Jump to content


Your Customers Do Not Want Artillery Nerf-Hammered!


  • Please log in to reply
169 replies to this topic

BogusBadger #41 Posted Feb 27 2017 - 21:08

    Captain

  • Players
  • 33664 battles
  • 1,816
  • Member since:
    07-11-2012

View PostAltwar, on Feb 27 2017 - 15:06, said:

 

Who is this vast majority you presume to speak for? The players you know?  They are but a drop of water in a lake.  The community that posts on this forum?  They are but a bucket in that same lake.

 

You've no idea on what the "majority" of players want anymore than I do.  As someone on this thread already said, it is quite likely that those not stating an opinion here simply don't care one way or the other.

 

 

​Go into any pub game.  I never hear "oh good arty is here!!!".  Almost every time though, I hear "great, arty.  Now I have to camp".  Open your eyes.

Chalybos #42 Posted Feb 27 2017 - 21:08

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 22596 battles
  • 904
  • Member since:
    04-18-2011

View PostBeornotns, on Feb 27 2017 - 14:56, said:

And to all you awesome players...  They will never, ever get rid of artillery.  Not ever.  They've said as much.  So, rather than whine like petulant children, how can you modify SPGs to be USEFUL to you?  How can you take something you loathe, and since you can't destroy it, remold it into something that will serve YOUR interests in game?

 

And that would be...?

 

Remodel it into a "support" piece.  Supposedly the sandbox fixes will do that, but I don't see it happening as they tested it.  That would require lights to be restructured to do minimal damage, forcing them to play their role as a scout rather than a bushwhacker with running shoes and a shotgun (something I could swear I read was happening, but damned if I can remember where).  That would send a large portion of the lights-who-don't-scout right into playing mediums.  Said mediums would then be the harassing fast-moving wolfpacks that they used to be, swarming heavies.  

Like I said, I don't see it working out as tested in the SB.  I think that when it's all said & done, people will dislike arty even more.

 

The other option would be to convert them into a new line of stand-alone TD's.  That's probably the least intrusive change to the game.



Beorn_of_the_NorthernSea #43 Posted Feb 27 2017 - 21:09

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 25200 battles
  • 2,633
  • [-SCA-] -SCA-
  • Member since:
    08-07-2014

View PostAnakins_Betrayal, on Feb 27 2017 - 12:01, said:

Didn't even the the OP, but just from the title I will say this ; SPEAK FOR YOURSELF.

 

But just an FYI - if the majority of customers were ok with arty / why would arty be changed - why would WG spend time and money to fix a mechanic if it was not broken

 

This right here...  A statistically significant number of people have at least a minor issue with artillery, which runs on a sliding scale from a mild annoyance to nigh-rabid hatred on any and all things SPG.  They are mostly mouth breathers, certainly, but the least cerebrally damaged to the regular ol' folks to the right smart gents herein have suggested many ways in which to modify artillery.  Virtually every week a plethora of threads devoted to artillery modification pop up like 'shrooms on $#it after a rainstorm.  How can THAT many people be THAT wrong THAT often?

 

Statistically, they probably aren't.  So...  That leads us back to, how to change it to benefit the players, game mechanics, and continued development of personal missions in WoT?

 

~B



_Marine #44 Posted Feb 27 2017 - 21:13

    Major

  • Players
  • 28405 battles
  • 3,284
  • [VILIN] VILIN
  • Member since:
    06-21-2011
I think the OP is using the same data set that WG used that determined that most players wanted 7v7 tier 8 SHs

Spanktankk #45 Posted Feb 27 2017 - 21:13

    Major

  • Players
  • 33734 battles
  • 11,044
  • [KFB] KFB
  • Member since:
    04-19-2011
My only REAL problem with arty is that it gives any 44% sh*tter the ability to one-shot the best player on the other team while never having to take any risk, and requires absolutely zero skill to master.

Beorn_of_the_NorthernSea #46 Posted Feb 27 2017 - 21:14

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 25200 battles
  • 2,633
  • [-SCA-] -SCA-
  • Member since:
    08-07-2014

View PostBogusBadger, on Feb 27 2017 - 12:04, said:

 

​Good god AND he's an ADULT!??!?!  GUYS look at him!!!!  He is superior!!!

 

FFS, I suggest a modification, you take a swing at my use of [censored] 'petulant'?

 

I go down YOUR alley and now you question my age?  Jesus H man, I am staring 50 in the face.  Would that you could stare a useful suggestion in the face.

 

AND WE ARE ON THE SAME DAMN SIDE BADGER!!!  You wrote:

Block Quote

 In fact, the vast majority of us DO want arty nerfed, if it can't be removed.

 So, I withdraw.  You win.  [edited]this.  I am an old cripple who just wants everyone to get along.

 

Meet me in game and blow me up.  Track me and send me back to the garage, and it would be a more pleasant interaction than this waste of pixels.

 

/done

 


Edited by Beornotns, Feb 27 2017 - 21:14.


orangeandblue #47 Posted Feb 27 2017 - 21:16

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 27215 battles
  • 877
  • Member since:
    05-10-2013

WG uploaded this video about 3-1/2 months ago. Why talk up arty and how much damage it can inflict if you have plans in the mix to "re-balance" it? Not sure if I'll mind the proposed "stun" feature of artillery, but if aim times and reload times stay the same while RNG remains poor then all of you arty haters will get your wish more than likely and artillery will become an unplayable option all together and WG will have another Super Pershing gold refund on their hands for those who bought the leFH French arty since it's a premium tank and this is most definitely a nerf to an already underwhelming arty. I think the stun proposal could be interesting in the sense that a player who knows where enemy tanks are likely to be advancing can still help their team's heavies at break-though points. A good stun to a group of enemy heavies and competent players smart enough to take advantage of that stun can turn the tide in your teams favor. What I don't like is that the damage the artillery player gets is dependent on the competency of the other players. Arty stuns, then gets assisted damage credit (kind of like spotting damage I suppose). So "stun" could be worth checking out I suppose. I like the idea of consumables being reusable and less damage inflicted on enemy tanks. Even though I own and have played artillery I have never appreciated being one shot myself and generally felt kind of bad for one shotting other tanks, even though let's face it sometimes it's funny as heck. ;) So wrong but so funny sometimes. :D I already spend most of my time over at World of Warships anyways and I think I'll pass on the Object 252U. Hard to have a desire to put more $$ into something that's a definite question mark at this point.

 



BogusBadger #48 Posted Feb 27 2017 - 21:17

    Captain

  • Players
  • 33664 battles
  • 1,816
  • Member since:
    07-11-2012

View PostBeornotns, on Feb 27 2017 - 15:14, said:

 

FFS, I suggest a modification, you take a swing at my use of [censored] 'petulant'?

 

I go down YOUR alley and now you question my age?  Jesus H man, I am staring 50 in the face.  Would that you could stare a useful suggestion in the face.

 

AND WE ARE ON THE SAME DAMN SIDE BADGER!!!  You wrote:

 So, I withdraw.  You win.  [edited]this.  I am an old cripple who just wants everyone to get along.

 

Meet me in game and blow me up.  Track me and send me back to the garage, and it would be a more pleasant interaction than this waste of pixels.

 

/done

 

 

​I'm actually sitting at my desk laughing

NomaeTheJester #49 Posted Feb 27 2017 - 21:19

    Captain

  • Players
  • 13909 battles
  • 1,032
  • Member since:
    12-01-2012

IMHO anything that causes arty to do less damage to me is good. I don't care if I have to be "stunned" for a while, so long as I am still in the game.

 

I occasionally do play arty, and when I do I am frequently frustrated by the amount of waiting I must do only to miss. It would be nice to be more accurate and reload faster, even if that means sacrificing the mega alpha that arty currently has. Being rewarded for stunning people is a bonus.

 

The last thing that I would like is for some (or most) artillery to have their arcs lowered. Force artillery to put at least as much thought into their positioning as a tank destroyer might.

 

So the sandbox seems to check two out of three boxes for me, I give it a thumbs up. Of course they can still [edited]it up in actual implementation, but theoretically I like the changes.

 

Edit: Seen a couple people in this thread mentioning the Lefh. Hate to break it to you, but it definitely needs a nerf. It currently does more damage per game than any other statistically significant tier 5. It beats out the next contender (the known-to-be-OP KV-220-2) by more than 75 DPG. Heck it does more damage per game than any tier arty.


Edited by NomaeTheJester, Feb 27 2017 - 21:22.


Mudman24 #50 Posted Feb 27 2017 - 21:21

    Major

  • Players
  • 36560 battles
  • 12,162
  • Member since:
    04-06-2012
OP is wrong.

Altwar #51 Posted Feb 27 2017 - 21:21

    Major

  • Players
  • 54651 battles
  • 3,725
  • [A-F] A-F
  • Member since:
    04-24-2011

View PostBogusBadger, on Feb 27 2017 - 12:08, said:

 

​Go into any pub game.  I never hear "oh good arty is here!!!".  Almost every time though, I hear "great, arty.  Now I have to camp".  Open your eyes.

 

I play plenty of pub matches.  The most common things I see are whining about the MM when the other team is stacked with more heavies and/or better players.  I only see complaints about arty when there is 4 or more per side and then, it is by the tomato players who I am not counting on to do much anyway.  So in my experience, complaints about SPGs are not common.

 

Sorry if that doesn't align with your own experience but experiences are bound to vary.  Especially when I don't fret about the composition of the other team.  They are simply the next challenge to face.



RamaLamaDingDong2 #52 Posted Feb 27 2017 - 21:23

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 24266 battles
  • 4,182
  • Member since:
    03-02-2015

View PostTsarCidron, on Feb 27 2017 - 13:30, said:

 

maybe, then again maybe just the vocal forum-go'ers/whiners want it removed.

 

If i could plus one this a dozen times I would.

Xits #53 Posted Feb 27 2017 - 21:28

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 18468 battles
  • 164
  • Member since:
    07-10-2011


RamaLamaDingDong2 #54 Posted Feb 27 2017 - 21:32

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 24266 battles
  • 4,182
  • Member since:
    03-02-2015
I am going to so enjoy the flood of tears and whining that will burst out when the Sand Box change comes into effect. The arty hate will be howling please WG bring back the mythical one shot arty days please. Unless you have been stunned and sat for an eternity waiting for it to wear off as the sharks circle and slowing punch holes in your now totally defenseless tank you HAVE no idea of the eternity that seems like. But even better is the new burst effect and the fact arty players now will almost be forced to become better support tanks...so they can spread the tears to many more poor defenseless tankers simply trying to enjoy a match...its going to be better than a FREE steak dinner at Smith and Wollensky!!!!

 



n4cer67 #55 Posted Feb 27 2017 - 21:34

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 16808 battles
  • 2,006
  • [NAAP] NAAP
  • Member since:
    10-18-2010

View PostWhistling_Death_, on Feb 27 2017 - 13:15, said:

Dear W.o.T;

World of Tanks is a great game and I love it! In two years I have 45,000+ battles, (13,672 of those using my 43 SPG's), and I hope this massive amount of experience in the game that I have will lend more weight to this feedback than from the average casual player or the artillery-whiners, (who are in the minority). I am not a spoiled child without a job that doesn't put any money into this game and constantly whines in the Forum about artillery. No, I'm an adult who has run my own business for over 30 years.  I, (along with thousands and thousands of other artillery players), have money to invest in this great game, financially supporting the game and have done so many times. I hope this vast base of experience in the game and my business experience of over 30 years lends much greater weight with the developers than the typical, "feedback", they receive from mere children still living with their parents and constantly whining in the Forum.

 

Let's talk raw numbers here and what they mean to Wargaming, as it's evident this aspect is being overlooked by the developers regarding the proposed nerf-hammering of artillery.

 

The video that announced the proposed nerf-hammering of artillery at this moment has 142,499 views in only 20 days, which equals 7,125 views per day. This sets a record for most views of any Wargaming video you have ever posted. The proposed nerf-hammering of artillery is extreme and deeply angers untold thousands and thousands of your artillery customers all over the world, as these numbers clearly demonstrate. The proposed nerf-hammering of artillery is a very hot topic and the outcome will determine whether Wargaming has a successful future or not. A successful, established business such as Wargaming should not be making extreme changes to their business or they invite financial ruin.

 

The total number of thumbs up and down votes for this video at this moment is 4,355.

 

The number of thumbs down votes is 1,653 and this is a whopping 38% of the total, almost 40%. That's huge. Any business that even lost a few percent of its customers would be cause for concern and there would be meetings to determine what they were doing wrong and how to correct it. But a business losing almost 40% of its customers would be red alert time and they clearly would be doing something incredibly wrong. Even 10% would be a serious problem.

 

This means statistically that of those 142,499 total views, that about 38% of the people viewing that video do not want artillery nerf-hammered, or "rebalanced". 38% of 142,499 equals a whopping 54,149 of your customers that have watched that video that do not want artillery nerf-hammered. Angering 54,149 of your customers is not good business and that is not good for the game in any way, shape or form.

 

At latest count, World of Tanks has 110 million registered tankers all over the world. 38% of 110 million is 41,800,000 of your customers/player base, almost 42 million of your customers that do not want artillery nerf-hammered, or "rebalanced". 42 million people, customers, is a staggering number.

 

Does Wargaming really want to lose 38% of its business? How many millions and millions of dollars in lost revenue would that total come to? Would it be wise to lose so much money? How many jobs would be lost at Wargaming?

 

When he visited the offices of Wargaming in California several months ago, your fine C.E.O. Victor Kislyi said in a video that, "everyone hates artillery". With the utmost respect to Mr.Kislyi, the numbers above indicate otherwise and every time Wargaming nerf-hammers artillery you are angering a very large percentage of your player base. This is not wise and not good business.

 

Wargaming, as the numbers above clearly demonstrate, if the proposal to nerf-hammer artillery is implemented, you would be making a huge mistake. Please do not do this. Cancel the proposed nerf-hammering of artillery.

 

Thank you for your time and consideration. Have a super day! :)

 

Very true, out of over 26k players a very small amount want the Spg's nerfed.

RamaLamaDingDong2 #56 Posted Feb 27 2017 - 21:34

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 24266 battles
  • 4,182
  • Member since:
    03-02-2015

View PostAltwar, on Feb 27 2017 - 14:21, said:

 

I play plenty of pub matches.  The most common things I see are whining about the MM when the other team is stacked with more heavies and/or better players.  I only see complaints about arty when there is 4 or more per side and then, it is by the tomato players who I am not counting on to do much anyway.  So in my experience, complaints about SPGs are not common.

 

Sorry if that doesn't align with your own experience but experiences are bound to vary.  Especially when I don't fret about the composition of the other team.  They are simply the next challenge to face.

 

Then you have not been in any match I was in...I prefer arty in any game I am in if the arty player has any sense and map awareness....its a huge benefit...opposing arty is total non factor for me...

Spanktankk #57 Posted Feb 27 2017 - 21:36

    Major

  • Players
  • 33734 battles
  • 11,044
  • [KFB] KFB
  • Member since:
    04-19-2011

View PostCanOfTomatoes, on Feb 27 2017 - 15:34, said:

 

Then you have not been in any match I was in...I prefer arty in any game I am in if the arty player has any sense and map awareness....its a huge benefit...opposing arty is total non factor for me...

 

Because you camp behind friendly arty the whole game?

 

Please pretend you know game mechanics even more.  I've yet to meet a 46% er that knew where the "w" key was.



RamaLamaDingDong2 #58 Posted Feb 27 2017 - 21:41

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 24266 battles
  • 4,182
  • Member since:
    03-02-2015

View PostSpanktankk, on Feb 27 2017 - 14:13, said:

My only REAL problem with arty is that it gives any 44% sh*tter the ability to one-shot the best player on the other team while never having to take any risk, and requires absolutely zero skill to master.

 

The village idiot has spoken and none of which is true in any fashion its a copy and paste regurgitation of what the kool kids want everyone to think...similar to Alternative facts and Fake News...

n4cer67 #59 Posted Feb 27 2017 - 21:43

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 16808 battles
  • 2,006
  • [NAAP] NAAP
  • Member since:
    10-18-2010

View PostBogusBadger, on Feb 27 2017 - 13:53, said:

In fact, the vast majority of us DO want arty nerfed, if it can't be removed.

 

Now that was a "bogus" comment.
:trollface:

n4cer67 #60 Posted Feb 27 2017 - 21:46

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 16808 battles
  • 2,006
  • [NAAP] NAAP
  • Member since:
    10-18-2010

View PostSpanktankk, on Feb 27 2017 - 13:33, said:

 

38% want Trump to stay if office too...so theres that.....

Got your figures backwards the majority wants him in, votes of illegals and padded votes don't count.






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users