Jump to content


REMOVE ARTY MISSIONS FROM CAMPAIGN

ARTY

  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
56 replies to this topic

Captain_Kremen0 #21 Posted 22 May 2019 - 09:12 AM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 39041 battles
  • 2,271
  • [TFMB] TFMB
  • Member since:
    06-04-2011

View PostYakito, on 22 May 2019 - 06:51 AM, said:

 

Silly reason. It's called "world of tanks", not "world of tanks plus some pathetic things that fire at you from the other side of the map and you have to hide behind rocks all the time". 

 

Spgs have no place in here. It doesn't matter if you like them. I dislike light tanks and yet I can happily do the light missions. 

 

 

I don't bother with campaigns because of the SPG stuff. Why bother if I'm forced to play a "class" I cannot stand? 

 

Just be thankful it doesn't include sneaky bastards who attach limpet mines to you or open the hatch and drop grenades in.

Gremlin182 #22 Posted 22 May 2019 - 11:17 AM

    General

  • Player
  • 57206 battles
  • 9,412
  • Member since:
    04-18-2012

View PostYakito, on 22 May 2019 - 07:51 AM, said:

 

Silly reason. It's called "world of tanks", not "world of tanks plus some pathetic things that fire at you from the other side of the map and you have to hide behind rocks all the time". 

 

Spgs have no place in here. It doesn't matter if you like them. I dislike light tanks and yet I can happily do the light missions. 

 

 

I don't bother with campaigns because of the SPG stuff. Why bother if I'm forced to play a "class" I cannot stand? 

 

Very poor argument TANK isnt the proper name its simply a code name for the first such vehicle so the enemy would believe it was a water carrier "water tank"

Armoured Fighting Vehicles is the correct term but world of armoured fighting vehicles is a bit long and world of AFVs could confuse so Tanks it is.

 

An armoured fighting vehicle (AFV) is an armed combat vehicle protected by armour, generally combining operational mobility with offensive and defensive capabilities. AFVs can be wheeled or tracked. Main battle tanks, armoured cars, armoured self-propelled guns, and armoured personnel carriers are all examples of AFVs.

 

 



KillingJoker #23 Posted 22 May 2019 - 11:32 AM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 39157 battles
  • 1,779
  • Member since:
    09-07-2015

i am stuck in the campaign as i needed a german arty to do an easy 8 stunt mission... 

 

this i hate the most the campaign, most missions aren't even that hard to accomplish, they simply force you to unlock an half of a techtree you absolutely despise to do it...

its not a campaign based on merit, its a campaign based on your whillingness to play the"things" they want you to play...


 



ZlatanArKung #24 Posted 22 May 2019 - 11:48 AM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 1537 battles
  • 5,309
  • Member since:
    12-20-2014

View Postkaneloon, on 22 May 2019 - 07:12 AM, said:

I don't like scouts, remove the scout missions too.

To bad this argument doesn't hold much water at all.

 

"If you are going to remove this thing many many many players dislike, you also have to remove this thing that only very very very few dislike".

 

Like.

 

If you are going to force everyone to use a helmet in hockey by a new rule, then you also have to remove the offside rule.


Edited by ZlatanArKung, 22 May 2019 - 11:51 AM.


DuncaN_101 #25 Posted 22 May 2019 - 11:53 AM

    Major

  • Player
  • 55596 battles
  • 2,944
  • [TEC] TEC
  • Member since:
    07-29-2011
No thats exactly the point.

If they remove one. Then there will be another group saying they will have to remove another class because this and that. So where will that end?

It's either all or none. If you can't grasp that then sorry there is no point debating.

ZlatanArKung #26 Posted 22 May 2019 - 12:00 PM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 1537 battles
  • 5,309
  • Member since:
    12-20-2014

View PostDuncaN_101, on 22 May 2019 - 11:53 AM, said:

No thats exactly the point.

If they remove one. Then there will be another group saying they will have to remove another class because this and that. So where will that end?

It's either all or none. If you can't grasp that then sorry there is no point debating.

 

No, there is no point debating because the argument above is very weak.

 

There are no groups consisting of a sizeable portion of the playerbase that actively works for what you propose.

 

So refusing to make a change due to a possibility that another group might want another change. 

A group that doesn't make themselves heard anywhere and probably doesn't even exist.



15JG52Brauer #27 Posted 22 May 2019 - 12:22 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 81303 battles
  • 718
  • [WHO] WHO
  • Member since:
    06-29-2011

View PostZlatanArKung, on 22 May 2019 - 11:00 AM, said:

 

No, there is no point debating because the argument above is very weak.

 

There are no groups consisting of a sizeable portion of the playerbase that actively works for what you propose.

 

So refusing to make a change due to a possibility that another group might want another change. 

A group that doesn't make themselves heard anywhere and probably doesn't even exist.

 

Actually I think that if we look back at the history of wot, while 1 thing seems to have been constant (a large vocal part of those posting on the forum voice their displeasure at arty) we can also see that there is some basis for the idea that if you nerf or maybe even remove A,that B will be hated instead - so what do I mean? If you were around back in the day before the first major arty revision/nerf then you may remember a wot which had a lot more bushes and camping TD's ,  so when WG nerfed arty who used to hit those bush campers hard, but now could not do so much to them, what do you think happened next? Another vocal group (not as large as the arty haters, but still large and vocal)rose up moaned about bush camping td's, and vision mechanics with bushes - so what did the whack-a-mole balance department do  - well having seen the next complaint pop up out of the molehill they whacked it with the nerf bat, and td's had their camo after firing bonus nerfed. The point is balance in wot is like an eco system - and if you change one part, it can have unintended effects elsewhere . The devs have more or less said they wont remove arty - so raging about it is at this point just  an excercise in venting frustration. 

ZlatanArKung #28 Posted 22 May 2019 - 12:37 PM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 1537 battles
  • 5,309
  • Member since:
    12-20-2014

View Post15JG52Brauer, on 22 May 2019 - 12:22 PM, said:

 

Actually I think that if we look back at the history of wot, while 1 thing seems to have been constant (a large vocal part of those posting on the forum voice their displeasure at arty) we can also see that there is some basis for the idea that if you nerf or maybe even remove A,that B will be hated instead - so what do I mean? If you were around back in the day before the first major arty revision/nerf then you may remember a wot which had a lot more bushes and camping TD's ,  so when WG nerfed arty who used to hit those bush campers hard, but now could not do so much to them, what do you think happened next? Another vocal group (not as large as the arty haters, but still large and vocal)rose up moaned about bush camping td's, and vision mechanics with bushes - so what did the whack-a-mole balance department do  - well having seen the next complaint pop up out of the molehill they whacked it with the nerf bat, and td's had their camo after firing bonus nerfed. The point is balance in wot is like an eco system - and if you change one part, it can have unintended effects elsewhere . The devs have more or less said they wont remove arty - so raging about it is at this point just  an excercise in venting frustration. 

 

Afaik, players where whining about bush-camping TDs before arty was nerfed aswell.

 

I have yet to see some whining about light tanks on the forums. I only see quite a lot of WV whining. And if WV was being forced in Missions, then we would get whining about this.



Gremlin182 #29 Posted 22 May 2019 - 12:51 PM

    General

  • Player
  • 57206 battles
  • 9,412
  • Member since:
    04-18-2012

View PostZlatanArKung, on 22 May 2019 - 11:48 AM, said:

To bad this argument doesn't hold much water at all.

 

"If you are going to remove this thing many many many players dislike, you also have to remove this thing that only very very very few dislike".

 

Like.

 

If you are going to force everyone to use a helmet in hockey by a new rule, then you also have to remove the offside rule.

 

Many Many Many

Really

Where is the evidence come on be honest we have ansolutely no idea How many players hate SPGs how many love them and how many do not care one way or the other,

What percentage of the player base visits the forums and of that percentage how many comment negatively about SPGs

For all I know the anti arty posters might number less than 50 but they just post again and again to try to get wargaming to do what they want.

 

I have had it with the Most players want SPGs removed or only bad players like arty.

The best players want it removed and so on.

 

I find SPGs to be a minor annoyance in the game I kept a log for an entire years play and that was some 3500 games.

The number of games where I was killed or so badly damaged by SPGs it was hard to continue came in at 3%

With the addition of stun and the increased area of effect it went up to around 6%

So why would I want something removed from the game that is a problem in so few games 6% of 3500 is 210.

So in an entire year SPGs were a problem in 210 games and had no effect at all in 3290 games 

 

I may not be a great or even good player but play all tank types and have loads of tier 10s including most of the superheavies.

Why do I have a problem 6% of the time and the SPG haters claime they cannot play at all because there are always 3 SPGs stunning them most games.

By all means produce some evidence to prove your point.

Start a poll giving people the option to vote like dislike or don't mind arty.

Get 1000 people to vote and I will consider that real evidence

 


Edited by Gremlin182, 22 May 2019 - 12:53 PM.


NUKLEAR_SLUG #30 Posted 22 May 2019 - 01:21 PM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 33818 battles
  • 4,235
  • [FISHY] FISHY
  • Member since:
    06-13-2015

View PostSiliconSidewinder, on 22 May 2019 - 07:14 AM, said:

 

so you played a game right after server start at a time most decent people are either working or sleeping.

 

and no the game isn't dying, and streamers waving with charts that have been discussed long before on the forums isn't proving anything either. (yep at least half the time the streamers read the forums than make their nice videos :P)

 

 

 

 

Best way to get an audience. See what people complain about, make video telling people what they want to hear, sit back and enjoy the back patting from all the people who will praise you for speaking 'the truth'. Profit! 



Steeleye_Spam #31 Posted 22 May 2019 - 01:32 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 33804 battles
  • 357
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    08-31-2014

Yawn.

 

I don't think the personal missions have any impact on the numbers of arty in game. There were plenty of multiple arty games when i started, there are plenty now. A personal opinion, but anyone who wants to retain their sanity should ignore personal missions and just let them happen when they happen. I happen to agree with you that three arty games are a problem, but this, and other arty arguments are as old as the sun, and this thread will be closed imminently.



Homer_J #32 Posted 22 May 2019 - 01:35 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Beta Tester
  • 31987 battles
  • 35,149
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    09-03-2010

View PostHelldron, on 22 May 2019 - 07:59 AM, said:

 

Where they at those majority then? 

The thing with the silent majority is they are silent.

 

Silently clicking battle and getting on with having fun and not whining about things.



WoT_RU_Doing #33 Posted 22 May 2019 - 01:44 PM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Player
  • 57281 battles
  • 3,261
  • [-GY-] -GY-
  • Member since:
    07-20-2013

I personally think that they should reduce the 1st campaign requirements (maybe only SPG-15), and for the second campaign make the missions more like Chimera Alliance-14...."Stun x OR Immobilise x". It WOULD reduce the number of people playing arty "that didn't want to really", and that in itself means that the quality of play from arty should improve (I suspect a sizeable proportion of the friendly fire accidents are actually people who haven't played arty enough to know when NOT to shoot.) How much effect it would have on the number of arties in battles we'd just have to see, but if it reduced the number of triple arty battles that'd be quite good fmost of the time for arty players doing their missions as well. Finally, it wold be quite amusing to see what happens with the "I only play arty for missions" argument.


Edited by WoT_RU_Doing, 22 May 2019 - 01:45 PM.


Homer_J #34 Posted 22 May 2019 - 01:54 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Beta Tester
  • 31987 battles
  • 35,149
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    09-03-2010

View PostWoT_RU_Doing, on 22 May 2019 - 01:44 PM, said:

I personally think that they should reduce the 1st campaign requirements

If they reduce them any further they will have to set things like.

 

SPG-1 - click battle.

SPG-2 - Use the S key.

SPG-3 - Press A or D at some point in the battle.

SPG-4 - Drive 0.1km

SPG-5 - knock down at least 1 tree.

SPG-6 - click

SPG-7 - mark a target

SPG-8 - Use the W key within 10 seconds of firing a shot.

 

Sorry, I've run out of ideas which are easier than the current arty missions.



SoupFork #35 Posted 22 May 2019 - 02:06 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 11386 battles
  • 386
  • Member since:
    11-07-2017

A small but loud, vocal, minority who claim to speak for “the majority/all” want arty removed. I respect your opinion, but I have by now lost all respect for how you are trying to achieve this.

 

They incessantly push their agenda with daily pointless, heavily biased polls, questionable claims, unsubstantiated statistics and cry-threads, even though there’s a dedicated, pinned thread for it already.

 

Meanwhile, they are so insecure about the validity of their point that they constantly feel the need to exaggerate how many players hate arty and how horrible and hurty it makes everyone feel. And how almost all of their games are ruined by arty. 

 

If you disagree with them, you get insulted. Or teamkilled.

If you play arty, they happily TK you and openly applaud others who do.

They openly tell players to actively go out and kill arty.

If you try to objectively argue with them, they immediately resort to personal attacks and insults instead of arguing the point.

They assert arty should be removed because it targets them and victimizes them. They want a safe space and the authorities to protect them from getting their feelings hurt by removing the trigger.

Sound familiar yet? 

Yep, In the real world that would be called ideological extremism.



WoT_RU_Doing #36 Posted 22 May 2019 - 02:10 PM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Player
  • 57281 battles
  • 3,261
  • [-GY-] -GY-
  • Member since:
    07-20-2013

View PostHomer_J, on 22 May 2019 - 12:54 PM, said:

If they reduce them any further they will have to set things like.

 

SPG-1 - click battle.

SPG-2 - Use the S key.

SPG-3 - Press A or D at some point in the battle.

SPG-4 - Drive 0.1km

SPG-5 - knock down at least 1 tree.

SPG-6 - click

SPG-7 - mark a target

SPG-8 - Use the W key within 10 seconds of firing a shot.

 

Sorry, I've run out of ideas which are easier than the current arty missions.

 

It'll be interesting to see what happens after the last arty change. It's harder now to actually stun for long periods of time, especially if you've two other SPGs stunning the same targets, and WG said they'd assess and rebalance the missions within 2 updates if necessary.

Captain_Kremen0 #37 Posted 22 May 2019 - 02:13 PM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 39041 battles
  • 2,271
  • [TFMB] TFMB
  • Member since:
    06-04-2011

View PostZlatanArKung, on 22 May 2019 - 11:37 AM, said:

 

Afaik, players where whining about bush-camping TDs before arty was nerfed aswell.

 

I have yet to see some whining about light tanks on the forums. I only see quite a lot of WV whining. And if WV was being forced in Missions, then we would get whining about this.

Their whining stopped when LT's got nerfed to f*** and they had no basis to whine about.

 

And Steve Alexander wept for there no more classes lands to conquer.



15JG52Brauer #38 Posted 22 May 2019 - 03:13 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 81303 battles
  • 718
  • [WHO] WHO
  • Member since:
    06-29-2011
To be honest I was surprised when they "forced" people to play arty for the second set of campaigns - they must know how many people hate it - and it's not like they cant make missions that could be done in arty or another class - so I do have empathy for those who hate arty and feel compelled to play them - I used to feel a bit like that with the light tank missions in the 260 set, but then I figured out how to do them and all was OK. I don't have a hatred of any specific class myself, but I can understand why others do (actually back in the day when I was grinding my E75 I hated arty with a vengance - 8 arty a side will do that to you lol) - but then I started to play it along with the other tanks, and I actually got better at finding arty safe locations etc, or just not camping the same spot all the time so arty no longer repeatedley sends me parking fines for camping in a forward location ;-) 

Edited by 15JG52Brauer, 22 May 2019 - 03:14 PM.


Homer_J #39 Posted 22 May 2019 - 03:54 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Beta Tester
  • 31987 battles
  • 35,149
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    09-03-2010

View PostWoT_RU_Doing, on 22 May 2019 - 02:10 PM, said:

 

It'll be interesting to see what happens after the last arty change. It's harder now to actually stun for long periods of time, especially if you've two other SPGs stunning the same targets, and WG said they'd assess and rebalance the missions within 2 updates if necessary.

 

I can't say I have noticed much difference.  Sometimes I wait 3 seconds before firing so I don't get overlapped stun.  But i don't have any arty missions open any more.

 

I do know my referral account completed all the StuG arty missions before even getting the M44 fully upgraded.  Not many classes where you can say you completed mission 15 with a stock tier VI.



Bordhaw #40 Posted 22 May 2019 - 07:01 PM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 14824 battles
  • 4,697
  • Member since:
    01-29-2017

View PostHelldron, on 22 May 2019 - 04:59 AM, said:

people dislikes arty but they have to do stun missions or arty missions for reward tanks and thats why 

 







Also tagged with ARTY

1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users