I play all classes of tanks, also much artillery. Yet i also believe that Artillery has to change. I am on the sandbox server and saw the suggested changes, but i am not sure about them since the "stun feature" will probably get on the players nerves more than being one-shotted. But that is only my personal impression. My friends and i are not sure why WG is doing such a step instead of more obvious possibilities which would not change much too drastically, or trying to invent the wheel anew. Most of the players of course have an oppinion like "remove artillery" which is removing a feature, which is a no-go for the gaming industry to remove a feature that was in the game for so long. It would be the same as if you would ask to remove sniper rifles in Call of Duty, or vehicles from Battlefield. Removing a feature which is part of the game for so long is simply not possible without loosing players, which WG does not want. So there is only the method of tweaking the game. Many players would agree with these things:
- Artillery does too much damage
- Artillery should not be able to one-shot you
- Some artilleries have a too high rate of fire
- Its unfair since its not directly involved in the combat (firing from a huge distance)
- There are too many artilleries in a match (3-5 )
So what is the possibility to limit the "unfairness" but make artillery into a vehicle class that is more likable and balanced? Is it difficult? Hell yes, you bet. Is it impossible? No, not at all. Lets see what makes the "mechanic" of playing artillery their trademark.
- Tactical view from above
- Can see live movement of all spottet vehicles even out of the drawing circle
- Is mostly close to the base and does not move much
- Is very inaccurate, but has the ability to do tremendous damage when hitting a vehicle
- Has "unfair" AP / HEAT rounds that can penetrate a vehicle with more damage than a TD
That are facts, and not in a bad or a good matter. Simply facts. WG now tries to solve the problem with cutting the damage and the penetration of the vehicle class, but at the same time extending the blast radius for AoE damage and implementing stun to slow down vehicle movement and stats to bring a "tactical" aspect to artillery. So instead doing damage, its here for slowing down or incapacitating the enemy tanks so that flanking or breakthrough manoevers are more easy for your own team. Is that the ultimate solution? Well, perhaps it can solve some problems, but it will definetely create other problems and rantings. Normal with such a new "mechanic". But are there other methods to balance artillery? Surely!
Connect the aim circle to the damage output
Whats meant? Well, a snapshot without aiming gives you only 30 - 50% of your shell damage (+/- rng ). So aiming is a MUST to do 100% damage. Is it realistic? Well, maybe not completely realistic, because a fired shell that hits should do the same damage in real. But we are talking about a game still. A normal artillery would never "snapshot". Never. Like ever never. So its only fair that an artillery is forced to aim fully to do all the damage.
Limit the live information over the drawing circle
Of course an artillery needs its tactical view. And we all can agree that an artillery is useless if it can not shoot over great distances. But limiting the live information would be a good option. For example, a medium tank is 800 meters away but spotted. Its driving a staight line. The drawing circle is only 450 meter. So Artillery does not see "up to date" all the time, what would that mean in game terms? Meaning is, the artillery view shows the arty the "last given information" and updates all 3-5 seconds. If the medium tank drove straight for 2-3 seconds and then makes a turn, artillery would see the medium driving a straight line (last update on information) , but after the new update, the mediums is vanished from the arty sight and appears on the spot where it drove in real. (yeah, i am not sure how to explain that precise. I did on the sandbox forum, but i can not find the post right now).
Give other shell types for tactical use or "tactical guns"
Why not giving the player a choice? Do you want to be tactical? Then research the smaller gun that does not make big damage but brings in more shell types, such as shell-shock, shrapnell, flares and smoke bombs. If an arty wants to do damage, the player has to research the "damage gun" but gets limited to some shell types and ammo. (and of couse already smaller damage, we all can agree to that). Also other players may see on the symbol on their team mate if he plays a damage type arty or a tactical artillery with the choice of guns. Wouldnt be too hard i think.
Other shell types bring complicated mechanics, its impossible! If arty can light tanks, scouts are useless!
You really think that? That WG has to create completely new mechanics? Not at all... we all know that if a stun can be placed on a tank, meaning a "debuff", we can use that with different shell types and area of effect. For example, a flare shell would only reduce the camoflage value and a smoke shell would increase the camoflage values on certain areas for a fixed amount of time. Also you can connect the use of shells with either a timer (90 seconds cooldown) , with limited ammo (only 3 shots of flare) and with the number of tanks (its locked until all scouts are dead). So whats the problem with that? We all know that a buff or a debuff can be implemented fast. No need for complicated mechanics.
New vehicle types should be implemented to counter arty
Well, we dont wanna break the game balance completely, do we? But rocket launchers or support vehicles would be neato. Yet i would not recommend it, balancing that would be difficult.
I have more ideas in my mind, but i think my post already is too big anyways...
Edited by Assault_Cat, Mar 20 2017 - 10:40.