Jump to content


WG "does not consider artillery to be a problem"


  • Please log in to reply
414 replies to this topic

Element6 #281 Posted 11 April 2015 - 01:05 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 31216 battles
  • 11,371
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    01-06-2013

View PostShnuks, on 11 April 2015 - 09:50 AM, said:

 

Did I somehow get under your skin Shnuks? You seem to have been caught up in a loop of sorts...



jabster #282 Posted 11 April 2015 - 01:15 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Beta Tester
  • 12657 battles
  • 25,346
  • [WSAT] WSAT
  • Member since:
    12-30-2010

View PostJigabachi, on 11 April 2015 - 11:35 AM, said:

[Don't mind this post, I'll just leave a short comment about the actual topic. Feel free to continue with the old arty circlejerk.]

 

Even if that Q&A line wasn't ripped out of its context and WG really doesn't consider arty to be a problem... how does that matter? Just look at the state of the game and tell me that you still believe everything they spout.

Remember; they also said that the KV-1S was balanced. And the WTF100. Historical battles anyone? Mapdesign?

Even devs can be wrong. A lot.

 

At the end of the day, neither tankinjibberish's love and all the fanboy arguments, nor Mungos hate and the elitist arguments won't help. At all. Keep banging your skulls, you won't change anything. 

Let's just hope that AW finally creates some valid competition so that WG is finally forced to actually do something to improve the game in general - including arty. (Yes, that last bit implies that arty is a problem.)

 

They've been like that for as long as I can remember. Claim pretty much everything is working right up to the point they change it. I have some sympathy for taking that approach as saying something isn't working correctly can be taken as a commitment to fix it even if it's a minor issue and also the truth doesn't always gone down to well - why is this OP tank still in the tree/not nerfed; well probably because they haven't enticed enough people to convert free exp. yet.

Evil_Mungo #283 Posted 11 April 2015 - 01:40 PM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Clan Commander
  • 28225 battles
  • 3,332
  • [-MM] -MM
  • Member since:
    06-12-2012

Sigh.

 

View PostRogDodgeUK, on 09 April 2015 - 10:24 PM, said:

What is there to defend. If the game is played as it is intended to be played and that is 'properly', players working as a team, using the tanks in the manor that they are supposed to be used then arty fits very well into the game model. The problem is many players do not play the game as it is intended to be played and thus arty unfortunately becomes the biggest causality of this. 

 

Games are patched and re-balanced all of the time because, although elements are being used 'proprerly' they are not working in a way that positively affects gameplay.  Those elements are usually either imbalanced, broken, or not fun.  Arty is at least two of those things.  As you state - arty becomes a casualty of it.  As you have correctly identified, arty is not working correctly.  So, Wargaming have two options, according to your own analysis; change the game ruining element or change the collective consciousnesses of the playerbase - all of the subtle nuances of thought that make people act the way they do and how they use it.  Which of those two things do you think is within the remit of a game developer?

 

Even without any input from me your argument is internally destroyed with its own awful reasoning.

 

RogDodgeUK

Many players moan about being 'one shot'ed' but hasn't anyone considered the possibility that this is due to the skill of the arty player hitting your tank in it's weakest spot?. We have all been in tanks where we have gained the upper hand by knowing where the weakspots are and focusing our fire on them. Is it not fair to say that arty also has that ability or are you saying that all tanks except arty are allowed to focus on weakspots? Should we remove the top gun and HE from a E-100 just because it is able to one shot a tier8 in the right place?

 

The reticle is usually the size of the tank or larger and the shell will land somewhere in that circle.  A major part of the arty defender's position is that arty doesn't hit very accurately.  Do you now want to reverse that position and claim that artyt is so accurate that it can aim for, and hit, weakspots?  If so, then arty is even more broken that we had initially thought.  

 

Your argument is internally destructive to your own cause.

 

RogDodgeUK

Should the Generals of WW2 from both sides have moaned and complained at each other because their artillery was knocking out their tanks and it was unfair that the artillery could not get return fire because the tanks could not see them and thus neither side should use artillery??? Rommels using artillery!!! oh gosh..that's so unfair, Patton has just knocked out 3 Tiger's with his artillery!!!, i am going to complain to headquarters and get them removed.

 

You cannot appeal to realism regarding warfare in arty's defense.  Arty is not implemented in the game in any realistic way at all, and that is a good thing for arty players because you would never hit a single moving tank, ever.  You might be able to employ arty as a makeshift TD but it would be outclassed in every regard by actual TD's where realism ever introduced into the game.

 

Even if we ignore your silly appeal to realism, you have basically just said that you are fine with the game being imbalanced due to arty being in it.  You are basically destroying the arguments of arty defenders by saying that arty isn't fair and that you don't care about game-balance at all.

 

Your argument is internally destructive.

 

RogDodgeUK

Players complain about arty because they feel it gives the enemy an unfair advantage, even though MM makes sure your team also has the same amount and matching in strength. Do not blame the game developers for people not playing the game properly. If one side has arty players who know what they are doing, that's just tough for you. Your team has arty too but if they cannot be bothered to play the tank properly, is that really the fault of the game developers, no, it is the fault of the player using that tank.

 

No, arty doesn't give 'the enemy' and unfair advantage - it gives the arty player an unfun and unafir mechanism for dealing damage not inline with player ability or input.  Your argument is, again, not a very good one because it amounts to 'both teams have it so it's okay!' - however, let's consider a situation where the game is exactly the same as it is now, except the top clan players each get a reward tank, the Challenger II or the M1A1 Abrams.  These players will, forthwith be placed into randoms teams equally, so that each team gets one of these players.  No other tank in the game can harm these tanks.

 

Now, every game will come down to which one of these players kills the other one, and then mops up the rest of the enemy.  In this case we have created a 'balanced' distribution of forces, but one that utterly destroys the fun for the rest of the team.

 

Your argument is internally destructive and illogical.

 

View PostElement6, on 10 April 2015 - 11:51 AM, said:

Is that really surprising? No matter how extensive the debate is on the forums, no matter the volume of atiller related threads, nothing is, or very little, is changed.

 

There is no need to put up anything other than for academic purposes, it seems. 

 

They have just said in the expanded quote from the dishonest opening post that they are looking at ways to solve the problem.  You are either woefully dishonest or willfully ignorant.  I don't care which because you make yourself irrelevant to the discussion by claiming that you don't have an opinion.

 

 

View PostGnomus, on 10 April 2015 - 04:39 PM, said:

Why should I or anyone else keep answering your oneline “arty is broken” comments? Why should someone write same answers time after time to every hate topic here? Perhaps some might, if it was just new players venting or trying to understand arty better, but it is always same small group ranting their hatred the moment someone starts a new hate topic. Then you wonder why no one is “defending ” arty anymore.

 

You don’t like arty, that is clear. Because you THINK arty is “different” you think it as broken. Different is not broken. If you have problem fighting enemy team, not always “fair” 1 vs 1 or you can’t deal with indirect fire it is your problem. This is team game and this game has indirect component. Deal with it. Repeating “arty is broken” does not change that. 

 

You don't answer and you never have, you just try to deny the existence of a problem despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary.  You do so by posting unnecessarily long and rambling posts that are boring to read.

 

Arty is different - that is not a subjective opinion.  It is a fact.  Every class is different in some distinct way that that defines it as part of that class of tank.  Arty, however, is so different that it is virtually incomparable with the other classes.  Even if the classes where comparable, as you seem to claim that they are, it makes no difference to the core issues regarding arty.  Even if we can compare the classes in any way, the problems with arty remain due to those differences and the way they are made manifest in the game.  Comparison is not a defense.

 

Block Quote

Arty makes people camp? No. Fear makes people camp. Fear of arty. Fear of TD’s. Fear of unseen LT/MT sniping them. Fear of being singled out and flanked. I’ve seen arty battles being campy. I’ve seen no-arty battles being campy. I’ve seen arty battles being fast and fluid and I have seen non-arty battles being fast and fluid. What I have not seen is any objective evidence of arty forcing people to camp. On some maps and some situations sure, it will. On some others it’s best way to break a camp.

 

Yes, fear of those things makes people camp and ONE of those things can projects its fear across the ENTIRE map, anywhere, any time and opponent is spotted , all match long - from 30 seconds until the end of the game.  Can you see the difference?  TD's can kemp boosh at base thereby making players weary of crossing that last open stretch of land towards cap, tanks can get dug in thereby making it difficult to advance but each of those classes only has the power to do that over a very very limited portion of the map.

 

You have claimed that fear of being hit makes people camp and we all know that arty can hit a player anywhere when they are not in hard cover - therefore, you are saying that arty causes more camping.

 

Arty aid campers in that they can sit in hard cover and spot.  They cannot be hit by the attacking team's arty because they are camping (and being rewarded for doing so).  However, to dislodge such an enemy takes an attacking push.  The attackers in this scenario are now exposed to the camping team's arty.  In this way arty fundamentally reinforces camping by actively and without question punishing the attacking player more than it punishes the defensive player.

 

Block Quote

Arty focus on active players? Yes. So does any other tank. Active players are seen. They are on fire range. They are always singled out by any enemy, arty or no arty.

 

We agree on this point.  However, they are able to induce their own skill in these attacking instances and utilise it to achieve victory over a lower skilled opponent.  Arty does not allow itself to be counterable with skilled play.  It is entirely removed from any skill-reward dynamic for the vast portion of play time.  They get to test their skill (what little is required to play arty effectively) without any chance of them being outskilled and defeated.  If their 'skill' (lol) is found lacking they simply try again, and again, and again.

 

Block Quote

 XVM let’s arties to focus on good players? Yes, same way as it gives other tanks possibility to direct fire or single out targets. Same way it tells unicums which opponents are bad and easy kills and which ones to avoid. You can’t have your cake and eat it too.

 

This is a stupid argument.

 

Remembering about the ability to draw upon skill in direct engagements - how do I try to focus a superunicum?  The answer is, that I expose myself to his counter-skill and try to defeat him.  He has the opportunity, and perhaps the advantage over me, in terms of skill - which is exactly how a skill-based shooter should be.  The more skilled the player the greater chances of success.

 

Clearly arty does not allow for the more skilled player to respond for the vast portion of the game time.  Until the game has already been won or lost, in matter of fact.

 

Block Quote

There’s nothing you can do against arty other than camp behind hard cover? Yes there is. As long as you bury your head in sand and even refuse to acknowledge that you yourself have major contribution on you being arty target or being hit. If you camp you are in known location and much easier arty target than when roaming. Same way as any other tank you predict it’s location. Think where it is aiming. You can sneak in and give him surprise shell to his exhaust pipe. You know, arty is not off the map.

 

The maps are created to have various vantage points - these points must be won if you are to succeed consistently.  Those places aren't 'known locations' for no reason, they are 'known locations' because they are extremely tactically important.  

 

'roaming' - That doesn't mean anything besides playing in the second line and going somewhere stupid.  Regardless, even where I to go top an 'unknown' location arty would take less than 20 seconds to re-aim on my location.  Now my location is 'known'.

 

Unless you're seriously suggesting that no-one should go to any important strategic location and we all just drive around randomly, your argument is utterly vacuous.

 

Block Quote

It’s unfair that you can’t shoot back? No. It’s no less “unfair” than tank you can’t penetrate or tank you can’t see or tank that can circle you or tank that can autoclip you in seconds. It doesn't matter if you can't retaliate because distance, tightness of armor, camo value, speed of opponent or slowness of your reload. In all those cases you cannot retaliate. When you get arty shell in your head you are as much “out played” as you are when eating any other shell. Some times it was because enemy was good, sometimes because you too kthe risk and got burned. Even when you can’t directly kill arty you can still kill his eyes. You can disengage and sneak to him and kill him as in direct battle arty is almost defenseless when compared to any other class. This is war game. It’s other teams job to be as “unfair” as they can when they work within game rules.

 

 As I have said, and you have ignored, all of those players have to directly expose themselves to my skill in return.  They may beat me in any of the ways that you describe, but in doing so they are using their tank better than I am using mine and are open to me doing the same to them, they are open to being defeated by me if they make their move poorly or if I play much better than them.

 

Arty is not open to this, he just reloads and tries again.  No amount of skillful play allows me to defeat him when he 'engages' me.

 

Block Quote

 Unskilled player can do more than they can do in their other tanks? Some tanks are like that. Arty, high alpha guns and well armored tanks. They all allow lower skilled player do something, but have lower carry potential because of their limits. Is presence of such tanks somehow unfairer than tanks that allow high skilled players do better than they do on their other tanks? No. You pick what suits you and let others pick something that suits them.

 

Arty requires no skill whatsoever to play adequately.

 

Block Quote

I could add all these basic “Arty players are this or that” ramblings from haters. Hate against players who happen to play one allowed class among others. Hate against players who mostly play every class in this game, but somehow they are all dubbed as “arty players” and are wretched poor things who can’t play and are such cowards and unskilled that they only spend 70-95% of their time in non-arties.

 

I don't care who plays arty.  It is a broken mechanic that needs to be 'solved', that is all I care about.

 

 



Obsessive_Compulsive #284 Posted 11 April 2015 - 01:43 PM

    General

  • Player
  • 28748 battles
  • 8,481
  • [BULL] BULL
  • Member since:
    09-09-2014
It is hard to argue with the logic applied there Mungo.. but guess what.. someone will!:popcorn:

Evil_Mungo #285 Posted 11 April 2015 - 01:48 PM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Clan Commander
  • 28225 battles
  • 3,332
  • [-MM] -MM
  • Member since:
    06-12-2012

View PostSmeeeeg_Heeeeed, on 11 April 2015 - 12:43 PM, said:

It is hard to argue with the logic applied there Mungo.. but guess what.. someone will!:popcorn:

 

One of the following:

 

Element6 - Some random statistic that has nothing to do with the core issues followed by a terrible analysis of that statistic that makes no sense whatsoever.

 

Gnomus - Will restate the same stuff again, only in a much much longer post.

 

Arty_loves_you - Will post something that is funny and make me in forum love with him even though I wish I didn't like him.

 

Phoobar - Will try to troll but in a really really unfunny way.



_Akoo_ #286 Posted 11 April 2015 - 01:52 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 19845 battles
  • 465
  • Member since:
    10-29-2011

I don't normally respond to peasants, but I suppose an exception can be made.

 

Artillery is fine, play a high level game without artillery and see how bad the game is without it.

 

Now scuttle off back downstairs and spend some time learning how to play the game.



zakiscool #287 Posted 11 April 2015 - 01:56 PM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 703 battles
  • 115
  • Member since:
    12-10-2012

View PostJigabachi, on 11 April 2015 - 11:35 AM, said:

[Don't mind this post, I'll just leave a short comment about the actual topic. Feel free to continue with the old arty circlejerk.]

 

Even if that Q&A line wasn't ripped out of its context and WG really doesn't consider arty to be a problem... how does that matter? Just look at the state of the game and tell me that you still believe everything they spout.

Remember; they also said that the KV-1S was balanced. And the WTF100. Historical battles anyone? Mapdesign?

Even devs can be wrong. A lot.

 

At the end of the day, neither tankinjibberish's love and all the fanboy arguments, nor Mungos hate and the elitist arguments won't help. At all. Keep banging your skulls, you won't change anything. 

Let's just hope that AW finally creates some valid competition so that WG is finally forced to actually do something to improve the game in general - including arty. (Yes, that last bit implies that arty is a problem.)

exactly this ^^^ im labeled as an arty player, in fact only 15% of my total games are in arty (and probably 60% of those arty games where in an fv304.....which if anyone disagrees was quite literally the most fun tank in the game to play before it got nerfed) the whole reason i defend arty posts in a stupid way is a i completely disagree with the totally unwarranted amount of butthurt threads that are raised, so i will make an attempt if i can be arsed to derail any such arty threads

View PostEvil_Mungo, on 11 April 2015 - 12:40 PM, said:

Sigh.

 

 

Games are patched annergindfgondobn0jt0-tjq0gj0-ekm0emth0-4y9j0hj0mgb[podzfmgpohmdohmothmodmnthbomhosnrthotrnhsetjh9edgno[ehnoesnht

 

Even without any inpl nhgineiughiebgiengondfongnrgipdr gbpoinz drogapbhgpingipdznfvbizne rgb

 

 

The reticle is usually thelkngfonibvioygabcb vigbibngviebngaciubgcfipzsbgpioxdngovixnzclvznzl;dfnbodfngboipdznfbndfnbvzfdson bvzdifnbvozdfnv[pnb[\oszdfnvbpzodsfunb[pszofjnbzsdfbnzsdofng

 

Your argument is iogna9eruhv 9h6t76fgonaicuiaerthveartag;fdmz]poefjaowhcgiarughOIIUTFDVBIoijohouhhih[pj[oijouhoigih~@}?}{PK{PJ

 

 

You cannot appeal to reallfnvho[hnsv[on[gpmcxera

gdf;zmcgozdrbi giurebgizdsfv089ewbg vpsdjnvz pzisdgvbzsidfngiubg zxign r9gb zr90gn rosidngp i g nisdfjgbzr p9ht ztdzrong9-erhg-ehvgtzordij,c zodfhg -9yhtv z9pe8ycht9pzelkdsmvzmz

 

Your argtiaeuhbt08r9sdbtv0 e98abtur d0zutvg hzd9-fugneszr9ugn eszrognv zdropg npdourg nzp

 

 

No, arty doesn't give 'lkntgvzdug ipzdrugbisdgcze 9r8htz-54u t6093u4069u0=3tu60-erjktapj[cp0js\er z0=t jg-9r0ztj vgz[osdjgczótijgz r[oirgn era9zg nflidzgnmzposdrgn zsdrog hnz

 

Now, every game will come down to which one ofsdnt9uvzpiuhtv zspodu vgfpszdoiuv dpoxu vhsepzouvhsdpohgszdotg hzpodsfvhzrpdothzmpfdohvzposdhtivzpodfshbzd

Your argument is internaglkndzfong;lvkzn f;lgnz;g

 

 

They hal;kmhlkxnhoixnyoibxjzyoj foj zd0xrjyb z[e0jybzdr [jybdzr[jybmd[zroyvjzdo[rihjbmfdohvjodfyhjbopdfhypboxzdhiybpxocihfybpofyhbjpocfyhbxpdofhybvdxpofhybxd

 

 
 

 

You don't answertuohfa9iewht5m9iaseht viatiausehtviaseuhctroiaseughtviose\ughctriseghtrvoi\sdghrcm\sieuhvzoisdhtvzoidsghvt z

 

Arty is differenojhtr9oahestfiohstihsze oitvh sziethvzisoethbciosethvio\seghct\isehtvcoisdgdsuhtvisduhtiodszthvzsoiuthcosidhtv

 

Yes, fear of thosotjvopdsvtgodzxn okgnzco psidugviszdubgv zisdubgtv zisdubgv zsdigbvzisdbutvmzi dsubtvzibvtzpixdbv mpidsbtv psidtubv psdibtv 

You have clalngv o;s n tviuzsditvusiuthvzsiuthvcmisrehtvsiop\euzthvmps\zehcvmsp\ezohtvpzsohtvpzs

Arty aid otnv osn tvoipshztivo uzhstpoivhz spoithvzpothvzposthvzmpsohtvbpsomzhtvzpodhtbzpothbpdothbvpzisdhb

 

We agree on this pogvnikzsbtv zuxdt ivusghtvios\zg tivhsetviusthvmszihtbvsizdoutvhbs mztoishpvbhzsptovhsdoiuvhzsdpotiubhvszpthvbzsdiptubhzsdih

 

This is a stupid mungo

 

Rehoidsjhoidfzjghfgihorzjyhvozdhjyvopzdhyjvmzpdoryhvmdzroyhvmzpdoryhv pmzodryhvpomzdryhvpomzdryhvmzdporyhjzedorpyihmpdzroyhvrzpodyhvzd

 

Clearly arty dojhyerhm6opmaihm6oparhomaerhmopearsh6mpoaesrhyopmerhymoprsdhm

 

The maps are ch4fiuhseoiuhirugigisdagfiasefiewhagoipwaehgpwaoughwpaoeghwpaioghawigphawrpoighiwhrgioshg

'roaming' - Thatuieruretureturrt

Unlesstuojeroynerhytoih39yhmer98hgp9aewrghpoaghpaowreh

 

 As I have said, andnjnnofbnxndcvl;sfdxbg;kljzdnvkl;zdjv;lkzjbv;klzjbv;kldzjbv;dzkvbdz;kvjb;zdkv

 

Arty is nofnoghnazsdfgophzdsfghzfdsoghzsdfpoubvhzfsdpoivbhzsoihbvzpoisdf

 

 

Arty relkjnglk;jzsdnfgblkzjsdnfblkjzsdfnbl;nzsdf;kbnzsdf;klnz;fdslknb

 

 

I don't care who plays arty.  yes you do you liar.........if only unicums could play it you'd be happy

 

 

BLAH BLA BAH BLAH Posted Imagevia Imgflip Meme Maker christ you must love the sound of your own fecking voice!!!!



Thundyuk #288 Posted 11 April 2015 - 01:56 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 14644 battles
  • 1,121
  • [1ETR] 1ETR
  • Member since:
    08-20-2011

I wouldn't have a problem with arty if they had to hit you to damage you but they don't.

 

Only direct hits should count and that is all it needs to balance their God mode map and ability to strike without being struck in return.

 



Element6 #289 Posted 11 April 2015 - 01:58 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 31216 battles
  • 11,371
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    01-06-2013

View PostEvil_Mungo, on 11 April 2015 - 01:40 PM, said:

They have just said in the expanded quote from the dishonest opening post that they are looking at ways to solve the problem.  You are either woefully dishonest or willfully ignorant.  I don't care which because you make yourself irrelevant to the discussion by claiming that you don't have an opinion.

I do not care how much they are looking into a way to fix the problem, or how long they have attempted to do it. You cannot set this game up to please all of the different types of players there are, when they all have to play in the same environment. I am neither dishonest, nor irrelevant. I am a realist.

 

If...

30% of the playerbase wants artillery removed

30% of the playerbase wants artillery reworked

30% of the playerbase wants to keep artillery in it's current form

 

How on earth do you please these three groups of people when you know that they all play in the same sandbox? It ain't going to work, and I guess 5 years of complaints and an equal amount of time WG not doing anything is what makes me a realist. Even a hughe artillery nerf didn't stop the problem form recurring. That is the sort of thing that makes me question what the majority of the playerbase actually want in this game.

 

-MM Disclaimer;

The % numbers above are not anywhere near reality, they are made up to illustrate that the different ideas of a good game will, at some point, be in conflict with eachother. There are likely more than three main groups of players, indicated by latest blog.



rikkelt #290 Posted 11 April 2015 - 02:00 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 17506 battles
  • 1,184
  • [ZIU] ZIU
  • Member since:
    03-23-2013

http://wotreplays.co...pard_prototyp_a

 

So much fun!



zakiscool #291 Posted 11 April 2015 - 02:01 PM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 703 battles
  • 115
  • Member since:
    12-10-2012

View PostElement6, on 11 April 2015 - 12:58 PM, said:

I do not care how much they are looking into a way to fix the problem, or how long they have attempted to do it. You cannot set this game up to please all of the different types of players there are, when they all have to play in the same environment. I am neither dishonest, nor irrelevant. I am a realist.

 

If...

30% of the playerbase wants artillery removed

30% of the playerbase wants artillery reworked

30% of the playerbase wants to keep artillery in it's current form

 

How on earth do you please these three groups of people when you know that they all play in the same sandbox? It ain't going to work, and I guess 5 years of complaints and an equal amount of time WG not doing anything is what makes me a realist. Even a hughe artillery nerf didn't stop the problem form recurring. That is the sort of thing that makes me question what the majority of the playerbase actually want in this game.

 

-MM Disclaimer;

The % numbers above are not anywhere near reality, they are made up to illustrate that the different ideas of a good game will, at some point, be in conflict with eachother. There are likely more than three main groups of players, indicated by latest blog.

element....its a waste of time saying percentages.............everyone sees the stats to suit themselves



Evil_Mungo #292 Posted 11 April 2015 - 02:11 PM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Clan Commander
  • 28225 battles
  • 3,332
  • [-MM] -MM
  • Member since:
    06-12-2012

View PostElement6, on 11 April 2015 - 12:58 PM, said:

I do not care how much they are looking into a way to fix the problem, or how long they have attempted to do it. You cannot set this game up to please all of the different types of players there are, when they all have to play in the same environment. I am neither dishonest, nor irrelevant. I am a realist.

 

If...

30% of the playerbase wants artillery removed

30% of the playerbase wants artillery reworked

30% of the playerbase wants to keep artillery in it's current form

 

How on earth do you please these three groups of people when you know that they all play in the same sandbox? It ain't going to work, and I guess 5 years of complaints and an equal amount of time WG not doing anything is what makes me a realist. Even a hughe artillery nerf didn't stop the problem form recurring. That is the sort of thing that makes me question what the majority of the playerbase actually want in this game.

 

-MM Disclaimer;

The % numbers above are not anywhere near reality, they are made up to illustrate that the different ideas of a good game will, at some point, be in conflict with eachother. There are likely more than three main groups of players, indicated by latest blog.

 

You do whatever makes the game a better game.  That's it.  It will displease players that currently benefit from bad mechanics but it will, in turn, generate much more players and revenue by virtue of creating a platform from which a better gaming experience can be achieved.

 

You know that Wargaming have changed artillery.  Saying otherwise is factually incorrect or a lie.



Element6 #293 Posted 11 April 2015 - 02:12 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 31216 battles
  • 11,371
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    01-06-2013

View Postzakiscool, on 11 April 2015 - 02:01 PM, said:

element....its a waste of time saying percentages.............everyone sees the stats to suit themselves

Anyone getting hung up on the % numbers, that at the same time fail to realise that the only thing they indicate is various groups of players in the playerbase with different ideas of what makes WoT a good game, should start calling me an arty-lover, or alternatively ask Shnuks for the URL to that DK gif he keeps posting.

 

And the people tell me that the developer is looking into the problem. Looking into the problem to fix it according to which group of players in the playerbase? Fix the problem for 1/5th of the playerbase and you have not fixed it, you have shifted the problem sideways. Some people who call me ignorant, an idiot etc. etc. seems to have a belief that the developer is actually trying to fix a problem that is not a problem for all of us. I'd like to see hte solution that pleases us all. Why this blind faith in the developer, now, when they have not managed to please us all in the artillery side of the game, for 5+ years? What magical solution do they think they will find?

 

Not until you split the playerbase that get to play different versions of the game will you ever get close to a solution that works for most people.

 

Then again, it seeems most people are actually playing WoT in it's current state, as well as playing artillery in huge numbers. Oh well. I must be running low on IQ...



Blue_Badger #294 Posted 11 April 2015 - 02:16 PM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 14731 battles
  • 2,440
  • [3VS27] 3VS27
  • Member since:
    09-25-2012

View PostElement6, on 11 April 2015 - 01:12 PM, said:

Anyone getting hung up on the % numbers, that at the same time fail to realise that the only thing they indicate is various groups of players in the playerbase with different ideas of what makes WoT a good game, should start calling me an arty-lover, or alternatively ask Shnuks for the URL to that DK gif he keeps posting.

 

And the people tell me that the developer is looking into the problem. Looking into the problem to fix it according to which group of players in the playerbase? Fix the problem for 1/5th of the playerbase and you have not fixed it, you have shifted the problem sideways. Some people who call me ignorant, an idiot etc. etc. seems to have a belief that the developer is actually trying to fix a problem that is not a problem for all of us. I'd like to see hte solution that pleases us all. Why this blind faith in the developer, now, when they have not managed to please us all in the artillery side of the game, for 5+ years? What magical solution do they think they will find?

 

Not until you split the playerbase that get to play different versions of the game will you ever get close to a solution that works for most people.

 

Then again, it seeems most people are actually playing WoT in it's current state, as well as playing artillery in huge numbers. Oh well. I must be running low on IQ...

 

Soooo, we should all revel in our own apathy and do nothing? Cool.

Element6 #295 Posted 11 April 2015 - 02:17 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 31216 battles
  • 11,371
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    01-06-2013

View PostEvil_Mungo, on 11 April 2015 - 02:11 PM, said:

 

You do whatever makes the game a better game.  That's it.  It will displease players that currently benefit from bad mechanics but it will, in turn, generate much more players and revenue by virtue of creating a platform from which a better gaming experience can be achieved.

 

You know that Wargaming have changed artillery.  Saying otherwise is factually incorrect or a lie.

You do whatever makes the game better, according to whom? Who do you make the game better for? The majority? The people who speak up? Some arbitrary change to the game can be judged by you as an improvement to the game, for another player it could be a step backwards and for me it could be un-noticeable. Who do you let judge what is better and worse for this game?

 

Didn't I just mention the arty nerf in my previous post? Why do you call me alier for saying artillery hasn't been changed? They have not removed it during those 5+ years.



Element6 #296 Posted 11 April 2015 - 02:19 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 31216 battles
  • 11,371
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    01-06-2013

View PostBlue_Badger, on 11 April 2015 - 02:16 PM, said:

 

Soooo, we should all revel in our own apathy and do nothing? Cool.

What you should do you must figure out on your own, in accordance with the desicions of the developer. The blog seems to indicate that that is what you can do. 

 

Note that I didn't say that this is a good thing for WoT, it is just a realistic viewpoint.



_b_ #297 Posted 11 April 2015 - 02:23 PM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 56719 battles
  • 4,155
  • Member since:
    04-06-2011

Considering some of the recent 'Shut up and take my money$$$' deals, one could almost think that WG have had some downwards flucuations in income ...

 

Those who'd normally spend a few € each month have either stopped doing so ...or are taking longer time tossing the € after WG ... and I've got this wild notion that a majority of that bunch is actually darn good at this game?!

 

With upcoming similar games just around the corner, I'll bet there is some reworks of arty in the close future ... No way that WG will willingly allow players to escape with their € over to competition ... only thing that remains to be seen is if they manage to do it fast enough ..

 

Pretty sure plenty of players that are amongst the spenders of € on this fun game are close to 'fewk it, enough is enough!' and are willing to just turn their back on this game ...



Evil_Mungo #298 Posted 11 April 2015 - 02:24 PM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Clan Commander
  • 28225 battles
  • 3,332
  • [-MM] -MM
  • Member since:
    06-12-2012

View PostElement6, on 11 April 2015 - 01:17 PM, said:

Didn't I just mention the arty nerf in my previous post? Why do you call me alier for saying artillery hasn't been changed? They have not removed it during those 5+ years.

 

That isn't what you said.

 

Element6

 5 years of complaints and an equal amount of time WG not doing anything

 

'not do anything' is what you said, you liar.  



Blue_Badger #299 Posted 11 April 2015 - 02:24 PM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 14731 battles
  • 2,440
  • [3VS27] 3VS27
  • Member since:
    09-25-2012

View PostElement6, on 11 April 2015 - 01:19 PM, said:

What you should do you must figure out on your own, in accordance with the desicions of the developer. The blog seems to indicate that that is what you can do. 

 

Note that I didn't say that this is a good thing for WoT, it is just a realistic viewpoint.

 

So there WG should do nothing at all to change anything within their own game because some players might possibly maybe be slightly displeased with the decision. 

 

I'm sorry but that isn't how game developing works. You take a calculated risk when you make a change and you hope that it pays off. They know the current game formula somewhat works, but it can be improved. What you are saying is that it isn't worth trying to improve it because it currently works. This is ridiculous. I like the game in it's current state but I want to see it get better. 

 

WG are already looking into ways to improve artillery. You don't need me to tell you that. 



Evil_Mungo #300 Posted 11 April 2015 - 02:26 PM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Clan Commander
  • 28225 battles
  • 3,332
  • [-MM] -MM
  • Member since:
    06-12-2012

View Postzakiscool, on 11 April 2015 - 12:56 PM, said:

BLAH BLA BAH BLAH

 

christ you must love the sound of your own fecking voice!!!!

 

I dare you to try and respond with some actual content.






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users