Jump to content


Which arty is best arty?

arty

  • Please log in to reply
131 replies to this topic

R_Razor #121 Posted Dec 13 2017 - 00:31

    Captain

  • Players
  • 8016 battles
  • 1,686
  • [_DDM] _DDM
  • Member since:
    08-20-2013

View PostBillT, on Dec 12 2017 - 18:26, said:

 

The first statement is true -- arty can shoot at targets that can't shoot back.  That makes it different, as does its (relatively) high angle fire.  But how does that lead to your second claim, that it's a fault?

 

All classes have differences. Light tanks get amazing mobility and are the only class that keeps its camouflage when moving.  Is that a fault?  How about the fact that a Tier 10 light gets triple the hit points of a Tier 10 SPG, despite being smaller and no better armored?   Autoloaders get clips, which no other tanks get, allowing them to out-DPM any enemy in the short term.  Is that broken?  The MM doesn't even try to balance the number of autoloaders on each side, nor limit one per platoon.

 

 

Again, you assume "different" means "broken".  I honestly don't get that.

 

Yes, the mechanics of arty in WOT are crazy unrealistic.  But is it really worse than any other class?  You telepathically know where every tank on your team is and you can instantly see everything they spot?  Your gunner doesn't have to adjust his aim for range, ammo type, or crosswinds?   Broken modules and dead crewman are instantly fixed with the press of a button?  You can roll the tank over and just keep driving? 

 

Compared to all that, SPG mechanics aren't so bad. Don't fixate on the fact that playing a WOT SPG doesn't simulate how real arty works; notice how it simulates the effect of real arty on a battlefield.  It doesn't really do all that much damage, but it confuses the enemy and even makes them cower. It breaks up formations.  It can deny an important landmark.  It can fire blind with good effect.  It covers a wide area.   Arty may be WOT's greatest success at simulating a battlefield, and you can judge that from the complaints -- in real war everyone hates artillery, too, even their own, and for exactly the same reasons. "I can't shoot back!  They're a bunch of cowards!  There's no skill!  My own arty sometimes hits me!"

 

When a successful game is based on your ability to do damage and create wins, and you provide a class with the ability to do damage with little to no capability of being damaged you insert a broken mechanic.

 

Arty doesn't do a good job in this game of simulating arty effects, if it did it would require many shots to track / stun enemy tanks. That is my point. And I'm well versed in what arty does to morale and individual frame of mind having been on the receiving end of it more than I'd care to contemplate. 


Edited by R_Razor, Dec 13 2017 - 01:03.


sergeantmine09 #122 Posted Dec 13 2017 - 00:35

    First lieutenant

  • -Players-
  • 12272 battles
  • 781
  • [D-DAY] D-DAY
  • Member since:
    08-21-2014

View PostR_Razor, on Dec 12 2017 - 23:05, said:

 

You lack basic reading comprehension skills. I have started playing arty recently and while I do find it distasteful, I don't think it needs to be removed or even changed. What it needs for for pro-arty trolls to stop assuming that just because you find fault with an aspect of the class you must hate it or want to gone. When I was much newer to the game I did, now I don't. A sign of intelligence is the ability to modify ones beliefs based on real experience. Some of you need to try that some time. 

Nothing he, or you for that matter, have said changes the fact that Arty as a class has the ability, to a far greater extent than any other class, to do damage without having to worry about what the class is shooting at getting to do damage in return. That's a fault, period. 

 

Counter-Battery is a helluva drug



BillT #123 Posted Dec 13 2017 - 00:37

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 26420 battles
  • 3,493
  • [FADES] FADES
  • Member since:
    08-13-2010

View PostMarkd73, on Dec 12 2017 - 17:48, said:

 

The challenge is that this game is an arcade shooter - tanks with HP, instant healing of dead crews, etc. It looks (on the surface) to be associated somewhat with the WW2 era but many of the vehicles are pre and post WW2, or in a lot of cases blueprints.

 

If you want something closer to an actual WW2 era there are other games to choose from.

 

I think you actually have it backwards. People who complain about arty don't really want realism, they want an arcade shooter where, if they push the right buttons at the right time, they are guaranteed to win.  They see arty as unfair or "noncompetitive" because it throws a monkey wrench into that.   They can be in a perfect situation; one-on-one against a lighter enemy tank with less health, certain that they can kill him with two shots before he can do serious damage to them, certain he can't get away and he has no support... and it can all be ruined by a surprise arty shot that leaves them tracked and stunned with low health.  

 

That is like real war -- surprises happen all the time and nothing ever goes according to plan.  Arty haters don't want that kind of realism, they want unrealistic predictability..  They just disguise it be talking about the mechanics, as if WOT is supposed to be a tank-driving simulator.



sergeantmine09 #124 Posted Dec 13 2017 - 00:42

    First lieutenant

  • -Players-
  • 12272 battles
  • 781
  • [D-DAY] D-DAY
  • Member since:
    08-21-2014

View PostBillT, on Dec 13 2017 - 00:37, said:

 

I think you actually have it backwards. People who complain about arty don't really want realism, they want an arcade shooter where, if they push the right buttons at the right time, they are guaranteed to win.  They see arty as unfair or "noncompetitive" because it throws a monkey wrench into that.   They can be in a perfect situation; one-on-one against a lighter enemy tank with less health, certain that they can kill him with two shots before he can do serious damage to them, certain he can't get away and he has no support... and it can all be ruined by a surprise arty shot that leaves them tracked and stunned with low health.  

 

That is like real war -- surprises happen all the time and nothing ever goes according to plan.  Arty haters don't want that kind of realism, they want unrealistic predictability..  They just disguise it be talking about the mechanics, as if WOT is supposed to be a tank-driving simulator.

 

I agree with this statement, and to add to it, I believe the players with lower stats that complain about arty just want a safe padding to terrible choices. Arty can capitalize off of terrible decisions. Lets say a Hellcat doesn't correctly use bush concealment and gets spotted, artillery takes that out of the game in a few seconds. If a heavy chooses to expose themselves and fail to recognize the mistake, arty can peck away at its health(or if it was old arty just send it back to the garage in one shot XD). Good players want predictability, Bad players want the game to be bubblewrapped and to compensate for their mistakes 

R_Razor #125 Posted Dec 13 2017 - 01:05

    Captain

  • Players
  • 8016 battles
  • 1,686
  • [_DDM] _DDM
  • Member since:
    08-20-2013

View Postsergeantmine09, on Dec 12 2017 - 18:35, said:

 

Counter-Battery is a helluva drug

 

And you would have a point if a general position were revealed when arty fires..........since it's not, you have no point, again. 

BillT #126 Posted Dec 13 2017 - 01:08

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 26420 battles
  • 3,493
  • [FADES] FADES
  • Member since:
    08-13-2010

View PostR_Razor, on Dec 12 2017 - 18:31, said:

When a successful game is based on your ability to do damage and create wins, and you provide a class with the ability to do damage with little to know capability of being damaged you insert a broken mechanic.

 

 

If that's your concern, WOT has a much bigger problem: the fourteen other players on your team who can lose the match for you despite your ability to do damage and create wins.  Compared to that, arty is a minor nuisance.

 

You misunderstand WOT's fundamental premise -- which I admit, may be flawed.  It's a team game, 15 v 15, where individual skill does not decide who wins, but only tilts the scales a little. This is screwed up because it's played by individuals and they have no control over, or investment in, the temporary teams the MM puts together. It is, and always has been, what it is.

 

If you think that playing arty gives a player some kind of advantage in the game, you'll learn that you're mistaken.   Most players have a worse win rate in SPGs than they do in other classes -- me, as an example -- because SPGs can't often carry a match.   If your team falls apart and you're in a heavy or medium, you might be able to salvage the game and win a Kolobanov's Medal by killing the last five enemy by yourself.  You're never going to do that in an SPG.  Nor do you earn more credits on average or get more experience than you would in other classes.  Half of all the damage you do gets credited to the guy who spotted for you, and stun damage depends on your teammates.  Track it for yourself and see how often arty is at the top of the team in either XP or damage done, and you'll find it's a lot less than for other classes. 

View PostR_Razor, on Dec 12 2017 - 18:31, said:

Arty doesn't do a good job in this game of simulating arty effects, if it did it would require many shots to track / stun enemy tanks.

 

By that reasoning, every other class of tanks also does a bad job of simulating tank effects, because if they did it would require only one penetration to kill an enemy tank.

 

The SPG mechanics are a reasonable effort to include artillery in a game about 30 tanks trapped on a square mile of land in a fog that limits visibility to 500 meters.  Yeah, they ought to be entire batteries firing from miles away.  And your 15 tanks should all be of the same nation and type, because they're one company.  Axis and allies on the same team, that's crazy talk!  One player should be appointed the CO at the start of the match and everyone else has to obey his orders and stay in formation.  A battle should take 2-4 hours and nobody would ever drive into town because of the infantry.


You're willing to accept all these other ridiculous compromise mechanics for the sake of having a game, so I honestly can't understand why you draw the line at artillery and say it alone is "broken".  It seems irrational to me. 



R_Razor #127 Posted Dec 13 2017 - 01:21

    Captain

  • Players
  • 8016 battles
  • 1,686
  • [_DDM] _DDM
  • Member since:
    08-20-2013

View PostBillT, on Dec 12 2017 - 19:08, said:

 

If that's your concern, WOT has a much bigger problem: the fourteen other players on your team who can lose the match for you despite your ability to do damage and create wins.  Compared to that, arty is a minor nuisance.

 

You misunderstand WOT's fundamental premise -- which I admit, may be flawed.  It's a team game, 15 v 15, where individual skill does not decide who wins, but only tilts the scales a little. This is screwed up because it's played by individuals and they have no control over, or investment in, the temporary teams the MM puts together. It is, and always has been, what it is.

 

If you think that playing arty gives a player some kind of advantage in the game, you'll learn that you're mistaken.   Most players have a worse win rate in SPGs than they do in other classes -- me, as an example -- because SPGs can't often carry a match.   If your team falls apart and you're in a heavy or medium, you might be able to salvage the game and win a Kolobanov's Medal by killing the last five enemy by yourself.  You're never going to do that in an SPG.  Nor do you earn more credits on average or get more experience than you would in other classes.  Half of all the damage you do gets credited to the guy who spotted for you, and stun damage depends on your teammates.  Track it for yourself and see how often arty is at the top of the team in either XP or damage done, and you'll find it's a lot less than for other classes. 

 

By that reasoning, every other class of tanks also does a bad job of simulating tank effects, because if they did it would require only one penetration to kill an enemy tank.

 

The SPG mechanics are a reasonable effort to include artillery in a game about 30 tanks trapped on a square mile of land in a fog that limits visibility to 500 meters.  Yeah, they ought to be entire batteries firing from miles away.  And your 15 tanks should all be of the same nation and type, because they're one company.  Axis and allies on the same team, that's crazy talk!  One player should be appointed the CO at the start of the match and everyone else has to obey his orders and stay in formation.  A battle should take 2-4 hours and nobody would ever drive into town because of the infantry.


You're willing to accept all these other ridiculous compromise mechanics for the sake of having a game, so I honestly can't understand why you draw the line at artillery and say it alone is "broken".  It seems irrational to me. 

 

The bold I agree with.

 

The underlined I don't, precisely because, and I've said this several times already, of the 5 classes in the game, only ONE gets to cause damage without significant fear of retribution, only ONE gets to completely ignore the mechanics all 4 other classes have to follow in order to deal damage. 



Sgt__Guffy #128 Posted Dec 13 2017 - 01:38

    Captain

  • -Players-
  • 3160 battles
  • 1,690
  • Member since:
    04-01-2017

I have read the above exchanges and I would add three points. 

 

First, it is not a broken mechanic, it is a different mechanic. It is necessary because if it were removed from the game by WG then they would...

Second, have to seriously look at the attributes of all vehicles, particularly those with high armour and alpha damage with a view to nerfing them to ensure one vehicle, or class of vehicle will not be likely to dominate the game. Artillery, for all it's criticisms, does not dominate the game.

Third, artillery is heavily dependent of other vehicle classes to reveal targets through the spotting mechanic. If anyone considers that artillery has too much influence on the game then it is the spotting mechanic that is at fault more than artillery per se.

 

Again, you can have this debate until the cows come home, but it does not alter the fact that as with the elephant and the mouse, artillery is in the game to create balance, not ruin balance. I think if it were removed tomorrow there would be a number of vehicles invoking the wrath of players, complaining they were overpowered and dominating the game. Look to what happened to the Hellcat, when every player and his dog had one, because they were overpowered. Balance in a game is a finite thing. Do something to one class and it will sure as God made little apples have an effect on another.

 

Be careful what you wish for.

 

Have fun, lobbing.

 

Guffy.


Edited by Sgt__Guffy, Dec 13 2017 - 01:41.


R_Razor #129 Posted Dec 13 2017 - 03:00

    Captain

  • Players
  • 8016 battles
  • 1,686
  • [_DDM] _DDM
  • Member since:
    08-20-2013

View PostSgt__Guffy, on Dec 12 2017 - 19:38, said:

I have read the above exchanges and I would add three points. 

 

First, it is not a broken mechanic, it is a different mechanic. It is necessary because if it were removed from the game by WG then they would...

Second, have to seriously look at the attributes of all vehicles, particularly those with high armour and alpha damage with a view to nerfing them to ensure one vehicle, or class of vehicle will not be likely to dominate the game. Artillery, for all it's criticisms, does not dominate the game.

Third, artillery is heavily dependent of other vehicle classes to reveal targets through the spotting mechanic. If anyone considers that artillery has too much influence on the game then it is the spotting mechanic that is at fault more than artillery per se.

 

Again, you can have this debate until the cows come home, but it does not alter the fact that as with the elephant and the mouse, artillery is in the game to create balance, not ruin balance. I think if it were removed tomorrow there would be a number of vehicles invoking the wrath of players, complaining they were overpowered and dominating the game. Look to what happened to the Hellcat, when every player and his dog had one, because they were overpowered. Balance in a game is a finite thing. Do something to one class and it will sure as God made little apples have an effect on another.

 

Be careful what you wish for.

 

Have fun, lobbing.

 

Guffy.

 

I'll just point out that nowhere in this thread (or in any other recent thread for that matter) have I said arty needs to be removed. (as far as I can remember anyway)

Sgt__Guffy #130 Posted Dec 13 2017 - 06:17

    Captain

  • -Players-
  • 3160 battles
  • 1,690
  • Member since:
    04-01-2017

View PostR_Razor, on Dec 12 2017 - 20:00, said:

 

I'll just point out that nowhere in this thread (or in any other recent thread for that matter) have I said arty needs to be removed. (as far as I can remember anyway)

 

..but I have. Well, tier 9 and 10 to be precise. :)

Fractured_Raptor #131 Posted Dec 13 2017 - 09:56

    First lieutenant

  • -Players-
  • 18695 battles
  • 826
  • [-RISK] -RISK
  • Member since:
    05-28-2016
The dead one.

Komitadjie #132 Posted Dec 13 2017 - 15:09

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 1635 battles
  • 2,167
  • Member since:
    11-10-2011
Missed my "Counterbattery" badge twice last night by just a couple seconds! Argh! Two of three both times, with the last one dying once to another of our team's arty, and once to an O-I with a crazy long RNG snipe.  This was in the M44, mostly as bottom tier.

I'll get that friggin badge yet!

Edited by Komitadjie, Dec 13 2017 - 15:10.






Also tagged with arty

1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users