Source: For The Record
Looks like there is a new hangar in the 9.1 files, named “4th of July”.
Regular version download (replacing regular): http://www.ulozto.net/xunj3XPv/hangar-v2-pkg
Premium version download (replacing premium): http://www.ulozto.net/xEue4HVn/hangar-premium-v2-pkg
This blog contain many interesting info which is collected or wrote by me and my friends. Hope u like it!
Saturday, May 31, 2014
9.1 Test 2 Patchnotes
Source: For The Record
- returned the 9.0 shooting sounds
- Hellcat and Jackson engine sounds returned to the ones in 9.0
- returned the tank explosions from 9.0
- fixed several cases of the appearance of the “black screen” bug
- fixed the appearance of black and blue tracers in sniper and arty mode
- fixed the bug where the map took too long to load on low graphic settings
- fixed the quick FPS drop when switching to the sniper mode while having other than maximum landscape settings set
- fixed the bug that caused FPS drop when shooting with rapid fire automatic guns
- fixed some crashes and freezes of the game client
- fixed the bug where the sound effects and voice alert was missing in some cases of shell hits
- fixed the 9.1 test 1 bugged changes of SU-100 camo when shooting
- changed the settings of some of the German tanks in the Bryansk Front HB
- fixed the bug where, when you switched from artillery mode to arcade and then back again while holding the RMB, the size of the aim circle was incorrect
- fixed the bug where the resolution setting resetted every time you ran the game in fullscreen mode
- added the support of 5:4 screen ratio
- fixed some of the errors in switching between your tank and allied tanks when you die
- fixed small graphic model issues of some tanks
- fixed small mistakes on some maps
- fixed the destruction effects of some objects
- returned the 9.0 shooting sounds
- Hellcat and Jackson engine sounds returned to the ones in 9.0
- returned the tank explosions from 9.0
- fixed several cases of the appearance of the “black screen” bug
- fixed the appearance of black and blue tracers in sniper and arty mode
- fixed the bug where the map took too long to load on low graphic settings
- fixed the quick FPS drop when switching to the sniper mode while having other than maximum landscape settings set
- fixed the bug that caused FPS drop when shooting with rapid fire automatic guns
- fixed some crashes and freezes of the game client
- fixed the bug where the sound effects and voice alert was missing in some cases of shell hits
- fixed the 9.1 test 1 bugged changes of SU-100 camo when shooting
- changed the settings of some of the German tanks in the Bryansk Front HB
- fixed the bug where, when you switched from artillery mode to arcade and then back again while holding the RMB, the size of the aim circle was incorrect
- fixed the bug where the resolution setting resetted every time you ran the game in fullscreen mode
- added the support of 5:4 screen ratio
- fixed some of the errors in switching between your tank and allied tanks when you die
- fixed small graphic model issues of some tanks
- fixed small mistakes on some maps
- fixed the destruction effects of some objects
Friday, May 30, 2014
Strongholds Game Mode: First Details
Source: http://worldoftanks.eu/en/news/46/strongholds-first-details/
Strongholds is a new game mode designed for clan members. It is available in the game client and has no connection to Clan Wars or any other activities on the Global Map. Strongholds represent clan property and consist of a virtual military base, zones surrounding it, and auxiliary buildings. Strongholds may be created by clan commanders for free.
Please keep in mind that Strongholds can only be created by clans with at least 20 members.
This new mode should not be thought of as a kind of browser strategy game. All features of this mode are free of charge, and the resources for it can be earned in tank battles.
In order to develop your Stronghold and achieve various bonuses (Orders) you will need to earn Industrial Resource by playing in the following battle types:
Skirmishes are 15 vs 15 battles, where teams are randomly matched up from all of those who are currently queued in the Skirmish mode. Companies may be created by any player to fight in Skirmishes. However, before joining these battles you’ll need to choose the type of Skirmish, which will define the maximum vehicle tier allowed in the battle. Currently there are three types of Skirmish:
The rules of these battles follow standard principles similar to the Tank Companies battle mode. The battle results determine the amount of Industrial Resource earned by each participant and team as a whole.
The Industrial Resource acquired can be spent on building and upgrading Structures. The Structures then issue Orders that activate temporary in-game bonuses for all clan members in all game modes, including Random Battles.
You can try this new mode during the special public test. Keep an eye on the news for the announcement!
Strongholds is a new game mode designed for clan members. It is available in the game client and has no connection to Clan Wars or any other activities on the Global Map. Strongholds represent clan property and consist of a virtual military base, zones surrounding it, and auxiliary buildings. Strongholds may be created by clan commanders for free.
Please keep in mind that Strongholds can only be created by clans with at least 20 members.
This new mode should not be thought of as a kind of browser strategy game. All features of this mode are free of charge, and the resources for it can be earned in tank battles.
In order to develop your Stronghold and achieve various bonuses (Orders) you will need to earn Industrial Resource by playing in the following battle types:
- Skirmishes.
- Attacks on enemy Strongholds.
- Defending your own Stronghold.
Skirmishes are 15 vs 15 battles, where teams are randomly matched up from all of those who are currently queued in the Skirmish mode. Companies may be created by any player to fight in Skirmishes. However, before joining these battles you’ll need to choose the type of Skirmish, which will define the maximum vehicle tier allowed in the battle. Currently there are three types of Skirmish:
- Medium (Tiers I-VI).
- Champion (Tiers I-VIII).
- Ultimate (Tiers I-X).
The rules of these battles follow standard principles similar to the Tank Companies battle mode. The battle results determine the amount of Industrial Resource earned by each participant and team as a whole.
The Industrial Resource acquired can be spent on building and upgrading Structures. The Structures then issue Orders that activate temporary in-game bonuses for all clan members in all game modes, including Random Battles.
Table of Orders available in the first test version of Strongholds
Order | Bonus type | Maximum value* | Produced by |
---|---|---|---|
«Battle Payments» | Increased earnings for all battles (credits) |
Up to 50% | Financial Unit |
«Tactical Training» | Increased earnings for all battles (XP) |
Up to 50% | Tankodrome |
«Military Maneuvers» | Increased earnings for all battles (Free XP) |
Up to 50% | Military School |
«Additional Briefing» | Increased earnings for all battles (Crew Experience) |
Up to 100% | Training Unit |
«High-capacity transport» | Increased earnings for all Skirmishes (Industrial Resource) |
Up to 100% | Transportation Unit |
*These values may be altered depending on test results.
We plan to introduce new types of Orders in further updates.You can try this new mode during the special public test. Keep an eye on the news for the announcement!
[Strippers Series] The American T110E5
Source: http://wotguru.com/weak-spots-guide-t110e5/
The tier
10 American heavy tank T110E5 has a great frontal armor profile
but sacrifices armor on the sides and rear of the tank. Frontally many
will struggle at first since the “go to” commander’s cupola is actually
pretty damn strong and the lower glacis is an eggshell shape which makes
it strong in some places.
The index at the bottom of each picture describes a few abbreviations used and also the format in which the armor details are described in. Effective Armor (EA) refers to the overall effectiveness of the armor without normalization.
Frontally the T110E5 can be very difficult to deal with if you treat it like any other tank. The commander’s cupola is heavily armored and only the base and small machine gun sticking out of it can be penetrated regularly. If you hit it in the sloped sections your round will simply bounce off which makes this location difficult to hit reliably. Moving down the the turret you find yourself faced with a very strong mantlet and frontal turret armor. The main weak spots here are just around the gun and also to both sides of the mantlet if you have enough penetration.
The upper glacis should be avoided in almost any situation since it is thick and heavily angled. It is capable of bouncing most shells in the game unless you can negate the armor by shooting down into it from above. The lower glacis is an eggshell shape and below the “beak” area is very weak for most tanks facing the T110E5. Simple shoot at the armor that is facing you and you will be hitting the least angled part of the lower glacis. Towards the bottom of the lower glacis inside of the tracks are 44mm “flaps: in A1 which can be difficult to hit since they are very small but are there for use if you are stuck in a light tank. The ammo racks are located behind the “LFG #1 +20°” sections.
The side armor of the T110E5 drops considerably compared to the frontal armor. The turret still retains some protection especially in the front half of the side turret armor. The ammo rack in the turret is located in the rear portion of the turret on the right side(if you were driving the T110E5) while the radio shields the ammo rack in the back left section of the turret. Parts of the frontal armor do bend around to the side view of the T110E5 so avoid shooting towards the very front of the side.
The side hull armor is only 76mm thick below the turret and drops to 44mm towards the bottom of the tank. Simple avoid shooting to low so that you do not hit the track areas with no hull armor behind them and you will be fine with damaging the hull armor.
The rear of the T110E5 is straightforward as far as damaging it… Simply avoid shooting the sloped sections of the turret and commander’s cupola as they are the strongest sections of armor on the rear of the tank. The remaining hull armor and the flat section of the rear of the turret are very lightly armored.
I did not include a detailed angled view for the T110E5 since the weak spots stay the same from the frontal view in this guide. Simply stick to shooting the lower glacis sections that are closest to you(least angled) and also the turret weak spots if the lower glacis is not available. If the side armor ever falls below 70° then it is easy pickings and you can cut through the paper thin side armor of the T110E5. If a T110E5 ever “wiggles” back and forth simple aim at the lower glacis and do not move your aiming circle. If you keep it still you can simply wait a half second and shoot when the weakest point of the lower glacis is moving into your shot. If you try and follow where you want to hit on the lower glacis then you will only increase your chance of bouncing off.
The index at the bottom of each picture describes a few abbreviations used and also the format in which the armor details are described in. Effective Armor (EA) refers to the overall effectiveness of the armor without normalization.
The
armor values are presented in three different scenarios for the angled
view of the tank.15° frontal(75° side), 25° frontal(65° side), 35°
frontal(55° side), and 45° frontal(45° side).
Frontal
Frontally the T110E5 can be very difficult to deal with if you treat it like any other tank. The commander’s cupola is heavily armored and only the base and small machine gun sticking out of it can be penetrated regularly. If you hit it in the sloped sections your round will simply bounce off which makes this location difficult to hit reliably. Moving down the the turret you find yourself faced with a very strong mantlet and frontal turret armor. The main weak spots here are just around the gun and also to both sides of the mantlet if you have enough penetration.
The upper glacis should be avoided in almost any situation since it is thick and heavily angled. It is capable of bouncing most shells in the game unless you can negate the armor by shooting down into it from above. The lower glacis is an eggshell shape and below the “beak” area is very weak for most tanks facing the T110E5. Simple shoot at the armor that is facing you and you will be hitting the least angled part of the lower glacis. Towards the bottom of the lower glacis inside of the tracks are 44mm “flaps: in A1 which can be difficult to hit since they are very small but are there for use if you are stuck in a light tank. The ammo racks are located behind the “LFG #1 +20°” sections.
Side
The side armor of the T110E5 drops considerably compared to the frontal armor. The turret still retains some protection especially in the front half of the side turret armor. The ammo rack in the turret is located in the rear portion of the turret on the right side(if you were driving the T110E5) while the radio shields the ammo rack in the back left section of the turret. Parts of the frontal armor do bend around to the side view of the T110E5 so avoid shooting towards the very front of the side.
The side hull armor is only 76mm thick below the turret and drops to 44mm towards the bottom of the tank. Simple avoid shooting to low so that you do not hit the track areas with no hull armor behind them and you will be fine with damaging the hull armor.
Rear
The rear of the T110E5 is straightforward as far as damaging it… Simply avoid shooting the sloped sections of the turret and commander’s cupola as they are the strongest sections of armor on the rear of the tank. The remaining hull armor and the flat section of the rear of the turret are very lightly armored.
Angled
I did not include a detailed angled view for the T110E5 since the weak spots stay the same from the frontal view in this guide. Simply stick to shooting the lower glacis sections that are closest to you(least angled) and also the turret weak spots if the lower glacis is not available. If the side armor ever falls below 70° then it is easy pickings and you can cut through the paper thin side armor of the T110E5. If a T110E5 ever “wiggles” back and forth simple aim at the lower glacis and do not move your aiming circle. If you keep it still you can simply wait a half second and shoot when the weakest point of the lower glacis is moving into your shot. If you try and follow where you want to hit on the lower glacis then you will only increase your chance of bouncing off.
Storm talks about 9.1 Test 2
Source:
http://world-of-kwg.livejournal.com/294238.html
For The Record
Storm is asking for Test round 2 feedback (performance, bugs etc) – he adds that the gun and Hellcat/Jackson engine sounds were returned to 9.0 standard because they were added to the test mostly to gather player feedback, there was no plan to release them in 9.1 live patch. The feedback on the gun sounds is conflicting, for the engine sounds it’s positive. Wargaming will take these opinions into account when developing the game further.
There is also a bug that changes the screen side ration, it will be fixed in the live server.
From the discussion:
- the 9.1 test sounds will be polished and they will return in one of the upcoming patches
- more tank engine sounds than Jackson and Hellcat are being recorded
- Storm states that the “moving corpses” bug was already fixed (players claim it is still there)
- engine sounds for exotic tanks will be recorded from “a similiar type of the engine”
- Storm doesn’t consider it a problem that the GPU is stressed in the new hangar more than in combat
- Chat 2.0 – “medium perspective”
- HD model mass-production system is not yet finished
- the mechanism of automatic platoon searching is not being developed yet
- the file “availablecontent.xml”, that appeared in the test client, does not mean there will be DLC, it is tied to the split of the HD and SD client
- the HB crew transfer without penalties “cannot be guaranteed for now” (SS: there was a plan for some of the tanks to act like “premiums” by being able to use crews from different tanks)
- there is little data collected from the test on the 9.1 historical battles
- reworking the decals and hit effects is not in near plans
http://world-of-kwg.livejournal.com/294238.html
For The Record
Storm is asking for Test round 2 feedback (performance, bugs etc) – he adds that the gun and Hellcat/Jackson engine sounds were returned to 9.0 standard because they were added to the test mostly to gather player feedback, there was no plan to release them in 9.1 live patch. The feedback on the gun sounds is conflicting, for the engine sounds it’s positive. Wargaming will take these opinions into account when developing the game further.
There is also a bug that changes the screen side ration, it will be fixed in the live server.
From the discussion:
- the 9.1 test sounds will be polished and they will return in one of the upcoming patches
- more tank engine sounds than Jackson and Hellcat are being recorded
- Storm states that the “moving corpses” bug was already fixed (players claim it is still there)
- engine sounds for exotic tanks will be recorded from “a similiar type of the engine”
- Storm doesn’t consider it a problem that the GPU is stressed in the new hangar more than in combat
- Chat 2.0 – “medium perspective”
- HD model mass-production system is not yet finished
- the mechanism of automatic platoon searching is not being developed yet
- the file “availablecontent.xml”, that appeared in the test client, does not mean there will be DLC, it is tied to the split of the HD and SD client
- the HB crew transfer without penalties “cannot be guaranteed for now” (SS: there was a plan for some of the tanks to act like “premiums” by being able to use crews from different tanks)
- there is little data collected from the test on the 9.1 historical battles
- reworking the decals and hit effects is not in near plans
Thursday, May 29, 2014
PROScout Tutorials: Welcome to Scouting!
Source: http://forum.worldoftanks.com/index.php?/topic/355321-proscout-tutorials-welcome-to-scouting/
You
have just acquired your first true scout tank; a Luchs, Pz38nA, T-50,
A-20, M-5 or M5A1 Stuart – it doesn’t matter which Tier IV it is – and
press “Battle!” in your garage. Moments later, the map loads and…
“WTH?!?! Tier VIII tanks? WHAT IS GOING ON HERE???”
If
you are foolish enough to ask or complain in chat, you are immediately
labelled a noob, or worse, and informed you are a Scout.
By
this time, the 30 second countdown timer hits :00 and off go the other
tankers while you, still somewhat confused, creep forward to the nearest
rock, bush, or building you can find, all the while trying to figure
out how in heck your baby tank can possibly help your team while
fighting those Tier VIII behemoths.
Before
you can come close to deriving an answer, team mates start complaining
to you and order you to “Go Scout!”. 30 seconds later, while you still
confusedly try to grasp what is going on, someone yells at you again for
not scouting and TKs you.
CONGRATULATIONS! You are now an official member of World of Tanks’ Fraternity of Scouts!
The
good news for some of you is running a Scout tank is a temporary
affliction; grind through a few and you are closer to your goal of
owning some higher tier Medium or Heavy. The bad news for those of you
who purposefully choose to run recon tanks, the disease scientifically
named “smalltanx spotomania”
(commonly known as “Scouting”) is NOT covered by the Affordable
Healthcare Act; even Obama was scared to address people crazy enough to
WANT to play Scouts.
So what is a new Scout, voluntary or involuntary, to do?
The
forums are full of advice, some good, some bad; often both mixed
together in a single post or thread. Tankers in battles are full of
advice, usually bad, however well-intentioned.
PROScout
is one of your answers. The original Word/pdf Scout Guide passed
2,000,000 downloads long ago. After migrating online, the PROScout
website has far surpassed that, reaching out to help neophyte and
veteran Scouts alike.
In
the upcoming WOT Forum series, PROScout will look at all aspects of
Scouting, 1 detail at a time. If you don’t want to wait for it all to
come to you, feel free to go to it. Head on over to the PROScout website
and watch as it updates as the series unfolds. Not only will you find
pages of information and ideas to browse through, but you will also
discover hundreds of narrated YouTubes featuring many of the best pub
Scouts from the NA, EU, and SEA servers.
Count on a new update at least once a week but the pace will normally be more rapid than that.
The first topic will hit the forum this weekend. Until then,
HAPPY HUNTING!
Wednesday, May 28, 2014
Tuesday, May 27, 2014
[Asia Pacific] Vietnam, China trade accusations after Vietnamese fishing boat sinks
(Reuters) - Vietnam and China traded accusations on Tuesday over the sinking of a Vietnamese fishing boat not far from where China has placed an oil rig in the disputed South China Sea, as tensions fester between the two countries over the giant drilling platform.
Hanoi said some 40 Chinese fishing boats had surrounded the Vietnamese craft before one of them rammed it and it sank. Vietnamese fishing boats operating nearby rescued the 10 fishermen on board, the government and the coastguard said.
China's official Xinhua news agency, citing a government source, said the vessel capsized after "harassing and colliding with" a Chinese fishing boat.
Scores of Vietnamese and Chinese ships, including coastguard vessels, have continued to square off around the rig despite a series of collisions earlier this month after the platform was towed to the site.
Each side have blamed the other over those incidents. Until Monday, no ship had sunk.
The incident took place around 17 nautical miles from the rig, which is drilling between the Paracel islands occupied by China and the Vietnamese coast. China calls them the Xisha islands.
"A Vietnamese boat from the central city of Da Nang was deliberately encircled by 40 fishing vessels from China before it was attacked by a Chinese ship," the head of Vietnam's coastguard, Nguyen Quang Dam, told Reuters by telephone.
Xinhua said: "Crew aboard the boat were saved after their ship jostled a fishing boat from Dongfang City in southern China's Hainan province and overturned in the waters near China's Xisha Islands."
Vietnam has said the Haiyang Shiyou 981 rig is in its 200-nautical mile exclusive economic zone and on its continental shelf. China says it is operating within its waters.
The rig is 240 km (150 miles) off Vietnam's coast and 330 km (206 miles) from the southern coast of China's Hainan island.
The $1 billion deepwater rig is owned by state-run China National Offshore Oil Company Group, parent of flagship unit CNOOC Ltd.
Vietnamese Prime Minister Nguyen Tan Dung last week said his government was considering taking legal action against China following the deployment of the rig.
That drew an angry response from China.
Earlier this month, mobs angered over the rig attacked mostly Taiwanese factories in Vietnam. Many of the rioters mistook Taiwanese companies to be owned by mainland Chinese. At least four workers were killed.
China claims about 90 percent of the South China Sea, displaying its reach on official maps with a so-called nine-dash line that stretches deep into the maritime heart of Southeast Asia. The Philippines, Vietnam, Malaysia, Brunei and Taiwan also have claims to parts of the potentially energy-rich waters.
9.1 Model Changes
Source: For The Record
Regular model changes – not much has changed in this patch, apart
from one quote big one. There have been a lot of really tiny changes,
most of them are completely unrecognizable, like textures fixes, here
for example a small texture fix on AMX50B turret:
Several (about a dozen) tanks recieved a small graphic overhaul – their non-HD model got back their shading, like in this case the Batchat 25t:
Several tanks had their tracks texture changed, like the RhB here, nothing really important:
But… now it gets more interesting. T82 model was fixed – now the sprockets correctly “bite” into tracks:
The Birch Gun model was fixed – now the gun has a proper mechanism model
And now comes the best part. M8A1 US TD (“Scott”) model was completely overhauled. The armor thicknesses did not change, but the layout and 3D model did.
Stock turret version (the one with the machinegun is new)
Elite turret version (the one that looks like stock is new)
Armor model – elite turret version (the smaller rounder is new obviously, thicknesses stay the same)
As for the HD models, these can’t be opened in the tank viewer, so as you can imagine, the comparison is quite harder. Allegedly there were some changes in the Centurion 7 model, but I can’t spot any. T-54 elite turret side armor changed from 180 to 160 nominally. As far as I can see, the actual layout of armor did not change at all.
Several (about a dozen) tanks recieved a small graphic overhaul – their non-HD model got back their shading, like in this case the Batchat 25t:
Several tanks had their tracks texture changed, like the RhB here, nothing really important:
But… now it gets more interesting. T82 model was fixed – now the sprockets correctly “bite” into tracks:
The Birch Gun model was fixed – now the gun has a proper mechanism model
And now comes the best part. M8A1 US TD (“Scott”) model was completely overhauled. The armor thicknesses did not change, but the layout and 3D model did.
Stock turret version (the one with the machinegun is new)
Elite turret version (the one that looks like stock is new)
Armor model – elite turret version (the smaller rounder is new obviously, thicknesses stay the same)
As for the HD models, these can’t be opened in the tank viewer, so as you can imagine, the comparison is quite harder. Allegedly there were some changes in the Centurion 7 model, but I can’t spot any. T-54 elite turret side armor changed from 180 to 160 nominally. As far as I can see, the actual layout of armor did not change at all.
Map Changes in 9.1
Source: For The Record
Arctic was strongly reworked. The popular south base camp position on the cliff above the base is practically gone – bushes were removed. North-western base was also reworked, now there is a hill obstructing the view. New paths opened for attack.
Tundra changes – the west is quite different now, didn’t test.
Komarin – a lot of bushes was removed, the map is flatter, more accesses and the infamous camping forest in the corner disappeared. The map now has less cover, the “villages” are denser.
North-West – the northern path got reworked, it’s much more open now.
Arctic was strongly reworked. The popular south base camp position on the cliff above the base is practically gone – bushes were removed. North-western base was also reworked, now there is a hill obstructing the view. New paths opened for attack.
Tundra changes – the west is quite different now, didn’t test.
Komarin – a lot of bushes was removed, the map is flatter, more accesses and the infamous camping forest in the corner disappeared. The map now has less cover, the “villages” are denser.
North-West – the northern path got reworked, it’s much more open now.
Monday, May 26, 2014
Saturday, May 24, 2014
Early Map Revealed
Source:
SEA Forum
For The Record
World of Tanks Facebook page (and it was reposted on the forums somewhere, CBA looking for it) revealed an unfinished map. Nothing more, nothing less, here’s what they are working on.
- doesn’t it look like some early Westfield prototype?
- am I the only one, to whom the two balls and the village resemble a…
Maybe Province ver 2.0, eh ?
SEA Forum
For The Record
World of Tanks Facebook page (and it was reposted on the forums somewhere, CBA looking for it) revealed an unfinished map. Nothing more, nothing less, here’s what they are working on.
- doesn’t it look like some early Westfield prototype?
- am I the only one, to whom the two balls and the village resemble a…
Maybe Province ver 2.0, eh ?
New Tank Spotted in 9.1 Video
Source: For The Record
Check this out. This appears for a split second at cca 0:46 in the KTTS 0.9.1 video.
Think that’s a Caernarvon? Look again. See the machinegun miniturret in the front? Nope, that’s not a Caernarvon, it’s the A45/FV201 universal tank.
A45 was Caernarvon’s predecessor. It’s basically an early Caernarvon hull, fitted with Centurion Mk.II turret and a 17pdr gun. Very little is definitely known about this tank – there were several variants of the hull. It’s basically a weaker version of the Caernarvon and as such, it’s most likely coming as a tier 7 (or even 8) or so premium tank, most likely a medium tank, since the British tree lacks that particular hightier premium. Technically it’s neither a medium nor a heavy tank, it was supposed to be something inbetween, so it might as well be a medium in the game.
A45 was designed in October 1946 (later it was redesignated to FV201) as a concept of a “universal tank”, because at that time it was thought that Centurion wouldn’t be able to take on some of the duties such as flame tank or flail tank (it did in the end). First prototype of FV201 appeared in 1947, but in the end, to produce the mentioned “specialist” variants would require the tank to be redesigned significantly, which was considered not really worth it and in October 1948, the program was cancelled.
Just a thought – notice that the vehicle in the video is not a HD model. That probably means the model was around for a while now and only now they decided to show it off.
Check this out. This appears for a split second at cca 0:46 in the KTTS 0.9.1 video.
Think that’s a Caernarvon? Look again. See the machinegun miniturret in the front? Nope, that’s not a Caernarvon, it’s the A45/FV201 universal tank.
A45 was Caernarvon’s predecessor. It’s basically an early Caernarvon hull, fitted with Centurion Mk.II turret and a 17pdr gun. Very little is definitely known about this tank – there were several variants of the hull. It’s basically a weaker version of the Caernarvon and as such, it’s most likely coming as a tier 7 (or even 8) or so premium tank, most likely a medium tank, since the British tree lacks that particular hightier premium. Technically it’s neither a medium nor a heavy tank, it was supposed to be something inbetween, so it might as well be a medium in the game.
A45 was designed in October 1946 (later it was redesignated to FV201) as a concept of a “universal tank”, because at that time it was thought that Centurion wouldn’t be able to take on some of the duties such as flame tank or flail tank (it did in the end). First prototype of FV201 appeared in 1947, but in the end, to produce the mentioned “specialist” variants would require the tank to be redesigned significantly, which was considered not really worth it and in October 1948, the program was cancelled.
Just a thought – notice that the vehicle in the video is not a HD model. That probably means the model was around for a while now and only now they decided to show it off.
9.1 Public Test Notes
Source: NA Portal
New Content
- New Historical Battles: Bryansk Front (1942, USSR) and the Siege of Tobruk (1942, North Africa)
- New map: Kharkov
- For supertesters, the Japanese Type 97 Te-Ke tier II light tank was added
Maps
- Various improvements and corrections to Arctic Region, Tundra, Komarin, Windstorm, and Northwest
- Reduced the frequency of Ruinberg on Fire showing up
Vehicle Characteristics
- Reduced the upper limit of the range of battles for light tanks tiers IV-VII
- Aligned (mainly increased) the after-fire visibility factor for all tank destroyers (except Premium) to be more in line with the factor for the same guns on other types of vehicles
- Damage of the UBR-354KA shell fired by 76mm L-10, L-10U, L-10S, and KT-28 guns changed from 105 to 110 (a bug with Premium shell dealing 5 points more damage than ordinary shells fixed)
VK 28.01
- Crossing capacity for VK 28.01 suspension on solid terrain increased by 20%
- Crossing capacity for VK 28.01 suspension on medium terrain increased by 18%
- Crossing capacity for VK 28.01 suspension on soft terrain increased by 10%
- Crossing capacity for VK 28.01 verstarkteketten suspension on solid terrain increased by 22%
- Crossing capacity for VK 28.01 verstarkteketten suspension on medium terrain increased by 20%
- Crossing capacity for VK 28.01 verstarkteketten suspension on soft terrain increased by 11%
- Maximum forward speed changed from 60 km/h to 68 km/h
M4 Sherman
- Aiming time for 105mm M4 gun changed from 2.3 sec. to 2.5 sec.
- Reload time for 105mm M4 gun changed from 8 sec. to 9 sec.
A-20
- Two upper battle levels removed
MT-25
- Crossing capacity for MT-25 suspension on solid terrain increased by 12%
- Crossing capacity for MT-25 suspension on medium terrain increased by 11%
- Crossing capacity for MT-25 suspension on soft terrain increased by 6%
- Crossing capacity for MT-25 reinforced suspension on solid terrain increased 14%
- Crossing capacity for MT-25 reinforced suspension on medium terrain increased by 12%
- Crossing capacity for MT-25 reinforced suspension on soft terrain increased by 6%
- V-16 engine (600 h.p.) replaced with V-16M engine (700 h.p.)
Gameplay
- Removed the two previous Historical Battles (Kursk and Battle of the Bulge)
- Five new awards introduced for SPGs:
"Rock Solid," "For Counter-Battery Fire," "Gore’s Medal," "Cold-Blooded," and "Stark’s Medal" - New awards added in Team Battles:
"Fire and Steel," "Heavy Fire," "Pyromaniac," "Promising Fighter," "No Man's Land" - Clarified conditions for "Billotte's Medal," "Bruno's Medal," and "Tarczay's Medal"
- The "Operation Nostalgia" award moved from the Commemorative Tokens category to the Special category
- Conditions for the Armored Fist award changed: it is now granted even if the player’s vehicle was destroyed
- Fixed the conditions for the "Tactical Genius" achievement that caused a failure for it to be credited when fulfilled
Graphics
- Fixed minor visual problems with textures and patterns in a large number of vehicles
- Fixed other minor mistakes in the models of the Valentine II and Pz. Kpfw 38(t)
- Also fixed minor visual problems with textures and patterns for certain objects on maps
- Effects of exhaust gases for all vehicles reworked
- Emblem location on certain vehicles fixed
- Vehicle explosion effects changed
- Added marks of excellence on guns
- Functionality of blown-off turret “slipping” from tank hull added
- Collision of a flown-off tank turret with surface now depends on the surface type
- Dynamic FoV option added
- Certain settings in the Graphics tab rearranged
- Start time for display of tracer effects changed
- Fixed issue when in certain cases ricochet effect was displayed on penetrating armor
- Vehicles' burning effects optimized for better performance
- Fixed “shaking” of tracks when switching between HD vehicles in the Garage
- Fixed certain bugs and defects in the Graphics settings window
- Fixed bug that caused equipment mounted on a vehicle to be displayed in random order in battles
- Fixed the bug that caused equipment mounted on a vehicle to be displayed in random order in battles
- Fixed some issues with camera movement in the arcade mode
Sound
- The "reach" of sound effects has increased from 300m to 600m
- Reworked tracer sounds
- Reworked the sound of destroyed vehicles, according to player feedback
- FMOD sound library updated
- Gunfire sounds completely reworked for testing purposes
- Sound effect of gun’s resonance when firing added (when firing is observed from the side of the gun)
- Gunfire sound muting added in Sniper mode (from the turret)
- Different tonal characteristics added to gunfire sounds, depending on the side from which the firing is heard (front or back of the gun, etc.)
- Sounds of turret traverse and after-firing shell cartridge ejection added in Sniper mode or at maximum zoom of the camera to the turret
- For testing purposes, engine and suspension sound patterns for the U.S. M18 Hellcat and M36 Jackson tank destroyers completely reworked
Interface
- In the Summary tab of the Achievements window, the clan icon and the date when the player joined the clan are now displayed
- Corrections and improvements affecting interface in Team Battles implemented
- Added a display of the time period in Historical Battles
- Dialog windows for confirming changes in Graphics settings changed
- In Tank Company battles, it is no longer possible to start a battle without a Commander
- Display order of parameters in the Summary tab of the Achievements window changed
- The Gametrix JetSeat settings section moved from the General tab to a new settings tab
- License agreement is now displayed after login, before loading the Garage
- Online/offline status of a friend in the chat will now be displayed correctly regardless of which server the friend is using
- Maximum number of characters in Garage chat messages increased to 512
Other Fixes and Changes
- Crew members can be trained for skills and perks even if the vehicle is damaged
- Quality of basic Emblems for nations improved
- Certain game client crashes and hang-ups fixed
- Fixed issue with excessive load on video card when the game client is minimized
- Certain bugs during battle playback fixed
- Certain bugs in the missions interface fixed
[Strippers Series] USSR IS-7
Source:http://wotguru.com/weak-spots-guide-is-7/
The IS-7 can be a very frustrating opponent for many and
most think it’s armor is a tad to strong. This guide will show you
general spots to shoot at varying angles. Keep in mind while facing the
IS-7 is that it’s armor is mainly based off of angling the armor to
increase it’s effectiveness. If you shoot at the flattest part of the
tank facing you generally you will penetrate unless you are in a tier 7
and sometimes tier 8.
Head On
An IS-7 facing directly at you is a tough opponent as much of it’s
armor is at it’s most effective. Generally if you are at mid to long
range you want to hit the low frontal hull. If you are at close range
you wan’t to avoid hitting the hull as it’s angled at a steep angle away
from you, and instead shoot at area 2, 3, or the turret ring. The
frontal armor of the IS-7 is only 150mm thick, but it’s angles very
steep and go both vertical and horizontal in some places.
Area One
Area One
The lower frontal hull can be penetrated by tier 8 heavy/TD guns
and above at mid-range. At close range only shoot if you have no other
option as it is near an auto-bounce angle.
Area Two
Area Two
These “cheeks” are at less of an angle than the center point area of the IS-7. Most tier 9 tanks can penetrate these spots.
Area Three
Area Three
This is a very small commander’s hatch. Only use if you are face hugging and confident you can hit it.
Area Four
Area Four
The “drivers hatch” unlike the IS-4 is not very weak. However it is
weaker than the armor surrounding it. Not my favorite spot to shoot an
IS-7 but it can be used if you are in a tier 9 or tier 10.
Area Five
Area Five
150mm armor at an insane slope? Avoid shooting this area if facing and IS-7 straight on and on flat ground.
Area Six
Area Six
The “seam” area used to be weak but a few patches ago it was fixed.
It is now very tough and you should avoid shooting here. Only the “pike
nose” directly on the tip can be penned by tier 10 guns.
Area Seven
Area Seven
240mm frontal turret armor at slight angles. Avoid shooting here.
Area Eight
Area Eight
Just below area two are small plates that are at a greater angle and thus harder to penetrate. Avoid shooting here.
Slight Angle
At a slight angle the IS-7 looses some of it’s armor protection and
becomes easier to damage. Many times when IS-7s round corners or are
on city maps they will need to expose themselves in this position to
fire upon you. Keep in mind angles though! As most of the tank is still
a giant bounce magnet.
Area One
Area One
Area one is the flattest part of the armor facing you. It is still
150mm thick, however some tier 8 tanks and all tier 9+ tanks can
penetrate this spot at this angle.
Area Two
Area Two
Depending on the specific angle this armor may be easier to
penetrate than area one, but generally it is at a greater angle and
harder to penetrate. Tier 10′s have no difficultly landing shots, tier
9′s may bounce 1/4 times.
Area Three
Area Three
150mm armor at an insane angle. Do not aim here on purpose.
Area Four
Area Four
150mm side armor that is angled away from you and also has spaced armor. Do not aim here either.
Area Five
Area Five
Turret armor is 240mm front and 185 side. Very tough to penetrate
at this angle or any angle for that matter. Do not shoot the turret!
Side View
The side of an IS-7 can frustrate many players
facing them for the first time as it is 150mm thick and also has spaced
armor in area three. Even for the experienced player it can be very
frustrating at times as the armor is angled opposite than what
it appears to be. Much like the IS-4 the side armor from area three down
to the yellow part of area three is angled “into” the center of the
tank behind the spaced armor and thus at a hard angle to penetrate. The
armor flattens out to a 90 degree angle in areas one and two however.
Area One
In between the tracks is very easy to penetrate. Any tier 8 tank and above can penetrate through the tracks.
Area Two
Area two is the same as area one, however it is getting closer to the angled part of the IS-7′s side armor.
Area Three
This are is very hard to penetrate besides
tier 10 guns and even then you can bounce shot after shot as you have to
penetrate angled spaced armor, and then angled 150mm armor to do any
damage. Only shoot here if you cannot aim at area one or two and have a
tier 10 gun.
Area Four
Side of the turret is 185mm with slight
angles. It can be penetrated by tier 9 tanks and above however to not
rely on this weak spot.
Area Five
Sharp angles pointing away from you equal lots of bounces! Avoid shooting these spots.
Overall the IS-7 has great all around armor however it relies on
angles to protect it and for people to miss shooting the flattest part
of the armor facing them. Shoot the flat parts=no frustration with
bounces.
Thursday, May 22, 2014
[Asia Pacific] Kishida to visit Vietnam in late June, eyes ties in maritime security
Source: http://www.globalpost.com/dispatch/news/kyodo-news-international/140522/kishida-visit-vietnam-late-june-eyes-ties-maritime-sec
Japanese Foreign Minister Fumio Kishida is planning to visit Vietnam from late June to early July to promote cooperation in ensuring maritime security in the East and South China seas, government sources said Thursday.
In a planned meeting in Hanoi, Kishida and Vietnamese Deputy Prime Minister and Foreign Minster Pham Binh Minh are likely to agree to speed up consultations on Japan's provision of patrol ships for Vietnam to better cope with China's rising maritime assertiveness in the South China Sea, the sources said.
China has increased tensions in the sea by deploying an oil rig off the Paracel Islands that are disputed with Vietnam, leading to clashes between Chinese and Vietnamese vessels.
In the East China Sea, China has repeatedly sent patrol ships into territorial waters around the Japanese-controlled Senkaku Islands, a group of uninhibited islets it claims.
In reference to China's muscle-flexing in the East and South China seas, Kishida and Minh are expected to affirm that Tokyo and Hanoi will never tolerate any attempt to alter the status quo through coercion or force, according to the sources.
The two ministers are also likely to agree to increase communications with the Philippines and other members of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations to keep Beijing's territorial ambitions in check, they said.
Claiming the South China Sea almost entirely, Beijing has been asserting control over the land features and waters encompassed by its U-shaped "nine-dash line" in territorial disputes with Brunei, Malaysia, the Philippines, Taiwan and Vietnam.
Kishida and Minh are likely to agree to urge the 10-member ASEAN and other regional powers at a regional security forum slated for early August in Myanmar to act in unison over such moves by China.
Kishida is considering visiting Cambodia before or after the planned trip to Vietnam, according to the sources.
==Kyodo
Japanese Foreign Minister Fumio Kishida is planning to visit Vietnam from late June to early July to promote cooperation in ensuring maritime security in the East and South China seas, government sources said Thursday.
In a planned meeting in Hanoi, Kishida and Vietnamese Deputy Prime Minister and Foreign Minster Pham Binh Minh are likely to agree to speed up consultations on Japan's provision of patrol ships for Vietnam to better cope with China's rising maritime assertiveness in the South China Sea, the sources said.
China has increased tensions in the sea by deploying an oil rig off the Paracel Islands that are disputed with Vietnam, leading to clashes between Chinese and Vietnamese vessels.
In the East China Sea, China has repeatedly sent patrol ships into territorial waters around the Japanese-controlled Senkaku Islands, a group of uninhibited islets it claims.
In reference to China's muscle-flexing in the East and South China seas, Kishida and Minh are expected to affirm that Tokyo and Hanoi will never tolerate any attempt to alter the status quo through coercion or force, according to the sources.
The two ministers are also likely to agree to increase communications with the Philippines and other members of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations to keep Beijing's territorial ambitions in check, they said.
Claiming the South China Sea almost entirely, Beijing has been asserting control over the land features and waters encompassed by its U-shaped "nine-dash line" in territorial disputes with Brunei, Malaysia, the Philippines, Taiwan and Vietnam.
Kishida and Minh are likely to agree to urge the 10-member ASEAN and other regional powers at a regional security forum slated for early August in Myanmar to act in unison over such moves by China.
Kishida is considering visiting Cambodia before or after the planned trip to Vietnam, according to the sources.
==Kyodo
[Asia Pacific] Vietnam PM says considering legal action against China over disputed waters
Source: http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/05/22/us-vietnam-china-idUSBREA4K1AK20140522
(Reuters) - Vietnamese Prime Minister Nguyen Tan Dung said his government was considering various "defense options" against China, including legal action, following the deployment of a Chinese oil rig to waters in the South China Sea that Hanoi also claims.
Dung's comments, given in a written response to questions from Reuters, were the first time he has suggested Vietnam would take legal measures, and drew an angry response from China, which insisted the rig was in its sovereign waters.
"Vietnam is considering various defense options, including legal actions in accordance with international law," Dung said in an email sent late on Wednesday, while on a visit to Manila. He did not elaborate on the other options being considered.
"I wish to underscore that Vietnam will resolutely defend its sovereignty and legitimate interests because territorial sovereignty, including sovereignty of its maritime zones and islands, is sacred," he said.
China accused Vietnam of stoking regional tensions.
"Now they are distorting the facts, conflating right and wrong on the global stage, blackening China and making unreasonable accusations against China," foreign ministry spokesman Hong Lei told a regular news briefing.
"Just who is the one who is repeatedly challenging other countries' sovereignty? Who is the one who is causing tensions in the seas? Who on earth is destroying peace and stability in the South China Sea? Facts speak louder than words."
In March, the Philippines submitted a case to an arbitration tribunal in The Hague, challenging China's claims to the South China Sea. It was the first time Beijing has been subjected to international legal scrutiny over the waters.
Beijing has refused to participate in the case and warned Manila that its submission would seriously damage ties.
Anti-Chinese violence flared in Vietnam last week after a $1 billion deepwater rig owned by China's state-run CNOOC oil company was parked 240 km (150 miles) off the coast of Vietnam.
Hanoi says the rig is in its 200-nautical mile exclusive economic zone and on its continental shelf.
China has said the rig was operating completely within its waters.
The spat is the worst breakdown in ties between the two Communist states since a brief border war in 1979.
"My own sense is that if the Vietnamese government start to ratchet up their tactics, the Chinese probably are not going to blink," said Christopher Johnson, a former senior China analyst at the CIA, now at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington. "So you could have a very difficult situation."
SHARPENED RHETORIC
The rig move was the latest in a series of confrontations between China and some of its neighbours. Washington has sharpened rhetoric towards Beijing, describing a pattern of "provocative" actions by China.
U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry discussed the situation by telephone with Vietnamese Deputy Prime Minister and Foreign Minister Pham Binh Minh on Wednesday, the two governments said. Kerry also invited Minh to visit Washington, U.S. State Department spokeswoman Jen Psaki said.
Dung, in some of his strongest comments yet on the breakdown in ties with Beijing, said that while Vietnam had sought to use dialogue to settle the situation, the response from China had been an increase in force and intimidation.
"There is a vast gap between the words and deeds of China," he said.
He followed up those remarks in a speech at the World Economic Forum on East Asia in which he warned the maritime territorial tensions could endanger global trade.
"The risk of conflict will disrupt these huge flows of goods, and have unforeseeable impact on regional and world economies," he said. "It may even reverse the trend of global economic recovery."
Both sides have traded accusations over who was to blame for a series of collisions between Vietnamese and Chinese vessels in waters near the oil rig earlier this month.
China claims about 90 percent of the South China Sea, displaying its reach on official maps with a so-called nine-dash line that stretches deep into the maritime heart of Southeast Asia. The Philippines, Vietnam, Malaysia, Brunei and Taiwan also have claims to parts of the potentially energy-rich waters.
HANOI WEIGHS OPTIONS
Vietnamese Deputy Prime Minister Vu Duc Dam told Reuters on Thursday that Hanoi had been staying well-briefed on the progress of Manila's arbitration case.
"We have followed this case very closely and would like to use all measures provided by international law to protect our legitimate interests," he said in an interview in Tokyo.
Diplomatic sources in Vietnam have previously told Reuters that China put pressure on Hanoi over joining the Philippine case.
Manila is seeking a ruling to confirm its right to exploit the waters in its exclusive economic zone as allowed under the U.N. Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS).
A ruling against China could prompt other claimants to challenge Beijing, experts say, although Manila has said it does not expect the tribunal to reach a decision before the end of 2015.
Any ruling would be unenforceable because there is no body under UNCLOS to police such decisions, legal experts say.
CHINA "BROUGHT US TOGETHER"
To try to keep up pressure on Beijing, diplomats said Vietnam might host a meeting with Philippine and Malaysian officials at the end of the month to discuss how to respond to China, underscoring the nascent coordination among the three countries. Meetings in February and March had discussed the Philippine legal case.
A senior Malaysian diplomatic source told Reuters last week that China's assertiveness had given momentum to the three-way talks and "brought us together", but he played down the discussions as little more than "chit chat" at this stage.
Malaysia had no intention of filing a legal case against China, the source added.
The growing Manila-Hanoi co-operation was a potential turning point in the tensions over the South China Sea that have intensified over the last five years said Carl Thayer of the Australian Defence Force Academy in Canberra.
"Vietnam may be siding up to the U.S. via the Philippines," he said. "A joint or two separate legal challenges would really put China on the spot, and outside international law."
(Reuters) - Vietnamese Prime Minister Nguyen Tan Dung said his government was considering various "defense options" against China, including legal action, following the deployment of a Chinese oil rig to waters in the South China Sea that Hanoi also claims.
Dung's comments, given in a written response to questions from Reuters, were the first time he has suggested Vietnam would take legal measures, and drew an angry response from China, which insisted the rig was in its sovereign waters.
"Vietnam is considering various defense options, including legal actions in accordance with international law," Dung said in an email sent late on Wednesday, while on a visit to Manila. He did not elaborate on the other options being considered.
"I wish to underscore that Vietnam will resolutely defend its sovereignty and legitimate interests because territorial sovereignty, including sovereignty of its maritime zones and islands, is sacred," he said.
China accused Vietnam of stoking regional tensions.
"Now they are distorting the facts, conflating right and wrong on the global stage, blackening China and making unreasonable accusations against China," foreign ministry spokesman Hong Lei told a regular news briefing.
"Just who is the one who is repeatedly challenging other countries' sovereignty? Who is the one who is causing tensions in the seas? Who on earth is destroying peace and stability in the South China Sea? Facts speak louder than words."
In March, the Philippines submitted a case to an arbitration tribunal in The Hague, challenging China's claims to the South China Sea. It was the first time Beijing has been subjected to international legal scrutiny over the waters.
Beijing has refused to participate in the case and warned Manila that its submission would seriously damage ties.
Anti-Chinese violence flared in Vietnam last week after a $1 billion deepwater rig owned by China's state-run CNOOC oil company was parked 240 km (150 miles) off the coast of Vietnam.
Hanoi says the rig is in its 200-nautical mile exclusive economic zone and on its continental shelf.
China has said the rig was operating completely within its waters.
The spat is the worst breakdown in ties between the two Communist states since a brief border war in 1979.
"My own sense is that if the Vietnamese government start to ratchet up their tactics, the Chinese probably are not going to blink," said Christopher Johnson, a former senior China analyst at the CIA, now at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington. "So you could have a very difficult situation."
SHARPENED RHETORIC
The rig move was the latest in a series of confrontations between China and some of its neighbours. Washington has sharpened rhetoric towards Beijing, describing a pattern of "provocative" actions by China.
U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry discussed the situation by telephone with Vietnamese Deputy Prime Minister and Foreign Minister Pham Binh Minh on Wednesday, the two governments said. Kerry also invited Minh to visit Washington, U.S. State Department spokeswoman Jen Psaki said.
Dung, in some of his strongest comments yet on the breakdown in ties with Beijing, said that while Vietnam had sought to use dialogue to settle the situation, the response from China had been an increase in force and intimidation.
"There is a vast gap between the words and deeds of China," he said.
He followed up those remarks in a speech at the World Economic Forum on East Asia in which he warned the maritime territorial tensions could endanger global trade.
"The risk of conflict will disrupt these huge flows of goods, and have unforeseeable impact on regional and world economies," he said. "It may even reverse the trend of global economic recovery."
Both sides have traded accusations over who was to blame for a series of collisions between Vietnamese and Chinese vessels in waters near the oil rig earlier this month.
China claims about 90 percent of the South China Sea, displaying its reach on official maps with a so-called nine-dash line that stretches deep into the maritime heart of Southeast Asia. The Philippines, Vietnam, Malaysia, Brunei and Taiwan also have claims to parts of the potentially energy-rich waters.
HANOI WEIGHS OPTIONS
Vietnamese Deputy Prime Minister Vu Duc Dam told Reuters on Thursday that Hanoi had been staying well-briefed on the progress of Manila's arbitration case.
"We have followed this case very closely and would like to use all measures provided by international law to protect our legitimate interests," he said in an interview in Tokyo.
Diplomatic sources in Vietnam have previously told Reuters that China put pressure on Hanoi over joining the Philippine case.
Manila is seeking a ruling to confirm its right to exploit the waters in its exclusive economic zone as allowed under the U.N. Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS).
A ruling against China could prompt other claimants to challenge Beijing, experts say, although Manila has said it does not expect the tribunal to reach a decision before the end of 2015.
Any ruling would be unenforceable because there is no body under UNCLOS to police such decisions, legal experts say.
CHINA "BROUGHT US TOGETHER"
To try to keep up pressure on Beijing, diplomats said Vietnam might host a meeting with Philippine and Malaysian officials at the end of the month to discuss how to respond to China, underscoring the nascent coordination among the three countries. Meetings in February and March had discussed the Philippine legal case.
A senior Malaysian diplomatic source told Reuters last week that China's assertiveness had given momentum to the three-way talks and "brought us together", but he played down the discussions as little more than "chit chat" at this stage.
Malaysia had no intention of filing a legal case against China, the source added.
The growing Manila-Hanoi co-operation was a potential turning point in the tensions over the South China Sea that have intensified over the last five years said Carl Thayer of the Australian Defence Force Academy in Canberra.
"Vietnam may be siding up to the U.S. via the Philippines," he said. "A joint or two separate legal challenges would really put China on the spot, and outside international law."
Wednesday, May 21, 2014
[NA] 21-5-2014 Invite Codes
Source:
http://www.mmorpg.com/giveaways.cfm/offer/519/World-of-Tanks-Gift-Key-Giveaway.html
For The Record
Hello everyone,
on the MMORPG.com site, there is a giveaway of invite codes, that contain:
- Premium T2LT Tank
- 3 Days Premium Time
- 500 Gold
http://www.mmorpg.com/giveaways.cfm/offer/519/World-of-Tanks-Gift-Key-Giveaway.html
For The Record
Hello everyone,
on the MMORPG.com site, there is a giveaway of invite codes, that contain:
- Premium T2LT Tank
- 3 Days Premium Time
- 500 Gold
[Asia Pacific] We Petition The Obama Administration to: Put Sanctions on China for Invading Vietnam Territory with The Deployment of Oil Rig Haiyang 981
Link: https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/put-sanctions-china-invading-vietnam-territory-deployment-oil-rig-haiyang-981/p2b7Rnnv
Request the US government of China immediately withdraw its HD-981 oil rig and other vessels out of Vietnam's EEZ
China has been using the unfounded nine-dashed line to claim ownership over the entire East Sea (South China Sea), which has absolutely no legal basis. China has been ignoring the international law and the world community and using that nine-dashed line to harass smaller countries in the region. On May 02, 2014, China placed oil rig HD-981 in Vietnam’s Exclusive Economic Zone with a flotilla of 80 military ships to ships, attacking Vietnamese patrol vessels working in the area.The world needs peace in the East Sea, and the United States has great interest in freedom of navigation in the East Sea. Peace will have a better chance to survive in the East Sea if the President of the United States weighs in the East Sea problem and requests that China stop its provocative and belligerent acts.
We need 100.000 signatures by June 19th, 2014. Let's share to your family, friends and peace lovers in all over the world to stop Aggressive China.
World of Warships – Interview with Ivan Morozov
Source: For The Record
This is the exclusive Wot-News interview with Ivan Morozov, one of the World of Warships developers. Please note that I tried to translate everything correctly, but I don’t know the naval terms even in English. Also, if you are confused by some of the answers (like “what did he mean by that”) – well, so am I. Here’s what he said:
Do you publish a lot of info about World of Warships?
We publish several entries per week on our blog, we do tell about the game and its development. There, you can find out about the game mechanics, get an idea about the state of the game from fresh screenshots or read regular reports from alphatest either from tester reports or from the infographics. Apart from various kinds of content posting, the developers simply talk directly to the blog readers, answering their questions using videos or interviews online. So, to answer your question – yes, we publish a lot about World of Warships. Especially given the fact that the project is still in the alpha testing stage.
Can you tell us what the WoWs ship classes will look like?
We can tell, but you have to see it with your own eyes. Of course a tanker will get the associations immediately: battleship – that’s a heavy tank, destroyer – that’s a “scout”, aircraft carrier is “artillery and cruiser is like a tank destroyer. But after even a few battles in WoWs, it becomes clear that using WoT tactics will surely lead to defeat.
Sea battles were fought according to their own rules, which were used for the core of WoWs game mechanics. That’s why there is no principles matching with World of Tanks mechanics apart from the general rules. The role of “scouts” is fulfilled by scout planes and destroyers can completely destroy a huge battleship with one good torpedo salvo. Interaction between classes of ships and effective set of tactics are also implemented completely differently. For example, traditional TD tactic – hide and snipe – is principially impossible in WoWs. Firstly – because a ship staying on one spot will be quickly destroyed and secondly, because of the difference in damage dealing system, that is described below. All these differences might seem unusual,but they will certainly not disappoint the tankers.The possibility to deploy smoke screens, deploy air attacks or cover your teammates with AA fire screen mean that the strategists will find their room to maneuver.
How big will the teams and maps be?
We are currently experimenting with team sizes, we are considering variants in range from 12 to 18 players. The optimal solution is tied to the map size – in our case, they will be 50km x 50km big.
Will the maps differ from the WoT ones, or will the islands play the role of “cover”?
They will be different – our map settings will be gorgeous. Generally, design of the game maps for WoWs is a separate topic, complicated and interesting. Just like in World of Tanks are the elements of landscape supposed to help the player, to determine the tactics and to decide the dynamics of the battle. In our case, they stimulate the player to maneuver actively and to react instantaneously. For example, tropical maps with a lot of small islands and shallow water force the heavy ships to pick their route very carefully, so they don’t get stuck in narrow straits much to the amusement of the enemy. But light ships have a sort of an advantage here: they can maneuver freely, sail through shoals and even fire torpedos through them.
The situation then changes on another map and those who had the advantage before will be forced to
be much more careful.
There are no camo bushes on open sea. How will the ships mask themselves? How will the visibility system different from the tank one?
Spotting and visibility mechanics as a whole will depend a lot on the design location. A player can hides behind islands, rocks and hills, but this kind of camo system, as I said before, is different from the one in WoT. You can’t just hide and stop the engines – a static ship is a dead ship. You also have to consider ballistics. Since the shell flies through a sharp ballistic curve (SS: not sure about the proper naval term, basically a high-angle shot like the arty uses in WoT), the closer to the land the player is, the better he is protected. By the way, I already mentioned smokescreen, that’s in fact also a landscape element. Setting it on the right spot, the player creates an artificial cover for his team and in fact he changes the layout of the map according to his needs. Other game possibilities, that affect the visibility system, are currently being developed.
What’s the current WoWs status? When will it enter closed beta stage?
Currently, WoWs is in closed alpha stage. That means that the game is now available to a small group of players, which help us to polish the main elements of the gameplay before we can open the door to all who want to try.
How can we now get into the alpha test?
There are several ways. You can leave your request on the forum, but in order for it to be considered, you have to post 50 and more posts on the WoWs forums. There are other options as well however. We are constantly running lotteries for alpha access on the forums, the blog and the WoWs VK group. Be active on our sites, that increases your chance of getting in compared to others.
What nations are available on alpha-test? What nations are planned in general?
Currently the players are testing the ships of two nations: Japan and USA. These will be implemented when the game is released. This answer can hardly raise eyebrows: at the beginning of WW2, these countries were rightfully considered foremost naval military powers. After the game is released, we will add other nations into the game. What definitely has to appear in WoWs are the branches of Great Britain, Germany, Russian Empire/Soviet Union, France and Italy. There is also an idea of a “small nations” tree. Many countries in those years couldn’t boast with an advanced fleet, but they had very unusual projects. By bringing together the ships of Holland, Spain, Sweden, Norway, Austrian-Hungary and Greece, we can get a very interesting and well balanced development tree.
Will there be “dings”? How will the damage system work? Will the ships have weakspots such as the KV-5 miniturret?
The damage system in WoWs considers many factors such as thickness of the armor, its slope, the point where the shell meets the obstacle, angle of impact, velocity and penetration capability of the shell. The difference from tanks is that the armor of the ship is not homogenous and is different on various parts of the ship, so in order to destroy the ship engine, you will have to penetrate 3-4 layers of armor of various thicknesses. Naturally, vital parts and equipment such as engine, ammunition storage and command center are protected by the thickest armor, but hitting them will cause significantly more damage than hitting for example the rear of the ship. That means that “oneshots” in WoWs are possible, but difficult to achieve. If you achieve a direct hit on the ammunition storage, consider the enemy already sunk.
The “didn’t penetrate their armor” situation can occur in a few cases. For example when picking a shell with penetration poorer than what is needed to beating your opponent:
Or when you choose the attack range poorly. Every ship has its “zone of free maneuver” – that’s the distance on which it is practically invulnerable to enemy shells. We described this mechanic in detail on our blog earlier.
How will the battle dynamic be compared to other WG projects? Will there be “hugging”?
It’s possible to say that the WoWs gameplay will go at slower pace, when compared to the other games of the “World of” series. But it won’t be boring! Even when playing on a relatively small destroyer, you will have to successfully keep switching between main guns and torpedos, while creating smokescreens and shooting enemy planes with your AA guns (AI helps with that) while not forgetting to maneuver actively, evading enemy fire. As you can see, it will be very important in the game to reach the right pace and keep it until the end of the match.
“Hugging” in classical sense will be impossible. First, the enemy can carry torpedos and cut it short by one click. Second, by assuming static position you become a perfect target. But when it comes to ships, there is the interesting concept of free maneuver range – within that distance range, causing significant damage to your ship gets a lot harder. That can be used as much as military ethics and shell reload time allow you.
How will ramming work?
Just like the common sense tells you: the rammed ship will sink! By the way, for many players the ramming became the first way to destroy the enemy (and sometimes a teammate). These pieces of info and many others can be learned when you subscribe to the World of Warships developer blog. Stay tuned!
This is the exclusive Wot-News interview with Ivan Morozov, one of the World of Warships developers. Please note that I tried to translate everything correctly, but I don’t know the naval terms even in English. Also, if you are confused by some of the answers (like “what did he mean by that”) – well, so am I. Here’s what he said:
Do you publish a lot of info about World of Warships?
We publish several entries per week on our blog, we do tell about the game and its development. There, you can find out about the game mechanics, get an idea about the state of the game from fresh screenshots or read regular reports from alphatest either from tester reports or from the infographics. Apart from various kinds of content posting, the developers simply talk directly to the blog readers, answering their questions using videos or interviews online. So, to answer your question – yes, we publish a lot about World of Warships. Especially given the fact that the project is still in the alpha testing stage.
Can you tell us what the WoWs ship classes will look like?
We can tell, but you have to see it with your own eyes. Of course a tanker will get the associations immediately: battleship – that’s a heavy tank, destroyer – that’s a “scout”, aircraft carrier is “artillery and cruiser is like a tank destroyer. But after even a few battles in WoWs, it becomes clear that using WoT tactics will surely lead to defeat.
Sea battles were fought according to their own rules, which were used for the core of WoWs game mechanics. That’s why there is no principles matching with World of Tanks mechanics apart from the general rules. The role of “scouts” is fulfilled by scout planes and destroyers can completely destroy a huge battleship with one good torpedo salvo. Interaction between classes of ships and effective set of tactics are also implemented completely differently. For example, traditional TD tactic – hide and snipe – is principially impossible in WoWs. Firstly – because a ship staying on one spot will be quickly destroyed and secondly, because of the difference in damage dealing system, that is described below. All these differences might seem unusual,but they will certainly not disappoint the tankers.The possibility to deploy smoke screens, deploy air attacks or cover your teammates with AA fire screen mean that the strategists will find their room to maneuver.
How big will the teams and maps be?
We are currently experimenting with team sizes, we are considering variants in range from 12 to 18 players. The optimal solution is tied to the map size – in our case, they will be 50km x 50km big.
Will the maps differ from the WoT ones, or will the islands play the role of “cover”?
They will be different – our map settings will be gorgeous. Generally, design of the game maps for WoWs is a separate topic, complicated and interesting. Just like in World of Tanks are the elements of landscape supposed to help the player, to determine the tactics and to decide the dynamics of the battle. In our case, they stimulate the player to maneuver actively and to react instantaneously. For example, tropical maps with a lot of small islands and shallow water force the heavy ships to pick their route very carefully, so they don’t get stuck in narrow straits much to the amusement of the enemy. But light ships have a sort of an advantage here: they can maneuver freely, sail through shoals and even fire torpedos through them.
The situation then changes on another map and those who had the advantage before will be forced to
be much more careful.
There are no camo bushes on open sea. How will the ships mask themselves? How will the visibility system different from the tank one?
Spotting and visibility mechanics as a whole will depend a lot on the design location. A player can hides behind islands, rocks and hills, but this kind of camo system, as I said before, is different from the one in WoT. You can’t just hide and stop the engines – a static ship is a dead ship. You also have to consider ballistics. Since the shell flies through a sharp ballistic curve (SS: not sure about the proper naval term, basically a high-angle shot like the arty uses in WoT), the closer to the land the player is, the better he is protected. By the way, I already mentioned smokescreen, that’s in fact also a landscape element. Setting it on the right spot, the player creates an artificial cover for his team and in fact he changes the layout of the map according to his needs. Other game possibilities, that affect the visibility system, are currently being developed.
What’s the current WoWs status? When will it enter closed beta stage?
Currently, WoWs is in closed alpha stage. That means that the game is now available to a small group of players, which help us to polish the main elements of the gameplay before we can open the door to all who want to try.
How can we now get into the alpha test?
There are several ways. You can leave your request on the forum, but in order for it to be considered, you have to post 50 and more posts on the WoWs forums. There are other options as well however. We are constantly running lotteries for alpha access on the forums, the blog and the WoWs VK group. Be active on our sites, that increases your chance of getting in compared to others.
What nations are available on alpha-test? What nations are planned in general?
Currently the players are testing the ships of two nations: Japan and USA. These will be implemented when the game is released. This answer can hardly raise eyebrows: at the beginning of WW2, these countries were rightfully considered foremost naval military powers. After the game is released, we will add other nations into the game. What definitely has to appear in WoWs are the branches of Great Britain, Germany, Russian Empire/Soviet Union, France and Italy. There is also an idea of a “small nations” tree. Many countries in those years couldn’t boast with an advanced fleet, but they had very unusual projects. By bringing together the ships of Holland, Spain, Sweden, Norway, Austrian-Hungary and Greece, we can get a very interesting and well balanced development tree.
Will there be “dings”? How will the damage system work? Will the ships have weakspots such as the KV-5 miniturret?
The damage system in WoWs considers many factors such as thickness of the armor, its slope, the point where the shell meets the obstacle, angle of impact, velocity and penetration capability of the shell. The difference from tanks is that the armor of the ship is not homogenous and is different on various parts of the ship, so in order to destroy the ship engine, you will have to penetrate 3-4 layers of armor of various thicknesses. Naturally, vital parts and equipment such as engine, ammunition storage and command center are protected by the thickest armor, but hitting them will cause significantly more damage than hitting for example the rear of the ship. That means that “oneshots” in WoWs are possible, but difficult to achieve. If you achieve a direct hit on the ammunition storage, consider the enemy already sunk.
The “didn’t penetrate their armor” situation can occur in a few cases. For example when picking a shell with penetration poorer than what is needed to beating your opponent:
Or when you choose the attack range poorly. Every ship has its “zone of free maneuver” – that’s the distance on which it is practically invulnerable to enemy shells. We described this mechanic in detail on our blog earlier.
How will the battle dynamic be compared to other WG projects? Will there be “hugging”?
It’s possible to say that the WoWs gameplay will go at slower pace, when compared to the other games of the “World of” series. But it won’t be boring! Even when playing on a relatively small destroyer, you will have to successfully keep switching between main guns and torpedos, while creating smokescreens and shooting enemy planes with your AA guns (AI helps with that) while not forgetting to maneuver actively, evading enemy fire. As you can see, it will be very important in the game to reach the right pace and keep it until the end of the match.
“Hugging” in classical sense will be impossible. First, the enemy can carry torpedos and cut it short by one click. Second, by assuming static position you become a perfect target. But when it comes to ships, there is the interesting concept of free maneuver range – within that distance range, causing significant damage to your ship gets a lot harder. That can be used as much as military ethics and shell reload time allow you.
How will ramming work?
Just like the common sense tells you: the rammed ship will sink! By the way, for many players the ramming became the first way to destroy the enemy (and sometimes a teammate). These pieces of info and many others can be learned when you subscribe to the World of Warships developer blog. Stay tuned!
Tuesday, May 20, 2014
[Asia Pacific] Vietnam should show the world why it’s worthy of support: Expert
Source: http://tuoitrenews.vn/international/19755/vietnam-should-show-the-world-why-its-worthy-of-support-expert
Dr. Jonathan D. London, a professor in the Department of Asian and International Studies and a Core Member of the Southeast Asia Research Center at the City University of Hong Kong, told Tuoi Tre (Youth) newspaper in a recent interview that he believes it is essential Vietnam show the world why it is worthy of support.
The interview was conducted on Saturday after China illicitly stationed an oil rig in Vietnamese waters on May 1 and dispatched ships and planes to ram, intimidate, and fire water cannons at Vietnam’s vessels tasked with asking the Chinese side to leave the area.
Dr. Jonathan D. London: The warming relations between Vietnam and the Philippines are intriguing. Certainly the countries have similar concerns. Vietnam needs to show that it is more serious about forging ties with other regions affected by Beijing’s aggressive claims, including Indonesia and Malaysia. It is one thing to be friends with everybody. It is another to have friends that will stand by you, shoulder to shoulder.
With respect to the U.S. support, the situation is of course complex. Vietnam-U.S. relations should be and could be much further along than they are now. As a scholar of comparative political economy, I do believe all countries should be careful in forging links with the U.S. (even South Korea recognized that), or for that matter other countries. The current crisis certainly gives both Vietnam and the U.S. a reason to deepen ties and new reasons to overcome various obstacles to deeper ties. Still, any deepening of relations with the U.S. should be driven by the need to create a stable region. A protracted cold war would be costly, dangerous, and a massive diversion from pressing challenges of the day.
* What are the main purposes behind Beijing’s deployment of oil rig Haiyang Shiyou 981 to Vietnam’s exclusive economic zone and continental shelf in the East Vietnam Sea?
Dr. Jonathan D. London: Internationally, there is a general agreement that the purposes of deploying the oil rig are mainly political, serving at least three distinct but related purposes: changing the status quo; testing the reaction of other states, principally Vietnam and the U.S.; and engaging in coercive diplomacy.
* Why did China take this step this time? Is it true that China deployed the rig to cause conflict overseas, aiming to cover up domestic governance problems including Xinjiang, Tibet, economic slowdown, environmental issues, and corruption among local officials?
Dr. Jonathan D. London: Like any country, China has no shortage of problems at home. One of the unfortunate byproducts of Beijing’s outsized and legally basely sovereignty claims and its attempts to enforce them is that it will tend to fuel a regional arms race, which is already underway owing in part to China’s rapid military expansion.
If peaceful solutions to regional disputes can be arranged, all states, including China and Vietnam, can focus their resources on serving the needs of their respective populations. Attempts to enforce legally baseless sovereignty claims by military means will be unfortunate as it will lead all countries in the region to divert resources away from where they are most needed. By contrast, a peaceful resolution of the conflict would allow both countries to focus resources on where they are most needed.
* What should Vietnam do to prevent aggressive acts from the Chinese side in the oil rig tension? Is there any possible peaceful solution to the Vietnam-China stand-off to which both sides would agree? Or will it lead to military confrontations?
Dr. Jonathan D. London: The most promising way to address aggression is to prevail on Beijing that it would be in its own best interest to cease and desist from aggressive acts, provocations, and efforts to change the status quo through force.
Yes, there is a range of peaceful solutions, but none of these are prefabricated and all of these will require an order of imagination. Across the region, from Japan to China to Vietnam, a new approach to diplomacy is needed; one that goes beyond hyper-nationalism and the ‘politics of face’ (e.g. rigid stances based on nationalistic pride and machismo). Vietnam has seen too much military conflict. So has the region and the world. A military conflict must be avoided by all possible means and Vietnam must engage the community of nations with greater energy and depth than it is accustomed to doing. This is why I believe it is essential that Vietnam show the world why it is worthy of support. This, in turn, will require energetically implementing the sorts of reforms outlined in the PM’s New Year address.
* Up to now, Washington has only called Beijing’s recent actions in the East Vietnam Sea “provocative” as well as called on both sides to deal with friction through diplomatic means and to observe freedom of navigation in the sea. They said they are not in favor of any side. However, in recent days, some U.S. officials have sent messages that they want to build military cooperation with Vietnam. Did you realize that?
Dr. Jonathan D. London: Yes, I have read of this, and greater military would seem logical, given regional power imbalances. However, military cooperation with the U.S. on any significant scale will carry with it certain ramifications. In a recent email exchange, the noted U.S.-based intellectual Amitai Etzioni, a prominent advocate of “mutually assured restraint” in U.S.-China relations, has warned of the risk of treating the dispute with China as a potential military conflict. So I think it is sensible that the U.S. explores the deepening of military cooperation with Vietnam, but that these decisions be made in view of the broader regional strategic calculus and with minimizing the likelihood of militarizing the region. Vietnam needs to balance the imperatives of self-defense with the need for a peaceful order. Ultimately, relations between Vietnam and China must be stable. But they cannot be stable if the overriding principles in the region follow the laws of the jungle.
* In your opinion, is it a good idea for Vietnam to file a lawsuit to an international tribunal against China over its illegitimate territorial claims in the East Vietnam Sea?
Dr. Jonathan D. London: Barring any significant changes in Beijing’s position, very possibly yes. With respect to international norms, it’s worth noting that the U.S.’s own failure to support the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) over several decades is extremely regrettable. Having the U.S. as a signatory to UNCLOS would likely give it even greater significance than it has today.
Unfortunately, saying that does not help Vietnam. So what about the international tribunal? Beijing has indicated that it would ignore any judgments against it, which is unfortunate and one would hope this position might change. The aim should not be to antagonize Beijing but to have a neutral body adjudicate between competing sovereignty claims on the basis of available evidence. If there is no change in Beijing’s position and diplomacy fails, the tribunal would at least provide an opportunity to make the world aware of how each country’s aims stand up.
That said, if there are alternatives to an international tribunal, those should be actively explored or created where none exist.
* Did the current tensions in the East Vietnam Sea affect the U.S. pivot to Asia?
Dr. Jonathan D. London: They certainly pose dilemmas for Washington. While some have voiced concern that the U.S. has not taken a more forceful stance, I believe the U.S. response to the tensions remain to be seen. One would expect these tensions to change the tenor of discussions between Hanoi and the U.S. with respect to military intervention. It is still unclear what exactly the pivot means now and will mean in practical terms going forward. But if one aim of the U.S.’s Pacific presence is to ensure a stable maritime environment conducive to the development of international commerce and supportive of security, we would expect the present tensions to add, and not diminish, attention to these goals. No one wants to see the region descend into a tense never-ending contest for hegemony. The region would be much better served by diplomatic measures. The so-called pivot is not and should not be mainly about military issues. It should be about promoting prosperity through cooperation.
Dr. Jonathan D. London, a professor in the Department of Asian and International Studies and a Core Member of the Southeast Asia Research Center at the City University of Hong Kong, told Tuoi Tre (Youth) newspaper in a recent interview that he believes it is essential Vietnam show the world why it is worthy of support.
The interview was conducted on Saturday after China illicitly stationed an oil rig in Vietnamese waters on May 1 and dispatched ships and planes to ram, intimidate, and fire water cannons at Vietnam’s vessels tasked with asking the Chinese side to leave the area.
Dr. Jonathan D. London
* In a recent interview with Deutsche Welle (DW), Southeast Asia expert Gerhard Will said that Beijing is testing the solidarity of members of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) with Vietnam and examining how much U.S. support Hanoi can rely upon. He added that after realizing the latest move has brought Hanoi and Manila closer together, China is now starting to backtrack. This is proof that China is not following a totally consistent strategy in the East Vietnam Sea. Do you think it is too early to jump to such a conclusion?Dr. Jonathan D. London: The warming relations between Vietnam and the Philippines are intriguing. Certainly the countries have similar concerns. Vietnam needs to show that it is more serious about forging ties with other regions affected by Beijing’s aggressive claims, including Indonesia and Malaysia. It is one thing to be friends with everybody. It is another to have friends that will stand by you, shoulder to shoulder.
With respect to the U.S. support, the situation is of course complex. Vietnam-U.S. relations should be and could be much further along than they are now. As a scholar of comparative political economy, I do believe all countries should be careful in forging links with the U.S. (even South Korea recognized that), or for that matter other countries. The current crisis certainly gives both Vietnam and the U.S. a reason to deepen ties and new reasons to overcome various obstacles to deeper ties. Still, any deepening of relations with the U.S. should be driven by the need to create a stable region. A protracted cold war would be costly, dangerous, and a massive diversion from pressing challenges of the day.
* What are the main purposes behind Beijing’s deployment of oil rig Haiyang Shiyou 981 to Vietnam’s exclusive economic zone and continental shelf in the East Vietnam Sea?
Dr. Jonathan D. London: Internationally, there is a general agreement that the purposes of deploying the oil rig are mainly political, serving at least three distinct but related purposes: changing the status quo; testing the reaction of other states, principally Vietnam and the U.S.; and engaging in coercive diplomacy.
* Why did China take this step this time? Is it true that China deployed the rig to cause conflict overseas, aiming to cover up domestic governance problems including Xinjiang, Tibet, economic slowdown, environmental issues, and corruption among local officials?
Dr. Jonathan D. London: Like any country, China has no shortage of problems at home. One of the unfortunate byproducts of Beijing’s outsized and legally basely sovereignty claims and its attempts to enforce them is that it will tend to fuel a regional arms race, which is already underway owing in part to China’s rapid military expansion.
If peaceful solutions to regional disputes can be arranged, all states, including China and Vietnam, can focus their resources on serving the needs of their respective populations. Attempts to enforce legally baseless sovereignty claims by military means will be unfortunate as it will lead all countries in the region to divert resources away from where they are most needed. By contrast, a peaceful resolution of the conflict would allow both countries to focus resources on where they are most needed.
* What should Vietnam do to prevent aggressive acts from the Chinese side in the oil rig tension? Is there any possible peaceful solution to the Vietnam-China stand-off to which both sides would agree? Or will it lead to military confrontations?
Dr. Jonathan D. London: The most promising way to address aggression is to prevail on Beijing that it would be in its own best interest to cease and desist from aggressive acts, provocations, and efforts to change the status quo through force.
Yes, there is a range of peaceful solutions, but none of these are prefabricated and all of these will require an order of imagination. Across the region, from Japan to China to Vietnam, a new approach to diplomacy is needed; one that goes beyond hyper-nationalism and the ‘politics of face’ (e.g. rigid stances based on nationalistic pride and machismo). Vietnam has seen too much military conflict. So has the region and the world. A military conflict must be avoided by all possible means and Vietnam must engage the community of nations with greater energy and depth than it is accustomed to doing. This is why I believe it is essential that Vietnam show the world why it is worthy of support. This, in turn, will require energetically implementing the sorts of reforms outlined in the PM’s New Year address.
* Up to now, Washington has only called Beijing’s recent actions in the East Vietnam Sea “provocative” as well as called on both sides to deal with friction through diplomatic means and to observe freedom of navigation in the sea. They said they are not in favor of any side. However, in recent days, some U.S. officials have sent messages that they want to build military cooperation with Vietnam. Did you realize that?
Dr. Jonathan D. London: Yes, I have read of this, and greater military would seem logical, given regional power imbalances. However, military cooperation with the U.S. on any significant scale will carry with it certain ramifications. In a recent email exchange, the noted U.S.-based intellectual Amitai Etzioni, a prominent advocate of “mutually assured restraint” in U.S.-China relations, has warned of the risk of treating the dispute with China as a potential military conflict. So I think it is sensible that the U.S. explores the deepening of military cooperation with Vietnam, but that these decisions be made in view of the broader regional strategic calculus and with minimizing the likelihood of militarizing the region. Vietnam needs to balance the imperatives of self-defense with the need for a peaceful order. Ultimately, relations between Vietnam and China must be stable. But they cannot be stable if the overriding principles in the region follow the laws of the jungle.
* In your opinion, is it a good idea for Vietnam to file a lawsuit to an international tribunal against China over its illegitimate territorial claims in the East Vietnam Sea?
Dr. Jonathan D. London: Barring any significant changes in Beijing’s position, very possibly yes. With respect to international norms, it’s worth noting that the U.S.’s own failure to support the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) over several decades is extremely regrettable. Having the U.S. as a signatory to UNCLOS would likely give it even greater significance than it has today.
Unfortunately, saying that does not help Vietnam. So what about the international tribunal? Beijing has indicated that it would ignore any judgments against it, which is unfortunate and one would hope this position might change. The aim should not be to antagonize Beijing but to have a neutral body adjudicate between competing sovereignty claims on the basis of available evidence. If there is no change in Beijing’s position and diplomacy fails, the tribunal would at least provide an opportunity to make the world aware of how each country’s aims stand up.
That said, if there are alternatives to an international tribunal, those should be actively explored or created where none exist.
* Did the current tensions in the East Vietnam Sea affect the U.S. pivot to Asia?
Dr. Jonathan D. London: They certainly pose dilemmas for Washington. While some have voiced concern that the U.S. has not taken a more forceful stance, I believe the U.S. response to the tensions remain to be seen. One would expect these tensions to change the tenor of discussions between Hanoi and the U.S. with respect to military intervention. It is still unclear what exactly the pivot means now and will mean in practical terms going forward. But if one aim of the U.S.’s Pacific presence is to ensure a stable maritime environment conducive to the development of international commerce and supportive of security, we would expect the present tensions to add, and not diminish, attention to these goals. No one wants to see the region descend into a tense never-ending contest for hegemony. The region would be much better served by diplomatic measures. The so-called pivot is not and should not be mainly about military issues. It should be about promoting prosperity through cooperation.
Monday, May 19, 2014
[Asia Pacific] Toasts Turn to Water Cannons in China, Vietnam Sea Spat
Source: http://www.businessweek.com/news/2014-05-18/vietnam-china-shared-patrols-turn-to-south-china-sea-standoff
The crews from the
Vietnamese and Chinese coast guards shook hands and took photos as they
met last month, sharing platters of fruit and raising their glasses for a
toast. Now, they are in a tense standoff in the South China Sea.
“The
two sides were very happy and united,” Lt. Colonel Phan Duy Cuong, the
operations assistant of Vietnam’s Coast Guard Command, said of the April
15 ceremony. “We toasted each other with wine. They went on our boat
and we went on theirs.” Ships No. 8003 and 2007 sailed alongside two Chinese coast guard vessels for three days in the Gulf of Tonkin. A month later, at least one of those Chinese boats has been spotted helping guard an oil rig that Vietnam is demanding be removed from contested waters about 140 miles (225 kilometers) off its coast, according to Cuong.
The dispute over the rig near the Paracel Islands reflects a renewed chill between the two Communist nations after efforts to draw them closer together, including a flurry of official visits last year. Both China and the U.S. have targeted Vietnam as a potential partner to bolster their influence in the region.
“We were working together just days before, but now there is a line dividing us,” Cuong said on board boat 8003, which carried a crew of 50 plus 100 live chickens in a pen on the stern. “I’m very sad.” While on the joint patrol in April, the boats together inspected Chinese and Vietnamese fishing boats.
Water Cannons
Cuong has been assigned to boat 8003 since it left Hai Phong port May 5 to patrol the waters west of the Paracel Islands. Over three days last week, the ship was chased by the Chinese coast guard five times as it attempted to break through a perimeter around the rig. The Chinese ships got as close as 400 meters to the Vietnamese craft, blasting their horns and ordering it to retreat. Other ships were rammed, Cuong said. Both sides have said they used water cannons.The cooling in ties is less about China picking a fight with Vietnam and more about it warning off the U.S., according to Tan See Seng, an associate professor at the S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies in Singapore.
“The reason for the schizophrenic quality of Chinese behavior, I suspect, has to do with what China thinks U.S. intention and strategy toward it might be,” Tan said by e-mail. “China’s big worry is the U.S. and its partners will block China’s access to strategic trade routes through the South China Sea.”.
China and Vietnam fought a border war in 1979, with China having forcibly taken the Paracel Islands from Vietnam five years earlier. In 1988, a Chinese naval attack in the Spratly Islands, which Vietnam also lays claims to, killed 64 Vietnamese border guards as China seized seven atolls. In 2007, Chinese naval patrol vessels fired on a Vietnamese fishing boat, killing one sailor.
‘City’ Lights
Out on the South China Sea last week, boat 8003’s radar screen showed about 60 Chinese ships facing off against half a dozen Vietnamese boats. Cuong’s ship got within three nautical miles of the oil rig on May 6 before being turned away and hasn’t been that close since.“The first day we got there we saw all these ships turn on their lights,” said Bui Son, a crew member in charge of artillery. “It looked like a city. We were so surprised to see such a heavy presence of Chinese ships in Vietnam’s territorial waters. We were shocked.”
As he spoke, in the distance the rig rose from the sea like a giant tower, with a platform on a red base holding several cranes. At night it glows and can be seen as far away as 12 nautical miles.
Low-flying Aircraft
The crew of boat 8003 has seen two Chinese missile-launching ships in the area, while Chinese aircraft have flown over at low altitude. Vietnam state media reported a Chinese submarine in the area.Colonel Luu Tien Thang, deputy director of the political division of the Coast Guard Command, said Vietnam has coast guard and fishing surveillance craft in the vicinity of the rig.
“We
do not use the navy to show our willingness to resolve this
peacefully,” he said on May 15 on boat 8003. “If we deployed the navy,
it would escalate the situation.”
Anti-China protests in Vietnam
last week morphed into attacks on factories operated by companies from
Taiwan and Singapore, leaving two Chinese dead and scores of businesses
damaged. That prompted Prime Minister Nguyen Tan Dung to instruct
provincial governments and security forces to take “quick actions” to
stop the violence and prevent protests. The Binh Duong government will exempt protest-damaged companies from land rental charges, Vietnam’s official state television reported yesterday, citing Le Thanh Cung, chairman of the provincial People’s Committee.
China said yesterday it was sending five ships to Vietnam to evacuate its citizens, with more than 3,000 Chinese nationals leaving as of May 17. An additional 3,000 Chinese workers are expected to leave on the ships from the central province of Ha Tinh today and tomorrow, according to Tran Dac Hoa, the province’s Labor Federation vice president.
China’s ‘Family’
Things had appeared on a more positive footing last year, as China’s President Xi Jinping and Premier Li Keqiang made a series of visits to Southeast Asian nations, pledging investment and bolstering trade ties. Xi said in October “the Asia-Pacific is a big family and China is a member of this family.”Vietnam and China last June set up a hot-line between their leaders, and expanded a 2006 agreement to jointly explore for oil in the Gulf of Tonkin. Li visited Vietnam in October, where he and Dung pledged to boost “political trust,” signing a memorandum of understanding for a cross-border economic cooperation zone and agreeing to open trade promotion offices.
Vietnam President Truong Tan Sang visited Beijing last June, where he had a three-hour meeting with Xi and they agreed to push “pragmatic cooperation” on areas such as defense, the official Xinhua News Agency reported.
China says the rig is in its territorial waters, and has accused Vietnam of ramming its ships. The attacks on workers in Vietnam prompted Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Hua Chunying on May 15 to criticize the Vietnamese government for “indulgence and connivance toward domestic anti-China forces and criminals.”
‘Normal Behavior’
The rig’s presence off Vietnam’s coast is “very normal behavior,” General Fang Fenghui, chief of the People’s Liberation Army General Staff, said in the U.S. on May 15. Vietnam dispatched ships to disrupt the drilling operations, “and that’s something we aren’t able to accept,” he said.China’s growing self-confidence on the international stage, coupled with Xi’s “tough” style, means the relationship with Vietnam could stay tense, according to Arthur Ding, a research fellow at the China politics division of the Institute of International Relations in Taipei.
“I don’t think you’re going to see it escalate into a war,” Ding said by phone. “China and Vietnam are still self-restrained.”
While Vietnam has confronted China in the waters it “also realizes that it’s quite impossible to confront China in a very sustainable way,” he said. “China has become the No. 2 power.”
Fading Friendship
Out on boat 8003, Son said he’s not afraid of the larger Chinese ships.“What I do worry about is that our friendship is fading and we are losing trust in each other,” he said. “That’s the bigger loss for the two countries.”
“When we said goodbye, we promised we’d see each other again. Now we see each other in this very difficult situation.”
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)