World of Tanks takes a jab at Armored Warfare

m113 is not a real tank, an e100 is image

You may also like...

57 Responses

  1. Cameron says:

    The E-100 is not a paper tank the had 3 people working on it in ww2

  2. Furbutt-requin says:

    -i’m really enjoying this “War” between “[B]Armored warfare[/B]” and “[B]world of tank[/B]”
    Even if they are 2 big concurrent , and that a real competition is happening between the two of them

    -When i see The gif of world of tank on twitter , i feel like it’s a friendly game
    It’s like watching someone , saying bad thing about the other , but honestly they both know it’s to make a joke and laught together .

    -“[B]That’s Not A tank — This is a tank[/B]” , is a really great and original idea … and Making it as a Gif is even better
    So Armored Warfare be sure to answer in a funny/attacking way too , originality will win this “[B]friendly[/B]” game , but don’t try yet it’s too soon
    Wait for World of tank to make a move , then strike ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)

  3. Ratel says:

    Had to add the actual Oxford Dictionary definition for the word “tank” -a heavy armored fighting vehicle carrying guns and moving on a continuous articulated metal track. So the M113 is a ….. Glad WG makes games and not educational flash cards! Cannot wait to see how this now escalates!

    • Woras says:

      Does WG have ANY card to play against AW?

      • Ratel says:

        How about World of Siege Engines or World of Dinosaur’s! Basically it looks like WG pigeon holed themselves within the confines of WW2 and neglected to expand onward in time. Why this was done only they know. What was rooted somewhat to history now can only expand by taking the WW2 theme into fantasy. If I was OE I would announce a 1950 onward naval warfare game and watch WG get even more excited!

  4. Pat says:

    I would haven answered with showing a T1 Cunningham beside the M113, it would have looked just as small as the M113 beside the E-100. And would have turned their jokes against them. lol

  5. baby says:

    I’m play in WOT from 2011 to present day (about 4 years) and was wait for Abrams and other modern tanks but WG say: “no, only up to tier 10! No rockets! …etc.”
    Why?
    And now i have fun play in this game becose my little dream come tru. Thanks for thet!
    P.S. M1A2 have -5 depression? It make me mad!

  6. BlackPaw says:

    who cares if it is a tank or not…..

    ps. like everything in WOT is a tank.. lol

  7. Daripuff says:

    This is not a tank:
    http://www.nwha.org/news_4Q2001/resources/heavy4.jpg

    This is a tank:
    http://www.fprado.com/armorsite/Leo2_Pics/Leopard-2E-firing-01.jpg

    I love the fact that the tank they chose is not actually a tank, but was only ever a hull.

    • kombajn says:

      I was gone comment that so many WOT “tanks” are just based on paper designs or just simple fakes like E50M but you were faster. Hell entire Japanese heavy branch is paper designed /fakes.

  8. Ian says:

    Two fold point which builds on what others have been saying:

    By Wargaming pointing out as what it see’s as inconsistencies with Armored Warfares logic:

    ie poiting out the M113 is not a tank thats in a ‘tank’ game, when infact we know its an APC or an AFV, and its not ‘just a ‘tank’ game) is one thing which doesnt actually make any sense…however they also highlight that their game isnt even consistent with itself, World of Tanks has artillery.

    Should have a nice big picture of a GW panther after that E-100 World of tanks image captioned with *This is not a tank* plastered all over it in font 50 with a nice big World of Tanks logo in the corner.

  9. FSFTalos says:

    After playing WOT since its early years I dropped it like a hot potato when AW arrived. I would much rather play AW with a game concept that is truer to life.

  10. DammaRamma says:

    well…..i would love to take my T90 of M1A1 (tier 8) against any tier 10 witch WG can trow at me…oke oke….Tier 7 will do the job also just fine…Tier6 perhaps??…XM1?….bring it on WG!….anytime!

  11. T54 Clone says:

    WG thinks it’s clever to compare a real vehicle which is a tier 1 in AW to a vehicle which was never produced that is a tier 10 in WoT. And of course they’re oblivious to the fact that most of their tech trees start off as useless tin cans, and their tier 10s would be tier 3-4 in AW.

  12. Puppies says:

    I think WOT’s little jab is going to really backfire on them. In a way they just raised awareness of the new tank game on the block. GG Wargamming, you just let a lot of people know about another game they might not have known about.

  13. S K says:

    I think WG poking fun at AW was a mistake. It’s one thing for an underdog to poke at the big dog to get attention. But WG responding to AW’s jab only legitimizes AW as a valid competitor. If WG saw themselves as unbeatable, they would not care if some pipsqueak upstart takes a poke at them.

    Then there’s the unfair comparison of WoT’s Tier 10 Heavy Tank (which may have existed in an unfinished version but never came close to being fielded) to AW’s Tier 1 AFV, which did exist in large numbers.

    As for “imaginary” or “paper” tanks, I get the feeling that AW is releasing prototypes as Premium tanks. Whereas WoT is famous for lots of imaginary, paper, and complete fantasy vehicles (T28 Proto, the Death Star, the WT auf E-100) in the regular tree.

    In WoT’s defense, when you have to come up with up to 10 vehicles of a particular type for a particular country, it is easier to fill the holes with imaginary or fantasy vehicles. If WG didn’t care about criticism about fantasy tanks and competitors with more real tanks, they would not be working to replace the FV215b with the Chieftain. If WG didn’t care about criticism about RNG having too much influence over artillery performance, thus making high tier arty boring yet frustrating to play, they wouldn’t be considering remodeling their SPGs to be more like AW artillery.

  14. A.T. says:

    yeah, how about comparing the E-100 to the Leopard 2A7 or the Abrams? here is the text for it “E-100: this is the dream of a megalomaniac, Leo/Abrams: this is his dream come true!” :)

  15. FN5Seven says:

    I understand the real life vs fantasy argument, but I think the other point to really point out about WG is they compared a top tier tank to a tier 1 vehicle. That would be like one racing game promoting a Bugatti Veyron to a Honda Civic of another game. It just shows how scared WG is of Obsidian and AW. The fact that AW is still in Beta and WG is already trying to foll others into playing their game is sad……and hilarious.

    • FN5Seven says:

      *fool…not foll

    • kombajn says:

      Whats more funny for me is that when you compare AW tier 1 M113 whit WOT tier 1 let say Leichttraktor. Now let see in WIKI”The Leichttraktor (VK-31) was a German experimental tank. … In the early years of World War II, it was used as a training tank “. Ok now M113
      “he M113 is a fully tracked armored personnel carrier that was developed by Food Machinery Corp (FMC). The vehicle was first fielded by the United States Army’s mechanized infantry units in Vietnam in April 1962” Also there is a list o conflict it took part in:
      Vietnam War
      Yom Kippur War
      Indo-Pakistani War of 1965
      Indo-Pakistani War of 1971
      Lebanese Civil War
      1982 Lebanon War
      South Lebanon conflict (1985–2000)
      Invasion of Panama
      Iran–Iraq War
      Persian Gulf War
      Kosovo War
      War in Afghanistan
      Iraq War
      Waziristan War
      Second Intifada
      2006 Lebanon War
      Gaza War
      Libyan Civil War
      Operation Protective Edge
      Iraqi insurgency
      Syrian Civil War

      yehh not a tank kiss my ass WG

  16. the_real_chuao says:

    Is just a matter of years (if they make it until then) for AW to start implementing project or even tanks/armored vehicles. Until then they can mock WoT 😀

    • the_real_chuao says:

      *or even fantasy tanks/armored vechicles

      • A.T. says:

        there is a fundamental difference though. Since AWs timeline starts at the beginning of the cold war and has so far NO END, even if they implement “fantasy” tanks, they MIGHT be built at some point in the future. WOT has a strict timeline that ENDS with the cold war and there is no way that things that did not have existed can even theoretically exist. Of course WOT can expand into newer timelines with Tiers 11+ :).

  17. Greengold says:

    The Danish M113 is a picture, something real which also saw action in Kosovo, the other is a painting and something never made it out of the factory.

    WoT have to many none existance tanks and the worst artillery in any game ever made.

    Nice try WG but you have lost me forever by not listening to your customers, something i feel that Obsidian are doing.

  18. d boove says:

    Funny trying to compare a tanknontank with a real life vehicle that soldiers served
    Just doesn’t work.

  19. _Beckett says:

    also dont forget about chieftain prank aswell:
    https://aw.my.com/gb/news/general/chieftain-approaches
    and yes they posted that on fb page aswell (cant find it now imho but something like “we have chieftain from begining and there’s no replacing”… hard to say how exacly they write that post)

  20. Woras says:

    I hope that whoever is responsible for PR understands that AW is nowhere near close to even take on WoT 😀
    In half year time – yeah maybe.

    Then its just piece of cake to mock WG – fantasy tanks, unfair mods, unreliable RNG mechanics – stuff that is clear to understand without playing the game.

  21. Kartoniak says:

    Well, at least M113 EXISTED IN REAL LIFE.

  1. November 9, 2015

    […] post World of Tanks takes a jab at Armored Warfare appeared first on Armored Talk, an Armored Warfare […]

  2. November 12, 2015

    […] a few days back when Wargaming took a jab at Armored Warfare with an ad? Well, the Armored Warfare portal today deiced to take a look at the scenario of what would happen […]

  3. November 12, 2015

    […] Źródło: World of Tanks takes a jab at Armored Warfare Spodobał Ci się ten post? Wesprzyj nasz serwis dotacją KLIKAJĄC TUTAJ! jQuery(document).ready(function ($) { $('.facebook-6341 .count').sharrre({ share: { facebook: true }, template: '{total}', enableHover: false, enableTracking: true, }); $('.twitter-6341 .count').sharrre({ share: { twitter: true }, template: '{total}', enableHover: false, enableTracking: true, }); $('.googleplus-6341 .count').sharrre({ share: { googlePlus: true }, urlCurl: 'http://ArmoredWarfare.pl/wp-content/themes/goodnews5/framework/sharrre.php', template: '{total}', enableHover: false, enableTracking: true, }); $('.linkedin-6341 .count').sharrre({ share: { linkedin: true }, template: '{total}', enableHover: false, enableTracking: true, }); $('.pinterest-6341 .count').sharrre({ share: { pinterest: true }, template: '{total}', enableHover: false, enableTracking: true, }); }); Udostępnij 0 Tweet 0 Udostępnij 0 […]

  4. December 11, 2015

    […] isn’t the first time Armored Warfare has taken a humorous shot at World of Tanks and World of Tanks has even fired a salvo back, essentially legitimizing the newcomer to the tank battle MMO […]

  5. December 12, 2015

    […] and commercials. As I did when I shared the Pepsi vs Coca Cola truck driver commercial when Wargaming responded the first time with a jab of their own towards Armored Warfare, I’ll leave you with another example of advertising I hope Wargaming and Armored Warfare […]

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *