20 replies to this topic

[cmgoku]

I know this has likely been addressed in a different thread but I have limited luck with the forum search engine so....  Here's the scenario:  I'm
lobbing shells in my M7 Priest yesterday having a good match.  Three heavy tanks have grouped up behind some cover avoiding my teammates direct fire but still in range for me artillerize them - so I am.  There's a Tiger, KV-3, and an IS all of which I have hit twice.  The Tiger ambles out a bit too far from cover and get popped by one of mine - he's now down to 2%.  I happen to be aiming near him anyway and manage to finish the job (knocked out the Tiger).  The question I would pose relates to his two remaining mates - they are both above 50%.  Is a kill at 2% worth worth more than a plain old damaging hit worth 15-20%?  I thought afterwards I may have screwed myself out of more XP/creds by taking an easy kill instead of a more damaging hit on a neighboring tank.  Any thoughts?.....

[facee01]

It is a good decision on your part... to kill the dying tiger which is Tier 7 hence one less tank and threat.

[jsgx3]

It's just damage done, you do more damage you get more XP.  If 2% of one tank is 200 HP (I know, no tanks have this much HP but for illustrations sake) and a 200 HP, 100% tank is your other choice it's all the same.  Not sure if there are any multipliers for tier though, i.e., lower tier damaging a higher tier.

Additionally, whether you should have hit the other tanks is a larger question than just XP.  What was teh situation?  For example, if you think the 2% tank is part of a group that might break through, perhaps prioritizing it first, just to get its gun out of the picture is the best move.  Or, alternately, if you think your tank buddies have him handled, perhaps the other tanks were the prioroity.  Basically, there is no one answer for the generic scenario, but put it in context of the game and there is probably a best "COA"/decision.

For me, I don't priortized based on XP.  I try to take everything I can process in my small little brain at the time and make a decision based on the tactical/strategic (strategic as applied to the whole 15 minutes and map/situation of a game) situation.  Even then we often make what in hindsight were bad decisions, but that is where a little self analysis and personal honesty can make you better player.

[_DK_]

It depends, if a team-mate can kill the Tiger fairly soon, then leave him be. If no team mates of yours can kill him, then take the kill shot - that's how I make my calls.

[cmgoku]

I'll add some details to clarify the battle scenario.  Our side was up two or three tanks (us 10 them 7-8).  The 3 tanks I was working on were near the top of their side's tier and well pinned down with at least 3 of ours attempting to tag them if came out of cover.  The win was not certain by any means but likely for sure.  The bottom line is I had more freedom than usual to pick and choose a target...

[SMScannonfodder]

Even a 2% Tiger shoot for full damage, yes you would have earned more experiance hiting the other tanks, but one less gun firing is good for the team. Winning the match is the best as you earn an extra 50% over a loss.

[selcooper]

cmgoku, on Apr 16 2012 - 13:46, said:

I'll add some details to clarify the battle scenario.  Our side was up two or three tanks (us 10 them 7-8).  The 3 tanks I was working on were near the top of their side's tier and well pinned down with at least 3 of ours attempting to tag them if came out of cover.  The win was not certain by any means but likely for sure.  The bottom line is I had more freedom than usual to pick and choose a target...

If I can I will always make the kill shot for the reason that it removes one more gun from the enemies arsenal


It could be his gun that magically pens you biggest tank and gets the  ammo rack to change the battle also I hate it when you do all but one percent damage.

[Panzerbar]

I'm with DK.

A 2% Tiger can kill a Priest.  A dead Tiger can't kill you.

If you have a good team you can rely on to polish off the Tiger, shoot the healthy tanks.

It really comes down to how much you trust your team.  In pubbies, I generally don't trust them.  In a clan, their name is mud if that nearly-dead Tiger gets off another shot, so they damn straight polish off the big kitty.

[Maverick92]

cmgoku, on Apr 16 2012 - 13:26, said:

I know this has likely been addressed in a different thread but I have limited luck with the forum search engine so....  Here's the scenario:  I'm
lobbing shells in my M7 Priest yesterday having a good match.  Three heavy tanks have grouped up behind some cover avoiding my teammates direct fire but still in range for me artillerize them - so I am.  There's a Tiger, KV-3, and an IS all of which I have hit twice.  The Tiger ambles out a bit too far from cover and get popped by one of mine - he's now down to 2%.  I happen to be aiming near him anyway and manage to finish the job (knocked out the Tiger).  The question I would pose relates to his two remaining mates - they are both above 50%.  Is a kill at 2% worth worth more than a plain old damaging hit worth 15-20%?  I thought afterwards I may have screwed myself out of more XP/creds by taking an easy kill instead of a more damaging hit on a neighboring tank.  Any thoughts?.....

Here is the opinion of an experienced arty player (20% of my ~8000 matches):

Yes you probably would have got more XP if you had hit either the IS or KV3, as most of your XP comes from damage not kills. There is some bonus for getting the kills, I'm not sure how much, but it isn't a lot. But I wouldn't really say you screwed yourself over, the Priest has a reload of what about 10 seconds? From memory I would be sitting there pounding a target over and over and I would be waiting for my reticle to finish aiming to get the next shot off, not waiting for the sell to reload So having killed the tiger you are ready to go again and hit the other tanks right away.

Also, whilst XP is nice, sometimes being too XP hungry can't be good. Sometimes it is better to take the lower XP shot that may eventually help your team win, which will in turn give you the opportunity to hit more targets and also get the 1.5 multiplier for the win. This all comes with experience, but I know sometimes I will take the kill shot, even if they are almost dead, because I just can't risk the fact that my ally could possibly bounce or miss, and then end up being killed by that enemy you could have easily taken out allowing them to then push on and possibly win. However if there are multiple allies all near that 1 tank, I will usually let them finish him off and look for a beefier target.

It also depends on what tier the enemy is, if it is a top tier tank (say a maus) I am much more likely to take the kill shot, because I know that even if there are allies around, they can be hard to kill. In most cases, I would rather go for a tier 9/10 at 5-10% than a tier 7 sitting at 100% right next them, as they are a much larger threat. Even though dealing 900 damage to an IS will probably get me more XP than taking the last 300HP of the Maus, killing the Maus will benefit the team a lot more. So I would say, first think what is going to help the team win easier, if both targets have a similar value for this... it is probably best to then shoot the one with the most HP to get more XP. Unless the other tank's HP is around your avg damage and where killing him will still get you the same amount of XP as damaging the other

Hope this helps you understand a bit more, happy tanking  

[rtp099]

I know i debate this every time I fire a 1000 credit shell, but a tank at 2% can still kill your team mates so taking him out leaves the opposition 1 less gun. It sucks that you don't get more xp, but it is good for the team so they can focus on the next target.

[Ignis_Leonis]

facee01, on Apr 16 2012 - 13:32, said:

It is a good decision on your part... to kill the dying tiger which is Tier 7 hence one less tank and threat.

Agreed.  It's only 2%, but how many hpts from your team could that Tiger have taken before someone got another shot on him.

[ledhed14]

You get paid for damage.
But after losing a match where I took out an IS7 with a KV5 then dueled a IS4 with another IS3 ..4% He kills me after I had to expose to deal with TD Jpanther ..The IS3 hit him at 4% ..no damage ..after killing me he took the IS3 out -- still 4%..
Then he drives to cap and kills afk %$&$#!..and arty ..4%..then kills the counter cap try ..1%...
Then sits in cap 1% for win when guys leave his cap ..dumb ..yes ..to get a stat ..1% invader 4% 5 kills ..
You see a living tank.
BLOW IT THE FRAK UP.

[Gohibniu]

facee01, on Apr 16 2012 - 13:32, said:

It is a good decision on your part... to kill the dying tiger which is Tier 7 hence one less tank and threat.

Esp since you have a machine gun like 105...

[death666grim]

just because tank is wounded so bad don't mean it can't fight.

happen to my churchill tank. I alone flank on one side while most team flank on other side. 4 TD saw me and pound me hard. But I manage to get away with 12% hp left.

Then I wait for my team to flank. they successful flank to enemy base. I start to move again and saw those 4 TD focus on my team. I just act as if I am on machine gun nest and shoot like manic   at those TD. result is 4 dead TD before they could fire at me.

this battle happen to not have any spg in any team. And, I am sure if Spg was in this battle, I would die before kill one TD

[Khanmots]

M7 reloads so fast that you should take the kill to remove the gun.  Once you start having 45 second reload times but are able to knock huge chunks off tier 10s, then the question of to kill or to nuke something healthier gets trickier.

[sr360]

Gohibniu, on Apr 16 2012 - 15:20, said:

Esp since you have a machine gun like 105...

THAT.

I will take kill shots on low-health tanks if:

1. I have a fast-firing gun
2. The tank has a big gun and poses a threat to me (e.g. shoot an Object 704 at 1% over a 100% IS-4 or IS-7)
3. I am solo and am being swarmed (i.e. take out one gun, and one less tank for the rest of the team to fight)
4. They're an arty (biggest gun theory)

Now, these aren't hard and fast rules, but that's the way I prefer to think

[Max_Brokerman]

I always go for Damage myself.  I figure 3 or 4 enemy tanks going around with 5% or 13% or 22% damage are a lot easier for my team mates to kill then me killing one while 5 others are still at 100%

Just my 2@

[Cybergod]

If i'm in arty I could care less about damage or kills.. It's more like threat control. I hit the tank that gives my team he biggest threat then work my way down.

But I have gave up on arty in pubs, Haven't played arty in about a month, These fail ass teams can barely support tanks let alone a arty.

[Thornir]

The goal is to win, not get damage/XP/Creds for yourself.

That said, the best way to gain damage/XP/Creds?

Win the game. Nothing buffs your XP and creds like winning the freaking game.

Take their tubes off the field. Kill them all, as quickly as possible.

Victory flows from the destruction of the enemy.

[Qumefox]

It's all situational, but in this case I would kill the tiger first.  Why?  Well, in this case, his buddies aren't going anywhere. They'll still be there after you finish off the tiger, which by doing so, you remove one more gun from shooting back at your guys, then you can play whack-a-mole with the next tank in the group.