Jump to content


9.18 artillery compared to the current


  • Please log in to reply
85 replies to this topic

Poll: 9.18 artillery compared to the current (112 members have cast votes)

You have to complete 250 battles in order to participate this poll.

Do you prefer the current arty mechanics over the 9.18 ones?

  1. I prefer the new, rebalanced 9.18 arty mechanics (45 votes [40.18%])

    Percentage of vote: 40.18%

  2. I prefer the current arty mechanics (46 votes [41.07%])

    Percentage of vote: 41.07%

  3. I just wanted something to click on / haven't read the thread (21 votes [18.75%])

    Percentage of vote: 18.75%

Vote Hide poll

Alukat123 #81 Posted 21 April 2017 - 04:02 PM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 9550 battles
  • 108
  • Member since:
    03-21-2016

View PostPhobos4321, on 21 April 2017 - 02:36 PM, said:

 

and why should that be the case without the 3 arty hardcap on the live server ? as for the testserver i got quite some games with 2 arties per team or 1

different arties, different reloads, different splash, different stun times and a game where you can disable the chat, different languages and you really want to defend you perma stun ? quite funny 

even more if the arties spread out so the got different fire lines what would mean not all could shot the same space

and even using the medkit once would break the lock and give you  13 seconds to get away (your own numbers)

3 arties would take about 4mins to knock down a maus 4 mins without shooting anything else  at an average matchtime of 6min thats 2/3 ... and if its batchat or 261 they might not be able to deliver damage at all even at full hits (shot the Type5 with obj.261 before did 0 damage and stunned him for like 6 seconds on a direct hit)

 

and most chokepoints are chokepoints because arty cant shot there  so clustering there wont help any arty

 

The hardcap of 3 arties won't make any change to current matches with 3 arties....

If the arties spread out to cover different lines of fire, then there are even less places to hide from arty.

Also with the increased splash radius arties just need to shoot nearby in order to stun.

And 13 seconds to get away, yeah try to get away with a ~15km/h reverse speed heavy tank while you may get tracked from the tanks in front of you.

 

 



OFAC #82 Posted 21 April 2017 - 05:24 PM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 3830 battles
  • 209
  • Member since:
    12-31-2016
I'm probably one of the few people who've had the opportunity to play both servers, and I have to say I prefer the EU state of artillery v. the NA. Artillery as a function is to be a skill equalizer, limit map control, exert influence on the avenues of approach, and to slow overall game play. Stun while in some respects achieves these goals, the damage nerf in its current state makes most artillery pieces unusable. I previously argued stun should not hit tanks that did not receive some form of damage, but pieces like the 261/BC 58 have issues even damaging the Maus. Damage was nerfed far too much, and that will show itself in the future. What many people who have either a biased view, or prefer the other classes have called a buff is actually a conciliation prize. Without stun anything outside the CGC/T92 and midtier artillery is unusable. People will find midtier artillery still one shots lightly armored vehicles, and I've heard streamers say "that shouldn't pen me" as they drive a skorpion. Why do we shoot HE to begin with? I prefer the current damage scale of artillery with a pen nerf. I agree one shots were far too frequent, but one shots honestly have won a third my games. Had I not one shot an opponent on a flank, the enemy would have advanced and taken advantage of a position my team could not defend. 

The ultimate issue with WOT was never artillery, and it was never super armored premiums, it was the barrier to entry for new players. While some players left blaming artillery, it is natural for a game to lose players. Much larger games than this one have died in half the time due in large part to attrition. There is always a reason people give when they leave, but that reason is rarely the reality. How many times justifiably can a person go into a game 15v15 before the repetition becomes boring? With a limited map pool, and an immense barrier to entry for new players due to skill growth it is hard to keep peoples attention. The answer to saving this game is not in deleting a class it is in finding a way to introduce people to this game in a way that doesn't leave them abused to replace those that have since found new a interest. 

By all means argue with me, but I'm right.

Francesco_Totti_ #83 Posted 21 April 2017 - 08:31 PM

    Corporal

  • Beta Tester
  • 18122 battles
  • 126
  • Member since:
    09-23-2010

View PostOFAC, on 21 April 2017 - 06:24 PM, said:

I'm probably one of the few people who've had the opportunity to play both servers, and I have to say I prefer the EU state of artillery v. the NA. Artillery as a function is to be a skill equalizer, limit map control, exert influence on the avenues of approach, and to slow overall game play. Stun while in some respects achieves these goals, the damage nerf in its current state makes most artillery pieces unusable. I previously argued stun should not hit tanks that did not receive some form of damage, but pieces like the 261/BC 58 have issues even damaging the Maus. Damage was nerfed far too much, and that will show itself in the future. What many people who have either a biased view, or prefer the other classes have called a buff is actually a conciliation prize. Without stun anything outside the CGC/T92 and midtier artillery is unusable. People will find midtier artillery still one shots lightly armored vehicles, and I've heard streamers say "that shouldn't pen me" as they drive a skorpion. Why do we shoot HE to begin with? I prefer the current damage scale of artillery with a pen nerf. I agree one shots were far too frequent, but one shots honestly have won a third my games. Had I not one shot an opponent on a flank, the enemy would have advanced and taken advantage of a position my team could not defend. 

The ultimate issue with WOT was never artillery, and it was never super armored premiums, it was the barrier to entry for new players. While some players left blaming artillery, it is natural for a game to lose players. Much larger games than this one have died in half the time due in large part to attrition. There is always a reason people give when they leave, but that reason is rarely the reality. How many times justifiably can a person go into a game 15v15 before the repetition becomes boring? With a limited map pool, and an immense barrier to entry for new players due to skill growth it is hard to keep peoples attention. The answer to saving this game is not in deleting a class it is in finding a way to introduce people to this game in a way that doesn't leave them abused to replace those that have since found new a interest. 

By all means argue with me, but I'm right.

 

With 100% of your battles being on artillery, I think the fact that you prefer the old system just shows the new one is an improvement. You sum it up perfectly by calling artillery a "skill equalizer" which is exactly why people call it "sky cancer". All it does is frustrate the players who are trying to do the right thing which results in more and more people playing super passively and nobody having any fun. The game has enough "skill equalizers" such as +/- 25% RNG and +2/-2 matchmaking as it is and adding just another retarded element of random one shots that further makes already borderline useless bottom tier tanks unplayable, is just unhealthy.

 

Artillery has always been an issue because it's a broken mechanic that damages the gameplay of everyone who tries to play the game while rewarding he camper bots. It has nothing to do with a steep learning. curve of WoT. The people like you are pathetic who try to take the role of the victim by saying artillery was never the problem, but everything else. Yes, it's the maps. Yes, it's the player base. Yes, its' the player base. Not arty! You have a mechanic in game which regularly encourages 3 players on both teams to sit in the corner, never participate in any activity and roll dice on 1-shotting any enemy who's trying to encourage interactive gameplay by leaving the base. You have a mechanic that can be dodged only by camping hard cover or never being spotted. Who really enjoys this kind of gameplay where nothing is happening? 

 

Part of the reason why a lot of WoT players grow into the passive camper bots is because they probably made the grave mistake of leaving the base and being 1-shot and the first lesson they learned in the "oh so awesome" Province map is that leaving the base is a grave sin in this game. 

 

Now sure go ahead and blame the maps next. You know why the game and its maps have changed? Because people didn't enjoy 7 TDs and 5 arties on both sides camping base while there's a light tank sitting in a magic bush and ruling out half of the map for the enemy team. So skill intensive man.

 

"I'm right" wow man a great argument. You're just trying to distract the topic into the other flaws of the game and trying to make it look like artillery is just the victim or the side-product of the problem. No, nothing wrong with a class that's designed to sit in the corner of the map and click 2k alpha shells to the other side of the map towards the players who are actually playing the game. Everything else is at fault!

 

This is naturally a fail reroll who has an AMX CDC with 53 battles, that being his most played non arty tank. The win rate 37.73% and WN8 is 406 with 579 damage per game. Who'd have guessed that he wants the old arty to stay? For reference his tier 5 arties Bishop and M41 deal more damage than his tier 8 CDC. His "second" non-arty tank is SuperPershing which deals less than 1k damage per game, unsurprisingly less than his tier 6 arty M44. Here we have the prime specimen of why artillery is so broken. This guy is clearly a total and utter disaster on anything that needs to leave the base so now he's upset that his arties are gone and he likes the old system more. But hey, he said he's right so we must agree with him!

 

I know you'd love if the old ways stayed and you didn't have to read the minimap or worry about your team and you could just focus solely on sitting in base and trying to 1-shot people without any external considerations, but it's the people like you who have forced WG's hand to make these changes. You'd prefer that your gameplay was simplified into knowing 1-3 positions on each map and leading shots. This is why you are below bot level with your CDC and are performing better with tier 6 arties than your SuperPershing. You just don't have any skills outside of shot leading and knowing a couple of arty positions here and there, and you don't want to learn. You just want to comfortably sit in base, click stuff and defend what you're doing by blaming everything and everyone else. You're just another arty bot who's butthurt that your cancer spreading machines are being taken away.


Edited by Francesco_Totti_, 21 April 2017 - 08:49 PM.


HeidenSieker #84 Posted 21 April 2017 - 10:10 PM

    Major

  • Player
  • 7383 battles
  • 2,986
  • Member since:
    03-26-2016

View PostFrancesco_Totti_, on 21 April 2017 - 08:31 PM, said:

You have a mechanic that can be dodged only by camping hard cover or never being spotted.

 

I appreciated one of your prior posts, but the one you made just now has far, far too many silly (or unthought, or uttered from a particular perspective) generalisations to like.

 

You might, for instance, add several more things to your "how to dodge" list for pre-"this patch" SPGs, mightn't you.

 

Yes, some "pre-patch" dyed-in-the-wool SPG players will need to adjust. I absolutely agree. Also, WG will almost certainly need to tune the patch to allow for the different perspectives of "arty lovers", "arty haters", and the majority in between.

 

I do hope that the changes are good for the game, which, with the other changes looks likely to change somewhat. That could be good. I hope it is!



Francesco_Totti_ #85 Posted 21 April 2017 - 11:19 PM

    Corporal

  • Beta Tester
  • 18122 battles
  • 126
  • Member since:
    09-23-2010

View PostHeidenSieker, on 21 April 2017 - 11:10 PM, said:

 

I appreciated one of your prior posts, but the one you made just now has far, far too many silly (or unthought, or uttered from a particular perspective) generalisations to like.

 

You might, for instance, add several more things to your "how to dodge" list for pre-"this patch" SPGs, mightn't you.

 

Yes, some "pre-patch" dyed-in-the-wool SPG players will need to adjust. I absolutely agree. Also, WG will almost certainly need to tune the patch to allow for the different perspectives of "arty lovers", "arty haters", and the majority in between.

 

I do hope that the changes are good for the game, which, with the other changes looks likely to change somewhat. That could be good. I hope it is!

 

The arty dodging mechanics are all overly obvious. You can make random moves, and trust me all good players do this but because the game has aiming mechanic that relies it's impossible to stay on the move forever. Eventually you have to stop. It's just the way things are.

 

It's also impossible to constantly use arty cover if you want to be useful. Most important areas of each map only offer some arty cover and if you stay in it all the time you're doing nothing. The reason why good players get artied more than the bad players who are proud of never being shot by arty is because they understand that winning the area and map control is so important that they have to take the risk and go out even if they know that the guy sitting in the corner of the map will sometimes get a lucky dice roll and ruin their game. They are not stupid. They are fully aware of the risk of being artied and they take it anyway because it's even worse to camp hard cover and do nothing.

 

The proud arty dodgers of WoT can be put into the same category as the poker players who are proudly telling that they never get bluffed. In poker if you're never being bluffed it's because you're a huge fish who is just calling every bet because he is too stupid to fold. Still many poker players are proud of such a feat. It's the same with arty dodging in WoT. The proud arty dodgers have bad win rates because they are putting their arty dodging above game winning. They are always playing it safe and not taking risks in a game where taking risks is inevitable.


Edited by Francesco_Totti_, 21 April 2017 - 11:22 PM.


Phobos4321 #86 Posted 21 April 2017 - 11:39 PM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 40939 battles
  • 6,593
  • Member since:
    09-27-2011

View PostAlukat123, on 21 April 2017 - 04:02 PM, said:

 

The hardcap of 3 arties won't make any change to current matches with 3 arties....

If the arties spread out to cover different lines of fire, then there are even less places to hide from arty.

Also with the increased splash radius arties just need to shoot nearby in order to stun.

And 13 seconds to get away, yeah try to get away with a ~15km/h reverse speed heavy tank while you may get tracked from the tanks in front of you.

 

 

 

interesting how you spin it around   should it be called flexible or spineless ?

first the stun lock is your main focus  needed 3 arties to work together and than its less places to hide while it would mean your perma stun fell apart ?

how much did the splash increased ? ~ 1m per arty its not such a big deal and stun time depends on distance of impact to  so hitting 10m away will give out something like a 5 sec stun

13 secs are perfectly fine if you just need to drive like 5m back to end your sidescrapping etc  out in the open it might not help that much but thats not a place for a heavy anyway

also for most heavies arties lost their bite  you might get stunned but a stun wont kill you






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users