Sandbox 2021: HE Shells and Artillery Combined Test Incoming!

Source: EU Portal

First, we’d like to express our gratitude to all the engaged and dedicated players who participated in testing the reworked HE shells and complex changes for vehicles and artillery. Thank you for your interest, commitment, comments, and feedback. You’ve done a tremendous job, and we highly appreciate it!

But now we need to brace ourselves and determine the format in which the reworked HE shells and changes for vehicles and SPGs will be added to the game. We’re entering the final stretch and launching the most important, combined pre-release test. At this stage, all our previous suggestions will be put together and take their almost-final forms. This is a decisive moment, Commanders—we’re counting on your support and engagement!

Combined Test: HE Shell Rebalance and Changes for Vehicles and Artillery

March 23 14:00 CET (UTC+1) through March 29 11:00 CEST (UTC+2)

If, by the end of our collective testing, we conclude that the changes can go live, you will likely be able to see them around May during the Common Test. They will be added to the game simultaneously as a single update. Now is your chance to make your voice heard and influence the way the new mechanics turn out!

As always, all active test participants will receive valuable rewards as a sign of our gratitude for their contribution. More on that below.

HE Shell Rebalance: Let the Final Test Begin!

Upon analyzing player surveys from the two previous tests, we can safely say that both Sandbox iterations showed good results. This is further confirmed by our statistics: for instance, after the testing of the reworked HE shells, more than 70% of reviews from players who played on the Sandbox were positive.

Test participants formed a diverse audience. Many of them played in vehicles other than HE tanks, including popular heavies. These players came up with several important questions regarding not only new mechanics, but also the performance of specific vehicles. We’ll now try to answer the most frequently asked questions.


The Sandbox data provides us with a general insight into vehicle performance. Because of this, we can see that the new mechanics don’t cause serious errors, but that doesn’t mean they are flawless or that transitioning to the new system will be perfect regarding game balance. If the changes go live on the main server, we will continue to actively monitor the performance of vehicles including those mentioned below.

The revamped Crew 2.0 system will not be present during the upcoming test—we’re still working on it after receiving your feedback.

All detailed parameters, shell characteristics, and numerical values on the test aren’t final. We’ll continue to work on them based on the test results and your feedback.

The Statistical Performance of Vehicles Using HE Shells as Standard Ammo

A number of negative reviews during the test addressed the performance of specific vehicles. Some players communicated on the forums and in surveys that gameplay in vehicles that use HE as standard shells became worse. What do the Sandbox statistics have to say on the matter?

We share this well-founded concern, and to verify it, we took test data concerning the most popular HE tanks (Type 5 Heavy, FV4005/FV215b (183), KV-2/KV-2 (R), Sheridan, T49) and carefully analyzed their performance on Sandbox. Let’s take a closer look at each of these vehicles.

Type 5 Heavy

The average damage caused by this tank’s standard HE shell dipped a bit, while the damage caused by its alternative HE shell slightly increased. The statistics show that the Type 5’s damage was redistributed: the vehicle caused less damage per non-penetrating shot, but at the same time, there were more penetrations. If we consider both types of HE shells—standard and alternative—in aggregate, the average damage remained the same. There were no significant changes here.

Thanks to the new mechanics, the survivability of this formidable but slow tank has increased. Even though it’s not easy for the Type 5 Heavy to hit a weak spot, it is now able to fire and penetrate with HE shells more often, just like other vehicles. This effectively contributed to a small increase in damage caused by alternative shells.

In general, the vehicle’s battle performance remains the same. As it stands, there are currently no reasonable grounds for rebalancing this vehicle.


The average damage caused by this vehicle’s standard HE shell remained practically the same, but at the same time, its average damage per shot with alternative HE shells slightly increased. The higher penetration value of the latter resulted in a greater number of penetrations.

Despite a small dip in survivability, the overall battle performance of the FV4005 didn’t change, which also indicates that there is no need for urgent changes.

Sheridan and T49

Thanks to their good dynamics and an ability to better realize the potential of the new HE shells, these vehicles now enjoy a significant increase in penetrations with both standard and alternative HE shells. However, the damage of non-penetrating shots naturally decreased, as was the case with other tanks. The average damage per shot increased, but at the same time, their survivability slightly worsened. Overall, the battle performance of these two vehicles didn’t change significantly either.

KV-2/KV-2 (R)

The statistics showed a small decrease in the damage of non-penetrating shots for these tanks. A general decrease in the average damage per shot can be observed, but less so than with other vehicles. Just like the Type 5 Heavy, the KV-2 now boasts better survivability in battle. Consequently, these tanks can fire more shots per battle, which compensates for the decrease in damage for non-penetrating shots. As a result, their average damage values remain largely the same.

Panhard EBR 105

The Panhard EBR 105 now deals more HE damage per shot, but at the same time receives much more HE damage to itself. The survivability of this wheeled tank worsened, but this is in no small part due to the general nature of Sandbox battles, not solely to the specifics of the new HE mechanics. The overall battle performance of the Panhard EBR 105 also didn’t change significantly.

If the new mechanics are introduced into the game, will vehicles with good gun depression/elevation angles and tough turrets gain an advantage?

There is another widespread opinion that players shared. Some tankers suggested that the new mechanics will worsen the performance of lightly armored vehicles, while those with well-armored turrets and good gun depression/elevation angles will gain an advantage. When fighting an enemy in a hull-down position, you could at least damage it with HE shells, which will become way harder to do with the new mechanics.

Let’s take the Super Conqueror as an example—a well-known heavy with a sturdy turret and gun depression/elevation angles of up to –10°. On the main server, HE shells account for 11% of the total hits this tank receives. Indeed, changing the HE damage mechanics may influence the outcome of a particular battle where this vehicle will use terrain. But considering the overall impact on game balance, this won’t affect the vehicle’s performance significantly. Regardless of how much the HE damage input on the Super Conqueror changes, it won’t influence its gameplay and battle performance in any meaningful way. In the end, it will be marginal in the statistics for this tank’s received damage, rather than a compelling argument for potential changes. Hence, as is the case with HE tanks, there is no need to implement changes to the characteristics of the Super Conqueror or other similar vehicles.

Why were types of shells other than HE allowed on the Sandbox?

During the test, it was important for us to see how a specific tank would interact with a specific shell type (HE), while ignoring other factors. We didn’t focus on characteristics and blocked damage from specific vehicles, their survivability, win rate of a specific player, etc. Instead, we were evaluating the effectiveness of the new mechanics and the general interaction of vehicles with reworked HE shells—screen penetration, revision of HE damage behavior, etc.

We wanted players to decide for themselves which shells to use in which situations, thus bringing the testing as close to real conditions as possible. That’s exactly why we didn’t restrict the choice of ammunition, reduce vehicles’ ammunition capacity, or introduce artificial changes to battlefield conditions.

Why were the T95/FV4201 Chieftain, the Object 279 early, and other rare vehicles absent from the test?

These vehicles are indeed very rare and highly coveted by any Commander, and their availability is limited in the game. We don’t want the focus shifted from testing new mechanics to learning the unique gameplay of these rarities, which is why we didn’t add them to the test. The upcoming Sandbox won’t have these vehicles either.


In summary, we can affirm that the Sandbox statistics neither exposed any major faults in the mechanics, nor showed any serious alterations in the vehicles’ battle performance. As a result, there is no need to introduce changes to the new mechanics or characteristics, as the test demonstrated that everything works properly in the current format.

We considered the results of the previous test and plan to launch the final iteration in which we will assess how the new mechanics operate in a single ecosystem with artillery changes. We will be simultaneously conducting an HE vehicle supertest for a more in-depth examination of their battle performance. If required, we will selectively tweak these vehicles’ characteristics based on the supertest results, but there is no need for that before the upcoming Sandbox.

Tank and Artillery Changes for the Upcoming Test

Most of you welcomed the complex changes that were tested on the Sandbox server, and this positive perception didn’t depend on whether you played in SPGs or other vehicles. The hottest topic you discussed was changes to arty shells and their characteristics, as well as the effectiveness of specific SPGs and the mechanics of the Sound Detection feature.

Changes to SPGs

  • Preliminary statistics show that the idea to introduce three types of tactically diverse shells works, and SPG players used or learned to use all three types of shells.
SPG Standard shell, % Alternative shell, % Tactical shell, %
Object 261 45 36 19
G.W. E 100 49 37 14
T92 HMC 42 46 12
Bat.-Châtillon 155 58 46 35 19
Conqueror Gun Carriage 48 40 12
  • Each type of shell was in demand and was actively used. According to the first estimates, this reduced the stun time in battles by 60-65%*. The exact numbers for specific vehicles are shown in the table below.
Vehicle Stun time in Update 1.12, seconds Stun time on Sandbox 2021: SPG Rebalance Test, seconds
Maus 22.8 5.9
T110E5 18.3 5.6
TVP T 50/51 8.8 3.0
STB-1 13.6 4.3
T-100 LT 6.9 2.2
These are average values for all vehicles, not just those shown in the table. They are also influenced by slightly faster Sandbox battles.
  • The average damage per battle remained about the same. When calculating the damage, we considered that the battles on the Sandbox take place a little faster than on the main server, so the artillery didn’t have time to reveal its full potential. In addition, the tools for counteracting SPGs also had their impact.

Counteracting SPGs

  • Based on your feedback and the survey results, our suggested tools to counteract SPGs received general community approval. The effectiveness of these changes should be evaluated over a longer testing period than just the 7 days of the Sandbox test.
  • The modified “Intuition” perk received the most positive reception, and not only among artillery players. According to our statistics, you began to change the type of shell much more often, especially when playing in SPGs.
  • The Sound Detection feature became a topic of hot dispute and raised questions in the community because it is a new and unusual mechanic that takes some time to get used to in battles. You need time to use it consciously and effectively. However, your feedback showed that this mechanic affected the amount of damage received after artillery shots, and the idea itself received your general approval.
  • Brighter shell tracers were also well received. According to your feedback, they helped you to better determine the direction of artillery fire and use this information to plan further actions. At the same time, we didn’t detect any changes in the behavior of artillery and didn’t notice an increase in the effectiveness of counter-battery fire.

Considering all of the above, by the start of the final iteration, we decided to make the following changes:

  • Standard shells are designed to support allies and contain enemy groups of vehicles through their combined ability to stun and inflict damage. At the same time, during the first iteration of the Sandbox, they showed a damage efficiency similar to the alternative shell. To highlight the tactical component of the standard shell in comparison with the alternative one, we will slightly reduce its damage on some SPGs.
SPG Damage with a standard shell on Sandbox: SPG Rebalance Test, HP Damage with a standard shell on Sandbox: HE Shells and Artillery Combined Test, HP
Object 261 810 800
G.W. E 100 990 900
T92 HMC 1,170 1,100
Bat.-Châtillon 155 58 680 680
Conqueror Gun Carriage 1,080 1,000
  • The trajectory of the alternative shells influenced their demand. You often didn’t get the right opportunity to fire this type of shell, even in favorable combat situations. To fix this, we will bring its trajectory closer to the trajectory of a standard shell and decrease its velocity without changing its effectiveness per effective shot. According to the test results, this shell also showed different levels of effectiveness for different SPGs. To equalize the effectiveness of this type of shell, it will receive small changes in damage (±5%) and a decrease in armor penetration by about 17%.
SPG Alternative shell velocity on Sandbox: SPG Rebalance Test, m/s Alternative shell velocity on Sandbox: HE Shells and Artillery Combined Test, m/s
Object 261 612 546
G.W. E 100 522 465
T92 HMC 552 492
Bat.-Châtillon 155 58 588 524
Conqueror Gun Carriage 432 385
  • Tactical AP shells showed less-than-expected effectiveness both according to the statistics and your feedback, even when used correctly. The main reason is their flat trajectory and the insufficient damage when penetrating armor. We want their use to be rare and situational, but add value when used correctly. To do this, we plan to increase their damage by about 10% compared to the previous Sandbox. In addition, their trajectory will become more convenient for shooting, but with a decrease in velocity.
SPG Tactical AP shell damage on Sandbox: SPG Rebalance Test, HP Tactical AP shell damage on Sandbox: HE Shells and Artillery Combined Test, HP
Object 261 470 520
G.W. E 100 525 570
T92 HMC 580 650
Bat.-Châtillon 155 58 415 450
Conqueror Gun Carriage 565 620

Your participation is now more important than ever, so be sure to test the changes and fill out the relevant surveys! The more players that join the test and share their feedback, the higher our chance of success. We really appreciate your time and dedication, which is why all active test participants will be able to earn rewards, including 4 unique decals and a special Sandbox-themed 2D style.

Rewards for Participation in the Test

During the test, you will have access to a chain of 5 simple daily missions. Completing each mission will reward you with 2 Tokens. Once all five missions are complete, the sixth and final mission in the chain will become available to you. To complete it, you only need to play one battle—you will be rewarded with 20 Tokens. You can complete the entire chain of missions three times during the test. The rewards for completed missions will be added together if all conditions and restrictions are met.

  • Play LT/MT/HT/TD Tier VI


  • Play 2 battles
  • Be among the top 10 players on your team by experience earned


  • Once a day
  • 3 times per account
  • Available only for Tier VI medium tanks, light tanks, heavy tanks, and tank destroyers
  • Random Battles


  •  Token x2

Tokens will be transferred to the live servers sometime after the end of the test. All unused Tokens will be compensated at the rate of  10,000 per Token.

The infographics show the rewards for one stage of the test.

How to Participate

Anyone can participate in the test!

  • Download the Sandbox launcher.
  • Install the Sandbox client by launching the downloaded file. If you’re running the Game Center for the first time, you’ll have to authorize and restart the downloaded installation file.
  • Wait until the Sandbox client is downloaded and installed.
  • Open the World of Tanks tab, select World of Tanks Sandbox, and click Play.

31 thoughts on “Sandbox 2021: HE Shells and Artillery Combined Test Incoming!

  1. WG logic:
    If we remove all tanks’ main guns, although they won’t be able to deal damage by shooting, they won’t be fired at too, so all vehicle’s battle performance remains the same.

    1. HAHAHAHAHa i had to admit it you make my laught a lot.
      Yea its a stupid Idea. Thats if you face enemies like you but if you fast a A-43 in your KV-2 you are Cucked.

  2. Any and all nerfs to arty are welcomed. If arty players don’t like it then they can play a different class of tank and finally play the game for once. Less arty will also reduce the toxicity of the game. It will be more enjoyable and less annoying to play the game.

    1. if Wargaming wants to reduce the toxicity of the game, they should look at wheeled vehicles first as far as I’m concerned. Imho wheeled vehicles are far more toxic than arty has ever been.

      Not that I’m against nerfing arty, btw. What I don’t get with the proposed changes, though, is why they consistently refuse to nerf mid-tier arties such as the M44. In my opinion, arties are more destructive in mid-tiers than in the endgame.

      1. because they nerf/buff things based on winrate. and usually the arty players are tomatoes that can only sit in the corner of the map and click and do damage, but only doing damage doesn’t mean that you will win. if any other tank will have a better general winrate, wg will nerf it…

      2. Ebr’s really never have been much of a problem for me (and many other high score players). Seems more like it is one for people who have a hard time aiming at moving targets or do stupid things (waiting patiently in a bush is one of them). If you wanna play with an other light you sure have to think about what to do more carefully as to not be counterplayed but it is true for each novelty.
        So yeah, I kinda see people arguing about ebrs as noobs and stubborn.
        Now comparing it to arty. In battle if an ebr spots me, he will sure not stay alive for long if he stays around. If an arty starts shooting at me, I can start crying into a corner until the end of the game. Nothing you can do about it. The moment you show up again, even on the other side of the map, many arty players are just waiting for you and will focus again. So yeah. I hate more arties than ebr’s. At least I can counter it and have fun with them sometimes.

        1. It is true that there is little you can against arties sometimes, especially when you’re sitting on an open map in a sluggish tank. But then – believe it or not – it is also not exactly easy to take out a wheeled tank racing at a retarded 90+ km/h on the battlefield. And while most wheelies usually die within minutes (because they are challenging to do well in), matches are often already decided by then as a result. Just one example: Put a total tomato in an EBR and let him yolo down the centre in Lakeville. Yes, he will die within 90 secs max, but the enemy side loses so much momentum in the crucial build-up phase that the match is often basically over. This is just one example, mind, but I have had it over and over again. And yeah, sure, people should learn to aim and all that crap – the most intellectually lazy argument ever, but it comes up every time – but be realistic for once and realize that this isn’t going to happen anytime soon. Face it: not everybody is as wonderful as you are, nor will they ever be. I stick to my guns – wheeled tanks are toxic because they have contributed to considerably shorten average match times, because they have largely made other light tanks obsolete, because the improved aim-lock in combination with a ridiculous dispersion while moving is simply retarded, because they are thoroughly unrealistic (which, to be fair, is true of arty as well) and and … well, you get the point.

        2. If I wanted a game where victory depended on my ability to hit quickly moving targets, I would go play one of the dozens of FPS games on the market. WoT is supposed to be about you ability to outthink the other player, not a test of your hand-eye coordination.

    2. sounds like someone is mad. If the game makes you mad, then I suggest you play a different game and shut your piehole whiner.

      1. oh, poor clicker… sounds like someone is mad because his arty is a little nerfed. 🙁

        1. hmm when you are using that thing in your hand is called a mouse and you click with it, no matter what you are playing. You are a clicker too but is too hard to understand when mother nature forgot to give some brain in that head 😂

          1. maltratatule, arata-i lu’ nenea pe manechin, unde te-a atins omu’ rau 😛

  3. Type5 and FV4005: “the standard HE were nerfed and the gold ammo was buffed despite being already problematic on these specific tanks, therefore nothing changed and everything is fine.”

    Can’t make this shit up

    1. Yes, they’conveniently ‘forget’ to mention that the shell type which ostensibly makes up for the reduced damage of non-penetrating hits is – tadaaa! – gold ammo. I guess that’s because “Stop whining and shoot gold suckers” does not sound quite as sexy.

      To be honest, I think they’re taking the piss. These analyses regarding the Type 5, the EBR 105, the KV-2 – I think that’s bullshit. Wargaming wants to push through these changes come hell or high water, and to make sure the community sucks it up they are trying to blind us with bullshit science. Perhaps I’m wrong, but the thing is, we have no means to know, and I have a hunch Wargaming are taking full advantage of that.

    2. idk how my new foch 155 is gonna be effected by HE, since I use he for problematic heavies

  4. Who the fuck fires normal ammo on the test server? It;s all premium HE and premium APCR lol

    1. That struck my mind aswell. They write about wanting to test under “normal conditions”, but then every single Ivan and his babushka is spamming premium ammo. Yeah, very “normal conditions” to test. Drunk muppets at WG.

  5. Limit arty to 2 per team, done. HE isn’t a problem and it makes no sense at all for HE to have no splash radius.

  6. Are people still whining about arty, which has been in the game for 8 years….more?

  7. I have arty, ebr and so many premiums that maltratorul won’t afford ever in his life but most annoying one is the ebr… it drives me crazy when he rush for arty, when I’m playing with other lights or any other tank…

  8. We can test all we want. In the end they’ll stick to what their holy spreadsheets tell them. These guys just don’t play their own game anymore.

Comments are closed.