Jump to content


Why was Arty introduced into the game?


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

Shortcult #41 Posted Aug 27 2017 - 21:51

    Major

  • Players
  • 30157 battles
  • 3,904
  • Member since:
    08-21-2012

View PostThornir, on Aug 27 2017 - 12:28, said:

 

 

YOU don't see it as a loss. Arty players would, again, that's the entire issue; it doesn't matter to YOU, so YOU don't see it as a problem. That's called "empathy". You should try it. Girls dig it.

 

And yeah. Sorry. You're passive aggressive, you distort what others' say for your own benefit,  then you attempt to laugh off points you can't address with insults. No honor there. None.

 

And I don't make a distinction between the internet and real life when it comes to treating people with respect. Apparently, you do. Says volumes.

 

 

 

 

10% fewer targets is a LOSS?  Even if it resulted in a less toxic player base?  So, is it a loss for arty players that there is terrain on any map that allows tanks to not be targeted?  Yeah, that's far fetched, but it sounds like where you are going.  What if 10,000 players quit tomorrow, is that not also a reduction in available targets?  I think I am gleaning what you mean, but I need no help looking foolish (ask my kids), explain what you consider the loss to be.

 

Empathy?  I'm the one arguing for a system that makes the most people happy.  So, I'm not empathetic to the fringe element?  Seems like I was the one posting the best attempt to keep everyone involved, not just the 'I, my, me, mine' that we see from both the haters and the apologists.  Plus I'm scared of girls.

 

I do agree with you wholeheartedly about not making a distinction between the internet and RL in how you treat people.  Respect you for that.  I mentioned it once before, you reap what you sow, I feel I have treated you with the very same flippancy I have watched you treat me and many others with.  In fact, there is a level of respect there.

 

And because there always has to be at least a little bit of a barb in every post, me thinks thou doth protest too much.



Shortcult #42 Posted Aug 27 2017 - 21:54

    Major

  • Players
  • 30157 battles
  • 3,904
  • Member since:
    08-21-2012

View Post_Kradok_, on Aug 27 2017 - 12:35, said:

 

please, enlighten me... what kind of player is attracted to arty? 

If A=B and B=C then...........

 

C'mon, I know you can get this.

 

 



_Kradok_ #43 Posted Aug 27 2017 - 22:02

    First lieutenant

  • -Players-
  • 21847 battles
  • 565
  • [LUL] LUL
  • Member since:
    10-09-2014

View PostShortcult, on Aug 27 2017 - 15:54, said:

If A=B and B=C then...........

 

C'mon, I know you can get this.

 

 

 

Thus far, you deflected but failed to answer. So... one more time.... please answer the question. No need to be a coy little girl.

Hurk #44 Posted Aug 27 2017 - 22:14

    Major

  • Players
  • 45111 battles
  • 13,865
  • [KGR] KGR
  • Member since:
    09-30-2012

last time WG said anything on the issue, before personal missions, over 80% of the playerbase owned and played arty, and thats back when it started at tier 4 ?

 

if you want to know who the actual bad players are, its not arty. its heavy tanks. 

this is due to the fact that heavy tanks typically have the win rate graphs that show more lower results... IE you may see arty being played by 44-46% players, while heavies tend to start at 40-42% for the same time periods. 



Shortcult #45 Posted Aug 27 2017 - 22:24

    Major

  • Players
  • 30157 battles
  • 3,904
  • Member since:
    08-21-2012

View Post_Kradok_, on Aug 27 2017 - 13:02, said:

 

Thus far, you deflected but failed to answer. So... one more time.... please answer the question. No need to be a coy little girl.

 

Clickz stated in essence that arty allows players to destroy each other, regardless of skill level.

 

Therefore...

 

Arty exists as a skill counter.

 

Therefore...

 

Players attracted to arty are attracted to countering skill.  That in and of itself implies that players attracted to arty are in fact less skilled and feel they need the counter.  Or consider themselves to be less skilled whether that be the case or not and use the counter as a crutch without making the effort to become skilled.  Or worst yet feel the need to use a skill counter rather than their personal skill set in a game against other players.  There is also the possibility of just lazy (but that would just be me seeing the worst in people).

 

Wait, read, 'attracted' is the pivotal word.



Hurk #46 Posted Aug 27 2017 - 22:36

    Major

  • Players
  • 45111 battles
  • 13,865
  • [KGR] KGR
  • Member since:
    09-30-2012

View PostShortcult, on Aug 27 2017 - 14:24, said:

 

Clickz stated in essence that arty allows players to destroy each other, regardless of skill level.

 

Therefore...

 

Arty exists as a skill counter.

 

Therefore...

 

Players attracted to arty are attracted to countering skill.  That in and of itself implies that players attracted to arty are in fact less skilled and feel they need the counter.  Or consider themselves to be less skilled whether that be the case or not and use the counter as a crutch without making the effort to become skilled.  Or worst yet feel the need to use a skill counter rather than their personal skill set in a game against other players.  There is also the possibility of just lazy (but that would just be me seeing the worst in people).

 

Wait, read, 'attracted' is the pivotal word.

why a tool exists and who use it in games rarely has anything to do with each other. 

people play for entertainment. 

 

picking a SPG specifically to try and counter skill is actually a META game play that requires skill to even contemplate. 



_Kradok_ #47 Posted Aug 27 2017 - 22:42

    First lieutenant

  • -Players-
  • 21847 battles
  • 565
  • [LUL] LUL
  • Member since:
    10-09-2014

View PostShortcult, on Aug 27 2017 - 16:24, said:

 

Clickz stated in essence that arty allows players to destroy each other, regardless of skill level.

 

Therefore...

 

Arty exists as a skill counter.

 

Therefore...

 

Players attracted to arty are attracted to countering skill.  That in and of itself implies that players attracted to arty are in fact less skilled and feel they need the counter.  Or consider themselves to be less skilled whether that be the case or not and use the counter as a crutch without making the effort to become skilled.  Or worst yet feel the need to use a skill counter rather than their personal skill set in a game against other players.  There is also the possibility of just lazy (but that would just be me seeing the worst in people).

 

Wait, read, 'attracted' is the pivotal word.

 

There's a lot of crap in that commentary... so let me sum it up like this.... I play arty, I'm better than you in so many ways... what qualifies you to say a damn thing about me? 

 

Go back to being a coy little girl. Maybe someone will find you relevant in that role...



Clickez4Fun #48 Posted Aug 27 2017 - 23:34

    Major

  • Players
  • 28842 battles
  • 2,114
  • [A-F] A-F
  • Member since:
    04-21-2011

View PostShortcult, on Aug 27 2017 - 10:35, said:

 

Like the man sayz, its a skill counter.  So what kind of players do you suppose that means are attracted to it?

 

View Post_Kradok_, on Aug 27 2017 - 12:35, said:

 

please, enlighten me... what kind of player is attracted to arty? 

 

Those that spend money on WG games is my guess. A HUGE reason it will never be removed.

Shortcult #49 Posted Aug 27 2017 - 23:40

    Major

  • Players
  • 30157 battles
  • 3,904
  • Member since:
    08-21-2012

View PostHurk, on Aug 27 2017 - 13:36, said:

why a tool exists and who use it in games rarely has anything to do with each other. 

people play for entertainment. 

 

picking a SPG specifically to try and counter skill is actually a META game play that requires skill to even contemplate. 

 

Last line Hurk, think you missed it.  There are obviously a lot of players who play it for different reasons.  Last line stands.

Shortcult #50 Posted Aug 27 2017 - 23:43

    Major

  • Players
  • 30157 battles
  • 3,904
  • Member since:
    08-21-2012

View Post_Kradok_, on Aug 27 2017 - 13:42, said:

 

There's a lot of crap in that commentary... so let me sum it up like this.... I play arty, I'm better than you in so many ways... what qualifies you to say a damn thing about me? 

 

Go back to being a coy little girl. Maybe someone will find you relevant in that role...

 

Panties bundled?  And I'm the little girl?

 

How are you better than me?  Height?  Weight?  Income?  Come on salty, list something.  Awfully self centered of you to assume I was posting about you, really I don'f find you that relevant.  But as a wiser man than me recently said, if the shoe fits....

 

Edit; What's with the angst, Clickz is the one that said it, I just interpreted it for the masses.


Edited by Shortcult, Aug 27 2017 - 23:50.


_Kradok_ #51 Posted Aug 28 2017 - 00:01

    First lieutenant

  • -Players-
  • 21847 battles
  • 565
  • [LUL] LUL
  • Member since:
    10-09-2014

View PostShortcult, on Aug 27 2017 - 17:43, said:

 

Panties bundled?  And I'm the little girl?

 

How are you better than me?  Height?  Weight?  Income?  Come on salty, list something.  Awfully self centered of you to assume I was posting about you, really I don'f find you that relevant.  But as a wiser man than me recently said, if the shoe fits....

 

Edit; What's with the angst, Clickz is the one that said it, I just interpreted it for the masses.

 

In tanks, I'm better than you. It's a fact. YOUR 'opinion' lacks any actual base.

 

Then again, you've not played the game in over 2 months, which speaks volumes. 

 

You've been weighed, you've been measured, and you've been found wanting.   Play the game again... you lack any credibility to "translate" a damn thing. 



StiffWind #52 Posted Aug 28 2017 - 00:09

    Sergeant

  • -Players-
  • 8524 battles
  • 128
  • Member since:
    03-15-2017

View PostShortcult, on Aug 27 2017 - 19:35, said:

 

Like the man sayz, its a skill counter.  So what kind of players do you suppose that means are attracted to it?

 

Exactly.  I've played arty now and then, just to see for myself what it was all about.  It's actually kinda boring, until you're spotted.  Then it gets interesting.

 

T



Clickez4Fun #53 Posted Aug 28 2017 - 02:29

    Major

  • Players
  • 28842 battles
  • 2,114
  • [A-F] A-F
  • Member since:
    04-21-2011

View PostShortcult, on Aug 27 2017 - 14:43, said:

...

 

Edit; What's with the angst, Clickz is the one that said it, I just interpreted it for the masses.

 

You interpreted my post to fit your agenda, nothing more. WG is here to make money!! Making the game skill based, only for the top 1%, cuts a huge chunk of income from their coffers. Or do you believe the top 1% actually pays WG enough to remove arty?

 

Adding a skill balancing mechanic to any game, gives everyone the chance to enjoy themselves. It's in their best interest for profitability. 

 

Ever consider not everyone dreams of being good enough to participate in the eSports arena? A lot of players are playing WoT for entertainment only. Or as the self proclaimed better players call them, the "play 4 funs". I'm retired and like to login, blow tanks up, and when I've had enough, logout. No need to research weak spots, watch tutorial videos, or read guides. It's entertainment for me, not a job.

 

 



HottieHotPants #54 Posted Aug 28 2017 - 04:16

    Sergeant

  • -Players-
  • 5013 battles
  • 172
  • Member since:
    05-31-2016

View PostClickez4Fun, on Aug 27 2017 - 19:29, said:

 

You interpreted my post to fit your agenda, nothing more. WG is here to make money!! Making the game skill based, only for the top 1%, cuts a huge chunk of income from their coffers. Or do you believe the top 1% actually pays WG enough to remove arty?

 

Adding a skill balancing mechanic to any game, gives everyone the chance to enjoy themselves. It's in their best interest for profitability. 

 

Ever consider not everyone dreams of being good enough to participate in the eSports arena? A lot of players are playing WoT for entertainment only. Or as the self proclaimed better players call them, the "play 4 funs". I'm retired and like to login, blow tanks up, and when I've had enough, logout. No need to research weak spots, watch tutorial videos, or read guides. It's entertainment for me, not a job.

 

 

 

Preach It. so true

 

 

View PostShortcult, on Aug 27 2017 - 16:43, said:

 

Panties bundled?  And I'm the little girl?

 

How are you better than me?  Height?  Weight?  Income?  Come on salty, list something.  Awfully self centered of you to assume I was posting about you, really I don'f find you that relevant.  But as a wiser man than me recently said, if the shoe fits....

 

Edit; What's with the angst, Clickz is the one that said it, I just interpreted it for the masses.

 

suc it. spin-doctor babble

HottieHotPants #55 Posted Aug 28 2017 - 04:22

    Sergeant

  • -Players-
  • 5013 battles
  • 172
  • Member since:
    05-31-2016

View PostShortcult, on Aug 27 2017 - 15:24, said:

 

Clickz stated in essence that arty allows players to destroy each other, regardless of skill level.

 

Therefore...

 

Arty exists as a skill counter.

 

Therefore...

 

Players attracted to arty are attracted to countering skill.  That in and of itself implies that players attracted to arty are in fact less skilled and feel they need the counter.  Or consider themselves to be less skilled whether that be the case or not and use the counter as a crutch without making the effort to become skilled.  Or worst yet feel the need to use a skill counter rather than their personal skill set in a game against other players.  There is also the possibility of just lazy (but that would just be me seeing the worst in people).

 

Wait, read, 'attracted' is the pivotal word.

 

this game is for any and everyone that wants to play, not just the holy-anointed ones.

Hurk #56 Posted Aug 28 2017 - 04:24

    Major

  • Players
  • 45111 battles
  • 13,865
  • [KGR] KGR
  • Member since:
    09-30-2012

View PostShortcult, on Aug 27 2017 - 15:40, said:

 

Last line Hurk, think you missed it.  There are obviously a lot of players who play it for different reasons.  Last line stands.

i didnt miss it at all, i simply completely disagree with your assessment. 

bad players do not magically migrate to the most frustrating class in game. the opposite is true. they migrate to the class they have the most success with, regardless of their own failures. thats heavy tanks and armor in general... since armor is the only thing in this game that forgives mistakes and bad play. 

just ask any maus driver. 



Aegis270 #57 Posted Aug 28 2017 - 07:18

    First lieutenant

  • -Players-
  • 10996 battles
  • 914
  • Member since:
    05-25-2014

Artillery is the single biggest mistake WG made when initially developing WoT. No other single mechanic has come close to the amount of hate artillery gets. Bad MM, gold ammo, OP premiums, these all pale in comparison to the sheer amount of artillery hate threads that clogged up this forum. It's slowed down considerably now, since the new form is less irritating, but back in the day you could expect an average of one to two active anti-artillery threads per day. More if something actually happened on that front. 

 

The mechanic itself is inherently flawed. The worst feeling you can inspire in a player is the feeling that they were cheated. That the reason they suffered a negative outcome was entirely out of their control and that their input didn't really matter. Especially when this outcome is not shared unilaterally by all players. Artillery was the quintessential mechanic that inspired this feeling. Back in it's one shot kill days, you could suddenly and without warning be removed from the game entirely by someone you can't see or fight back against. Even now, if you get focused down by artillery there really isn't anything you can actually do about it. The only counter-play is to glue yourself to artillery cover and not move. This is not fun or engaging for the victim in any way. You're effectively encouraged to play more passively or risk being arbitrarily removed from the game. 

 

Artillery, as it was originally envisioned, was supposed to assist in dislodging tanks from powerful positions and speeding up the game. The biggest problem with this, is that there's a player in the artillery who's expecting a reward for their efforts, and there's a victim that wants a fair chance to avoid artillery. These two cannot be balanced against each other. Give good players a fair chance to avoid artillery without giving up their positions entirely, and artillery players will complain about their lack of effectiveness. Don't give them the chance, and the victims will complain that they're really not a whole lot they can do to avoid artillery. 

 

WG then decided that, to artificially limit this effectiveness, they'd slap an absurd amount of RNG into the mix to make it less reliable. This only served to anger both sides more. Now, if an artillery shell hits a tank, it's not player skill or tactical awareness that's credited, but luck. And if you have a run of bad luck, that artillery piece might as well not exist. Anywhere it lands along the spectrum, someone, somewhere is pissed off at the outcome. That's terrible game design 101. 

 

What they should have done, is what a certain other Russian developed tank game did. In that game, artillery is not player controlled. You call it in on a certain area of the map, and then any enemy tanks get a warning that artillery is incoming. They're left with a choice. Hold the position and risk damage from artillery, or fall back and cede the ground to the enemy. This gives the victim counter play opportunities. Now, if they really want to avoid all artillery, they totally can. Additionally, artillery is not nearly as powerful as it is in this game. Due to the lack of healthbars, you don't tend to take any permanent damage from artillery strikes unless you're unlucky enough to suffer a direct hit. The damage is (nearly) 100% repairable, and the victim can choose to remain aggressive without a sizable risk of blowing up. 

 

Not that I'm claiming that game is in any way better than this one. They have their own massive list of problems, and I'm not getting into that. But their take on artillery is probably the only fair way to do it. The other tank game attempted to introduce it as a playable class, only to rework it a bunch of times and eventually can the whole class. The inevitable truth of the matter is that taking a game based around health management, and adding in a mechanic that allows players to reduce other players health in a way they cannot reasonably defend against, is never a good idea.



Clickez4Fun #58 Posted Aug 28 2017 - 07:59

    Major

  • Players
  • 28842 battles
  • 2,114
  • [A-F] A-F
  • Member since:
    04-21-2011

You have 4 available options:

 

1) Play the other game you describe. Oh wait, there's nobody in queue to play against. 

 

2) Go play WoT Blitz, an arty free game by the same game developers...WG. Windows 10 compatible. 

 

3) Continue to play WoT as it is designed and continues to evolve.

 

4) Develop and produce your own game, with the game mechanics you deem appropriate. 

 

All are available to everyone that can't adapt or won't adapt to the mechanics of WoT.



OrnmiIler #59 Posted Aug 28 2017 - 11:22

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 37969 battles
  • 597
  • Member since:
    06-01-2013

View PostClickez4Fun, on Aug 27 2017 - 17:34, said:

 

 

Those that spend money on WG games is my guess. A HUGE reason it will never be removed.

 

+1

Those extra hard to come by NA dollars, spent herein, better secured everyone’s WoT account for the long term.

That’s why the miserable anti-SPG change everything cult is really, at the very core, the most hypocritical and cancerous element, A thru Z, within entire WoT community!



Wtornado #60 Posted Aug 28 2017 - 12:28

    Captain

  • Players
  • 29530 battles
  • 1,238
  • Member since:
    04-24-2011

View PostOldFrog75, on Aug 27 2017 - 13:19, said:

I'm still pretty new (6 months) so from my perspective, arty has always been part of the game.  It used to drive me bonkers when I started so I bought a little tier III SU-26 to fool around with so I could better understand how they work.

 

Anyway, so many people complain about arty in the Forums I'm now wondering when it was introduced and why?  If the game was fine without it, why did WG/WoT put it in?  :popcorn:

 

Its a Russian thing we in the West cannot grasp the importance of it.




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users