Jump to content


Artillery absolutely integral to game-quit whining


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

9999bc #21 Posted Dec 31 2017 - 17:40

    First lieutenant

  • -Players-
  • 35088 battles
  • 618
  • Member since:
    07-01-2014

OP is right.

1. First big arty change, patch 8.6, caused big player loss

2. Second big arty change, patch 9.18, caused big player loss

 

Keeping whining about arty, and we'll see another big arty change that will kill NA server.

None of the big arty changes caused players to stay; the opposite happened. This tells you arty has positive impact on player bases. You nerf arty, you lose players!

 

Feel free to say otherwise if you have numbers to back you.



Duqe #22 Posted Dec 31 2017 - 17:44

    Major

  • Players
  • 26112 battles
  • 8,455
  • [BERT] BERT
  • Member since:
    06-19-2011

View Post9999bc, on Dec 31 2017 - 17:40, said:

OP is right.

1. First big arty change, patch 8.6, caused big player loss

2. Second big arty change, patch 9.18, caused big player loss

 

Keeping whining about arty, and we'll see another big arty change that will kill NA server.

None of the big arty changes caused players to stay; the opposite happened. This tells you arty has positive impact on player bases. You nerf arty, you lose players!

 

Feel free to say otherwise if you have numbers to back you.

 

Is the big player loss how the community has been pretty level over the last 4 years?

 

Because you're completely making up stuff at this point.



Shortcult #23 Posted Dec 31 2017 - 17:46

    Major

  • Players
  • 36594 battles
  • 5,145
  • Member since:
    08-21-2012

Pure opinion OP.

 

Looks more like a defense for your ego.  If your ego needs defending, what is the underlying undesirability?

 

No class in the game is absolutely required.  

 

Arty free matches happen.  Apologists will tell you they are bore fests.  I have a different opinion, fix em and flank em becomes an option and makes for a much more dynamic enjoyable game.  Again, opinion.

 

Heavy free matches happen, does then nobody brawl?

 

Light free matches happen, does no one light?

 

TD free matches happen, are corridors safe?

 

I cannot remember a medium free match, proly has happened but just doesn't stick in my mind.  But would the match just automatically end in a draw if there were no mediums?

 

Arty is a counter to skill.  It opens the game up to a wider audience.  As an income source, well done WG.  But your not being honest with yourself if you think it is anything more than that.



Mikosah #24 Posted Dec 31 2017 - 17:47

    Major

  • Players
  • 17582 battles
  • 3,982
  • Member since:
    01-24-2013

The indirect fire gimmick was originally conceived of with the idea that it might punish campers, but what WG completely neglected at the time is that the worst cases of camping were done way in the back with abundant camo. These guys were always the last ones to get spotted, and therefore the last ones to get shelled. Arty would hardly punish them at all compared to how much it focused on the active players up front. Besides this, the concept of an indirect weapon that can lob shells over solid cover and outside of render range is anathema to all the rules of positioning, movement, terrain use, and line-of-sight combat that are the backbone of the game for everyone else. I called it a gimmick for a reason, because that's all it ever was. And not even just a cute, fun, or interesting gimmick. The other kind, a needless cancer that causes nothing but problems.



9999bc #25 Posted Dec 31 2017 - 17:51

    First lieutenant

  • -Players-
  • 35088 battles
  • 618
  • Member since:
    07-01-2014

View PostDuqe, on Dec 31 2017 - 17:44, said:

 

Is the big player loss how the community has been pretty level over the last 4 years?

 

Because you're completely making up stuff at this point.

You have no numbers to back your claim, yet you are quick to say other people are making stuff up. Get numbers before you speak.

http://wot-news.com/...rver/us/norm/en

See April 2017, the day 9.18 was released.

People  come back for specials and events; they will also come back if WG revert nerf on arty.



Duqe #26 Posted Dec 31 2017 - 17:54

    Major

  • Players
  • 26112 battles
  • 8,455
  • [BERT] BERT
  • Member since:
    06-19-2011

View Post9999bc, on Dec 31 2017 - 17:51, said:

You have no numbers to back your claim, yet you are quick to say other people are making stuff up. Get numbers before you speak.

http://wot-news.com/...rver/us/norm/en

See April 2017, the day 9.18 was released.

People  come back for specials and events; they will also come back if WG revert nerf on arty.

 

People left because so many of them hated the stun mechanic, not because artillery got "nerfed".

 

They got objectively buffed, instead of one-shot killing, they became a griefing tool like never before, and now they can fire into brawls because the likelihood of high damage to their own teammates has way decreased. Team damage by artillery isn't only more common now, it's abundant.

 

That's why people leave, because artillery keeps becoming more of an obstacle to fun.

 

If you rubbed your 1.5 brain cells together sometime, you might be able to see the obvious.



fatkiddown #27 Posted Dec 31 2017 - 17:55

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 24627 battles
  • 2,641
  • Member since:
    07-06-2010
tl;dr?

Duqe #28 Posted Dec 31 2017 - 17:56

    Major

  • Players
  • 26112 battles
  • 8,455
  • [BERT] BERT
  • Member since:
    06-19-2011

View Postfatkiddown, on Dec 31 2017 - 17:55, said:

tl;dr?

 

No need to read, it's a post defending artillery, so you know it's incoherent, baby-ish mouth-spittle from the start.

9999bc #29 Posted Dec 31 2017 - 18:00

    First lieutenant

  • -Players-
  • 35088 battles
  • 618
  • Member since:
    07-01-2014

View PostDuqe, on Dec 31 2017 - 17:54, said:

 

People left because so many of them hated the stun mechanic, not because artillery got "nerfed".

 

They got objectively buffed, instead of one-shot killing, they became a griefing tool like never before, and now they can fire into brawls because the likelihood of high damage to their own teammates has way decreased. Team damage by artillery isn't only more common now, it's abundant.

 

That's why people leave, because artillery keeps becoming more of an obstacle to fun.

You agree with my point then: you mess with arty, you lose players.

Arty was fine before the patch, but WG devs were misled by arty whiners and messed with arty. They are regretting it ( if you read latest Dev Q&A).



Duqe #30 Posted Dec 31 2017 - 18:01

    Major

  • Players
  • 26112 battles
  • 8,455
  • [BERT] BERT
  • Member since:
    06-19-2011

View Post9999bc, on Dec 31 2017 - 18:00, said:

You agree with my point then: you mess with arty, you lose players.

Arty was fine before the patch, but WG devs were misled by arty whiners and messed with arty. They are regretting it ( if you read latest Dev Q&A).

 

No, I don't. Because since then the majority have returned despite that.

 

Artillery wasn't fine before the patch, it was worse after. If they touch it up again I hope they remove the class altogether, the only possible fix.

 

Hopefully without reimbursing credits or XP.



Littleholyterror #31 Posted Dec 31 2017 - 18:04

    Corporal

  • -Players-
  • 11097 battles
  • 98
  • [-P-] -P-
  • Member since:
    01-22-2016
One weekend per month of being arty free....makes me wonder if the amount of players online would go up to enjoy the game for those two days?

BigTomka #32 Posted Dec 31 2017 - 18:15

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 56474 battles
  • 716
  • Member since:
    03-05-2011

View Post9999bc, on Dec 31 2017 - 10:40, said:

OP is right.

1. First big arty change, patch 8.6, caused big player loss

2. Second big arty change, patch 9.18, caused big player loss

 

Keeping whining about arty, and we'll see another big arty change that will kill NA server.

None of the big arty changes caused players to stay; the opposite happened. This tells you arty has positive impact on player bases. You nerf arty, you lose players!

 

Feel free to say otherwise if you have numbers to back you.

+1



Duqe #33 Posted Dec 31 2017 - 18:16

    Major

  • Players
  • 26112 battles
  • 8,455
  • [BERT] BERT
  • Member since:
    06-19-2011

View PostT__J, on Dec 31 2017 - 18:15, said:

+1

 

I see you, too, like to drink the Kool-Aid and believe anything without evidence.

 

Some bearded man would love to get you in touch with 72 virgins.



Whistling_Death_ #34 Posted Dec 31 2017 - 18:19

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 59369 battles
  • 2,606
  • [13-AD] 13-AD
  • Member since:
    11-09-2014

View Post_PePe_, on Dec 31 2017 - 10:56, said:

The funnest games I've played have been arty free and I cuss the rest.   

 

Without artillery, battles become World of Brawling Heavy Tanks.

 

B-O-R-I-N-G.



Duqe #35 Posted Dec 31 2017 - 18:20

    Major

  • Players
  • 26112 battles
  • 8,455
  • [BERT] BERT
  • Member since:
    06-19-2011

View PostWhistling_Death_, on Dec 31 2017 - 18:19, said:

 

Without artillery, battles become World of Brawling Heavy Tanks.

 

B-O-R-I-N-G.

 

Yeah, because only heavy tanks and artillery play the game.

 

What would actually happen is that mediums and lights would be allowed to get around without fear of being death slapped for most of their health, then having their superior gun handling and mobility taken away from them for 10-15 seconds.



Littleholyterror #36 Posted Dec 31 2017 - 18:23

    Corporal

  • -Players-
  • 11097 battles
  • 98
  • [-P-] -P-
  • Member since:
    01-22-2016

Just curious, I wonder what the online numbers would be if we had an arty free weekend once a month? Would the numbers increase for those two days with people coming back online

for the event? Just curious.....



Duqe #37 Posted Dec 31 2017 - 18:23

    Major

  • Players
  • 26112 battles
  • 8,455
  • [BERT] BERT
  • Member since:
    06-19-2011

View PostLittleholyterror, on Dec 31 2017 - 18:23, said:

Just curious, I wonder what the online numbers would be if we had an arty free weekend once a month? Would the numbers increase for those two days with people coming back online

for the event? Just curious.....

 

Wargaming already knows artillery hurts the game, but like many companies such as EA they favour short-term profit over long-term loyalty.

P_A_N_Z_E_R #38 Posted Dec 31 2017 - 18:25

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 47923 battles
  • 338
  • [CARYU] CARYU
  • Member since:
    05-30-2013

View Postsksmith, on Dec 31 2017 - 16:47, said:

I've said this before, and the artillery whining continues unabated.  Without artilery, WoT would be an utterly boring, one-dimensional game that would quickly get stale and die.  Artillery must stay in the game.

 

I'll simplify a bit, but the basic structure of a WoT battle is: there are three vehicle classes: artillery, scouts, and fighters (at vehicles, mediums, and heavies).  Those three have different functions, and the interaction between them creates a team and not just individual game.  What are the roles of the three classes?

 

Scouts: first, win the scout fight-defeat enemy scouts, or drive them into fighters (where they will lose being light tanks against meds and heavies).  After this is accomplished, zip forward, and either spot enemy fighters, or enemy artillery (and destroy it, or light it up for friendly artillery). Scouts have secondary purposes (light up enemy fighters, and participate in the direct firefight as flankers), but they are primarily there to win the first phase of the battle.  Winning or losing that first phase shapes the entire rest of the battle (it may not win it or lose it, but it shapes it).

 

Artillery; obviously shoot at enemy fighters and break deadlocks (there's nothign wrong with shooting at scouts, but scouts should be moving and thus are more difficult to hit).

 

Fighters: though you don't want to admit it, fighters have the least interesting role in the battle-choose an avenue of approach, drive forward, and shoot at what you see.  If you just guess a particular avenue of approach, as a general rule, you will win or lose based on how the enemy guessed (3 v 3 will be roughly a draw: 1 v 3 should be a win for the 3, and so on).  Particularly for slow heavies: your one important decision is made at the beginning of the battle (go left, go center, or go right?).  When I first started playing, I ground in order to get the KV-1.  When I got it, I was utterly bored-rumble forward for 4 minutes, then shoot basically straight ahead?  How is this fun?

Note that if your scouts have won their battle, and you take the time to use the information they provided to make your decision (left, center, or right), you make an informed decision (set up a 3 v 1 rather than a 1 v 3, and win).  That doesn't often happen (people just tend to rumble forward whereever they want, without looking at the minimap to aid in their decisions), but in a good team game, fighters would use scouts' information to shape their decisions.

 

The point of all this is with the three classes, WoT is a team game, in which each individual tank is dependent on other tanks, and other classes, for victory.  If scouts just fight a scout fight (2 v 2, or 3 v 3) it is generally an irrelevant draw between weaker, light tanks.  They need a reason to fight that scout fight-to win and provide information to artillery (and fighters).  Without it, they are just little, weak, fast tanks.  Spotting for artillery, and spotting for fighters, and breaking through to hunt artillery, has to be important to justify their existence.

  And artillery has to be powerful-it has to have the ability to impact the frontline battle-otherwise scouts have no reason to hunt them down, and frontline battles just devolve into a 3 v 3 sniping exercise (peak around rock, shoot, back up.  Repeat).

  The fighters, while the heart of the game, need those other classes in order to have an interesting battle experience.  We have all had battles where that particular chokepoint is nothing but mediums/heavies.  Peak over the ridge (or around the rock), shoot, backup.  There are enough fighters that it is impossible to flank, and the armor is strong and equal enough that each shot does a bit (say, 25%) of damage.  Just 15 minutes of hunt and peck.  It is utterly uninteresting.  I can't remember the names of the maps, but several choke points are: the east edge of the map with a huge mountain with the lighthouse-often lights drive up it for sighting purposes, and 3-4 tanks peak around the east side (with the cliff just east of that).  The central ridgelines on Prokhorovka and the fisherman's village.  The east avenue on the arctic map.  Just a clump of tanks peaking around the corners to get a quick shot off.  Utterly boring.

 

Artillery has to be in it-otherwise there is no team, or systemic, condition that impacts the whole battlefield.  Scouts have to be in it, in order to find enemy artillery and free up your own artillery to break the deadlock.  

 

If there is a complaint to be made, it is about the map design.  Too many maps are really pretty poor, with not many avenues of approach (and thus limited opportuniites for flanking, scout breakthroughs, etc).  Think of all the maps with a central ridge that results in a boring deadlock (Prokhorovka is the worst, but the fisherman's village is another one).  Maps should be designed with multiple independent avenues of approach-so that maneuver decisions make a difference (down this valley or the other one?  If I make the wrong choice, I might be flanked-and I can't get back to the other avenue easily).  One map that is now out of rotation (tundra, or northwest, or something-it had logging camps on a hilly map) had excellent maneuver choices.  Several maps have as few as three avenues of approach (I think Prokhorovka realistically has two-the field in the west, and the town/hill in the east).  Horrible design.  A map with 4+ independent avenues of approach is what makes a good game.

 

But a game without artillery (and thus, for all intents and purposes, without a meaningful use for scouts) would be a boring, deadlocked, stagnant game.  I'd say the ideal vehicle count would be

3 artilery, 3 scouts, and 9 of mediums/heavies/at guns.  

 

 

Agree.

Guido1212 #39 Posted Dec 31 2017 - 18:29

    Major

  • Players
  • 76956 battles
  • 7,987
  • [CARTL] CARTL
  • Member since:
    06-11-2011

View Postsksmith, on Dec 31 2017 - 15:47, said:

I've said this before, and the artillery whining continues unabated.  Without artilery, WoT would be an utterly boring, one-dimensional game that would quickly get stale and die.  Artillery must stay in the game.

 

I'll simplify a bit, but the basic structure of a WoT battle is: there are three vehicle classes: artillery, scouts, and fighters (at vehicles, mediums, and heavies).  Those three have different functions, and the interaction between them creates a team and not just individual game.  What are the roles of the three classes?

 

Scouts: first, win the scout fight-defeat enemy scouts, or drive them into fighters (where they will lose being light tanks against meds and heavies).  After this is accomplished, zip forward, and either spot enemy fighters, or enemy artillery (and destroy it, or light it up for friendly artillery). Scouts have secondary purposes (light up enemy fighters, and participate in the direct firefight as flankers), but they are primarily there to win the first phase of the battle.  Winning or losing that first phase shapes the entire rest of the battle (it may not win it or lose it, but it shapes it).

 

Artillery; obviously shoot at enemy fighters and break deadlocks (there's nothign wrong with shooting at scouts, but scouts should be moving and thus are more difficult to hit).

 

Fighters: though you don't want to admit it, fighters have the least interesting role in the battle-choose an avenue of approach, drive forward, and shoot at what you see.  If you just guess a particular avenue of approach, as a general rule, you will win or lose based on how the enemy guessed (3 v 3 will be roughly a draw: 1 v 3 should be a win for the 3, and so on).  Particularly for slow heavies: your one important decision is made at the beginning of the battle (go left, go center, or go right?).  When I first started playing, I ground in order to get the KV-1.  When I got it, I was utterly bored-rumble forward for 4 minutes, then shoot basically straight ahead?  How is this fun?

Note that if your scouts have won their battle, and you take the time to use the information they provided to make your decision (left, center, or right), you make an informed decision (set up a 3 v 1 rather than a 1 v 3, and win).  That doesn't often happen (people just tend to rumble forward whereever they want, without looking at the minimap to aid in their decisions), but in a good team game, fighters would use scouts' information to shape their decisions.

 

The point of all this is with the three classes, WoT is a team game, in which each individual tank is dependent on other tanks, and other classes, for victory.  If scouts just fight a scout fight (2 v 2, or 3 v 3) it is generally an irrelevant draw between weaker, light tanks.  They need a reason to fight that scout fight-to win and provide information to artillery (and fighters).  Without it, they are just little, weak, fast tanks.  Spotting for artillery, and spotting for fighters, and breaking through to hunt artillery, has to be important to justify their existence.

  And artillery has to be powerful-it has to have the ability to impact the frontline battle-otherwise scouts have no reason to hunt them down, and frontline battles just devolve into a 3 v 3 sniping exercise (peak around rock, shoot, back up.  Repeat).

  The fighters, while the heart of the game, need those other classes in order to have an interesting battle experience.  We have all had battles where that particular chokepoint is nothing but mediums/heavies.  Peak over the ridge (or around the rock), shoot, backup.  There are enough fighters that it is impossible to flank, and the armor is strong and equal enough that each shot does a bit (say, 25%) of damage.  Just 15 minutes of hunt and peck.  It is utterly uninteresting.  I can't remember the names of the maps, but several choke points are: the east edge of the map with a huge mountain with the lighthouse-often lights drive up it for sighting purposes, and 3-4 tanks peak around the east side (with the cliff just east of that).  The central ridgelines on Prokhorovka and the fisherman's village.  The east avenue on the arctic map.  Just a clump of tanks peaking around the corners to get a quick shot off.  Utterly boring.

 

Artillery has to be in it-otherwise there is no team, or systemic, condition that impacts the whole battlefield.  Scouts have to be in it, in order to find enemy artillery and free up your own artillery to break the deadlock.  

 

If there is a complaint to be made, it is about the map design.  Too many maps are really pretty poor, with not many avenues of approach (and thus limited opportuniites for flanking, scout breakthroughs, etc).  Think of all the maps with a central ridge that results in a boring deadlock (Prokhorovka is the worst, but the fisherman's village is another one).  Maps should be designed with multiple independent avenues of approach-so that maneuver decisions make a difference (down this valley or the other one?  If I make the wrong choice, I might be flanked-and I can't get back to the other avenue easily).  One map that is now out of rotation (tundra, or northwest, or something-it had logging camps on a hilly map) had excellent maneuver choices.  Several maps have as few as three avenues of approach (I think Prokhorovka realistically has two-the field in the west, and the town/hill in the east).  Horrible design.  A map with 4+ independent avenues of approach is what makes a good game.

 

But a game without artillery (and thus, for all intents and purposes, without a meaningful use for scouts) would be a boring, deadlocked, stagnant game.  I'd say the ideal vehicle count would be

3 artilery, 3 scouts, and 9 of mediums/heavies/at guns.  

 

 

You just described the WG developers intentions for their game.

 

It is completely and utterly incorrect.  It's not how the game is played or enjoyed.  It's also irrelevant (and horribly flawed) in regards to PvP game play and game balance.



Duqe #40 Posted Dec 31 2017 - 18:29

    Major

  • Players
  • 26112 battles
  • 8,455
  • [BERT] BERT
  • Member since:
    06-19-2011

View PostP_A_N_Z_E_R, on Dec 31 2017 - 18:25, said:

 

Agree.

 

Another cow blindly walks into the slaughterhouse.




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users