Jump to content


Artillery needs to be adjusted

Arty Artillery

  • Please log in to reply
160 replies to this topic

Kenshin2kx #101 Posted Apr 11 2018 - 18:08

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 18111 battles
  • 6,214
  • Member since:
    07-20-2014

View PostEmperorJuliusCaesar, on Apr 11 2018 - 06:46, said:

 

Other than visuals, there's nothing realistic.  The way the shots hit the tanks, the way the knocked out crew can be brought back, the way instant repairs take place.  The number of penetrating shots a tank can take, the spotting system, the camo system(no actual visual camo added, just a number), all the crew skills etc.  Nothing about it is "real", that's because it's not a sim, it's an arcade type tank game. 

Name one thing that makes this game like a simulator.....one thing.  Plenty of people have tried "other tank game" that has a sim mode and it's nothing like this at all. 

The physics patch was more to make the game seem not completely stupidly game like, tanks floating down and landing right side up and blowing up, that was too fake.  That was them learning how to make a game etc, that had nothing to do with trying to make it a "hybrid game" or they would advertise it as such, and they DO NOT. 

 

<Kenshin2kx>  What you just describe IS the very motive I've been stressing in terms of an ongoing recognition and desire for a balance between realism and the draw of arcade.  

 

You can refute it all you want, but if they wanted a "hybrid game", and thought it was better, they would market it as such. 

 

<Kenshin2kx>  Such exists now, as you've just reinforced by compatible description (if biased descriptively) that WG IS making the game less fake ... so yes, apparently,  'they' thought it was better ... your point?

 

Their improvements aren't going towards a sim type game, just trying to tweak the current ARCADE type game to make it better. 

 

<Kenshin2kx>  Okay, now if we take your 'glass half full" ... WG has taken an "ARCADE" type game and <factual descriptor> ... added in additional elements to vehicle + gravity + terrain interaction ... i.e. made it more realistic.  

 

So, once again with your description, has taken an "ARCADE" TYPE GAME and made it more realistic ... so even in your interpretation (albeit you use an ambiguous - better )  ... this arcade game per the creators has been blessed with progressive realism, and so, a game with both arcade AND simulator like traits is by unambiguous definition ... a hybrid.    Now let's examine comparative usage  -  in terms of meaning, your intended "better" aligns and equates with "more realism" ... hmmm. 

 

... it seems we agree, it is a hybrid (by your own description).

 

If you've played the sim version of the other tank game, you'd know that's not the direction WG is heading AT ALL, nor do they want to, they've been asked in many developer Q&A's.  They like the current format and just want to add to it.

 

 <Kenshin2kx>  I try not to make assumptions where possible ... thus, I know nothing of the sort ... now if you truly KNOW THIS ... then please share your credentials and plans for the game.

 


Edited by Kenshin2kx, Apr 11 2018 - 18:49.


EmperorJuliusCaesar #102 Posted Apr 12 2018 - 04:29

    Major

  • Players
  • 33036 battles
  • 5,387
  • [EOR] EOR
  • Member since:
    03-16-2014

View PostKenshin2kx, on Apr 11 2018 - 09:08, said:

 

 

More word salad, more sophistry.

DoNutDestroyer #103 Posted Apr 12 2018 - 05:01

    Sergeant

  • -Players-
  • 15151 battles
  • 144
  • [TRED] TRED
  • Member since:
    07-20-2015

View PostEmperorJuliusCaesar, on Apr 12 2018 - 04:29, said:

 

More word salad, more sophistry.

 

I had to look up sophistry....then I had to look up some of the words they used to define sophistry....

EmperorJuliusCaesar #104 Posted Apr 12 2018 - 07:58

    Major

  • Players
  • 33036 battles
  • 5,387
  • [EOR] EOR
  • Member since:
    03-16-2014

View PostDoNutDestroyer, on Apr 11 2018 - 20:01, said:

 

I had to look up sophistry....then I had to look up some of the words they used to define sophistry....

 

Nothing wrong with learning every day :-)

rogueluke #105 Posted Apr 12 2018 - 10:39

    Corporal

  • -Players-
  • 16268 battles
  • 70
  • [MAG7] MAG7
  • Member since:
    04-22-2014

View PostKenshin2kx, on Apr 10 2018 - 18:07, said:

 

Key difference ... verbally describe or text generation versus given an effective real time visual of a moving target.  Its not the same ... same concept maybe, but the application is like night and day.  Now you claim as mitgation that this game is 'arcade' ... but I submit that there is a difference when a change is so contrived, it begs the functional question ... why, if you want fair.  Now, as I see it, I'm not exaggerating - literally we are talking, making white into black or the reverse ... 

 

Artillery is the very definition of INDIRECT fire ... by giving it the targeting view it has, it is making the class into a "Direct View by proxy" or "Indirect ... but not",  Yes/No, Right/Wrong, Matter/Anti-Matter ... I can't see you ... but I can ...

 

artillery has a over head view because it is needed in the game.

in reality artillery is pre aimed at choke points before a battle ever starts and not 1 gun but 12+ are firing at those pre aimed points in a grid with each guns kill zone paired next to another guns kill zone. 

The arty is walked by forward personal to keep pace with the grounds units being targeted.

All combat arms personal are trained in how to do this, every infantry soldier with a radio, every crew member in a vehicle in combat roles ect are trained in this. 

The coordinate system used by the army is designed to put a round with in 10 meters of its target with most large artillery having a 75 meter kill radius.

The navy system can put a round in 5 meters of the target (fewer guns so they go for accuracy).

in times past land surveyors set up the points for artillery to be setup on running from known points for accuracy so the point the gun was firing from was exactly known.

today GPS is used mostly instead to setup the artillery by land surveyors.

Only 2 games to my knowledge ever used a indirect fire method for artillery style firing.

both used a system that gave the artillery a firing point based off other players requested firing points and both games artillery was far more devastating than what WG implements.

A 3rd game used spotters but the Artillery firing rate was faster and was multiple guns (battleships so 1-3 guns) and air units would walk the rounds to targets. 

in all 3 the splash damage was the full 75 meter to 100 meter radius.

(all 3 games had far more players in a map some cases over 100 per side)

 

 

 



rogueluke #106 Posted Apr 12 2018 - 10:49

    Corporal

  • -Players-
  • 16268 battles
  • 70
  • [MAG7] MAG7
  • Member since:
    04-22-2014

View PostcruiserSS, on Apr 09 2018 - 21:30, said:

I totally agree that arty should not SEE actual tanks in the arial view, it is after all, INDIRECT fire. That would make them rely more on other players to CALL FOR FIRE the way it actually works. Then the alternate aiming would be limited to line of sight targets that can shoot back.

 

seen that in games before.

The firing rate and splash damage area would have to be increased for it to work in WOT.

and people would still complain. 

 



rogueluke #107 Posted Apr 12 2018 - 11:11

    Corporal

  • -Players-
  • 16268 battles
  • 70
  • [MAG7] MAG7
  • Member since:
    04-22-2014

I love how people complain about how arty has a top down look mode in the game.

yet ignore the same mode the tanks often use that gives them a drone view over objects, buildings, and hills ect where they can watch what a enemy tank is doing while fully behind cover.

Or the fact you can fully spot another unit with out LOS just because you are close to them.

never mind instances where another tank has LOS allowing you to see exactly what a enemy tank is doing (even which way its turret is pointing) behind cover.

 



Bajan_BB #108 Posted Apr 12 2018 - 13:00

    Corporal

  • -Players-
  • 22133 battles
  • 26
  • Member since:
    12-27-2014
Those who play mediums and lights tend to pour cold water on complaints about arty.  I play heavies almost exclusively and arty is always a problem. Whenever I take my Lowe or T29 out for a spin, you can be sure to attract arty fire constantly.  It spoils my game.  You don't have the maneuverability especially on open maps to get away from arty hits.  They should be limited to one per game. You have some interesting ideas however.

DoNutDestroyer #109 Posted Apr 13 2018 - 04:47

    Sergeant

  • -Players-
  • 15151 battles
  • 144
  • [TRED] TRED
  • Member since:
    07-20-2015

View PostBajan_BB, on Apr 12 2018 - 13:00, said:

Those who play mediums and lights tend to pour cold water on complaints about arty.  I play heavies almost exclusively and arty is always a problem. Whenever I take my Lowe or T29 out for a spin, you can be sure to attract arty fire constantly.  It spoils my game.  You don't have the maneuverability especially on open maps to get away from arty hits.  They should be limited to one per game. You have some interesting ideas however.

 

I feel the same way no matter what class or tier tank I'm in.  I always seem to have a giant arty magnet on top of my tank.  I also play arty a lot so it gives me a better understanding of how to use my tanks.  If you don't have 6th sense, don't sit in one spot for a long time and snipe.  Move around.  If you have to traverse open ground, don't drive in straight lines or be predictable in your movement.  Drive erratic, stop and start.  Even if you are spotted and arty is watching, it makes it harder to guess what you are going to do and pick an aim point.  Once the shot is in the air, it can't be corrected so make yourself a hard target to hit.  Just a little bit helps, a stun is better than an HE round through your top hatch.  I've hit and killed fast light tanks from across the map simply because they were running straight and constant, then it's just a matter of bird hunting, lead and shoot.  Of course RNG rears it's ugly head a lot, but if the shot is true, hitting is easy when you're predictable.

DoNutDestroyer #110 Posted Apr 13 2018 - 04:48

    Sergeant

  • -Players-
  • 15151 battles
  • 144
  • [TRED] TRED
  • Member since:
    07-20-2015

View PostEmperorJuliusCaesar, on Apr 12 2018 - 07:58, said:

 

Nothing wrong with learning every day :-)

 

Completely agree with that.  Now I can lie and wait for the opportunity to spring "sophistry" on someone.  I know I can work in "word salad" too.

OrnmiIler #111 Posted Apr 13 2018 - 08:09

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 37969 battles
  • 676
  • Member since:
    06-01-2013

View PostWhistling_Death_, on Apr 05 2018 - 13:23, said:

 

 

Artillery was already ruined in the hated 9.18 patch and the result was over 10,000 players quit the North American server alone.

 

Being good at artillery is a lot more than just, "sit and click".  With all due respect, your comment is very ignorant.

 

Stop flooding/spamming the forum with this artillery-whining crap!  It's against forum rules.

 


 

+1

The heavy emphasis should have always been on play, instead of needless endless talk, which it never was.

Dry out the bull and let the game stand on its own merit of in game action, without any further annoyances throughout! 

WoT should eliminate the much hated free in game Chatter and Forums, not SPG’s, and bring back 9.17 dynamic to get some of those once loyal 10,000 silent majority to play/pay stress free.


 


 


 


 



CowtownBob #112 Posted Apr 13 2018 - 18:50

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 27426 battles
  • 104
  • Member since:
    05-20-2013

Why is this discussion still a thing?  Arty has been part of this game since before anyone here started playing; if you don't like it that much, go find a different game to play.

 

If you want to play WoT and don't want to get hit by arty and don't want to just hide behind a rock, then don't sit in one spot longer than it takes you to aim and fire.  Arty takes longer to aim than you do, and is far less accurate than you are; if you keep jinking around - arrhythmically - it's going to be very hard, if not impossible, for them to get a bead on you. 



Kenshin2kx #113 Posted Apr 13 2018 - 22:33

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 18111 battles
  • 6,214
  • Member since:
    07-20-2014

View Postrogueluke, on Apr 11 2018 - 23:39, said:

 

artillery has a over head view because it is needed in the game.

 

in reality artillery is pre aimed at choke points before a battle ever starts and not 1 gun but 12+ are firing at those pre aimed points in a grid with each guns kill zone paired next to another guns kill zone. 

The arty is walked by forward personal to keep pace with the grounds units being targeted.

All combat arms personal are trained in how to do this, every infantry soldier with a radio, every crew member in a vehicle in combat roles ect are trained in this. 

The coordinate system used by the army is designed to put a round with in 10 meters of its target with most large artillery having a 75 meter kill radius.

The navy system can put a round in 5 meters of the target (fewer guns so they go for accuracy).

in times past land surveyors set up the points for artillery to be setup on running from known points for accuracy so the point the gun was firing from was exactly known.

today GPS is used mostly instead to setup the artillery by land surveyors.

Only 2 games to my knowledge ever used a indirect fire method for artillery style firing.

both used a system that gave the artillery a firing point based off other players requested firing points and both games artillery was far more devastating than what WG implements.

A 3rd game used spotters but the Artillery firing rate was faster and was multiple guns (battleships so 1-3 guns) and air units would walk the rounds to targets. 

in all 3 the splash damage was the full 75 meter to 100 meter radius.

(all 3 games had far more players in a map some cases over 100 per side)

 

<Kenshin2kx> plus 1 for you on the both the information and the perspective ... I personally learned greater detail on the reality of RL artillery ( relatives gave me a somewhat less detailed account :D  )

 

In any case, I can' gainsay that there is likely the expedient motivation (by way of arty player entertainment)  I don't think that its too inaccurate to say that this provides a significant increase in making artillery 'fun' in WoT for said arty player?   So if anything, I hazard that WG was accurate that such a model would appeal for recruitment purposes (for artillery to have an actual visual targeting system)  That the 'need' as you put it, was in actuality a device to get players to actually ... play the class?

Now, its not my contention to say that arty can't have fun ... rather I'd like to see something with a bit more of a compromise between the artillery player and the LOS advocates.  I think that this is possible ... at least hope so.

 

 

 


Edited by Kenshin2kx, Apr 13 2018 - 22:36.


EmperorJuliusCaesar #114 Posted Apr 14 2018 - 08:07

    Major

  • Players
  • 33036 battles
  • 5,387
  • [EOR] EOR
  • Member since:
    03-16-2014

View PostDoNutDestroyer, on Apr 12 2018 - 19:48, said:

 

Completely agree with that.  Now I can lie and wait for the opportunity to spring "sophistry" on someone.  I know I can work in "word salad" too.

 

The OP is already using word salad against others......lol.    It's quite funny to see.

rogueluke #115 Posted Apr 14 2018 - 20:38

    Corporal

  • -Players-
  • 16268 battles
  • 70
  • [MAG7] MAG7
  • Member since:
    04-22-2014

View PostKenshin2kx, on Apr 13 2018 - 21:33, said:

In any case, I can' gainsay that there is likely the expedient motivation (by way of arty player entertainment)  I don't think that its too inaccurate to say that this provides a significant increase in making artillery 'fun' in WoT for said arty player?   So if anything, I hazard that WG was accurate that such a model would appeal for recruitment purposes (for artillery to have an actual visual targeting system)  That the 'need' as you put it, was in actuality a device to get players to actually ... play the class?

Now, its not my contention to say that arty can't have fun ... rather I'd like to see something with a bit more of a compromise between the artillery player and the LOS advocates.  I think that this is possible ... at least hope so.

 

most of the LOS advocates do not realize that SPG's would need a major buff to be that close, ROF and HP would have to be increased.

i think the biggest mistake WOT made on SPG's was not giving them a smoke round.

have a bunch of stealth TD's let the SPG's put down a smoke screen so the tanks can advance unseen.

Even the tanks themselves have smoke round launchers modeled on the skins lol yet we do not have any form of smoke

it was a major aspect of combat WW I forward. 

 



mworthy #116 Posted Apr 15 2018 - 00:56

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 10917 battles
  • 890
  • [941ST] 941ST
  • Member since:
    05-14-2011
3 Arty per match is fine I will agree before when you could get 5 Arty on both sides in a match was bad but why does everyone want Arty to be readjusted Everytime people get hit by them. I dont hear complaints about kv2s derping tanks do t hear anything  about that. Arty is fine it's time to leave Arty alone they've been nerfed to Oblivion what more do you want?

M0nkE #117 Posted Apr 16 2018 - 02:00

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 22234 battles
  • 198
  • [SEIKO] SEIKO
  • Member since:
    03-12-2011

View Postmworthy, on Apr 14 2018 - 23:56, said:

3 Arty per match is fine I will agree before when you could get 5 Arty on both sides in a match was bad but why does everyone want Arty to be readjusted Everytime people get hit by them. I dont hear complaints about kv2s derping tanks do t hear anything about that. Arty is fine it's time to leave Arty alone they've been nerfed to Oblivion what more do you want?

Removal, obviously.

 

Perhaps the reason people don't complain as much about the KV-2 is because they feel it's more balanced and hurts gameplay less than artillery? The counterplay to tanks that can delete half or more of your hp at once is to not poke where they're likely to be, and (when they don't have [edited]HE-based guns, which should also be changed/removed) to use your armor. The counterplay to arty is to stay behind rocks and stick to bushes and trees, which drags the game out and prevents aggressive play. While it would still be obnoxious, it would certainly be less blatantly broken if more counters were added, such as buffing counterbattery fire to where it's actually worthwhile and common.



ket101 #118 Posted Apr 16 2018 - 02:56

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 18441 battles
  • 9,329
  • [N-O-M] N-O-M
  • Member since:
    01-10-2011

View PostM0nkE, on Apr 16 2018 - 11:00, said:

Removal, obviously.

 

Perhaps the reason people don't complain as much about the KV-2 is because they feel it's more balanced and hurts gameplay less than artillery? The counterplay to tanks that can delete half or more of your hp at once is to not poke where they're likely to be, and (when they don't have [edited]HE-based guns, which should also be changed/removed) to use your armor. The counterplay to arty is to stay behind rocks and stick to bushes and trees, which drags the game out and prevents aggressive play. While it would still be obnoxious, it would certainly be less blatantly broken if more counters were added, such as buffing counterbattery fire to where it's actually worthwhile and common.

 

People don't complain about the KV-2 because it's the KV-2.  They all want to go "blat" with the KV-2 and remove someone else from the game.  People DO complain about other derp guns.  Frankly, I wouldn't mind seeing the 105mm and 122mm derps removed from vehicles that are a lot more mobile than the KV-2.  I'm not going to insist on it, at least some of them were historical mountings, but people coming up the tiers could do without them.  M4 and Pz IV with the 105mm are one of the reasons that lower tiers can be brutal for newer players.  Arty kills pale in comparison to what the mid-tier derps do to other players.

Kenshin2kx #119 Posted Apr 16 2018 - 17:34

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 18111 battles
  • 6,214
  • Member since:
    07-20-2014

View Postrogueluke, on Apr 14 2018 - 09:38, said:

most of the LOS advocates do not realize that SPG's would need a major buff to be that close, ROF and HP would have to be increased.

i think the biggest mistake WOT made on SPG's was not giving them a smoke round.

have a bunch of stealth TD's let the SPG's put down a smoke screen so the tanks can advance unseen.

Even the tanks themselves have smoke round launchers modeled on the skins lol yet we do not have any form of smoke

it was a major aspect of combat WW I forward. 

 

 

... I like that idea ... the literal 'fog of war' ... add to this, destructable foliage when firing ... so say that any tank, td or even artillery, if they actuall fire through trees or shrubbery ... it would take appropriate damage (as it logical should - in receiving a very high velocity stream/shock wave of hot spent gas) 

Edited by Kenshin2kx, Apr 16 2018 - 17:38.


rogueluke #120 Posted Apr 16 2018 - 18:23

    Corporal

  • -Players-
  • 16268 battles
  • 70
  • [MAG7] MAG7
  • Member since:
    04-22-2014

View PostKenshin2kx, on Apr 16 2018 - 16:34, said:

 

... I like that idea ... the literal 'fog of war' ... add to this, destructable foliage when firing ... so say that any tank, td or even artillery, if they actuall fire through trees or shrubbery ... it would take appropriate damage (as it logical should - in receiving a very high velocity stream/shock wave of hot spent gas) 

 

i had a gunner accidentally fire a 25mm cannon while 3 of us were cleaning the spent casings off the deck. 

the flame out of the barrel was about 3 long and in diameter and singed all of us.

tanks produced even more flames than that, oftentimes shooting out a fireball almost as big as they are.

there was no plant life near any of the M1A1 tank firing positions lol they had burned it all away.

 

 







Also tagged with Arty, Artillery

1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users