

a checkbox on the login page below the "save password" checkbox labeled "atomatic login"

the checkbox is greyed out if "save password" is not enabled

if "save password" and "automatic login" is enabled the client will go directly into the garage if the player presses "play" in the launcher or launches worldoftanks.exe directly

to disable auto login, change the user or change the server the player has to "disconnect from server" form the game menu

[WoT] Update 8.8

What's your opinion on the newly-released 0.8.8 for World of Tanks? Online numbers, CCUs and such stuff across all regions, were a good indicator that the update was well received, however the devil is in details. What you liked and what you didn't?

• New mission interface in garage
• New statistics tabs
• National voiceovers
• Tundra map
• Redesigned Komarin, Swamp, and Serene Coast
• New Soviet medium tanks
• New German tanks and rebalanced VK30.01 and VK36.01
• New Chinese tanks (anyone?)

Anything else?

PS: I'm in Japan now, expect some interesting pictures and breaking news.
PPS: Rolling out 0.5.3 for World of Warplanes for RU/CIS region. EU and NA to come.

[WG] Interview with Slava Makarov: What’s Ahead.

The 3rd interview of the series.

— Slava, what’s your role in WG now and how did you become part of the company?

— I joined Wargaming 4 years ago and I was one of those who initiated World of Tanks. Now I am VP of Producing (Head of Producing Department) of the company (and my boss - Overlord). My major task is to make sure that our new projects reflect the global strategy of the company and satisfy the quality standards of Wargaming. To put it short, I make sure that all our games are cool!

— Where are you heading now? All your “Worlds…” are well-known and the plans regarding them are pretty clear: new vehicles, new modes… What about World of Tanks Generals, for example? 

— It’s more difficult with Warplanes and Warships than it seems. The games differ not only in terms of vehicle types. They both have their unique battle pace and the gameplay itself. World of Warplanes is the most dynamic out of the three. 3D battles require good reaction and the ability to adapt to a fast-changing situation. World of Warships is a more strategic type of game with relatively slow gameplay. When all the three projects are out, every user will be able to satisfy their preferences.
The success of Tanks was partly due to the fact that we slowed down comparing to Counter Strike and shooter fans found something slower and more technically accurate than CS. Now we have two new products – one of them is faster than Tanks, the other one is slower. Warplanes are more about skills. Warships are about strategy. Thus we tend to widen the horizons of game experience for our players.

— Do you think this choice might lead to the audience’s splitting age-wise? Warplanes’ players will be younger than the ones playing Tanks and those who prefer Warships will fall into an older category. 

— I am 100% sure that the Warplanes’ audience will be younger than the current Tanks’ audience. And it’s okay. I don’t see a problem if Warships will attract an older audience than the Warplanes. By the way those who came to like Tanks in 2009 will have grown 4-5 years older when we release the Warships. Hopefully they will be old enough to appreciate the Warships’ appeal. I personally prefer World of Warships because I am pretty old now ☺
I’d say that World of Tanks requires a lot of strategic elements to play successfully. However, we do understand that “digging” into strategy we would ruin the good old gameplay. It’s unlikely that most players will be happy about that. That’s why we’ve decided to develop a completely new project where strategy is crucial.

— What about WoT Generals then? Are they for grannies?:)

— Nope! The uniqueness of WOT Generals is in its individual confrontation with other players. In addition, this project is aimed for less powerful devices.

A lot of users wouldn’t mind playing something related to Tanks but they can’t do it during breaks of a working day for example. For them we are going to offer World of Tanks: Generals and World of Tanks Blitz. These projects will be available on tablets and smartphones and in any browser. The main goal is to minimize playing time. If a player wants Tanks, some kind of them will be available all the time.

— Wives will start hating you! You will occupy all the niches of a player’s life! 

— Is there anything bad about it?:) We have got our load of comments from angry wives with World of Tanks already. A little more of hatred won’t worsen our karma seriously.

— All the Worlds… are using the same engine - Big World. What about WoT Generals? Anything new will be used for them? 

— The “exterier” – something that a player sees – it’s not Big World, it’s a browser application on HTML5. It was chosen because we are more or less sure that all browsers will support this version in a few upcoming years. One can’t say the same about Flash, on the other hand.

— There quite a few browser games where outstanding things are made using Flash? 

— Nobody knows how many years they will support Flash in Safari for Macs and other devices. The confrontation of Apple and Adobe Flash is no secret. The interest of other companies to the multimedia platform has faded greatly. We don’t want to face the situation when we lose audience just because they cannot play because of technical reasons.

— You have recently made a few big acquisitions: studios with good expertise which developed popular games. Are they going to work on porting your World of trilogy and WoT Generals to different devices or are you going to use their potential otherwise? 

— Our acquisitions is a different story. We felt that at some things we are not as good as we’d want to be. The first issue was definitely the engine. We needed full control over the server part of the technology to ensure stability. Big World was an expected and reasonable purchase. Acquiring Day One Studios is also about technology. The studio can boast great expertise developing multiplatform projects. They guys know how to develop games for different platforms, devices and controls.
It’s different with Gas Powered Games though. First of, they are a source of gamedesign expertise for us. They have great experience in world-renowned titles development and they simply know a lot about about game development as such. The aim of all these purchases is expanding the company’s knowledge base. Possibly as a result we will have other projects that are not Tank-related. Sooner or later they will be announced.

— Gas Powered Games included?

— Gas Powered Games included. Chris Taylor smiles all the time he is interviewed. We are not announcing anything as we are still discussing with Chris what kind of game we are developing in detail. It’s not a two-week discussion. Everything has to be counted accurately: cost of development; whether we have enough resources and whether we are professional enough. If all goes well, we’ll come out with a few products that will blow the industry!

— One question only: reality or fantasy? 

— No comment.

— Talking about Gas Powered Games… World of Tanks as well as other Worlds are European games mostly. The topic of World War II is not very popular in the US. Maybe you acquired Gas Powered Games to learn to develop games for the USA? 

— As I have already mentioned, we want to boost our expertise, including the regional markets specifics. We are currently working on organizing the process of how to teach our teams  those things which the US guys – old good developers - are good at. The reciprocal training process is currently going. We aim to increase the professionalism of all our teams.

— How do teams from different countries interact? Their mentalities are different as well as their experience. How are the new teams doing? 

— I went to the US where I communicated with the Chicago team from Day One Studios and Chris Taylor. They are very cool and comfortable to work with. Seriously! I’d say that the barrier between the American mentality and ours is exaggerated. On condition of mutual respect and understanding, everything goes perfectly well.

Of course there are some specific moments. For example, I tend to be outspoken and they used to think that I was being aggressive. It might be not our national mentality but my personal feature. WOT team had to also get used to this characteristic of mine. To tell an American that their idea is not that great means to give offence to them. We should be softer. In my case everyone had to adapt. The guys understood that my criticism doesn’t lead to firing someone. And I also started to be more attentive when I had to say something which was not a praise.

— What about the contacts between teams? Do they communicate via a top manager? Or is there a horizontal scheme of communication? 

— The devs communicate with each other directly, they discuss technological issues using their own language that only they can understand. Managers communicate directly too as well as game designers. There are not many horizontal contacts on day-to-day basis, but it hasn’t been long since the acquisitions took place.

— They say that in Wargaming America employees attend the Russian Language courses?

— Yes, there are people learning English. For instance I work directly with Chris Keeling, a western game designer who has been cooperating with WG since Operation Bagration. He speaks a little bit Russian.

We mostly communicate in English with our colleagues. Our European and American offices employ Russian speaking colleagues too. It’s nice and somehow useful in terms of building rapport.

— Shall we expect a new WG title about gigantic marching warrobots – Massive Assult resurrection or something like that? 

— I’ll give you our traditional answer – we’ll let you know ASAP ☺

Originally posted here. 

[WoT] News From the Front

Related to 0.8.8:

• Superpershing's armour "belt" on upper armour plate is now 2 times wider (hitbox now corresponds to the visuals)
• E-75's passing ability for bad and medium terrains is improved
• Ammo sliders have been reversed to previous version. Will be improving the new version.
• Bugs and glitches related to going into battle have been fixed. Now it should work ok.
• There will be a surprise related to global rating.
• British desert camo with blue string will be returned.

Not related to 0.8.8:

• Haven't decided on KV-1S top gun thing yet. This is being discussed.
• Object 140 turret will be re-armoured (going to be similar to T-62A) some time in 0.9.0 - need more tests.
• The concept of historical battles is now more or less finalised and almost ready to go into pre-production. Finally.

[WoTB] New Screenshots

World of Tanks Blitz is now being tested internally. The game was demoed behind closed doors at Gamescom. At this stage we are satisfied with what we have got - closed beta will show though.

Below are some new screenshots (yes, they are not from PC):

[WoT] ASAP 0.8.8

While this might be a bit late, adding the video on 0.8.8, to start talks on the major (as promised) upcoming update.

Among the big features:

• Quest system improved and supported in the game client
• New line of Soviet med tanks
• National crew voices (finally)
• Redesigned achievements/statistics tab
• New map - Tundra
• Komarin map is back!
• Super Pershing rebalance (you will get a chance to sell it, if you want to)
• and some more

[MoO] Space Awaits

Following this post, I assume there are at least some MoO fans around.

This is going to be feedback/brainstorming topic. What new MoO title would you like to play?

• Genre (strategy, MMO, etc)
• Platform (s)
• Distribution (f2p, paid, etc)
• Particular MoO 1, MoO 2, MoO 3 (o_O) features you liked
• Visual style and art
• Anything else 

Give your ideas and remember that every vote counts.

[WoT] 0.8.7?

The 0.8.7 update has been live for a while (especially for EU server) - waiting for feedback in this thread. Share your personal pros and cons - already heard fair amount of negativity tbh. That means 0.8.8 will definitely be better :)

Personally, I haven't checked out the new (0.8.7) version yet because of the vacation. Going to do that later today. 

[WoWP] Open Beta Impressions

World of Warplanes open beta has been up and running for quite some time for now. Any impressions and feedback you could share at this stage? How's grind so far?

The game will fully go live before long. Still, we are going to release at least a couple of both minor and major updates prior to that focusing on interfaces, optimizations, single wallet / premium account for Wargaming's games, balance fixes (including high-tier battles), mouse controls, reduction of server lags, post-battle screen, cameras, crew functionality, new consumables, new content (Brits, anyone?), including maps and some other stuff, I forgot to mention.

So, how's your flight?

[WG] Anton Sitnikau On Warplanes

Yet another interview. Now with Anton Sitnikau, WoWP Lead Producer

 — Anton, currently you are World of Warplanes producer however your start was totally different – you were a programmer. What is the story behind this transition? How long did it take? What stages did you go through? 

— I was studying to become a programmer, which I eventually did getting software engineering degree from Belarusian National Technical University. My specialization was C++. First 10 years after graduation I spent working for a scientific research institute. I developed and supported dispatching systems for power engineering. Those 10 years were interesting both in terms of contents and financially, but it was middle-age crisis I guess that made me long for a change. I went to work for the largest IT-company in Minsk then (EPAM Systems - Overlord), where I did a course on ABAP/4. I stayed there for a year only and mostly because that condition was stated in my contract. Despite growing popularity and potential of SAP, it appeared to be not my cup of tea. I was invited for a job interview in a small and cozy company called Wargaming. The opening I was interviewed for was of a game logics developer. And that was my role in 2005 when I joined the company. In those times we were developing something that was later called “Operation Bagration” (Order of War for Western market - Overlord).

 — When you joined the company, were you thinking of becoming a game designer? 

— Back then I didn’t know that such profession existed. When they were introducing some of the colleagues who were game designers, I could hardly understand what the guys did. It appeared that game designers had their fingers in many pies – they were doing a lot of things from different areas. The only thing they didn’t do was drawing, perhaps. This situation was true not just about WG but a lot of other gamedev companies, too.  My personal transition to game design was smooth. Executing my duties as a programmer, I also worked on draft unit balance in technodemos and on making video presentations. When I got to grips with the essentials of game design, I finally realized that I wanted to be fully involved in the area.

— But why?

— I have never had troubles coming up with ideas. I felt that my background as a programmer is beneficial because it was easy to sieve the ideas that were impossible to implement. Long story short, I had an interview with Victor Kisly and my shift to game design was approved. Soon I was appointed “Operation Bagration” lead game designer.

— It sounds like you took over the project just off the bat? 

— Well, yes. I’d say it’s probably one of WG’s traditions to throw a person into the open see and wait if they swim out or not. If they emerge, that’s cool. If not, well…kinda sad but overall they work…so…
«Bagration» was a success. We got “Best Strategic Game Award” at KRI (Russian game awards - Overlord) and we also got Editor’s Choice Award from several game industry editions.
At some point at pre-final stage of working on the westernized reincarnation of “Bagration”  — Order of War — I was offered to move to “World of Tanks” project as a balance specialist. Mostly I was working on game economy but sometimes – on battle balance as well (at early stages - alpha, closed and open beta of WoT - Overlord). I was curious about other tasks too, but the project needed a technical specialist able to analyze and calculate, which I was. I worked out an economy model which was a totally reckless thing as there were no statistics – not enough at least – it wasn’t obvious what data to be guided by. Even the system of prices and values was to be defined. The model appeared to operate successfully and to some extent it’s been applied in WoWP as well. Obviously, the model has been polished as the economy of an MMO is affected by various influences and fluctuations. This process will be going on for as long as the project lasts.

— When were you offered to be at the helm of Warplanes?

— The initial balance of “Tanks” was completed. For a month or two I worked as an analyst and later became the lead of the analytical department that never appeared. During that time a report system  specifications were created (the system is now in WoT - Overlord). The system has been implemented and will be fully functioning in WoWP open beta. It was then that I was offered to check out “Warplanes”. I went to Kiev, played the prototype, got acquainted with the staff. Upon arrival I came up with a huge report listing project risks, major gameplay issues, gave characteristics to the staff. The time has proved that I was right about all of the points. Thus, I was offered to lead the project from Minsk side.

The studio in Kiev was very professional. It started to grow fast due to the new project mostly – World of Warplanes I am talking about. In Minsk we had experience, knowledge and vision developed with “Tanks”. All of it was to be shared with the developers in Kiev. Kiev specialists are cool but some “parenting control” is necessary anyways. It’s true not just about the level of concept creation but also knowledge transfer from major to minor details.

— Would you say that your programming background helps you now, when you are a project producer and in charge of “Warplanes” gameplay? 

— It helps when I have to make an astonished face asking: Do you really believe that the development of this feature will take a week? I’d say that my technical background, logical thinking and common sense are of great use. They help to formulate requirements and specifications. Plus it helps to stick to a rather strict and consistent product concept as such.

— How are “Warplanes” different from “Tanks” in technical terms? What problems did you have due to these discrepancies? 

— In technical terms “Warplanes” and “Tanks” are very different. One of the main reasons is the transition from 2.5D in WoT to full 3D in WoWP. Besides, plane speed and armament are totally different. Although we did understand that the concept of “like tanks but about planes” sounded a bit naive, it turned out that the gameplay was even more different than we imagined. A lot of solutions were to be developed from scratch. It was tough as we lacked some specific experience.

For instance, render. World of Tanks has never used the default one – offered by BigWorld. Our render was modernized and shaped according to tank “needs”. Even at alpha stage it was different from the default version. It turned out that what we had for tanks couldn't be applied to what we required to have for planes. Planes need bigger maps, very few visual objects in the air. Planes themselves are more complicated than tanks. The main object that the player sees for 99% of the whole gameplay should be implemented otherwise, not like in WoT. For “Warplanes” it’s not important to display a bicycle leaning on a fence in a shadow of a tree in detail, but this is something that those who play tanks should see. Those who pilot planes can see that only when they are flying over the ground on high speed. However, the rest requires a more thorough approach: complexity of the aircraft models, 3D terrain, massive trees, large city quarters, water, complex 3D clouds.

When Kiev programmers got the BigWorld box version render, they realized that it was not enough at all – just the same thing had happened to Minsk programmers when they were working on “Tanks”. For some time we were coping with a compilation of the default render, tank pieces and first own ideas, but eventually the WoWP render was redeveloped and redesigned completely. By the way, then the knowledge was transferred to St.-Petersburg - WoWS will get its own unique render that has very little in common with default BW solution.

— These render improvements of yours, are they integrated back to BigWorld? 

— Now they are. In the situation being we can prioritize our requests to the Australian team more effectively. Much work has been done on server-side improvement, network protocols optimization and toolset development. Speaking on server-side, WoWP differs from WoT a lot. For instance, take shooting. When the shell is fired, it flies with a particular speed according to particular ballistics, enters the armour plate under a particular angle. It can pierce the armour, can just damage it or ricochet. The shell behavior is defined by real life empiric formulae.  Having penetrated the shell can move further and damage one or more internal tank modules, inside armor compartments an so on. Now we can compare. The tank gun makes up to 6 or so shots a minute. My favourite example in “Warplanes” is the following: tier 3 attack aircraft – a monstrous Soviet construction of the 30-ies ТSh-3 – carries 10 machine-guns, every one of which shoots 10 bullets per second. Although the armour of planes is simpler that the one of tanks and we don’t really need detailed calculations for penetration, it still is a serious calculation problem. No one is insured against a battle where 30 (!) ТSh-3 will start shooting simultaneously.  Initially we were trying to deal with it by clusterization of bullets and after the server side optimization we can now calculate each bullet separately. Well, of course there are some simplifications but in terms of game mechanics, we are happy now.

— Apart from render-issues, were there any other difficulties in the development process of WoWP? 

— From the very beginning our major concern was simple and comfortable controls system. First, we simplified the aircraft’s behavior. We disabled the flatter – vibration on a particular speed, which may lead to a plane destruction. We disabled the spin, too. We left behind the nuances of fuel mixtures regulations and some other things. We are not trying to make a hardcore simulator, our target audience is different.  Despite this and thanks to this, our controls have to be user-friendly and understandable. And funnily enough our advantage is our drawback at the same time. What I mean to say is that everything is calculated on the server only.

— Is that a way of fighting against cheaters?

— Yes. We tend to guarantee equal rights for all players. What has it led to? Let’s compare with “Tanks”. The player pushes the button “move forward” and the tank accelerates. The plane has got totally different speeds. They require different reactions – being 200 milliseconds late can be too much for a player. “Warplanes” is definitely a more dynamic shooter than “Tanks”. Imagine the situation, game client has got player’s input, converted it, sent to server, the server has calculated everything and sent it back to client, which has interpolated and visualized everything. If the flight physics and the damage were calculated on the client side, we would be able to have sensitive controls straightaway.  However, the players can be located somewhere far and the ping of 300 milliseconds is quite unpleasant for “Tanks” players, for “Warplanes” it's just fatal.  By the way, server lags are just one aspect. Another aspect would be causality and easy controls. To solve this problem we spent a lot of time and resources. We created more than 15 controls prototypes. Barely 1/3 of those has reached our testers. At some point our flight model became overcomplicated and too difficult to balance. Our controls were liked by some players but hated by others. When we tried to change the controls, these audiences switched places. We felt we faced a dead-end.

However, a young and initiative group of developers inside the development unit – game designer Anton Muskeev and server programmer Misha Pavlenko gathered together to prototype independently in their own time. In one of the meetings with Minsk managers the guys presented their prototype and we got amazed! Their solution was developed in parallel to the existing one. After some time their idea became the default version and it was introduced in 0.4.0 update. Now we understand that we are on the right path.

What was the solution of the creative duet? The guys have totally redesigned the flight model on the server making the behavior of the plane more sensitive and real. They were not afraid to try out some architectural changes. It allowed us eventually to have a totally independent and quality data processing from different devices. I have to mention that the final version of the solution appeared with the help of 777 studio – the guys who created a fine hardcore simulator Rise of Flight about WWI warplanes. At the moment by the way they are working on the new IL2 with 1C. We invited them as consultants. Their expertise and fresh approach helped us to polish the great solution and make it fantastic.

Finally we implemented these new mouse controls. Plus we started working on a more hardcore option of the controls but it was decided to freeze the implementation.  Apart from the controls, the guys’ flight model was more predictable. This complex of solutions simplified game designers’ lives when it came to aircraft balance and adjustments. Now all the planes can be easily tuned according to both, historical data and gameplay needs.

— Are the Ukrainian developers any different from Belarusians? 

— They are. Their temperament is different as well as their attitude to corporate culture. In Minsk all communication processes are tougher. In Kiev they are more relaxed and friendly.

It is easier in Kiev when it comes to finding resources. Their market is richer. In Kiev there are a lot of studios of well-known companies, which “shared” their employees with us. From employer’s perspective the situation in Kiev is less tense than in Minsk. Plus, people are more eager to relocate to Ukraine rather than to Belarus.

I am happy to work with the Ukrainian office. The team has got experience of working for European and American companies renowned in game-industry. The guys in Kiev are competent and qualified. On one hand, their outsourcing experience is a double-edged sword. You have to change the way you think when you are working on your own project. On the other hand, “Warplanes” is the first own project for the studio. The story about controls development I told earlier is a proof of how the way of thinking is changing.

Generally speaking, “we make our own product” mood is still something that empowers Kiev developers. It becomes obvious the very moment you enter the office – posters of WoWP everywhere, a lot of plane models on desks. It’s great that people like what they do!

Originally posted here. 

[ALL] WG & Linux

Online game developer and publisher Wargaming relies on Linux and open source software to produce and distribute its line of popular military strategy games, says Maksim Melnikau, a solution architect at Wargaming.

The growing company joined the Linux Foundation in May as it seeks to advance the gaming industry. And it's off to a great start, having shipped more than 15 titles since 1998, including the armored World of Tanks and World of Warplanes, a free-to-play flight combat game. Wargaming is now expanding to a new mobile platform and continues to hire developers as it opens offices across the globe.

Here, Melnikau discusses how Wargming uses Linux; the company's hardware setup; gaming on Linux; his advice to game developers; and openings at the company.

How does Wargaming use Linux?

We extensively use Linux for multiple Wargaming projects. Servers for all our games, for example, are powered by Linux. Whether you play World of Tanks and World of Warplanes on PC, World of Tanks: Blitz on iPad, iPhone or any Android device, World of Tanks 360 Edition on your Xbox, or World of Tanks Generals in your browser—the server side is always Linux-based.

To run its web services, Wargaming actively uses a wide range of open source tools and frameworks such as, to name but a few: MySQL, Python, Django, Nginx, and RabbitMQ, and when it comes to servers, all our games rely on Linux.

The company’s development studios handle their day-to-day operations and processes, widely applying Linux. Finally, many of us prefer the GNU OS for everyday use.

What’s your server setup? 

World of Tanks has client-server based architecture, where everything is being calculated on the server. The major benefit it grants is security—it is virtually impossible to hack in to the World of Tanks. The client does nothing other than translate keyboard and mouse movements into commands to send to the server.

The overall server setup depends on the amount of active players. The Russian game cluster, for example, peaks with more than 800,000 concurrent users, which calls for relevant server capacities. Presently the game cluster has close to 300 powerful servers with 24 threads and 64 GB RAM each. Besides significant computing power, we have huge database machines with a lot of RAM (our largest database server has 384GB RAM, to be exact) and powerful storage (24 HDD x 600 GB in RAID10).

What are some of Wargaming’s most popular titles for LinuxOS users?

Although there’s no World of Tanks client for Linux, the game runs on Wine and other Windows emulators.
The collectible card MMO game World of Tanks Generals, which is now in Closed Alpha testing, will be cross-platform. Another upcoming title—the mobile MMO action game World of Tanks Blitz—will have a version for Android.

How has the recent release to Steam on Linux worked out so far?

Wargaming is not using Steam for its products. The company’s vision is to create and run its own distribution services. However, we are happy to watch Linux evolve as a quality gaming platform, and Steam is what helps it to grow.

What advice would you give developers who want to build games for Linux?

For starters, I’d tell them to be less platform-specific and concentrate more on the quality and robustness of the experience they create. If your game is engaging, accessible, and deep, it will attract players at launch. Don’t stop when the game goes live—improve and grow it to ensure users stick to it for years on. As for the server side, I would definitely advise you to choose Linux.

Why did you join the Linux Foundation?

We rely on Linux open source tools a lot. They help us continuously improve on our server platform and stay in the vanguard of the global technology evolution of this massive movement.
The Linux Foundation contributed greatly to Wargaming’s success, and we hope to continue our collaboration in the future and expand it into other areas.

I see you’re currently looking for a Linux system administrator. What are the skills and experience you look for in new Linux hires?

Besides system administrators, we seek Linux system developers and Web developers. The full list of vacancies and requirements for them is available at Hot Vacancies section of Wargaming’s corporate website. Linux engineers will find plentiful offerings there. As for the skills, we hire both experienced specialists and those only starting their work life.

Originally posted here.

[WoT] 0.8.7 Preview

Taken from WoT RU.

No comments. 

[360] Tanks All Around

Taken from here.

Did you have a chance to try the game in beta on during E3 2013? Any thoughts?

I don't own any console and my first PvP experience with WoT 360 happened about 3 weeks ago - found the controls pretty intuitive. Sure thing, gold Xbox Live sub requirement is a kind of entry barrier, unfortunately there was nothing we could. May be MS will drop this as they did with updating fees just recently. :)

And, which side are you on - Xbox One or PS4? 

[WoT] 0.8.6 Hits EU

Major 0.8.6 update has just hit EU and it's time for first-hand feedback on it (NA guys, sorry for the release delay this time).

• tier 10 arty branches
• economy changes including switch to free-2-win and credit income boost
• exp income boost for TDs and SPGs 
• game mechanics changes (HEAT, spall liner, camos, accuracy, shell normalization, pen reduction, damage and pen range, velocity reduction for arty shells)  
• dynamic camera
• new Korean-style map
• new birds added to Ruinberg and Lakeville

And how is overall performance after 0.8.6?

[WG] WoWS Is Taking Off

The first WoWS demo took place during E3 and consisted of two 6 vs 6 battles. Players fought US and Japanese destroyers, cruisers, battleships, and carriers.

The scale of action was epic with maps up 100 km in length and width with multiple islands. And there is reason to go large, because battleships (like demoed North Carolina) had effective range up to 40km.

Battles usually began with recon and fighter planes taking off from cruisers and carriers to locate the enemies. While both sides are approaching one another it's time to get a closer look at nicely modeled ships, all based on real-life materials. The attention to detail is impressive, however the decks did look a bit empty without crews dashing about. Well, this is pre-alpha.

Balance is classical: rock - paper - scissors.

Battleships with their heavy but slow guns are weak in close combat, and can't defend against destroyers which are vulnerable against cruisers which have little to withstand battleships' competition.

As for carriers, well, they have no guns worth mentioning. Carriers have a game of their own, using RTS-like UI to control their aerial forces. There is no control of single aircraft of course (go play WoWP), orders are given to entire units.

The goal of the battle is to capture and defend the central area. Players control only main armament - the rest of the guns are automated.

Aiming is done using ballistic reticle that make camera follow shell's trajectory. The trick is to choose the right distance and predict the movement of your enemy so as to strike it hard and not waste your ammo and loading time.

HP bars are in place just like in WoT.

Destroyers are using torpedos which are .. surprised .. powerful. Underwater hits lead to decrease of floatage bar (water incoming!).

Both 10-minute battles were rather fast and dynamic. Who said ships are slowpokes. One of the battles ended with last survived carrier being destroyed by concentrated fire of 2 cruisers and 1 battleship.

All in all it didn't like like swimming tanks, lots of things work differently. The demoed CTF battles took place in the south Pacific and near Orkney islands.

Ready for beta?

[WG] Wanna Help?

Are you an experienced World of Tanks player (2000+ battles)? Do you live in Orlando area, the US?

Do you have some 3+ years of PC gaming experience? Wanna help us test something new and awesome some time mid June?

If interested, send you details (real name, email, link to WG account) to young@wargaming.net

Successful candidates will be selected for future processing. :)

Updated. June 7, 2013. Thanks to everyone who has responded (more people than I actually expected). We will select only a few candidates, so please don't get disappointed if you are not in. 

[WG] Life Before Tanks

Starting a series (hopefully) of interviews with WG employees with this entry.

Interview with Piotr Bityukov, gamedesigner and Wargaming Pioneer.

Piotr Bityukov is one of WG ‘aborigines’. He is one of those who can give an insight into how ‘an MMO about tanks’ appeared.

— You are one of the oldest employees of Wargaming. How did you get acquainted with the company? When did you join the ranks of WG?

— I got acquainted with the company accidentally. I’ve been keen on stand modeling since my childhood. In 1997 I was trying to master dial-up Internet connection using a low-speed modem and decided to surf the net for information about different models. While checking out one of the sites I noticed an announcement about the testing of a new game called Iron Age. I got hooked by the fact that it was my favourite genre – turn-based strategy – where you had to fight against real opponents over the Internet. It was something like ‘play by e-mail’ but all moves were sent out and kept on a server. Though the game was pretty light – about 2 MB, it appeared to be rather fascinating.

A little later I learnt that my first opponent was… one of the first game developers – Viktor Kisly. We started our correspondence. At the beginning it was about our battle. Later we talked about what to change or improve in the game. When Viktor found out that War history was one of my interests, he offered me to participate in creating a web-site about armoured vehicles in English. And that was how tanks first appeared in Wargaming’s history.

— Wow! And this web-site… Is it still alive?

— No, the site does not exist any longer. Its design became outdated and the data was old and they decided not to renew it. Instead, there appeared the whole game about tanks with its tank wiki. J

— You mean to say that Wargaming was developing games even before DBA online... And what about the brand? Was that very company called Wargaming then?

— As far as I know Iron Age was developed by students. At the final stage of development Wargaming started to form as a company. DBAOL appeared under Wargaming.net brand.

— The development of which “old” game did you participate in? What was your role?

— DBAOL. I participated as a tester and later was assisting in its promotion. Also I was organizing different tournaments and championships based on the game.

— DBAOL and Iron Age, how similar were those games?

— Iron Age was full of original gaming ideas and was not based on any authentic historical events or any existing area. DBAOL was an online version of a table game (not even table, it was rather a floor game J) popular in Europe and the US. The similarity between the two games was in how they both were operated: each move was sent to a server and the opponent received them when connected. I mean it was not necessary for the two parties to be online simultaneously. Their battle could last for days or weeks, unless they were receiving and sending the moves quickly, in which case the battles of course were faster.

— Well, it looks like Wargaming as company has roots in online gaming, and World of Tanks appeared as a kind of turning point of it? 

— Definitely. By the way, the company was named Wargaming.net because of the web component of their games.

Later we started the development of Massive Assault net version with extended functionality. Massive Assault Network was aimed to be spread via the Internet. Massive Assault: Phantom Renaissance development was the next step: it was a disc version with improved graphics, new units and game modes and maps. Its Internet version was called Massive Assault Network 2.  

— It seems that Wargaming understood well the psychological portrait and needs of an online player. Namely a PvP player.

— A distinctive feature of all Massive Assault games was the minimal influence of randomization in battles. Spread of countries-allies over the map was the only random thing in the game. Just the player knew their locations, and the opponent had to plan everything not possessing all information. The results of shooting were defined and foreseen… So, it was long time before the Great Belarusian Random appeared (RNG - Overlord) J 

Wargaming’s next game was Galactic Assault. This game was all about single players and offered several scenarios. There was an opportunity to play with a real opponent over the Internet too. Since ‘the fog of war’ introduced in the game affected the results of battles, they had to be fought in real time. Despite this, the rivals were making their moves one by one. Thus, while one player was making a move, the second one had to be online and wait for their turn. Possibly that was the reason why the network mode of the game never proved popular.

— Was this game ordered by a publisher?

— Yes, as far as I remember the publisher acquired the rights to develop a series of games based on Strugatskiys’ (link - Overlord) works. Wargaming was developing a strategy.

— What was your role in all of those projects?

— Well, I seem to have told you everything about DBAOL.  As for the first Massive Assault, I was one of the testers. I also organized different tournaments, was instructing newcomers, preparing tutorials, writing alternative scenarios for the first version of the game. My role in the development of Massive Assault: Phantom Renaissance was different. I participated in different stages of the campaign and wrote single-player scenarios. After that I also tested scenarios and the game in general.

— Were you in game design team then?

— Yes, but I also helped to support the released projects. As I have already said, I organized tournaments, including the League – tournaments that lasted almost a year and were divided into one-month long stages/rounds.

In Galactic Assault I participated in testing scenarios and the whole campaign, wrote single-player scenarios, alongside Kirill Mal (lead Clan Wars developer - Overlord), a gamedesigner, and was testing the in-game balance.

— How many people were involved in those projects?

— Iron Age was developed by a few people, less than 10. About 20 people were working on DBAOL.  Then I wasn’t in Minsk yet (he lives in Moscow - Overlord) and I was not familiar with the situation in detail. I was regularly communicating with 10-15 programmers, artists and admins. While we were working on Massive Assault, a lot of new people joined the team. They were programmers, artists, sound specialists and guys working on special effects. I believe Massive Assault was developed by a few tens of people.  

— You were always working remotely. How did you feel about that? Have you ever thought about moving to Minsk?

— Yes, I was working remotely most of the time. I first came to Minsk after World of Tanks was released. I quite liked the city. I have thought about moving to Minsk but there are some difficulties.

— You know, it seems that some parts of Massive Assault reviews can actually be used for World of Tanks now and it will sound completely natural. In your opinion, what has World of Tanks inherited from the old games developed by Wargaming?

— I believe the most important thing here is the attitude of staff to what they do. The company develops games that developers themselves are eager to play! And that’s important because when you are working on the same project for a long time, not everyone would want to spend their free time playing the game.

— According to these old reviews it seems that all WG games have a lot in common: PvP, high addictivity, easy controls, intensity of gameplay, strategic component and of course unexpectedness, i.e. Wargaming develops something that doesn’t exist on the market. This cannot be said about Bagration and Order of War, perhaps, since they were pretty standardized. Apparently Massive Assault and World of Tanks have got most similarities in comparison with other games.

— Yes, I think so. It was pretty hard to invent something in RTS genre but the series of games that included Massive Assault and World of Tanks were initially based on new and original ideas. While working on them we were trying to lower barriers to entry as much as possible, but the game was meant to become more difficult giving an opportunity to improve and perfection players’ skills.

— Were you the person who was the first to pronounce aloud the idea to develop an MMO about tanks which shocked everyone at first? Could you give the details of that Eureka-moment?

— The chronology was as follows: in 2007 when we were wrapping up the development of Bagration and Galactic Assault we started discussing our future plans. The near prospective then included Order of War but it was important to decide also what was going to come after it in the long run. We knew then that the game would be online but what kind of game and in which setting – that was the question. Opinions differed.

In the middle of 2007 I tried a relatively new Korean game just released in Russia – Navy Field. In autumn 2007 I sent my preliminary ideas about an MMO game with infantry and equipment from Bagration. The guys found my ideas interesting but the final decision was not yet made. We got a little tired of tanks and were thinking of developing a game about ‘orcs and elves’ and at the same time brainstorming other ideas. Later I started to gather statistics of players’ activity in Navy Field. 

The turning point was the meeting at my place on December 12, 2008. Victor Kisly (CEO - Overlord), Marat Karpeko (COO - Overlord), Slava Makarov (Lead Producer - Overlord) and me – this was the list of participants. All together we brainstormed a lot of options and versions of game setting for the future MMO, their pluses and disadvantages (partially the ICQ log is published here - Overlord). And then we decided that our best idea was developing an MMO about tanks. It was more creative than coming out with some fantasy game and we were well familiar with the topic.

— What are your responsibilities today?

— I am a historical consultant. I prepare materials for future tank and plane models. I also participate in development of branches and trees of WoT and WoWP. I take part in discussing in-game changes, introduction of new modes and so on. So, it’s more or less the same all the time – game design. The most important part of course is gathering materials to create models and ways of progression. After all, it’s vital that designers’ wishes coincide with the historical properties of the vehicles.

— Which WG game do you prefer as a player?

— If we are talking about all our games, then my personal best is Massive Assault 2 Network  which I still play from time to time and the last but not the least…World of Tanks! :)

Originally posted here.