Jump to content


Artillery needs to be adjusted

Arty Artillery

  • Please log in to reply
160 replies to this topic

rockbutcher #21 Posted Apr 03 2018 - 23:52

    First lieutenant

  • -Players-
  • 18883 battles
  • 696
  • [69CBR] 69CBR
  • Member since:
    03-06-2015

View PostKilIingblow, on Apr 03 2018 - 16:24, said:

First off let me say 1.0 is awesome. Love the music, love the new maps, love the physics, you almost hit this out of the park but one thing is left to adjust in my opinion....Artillery...

 

I just watched my son try artillery today and I was surprised at how well they can see and shoot without having to reposition during a game.

 

I want to maneuver with strategy not worry about getting triple shot from above by something I cannot see or stop. As a tanker we have to move, pivot, scrape, aim, wait, pull back, and then reposition constantly but as an artillery player you can sit still most of the game and fire without fear on all the tanks in the field. until the very end of course if you lose. This makes me stay away from artillery as much as possible.

 

I have several suggestions:

 

  • Only allow the arty to see Hvy, Md, Lt, At, and tank location with a symbol.
  • Don't allow arty to shoot outside its line of sight (yellow line) and only allow artillery to target "lighted tanks" 
  • The new fire mode is way to powerful. Allow sniper mode only (arial mode).
  • Or make the arty have to close the distance if it wants to fire in the new fire mode.
  • Do not allow more than (1 or 2) arty in a game. (3) is just over the top and can be a hindrance depending on how the game rolls.
  • Have an option for arty to switch to a light or medium back-up tank on city maps. 

 

I have only played a small handful of artillery games. I don't mind arty but too much is too much. Something needs to be adjusted to balance the fun of the game from the tanker perspective.

 

Thanks for any consideration,

Steve H.

Aka: KillingBlow - an below average tanker but still has lots of fun.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

​If you've only played a handful of games in it, and avoid it as much as possible....

 

Tell "your son" that if he shoots more than twice without repositioning and I'm in arty on the opposing team I will vaporise him.  If more arty players focussed part time on counter battery there would be less arty wine in the forums.

 

Everyone has an opinion...some more educated than others.

 

 



Kenshin2kx #22 Posted Apr 04 2018 - 00:15

    Major

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

View PostIVilKilU, on Apr 03 2018 - 12:36, said:

Everything every time is Artie's fault. OP says he let his son play on his account. How old? How often? You whiners think Players giving the logins and controls of their accounts over to the10 year olds might be why your team is a super failure? Not arty.

 

Valid point ... account shifting is against the rules ... as to the perception that everything is artie's fault ... in all honesty I can see the strong temptation in that as well.  Definitely not right or fair, but I think that game context has a lot to do with this 'loading' of expectation.   I think it fair to say that by game design ... artillery (and possibly TD's) will tend to last longer or stay alive for the first half of the game with less to no damage when compared with lights, mediums and heavies in particular ... 

 

...  there is certain psychological predisposition to feel a certain ambivalence for those 'behind the lines' and yet tasked to fight ... (in relative safety) for the first half of the game usually - as the rest of team (depending on caliber of player) is taking direct fire in relatively CQB.   Now in this context, as the forward element is taking damage on the advancing lines ... likely one of the most common thoughts,  is that "THEY" are lit ... take that shot ARTY.  

 

Now you may very well ask yourself, is this totally fair?  The answer is a 'reasoned' ... no ... but the problem here is that those not directly in a fully interactive battle with foes that actively see you (line of sight) ... can usually afford the luxury of reasoned calm.   ... this state of mind is harder to achieve when a round splangs against your armor and you suspect you are about to be flanked ... 

 

So, don't find it too much of a surprise if ... the honest perception or hope for the advancing greens (your team mates) ... is the expectation of good artillery, and that you will give back what was taken in fierce close battle in the front lines.  Now the arty player could also say this as well, that the forward elements should be skilled and just as deadly ... thing is though, almost invariably in this game ... causal liability will always exact justice to the front line player in an immediate and consistent manner. 

 

Now this may or may not be the case for artillery, who, in any case is often the last alive ... whether they contributed or not. 


Edited by Kenshin2kx, Apr 04 2018 - 00:24.


Dirizon #23 Posted Apr 04 2018 - 00:44

    Major

  • Players
  • 27352 battles
  • 5,007
  • Member since:
    06-05-2011

View PostKenshin2kx, on Apr 03 2018 - 18:05, said:

 

Going by my formula ... 1 arty would then be mitigated with significantly higher dpm globally speaking ... more damaging, accurate, faster firing and possibly more durable ... consider the present formula with up to 3 artillery, now condense it down to a max of 1 ...

 

Your formula is quite incorrect. It would not work that way



Kenshin2kx #24 Posted Apr 04 2018 - 01:06

    Major

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

View PostDirizon, on Apr 03 2018 - 13:44, said:

 

Your formula is quite incorrect. It would not work that way

 

As stated previously, this is a guess on my part as to how a single SPG would be 'weighted' as the only artillery per side ... how do you see it working?

Edited by Kenshin2kx, Apr 04 2018 - 01:07.


ket101 #25 Posted Apr 04 2018 - 01:07

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 18441 battles
  • 9,296
  • [N-O-M] N-O-M
  • Member since:
    01-10-2011
Arty has been really nerfed over the years.  There's now basically no choice for most arty in the way they are played.  They have to sit back and use indirect fire.  They are too slow to move, too lightly armoured to bounce a shot (with exceptions), and too little health to survive being shot more than once or twice.  They have no view range and less camo.  The reloads are really slow (in comparison to what they used to be), and they don't even do the same amount of damage they used to do.  And the aim time is hideous.  The Hummel was really badly nerfed, for example.  There used to be Assault Hummel players in the game, using the vehicle's mobility to shift around and blast people head on.  Not so surprising, since it's the same vehicle as the Nashorn TD.  But not now.  If people want arty to be played more like a normal tank, then arty needs massive buffs to be competitive.  And how many people want arty to be buffed?

Kenshin2kx #26 Posted Apr 04 2018 - 01:10

    Major

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

View Postket101, on Apr 03 2018 - 14:07, said:

Arty has been really nerfed over the years.  There's now basically no choice for most arty in the way they are played.  They have to sit back and use indirect fire.  They are too slow to move, too lightly armoured to bounce a shot (with exceptions), and too little health to survive being shot more than once or twice.  They have no view range and less camo.  The reloads are really slow (in comparison to what they used to be), and they don't even do the same amount of damage they used to do.  And the aim time is hideous.  The Hummel was really badly nerfed, for example.  There used to be Assault Hummel players in the game, using the vehicle's mobility to shift around and blast people head on.  Not so surprising, since it's the same vehicle as the Nashorn TD.  But not now.  If people want arty to be played more like a normal tank, then arty needs massive buffs to be competitive.  And how many people want arty to be buffed?

 

See that is the thing ... if there is anything the arty community seems to want as a fairly cohesive group ... is dynamic top down targeting (WG guessed right) ... as such it appears as almost everything else is negotiable in terms of nerf ... but that.  If there is extreme awkwarness in the class, I'd say it was due primarily to this game kludge.  In reality, artillery is VASTLY more powerful (en coordinated masse) ... but it is blind in the BVR sense.

Edited by Kenshin2kx, Apr 04 2018 - 01:12.


Altwar #27 Posted Apr 04 2018 - 01:38

    Major

  • Players
  • 54924 battles
  • 4,055
  • [A-F] A-F
  • Member since:
    04-24-2011

View PostKenshin2kx, on Apr 03 2018 - 16:10, said:

 

See that is the thing ... if there is anything the arty community seems to want as a fairly cohesive group ... is dynamic top down targeting (WG guessed right) ... as such it appears as almost everything else is negotiable in terms of nerf ... but that.  If there is extreme awkwarness in the class, I'd say it was due primarily to this game kludge.  In reality, artillery is VASTLY more powerful (en coordinated masse) ... but it is blind in the BVR sense.

 

Do we really have an arty community? Or just players who select SPGs among the other classes of tanks in this game that they play?    I play plenty of SPGs (4th most played of the 5 classes for me), but I'm part of the World of Tanks community.  Did I somehow miss the secret door to the SPG players room?   Or was there a special handshake I didn't pick up on or maybe it's my limited sight that sees every class here as one of 5 to choose from?

 

As far as the post to which you responded, that player is incorrect in saying that SPGs are too slow to move and have to sit back and use indirect fire.  The vast amount of players against SPG play would have people believe that, but SPGs can and do move enough, especially when they see camping tanks that refuse to leave a position they feel is arty safe.  That's just a fish in a barrel waiting to be exploited and the way to exploit is to move to an improved firing position to harvest that fish.

 

Anyway, the original post by the OP wishing to have even less (1 to 2 ) SPGs in a game I ask, why limit them at all?  Why not let players choose how many SPGs are in a battle by letting them come into a battle as any other class?   If that means 8 to a side, so be it.  If it's none, that's possible too.   But there shouldn't be a limit IMO; that's just catering to those who can't adjust to the differences from battle to battle and want it their way.



Kenshin2kx #28 Posted Apr 04 2018 - 01:51

    Major

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

View PostAltwar, on Apr 03 2018 - 14:38, said:

 

Do we really have an arty community? Or just players who select SPGs among the other classes of tanks in this game that they play?    I play plenty of SPGs (4th most played of the 5 classes for me), but I'm part of the World of Tanks community.  Did I somehow miss the secret door to the SPG players room?   Or was there a special handshake I didn't pick up on or maybe it's my limited sight that sees every class here as one of 5 to choose from?

 

<Kenshin2kx>  Fair point ... let me rephrase ... those who have a vested interest in artillery and as a point of identification/interaction in the forums on related issues.

 

As far as the post to which you responded, that player is incorrect in saying that SPGs are too slow to move and have to sit back and use indirect fire.  The vast amount of players against SPG play would have people believe that, but SPGs can and do move enough, especially when they see camping tanks that refuse to leave a position they feel is arty safe.  That's just a fish in a barrel waiting to be exploited and the way to exploit is to move to an improved firing position to harvest that fish.

 

<Kenshin2kx>  From my viewing experience, I see the smaller artillery SPGs as being mobile, so I see your point there ... as for the larger pieces, well, as one would expect, they are ... less than agile to put it mildly.

 

Anyway, the original post by the OP wishing to have even less (1 to 2 ) SPGs in a game I ask, why limit them at all?  Why not let players choose how many SPGs are in a battle by letting them come into a battle as any other class?   If that means 8 to a side, so be it.  If it's none, that's possible too.   But there shouldn't be a limit IMO; that's just catering to those who can't adjust to the differences from battle to battle and want it their way.

 

<Kenshin2kx> Actually, I am a great fan of reality, randomness and choice ... that said, I would support this idea 100% IF all the classes were 'minimally adjusted' as the goal ... no red outline for LOS vehicles, no instatrack repair convenience (make it harder to track, but if tracked you are a pillbox unless towed)  ... no magic ressurection , a more explainable 'exp' function (good eyesight + experience = intuition), no dynamic top down view (a map image yes. like a photo by a recon plane from an overhead flight.   

 

Well anyway, my druthers on the issue on choice and game mechanics ... heck I'd go so far as 15 arties per side (random chance) ... but make it a more rational artillery that has LOS capacity and deadly damage capacity, BUT ... no hovering drone view in 60 fps HD glory ... oh, and almost forgot, limited external view of the tank (at most open hatch commander perspective, but at the risk of commander injury/death)


Edited by Kenshin2kx, Apr 05 2018 - 17:33.


ket101 #29 Posted Apr 04 2018 - 02:19

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 18441 battles
  • 9,296
  • [N-O-M] N-O-M
  • Member since:
    01-10-2011

View PostAltwar, on Apr 04 2018 - 10:38, said:

 

<snip>

 

As far as the post to which you responded, that player is incorrect in saying that SPGs are too slow to move and have to sit back and use indirect fire.  The vast amount of players against SPG play would have people believe that, but SPGs can and do move enough, especially when they see camping tanks that refuse to leave a position they feel is arty safe.  That's just a fish in a barrel waiting to be exploited and the way to exploit is to move to an improved firing position to harvest that fish.

Arty can move (mostly pretty slowly, certainly in relation to the vehicles that they themselves are derived from) when not in view of the other team.  But even then, it's a bit painful to move, due to the lack of mobility.  That's why players of arty tend to settle on certain positions.  And you are never going to get an arty these days playing peek-a-boom like even TD's do, due to lack of mobility, among their other handicaps.  If an arty player knows they're going to die, then most will try to get one last shot in, but it's no wonder that some don't even try.

<snip>


pickpocket293 #30 Posted Apr 04 2018 - 02:19

    Captain

  • -Players-
  • 28549 battles
  • 1,000
  • [FD_UP] FD_UP
  • Member since:
    05-14-2015

View PostKenshin2kx, on Apr 03 2018 - 14:35, said:

 

Going by my <best guess> formula ... 1 arty would then be mitigated with significantly higher dpm globally speaking ... more damaging, accurate, faster firing and possibly more durable ... consider the present formula with up to 3 artillery, now condense it down to a max of 1 ...

 

I'm not suggesting that the current formula be condensed to 1, I'm suggesting only ONE arty per match with no other balance changes. That arty can still support the team and dig out a hull-down tank but it isn't oppressive. 3 arty is oppressive, even moreso now than it was before the stun mechanic was added. 

 

View PostDirizon, on Apr 03 2018 - 15:44, said:

 

Your formula is quite incorrect. It would not work that way

 

..and he's missed the point, as is the tradition of this forum. I'm not saying "let's make arty 3x as powerful and just have one" because that wouldn't solve the problem. I'm saying keep all combat characteristics of arty the same as they are now, but only one arty per team, max. 

 

View PostKenshin2kx, on Apr 03 2018 - 16:06, said:

 

As stated previously, this is a guess on my part as to how a single SPG would be 'weighted' as the only artillery per side ... how do you see it working?

 

You're completely missing the point.



ket101 #31 Posted Apr 04 2018 - 02:38

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 18441 battles
  • 9,296
  • [N-O-M] N-O-M
  • Member since:
    01-10-2011

View Postpickpocket293, on Apr 04 2018 - 11:19, said:

 

I'm not suggesting that the current formula be condensed to 1, I'm suggesting only ONE arty per match with no other balance changes. That arty can still support the team and dig out a hull-down tank but it isn't oppressive. 3 arty is oppressive, even moreso now than it was before the stun mechanic was added. 

 

 

..and he's missed the point, as is the tradition of this forum. I'm not saying "let's make arty 3x as powerful and just have one" because that wouldn't solve the problem. I'm saying keep all combat characteristics of arty the same as they are now, but only one arty per team, max. 

 

 

You're completely missing the point.

 

There's a problem with having just one arty per game, and WG themselves have pointed it out.  There would no longer be arty free games.  You would ALWAYS have an arty in the game.  Everyone has a soft spot for having a game without arty.  That's quite apart from the inequity of making arty players queue for ages to get a game.

pickpocket293 #32 Posted Apr 04 2018 - 03:30

    Captain

  • -Players-
  • 28549 battles
  • 1,000
  • [FD_UP] FD_UP
  • Member since:
    05-14-2015

View Postket101, on Apr 03 2018 - 17:38, said:

 

There's a problem with having just one arty per game, and WG themselves have pointed it out.  There would no longer be arty free games.  You would ALWAYS have an arty in the game.  Everyone has a soft spot for having a game without arty.  That's quite apart from the inequity of making arty players queue for ages to get a game.

 

I would rather have 1 arty per team for each and every game than the current system, which is 3 arty per game about 75% of the time.

 

 

Furthermore, with only one per game the toxicity that would be created by it would be substantially lower. For instance, let's take a tier 10 game with a T92 on each team. If there are 3 of them and they each focus the same heavy (which is common), they each stun for 15ish seconds and reload in 40ish seconds. If they time their reloads and focus the same tank, that one cursed heavy tank will be essentially perma-stunned until he dies. At least if there's only one per game that same heavy is only stunned for 1/3rd of the game.



ket101 #33 Posted Apr 04 2018 - 05:11

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 18441 battles
  • 9,296
  • [N-O-M] N-O-M
  • Member since:
    01-10-2011

View Postpickpocket293, on Apr 04 2018 - 12:30, said:

 

I would rather have 1 arty per team for each and every game than the current system, which is 3 arty per game about 75% of the time.

 

 

Furthermore, with only one per game the toxicity that would be created by it would be substantially lower. For instance, let's take a tier 10 game with a T92 on each team. If there are 3 of them and they each focus the same heavy (which is common), they each stun for 15ish seconds and reload in 40ish seconds. If they time their reloads and focus the same tank, that one cursed heavy tank will be essentially perma-stunned until he dies. At least if there's only one per game that same heavy is only stunned for 1/3rd of the game.

 

And while they're concentrating on one tank, the rest of the team is destroying theirs.  Swings and roundabouts.  Not every arty is a T92, either.  I've been focused on (gawd knows why, I'm not that good), so I've gotten better at going where arty can't get at me.  Learning experience.  You can be removed from battle just as quickly by sticking your nose out in front of three TD's as you can by getting hit by three arty, and you even have a chance these days of surviving being hit by three arty, which is something that's rare when you get hit by three TD's.  People forget that the medkits remove the stun effect, too. 

 

When the number of arty wasn't limited, people grinding out the lines would populate (later at night for the NA server) the teams with more arty than other tanks.  So be thankful you don't have that.

 

You are never going to get everything you want.  You can't remove arty these days, there are a number of players who have invested time and effort into them.  Getting annoyed at the mechanics of arty, when they are so very bad at actually delivering damage these days (you really are lucky with most arty to actually hit a third of the time.  Some, you can get up to near 50% hits.  Tanks and TD's, unless you're a really bad shot, average 66 to 75% hit rates.  And the arty that are more accurate tend to be the less lethal.  Rare for an FV304 to one shot a tank these days in my experience.  Usually have to whittle it down, because the other player doesn't move from where he is).  How many times does arty actually take you out in the games you play?  1 in 10?  More?  Less?  Treat them as another threat you have to look out for, and try your best to exploit it, like the best players do.



P0NYTANK #34 Posted Apr 04 2018 - 07:01

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 37655 battles
  • 232
  • [GOONZ] GOONZ
  • Member since:
    07-31-2013
Needs to be Removed*

pickpocket293 #35 Posted Apr 04 2018 - 16:06

    Captain

  • -Players-
  • 28549 battles
  • 1,000
  • [FD_UP] FD_UP
  • Member since:
    05-14-2015

View Postket101, on Apr 03 2018 - 20:11, said:

 

And while they're concentrating on one tank, the rest of the team is destroying theirs.  Swings and roundabouts.  Not every arty is a T92, either.  I've been focused on (gawd knows why, I'm not that good), so I've gotten better at going where arty can't get at me.  Learning experience.  You can be removed from battle just as quickly by sticking your nose out in front of three TD's as you can by getting hit by three arty, and you even have a chance these days of surviving being hit by three arty, which is something that's rare when you get hit by three TD's.  People forget that the medkits remove the stun effect, too. 

 

When the number of arty wasn't limited, people grinding out the lines would populate (later at night for the NA server) the teams with more arty than other tanks.  So be thankful you don't have that.

 

You are never going to get everything you want.  You can't remove arty these days, there are a number of players who have invested time and effort into them.  Getting annoyed at the mechanics of arty, when they are so very bad at actually delivering damage these days (you really are lucky with most arty to actually hit a third of the time.  Some, you can get up to near 50% hits.  Tanks and TD's, unless you're a really bad shot, average 66 to 75% hit rates.  And the arty that are more accurate tend to be the less lethal.  Rare for an FV304 to one shot a tank these days in my experience.  Usually have to whittle it down, because the other player doesn't move from where he is).  How many times does arty actually take you out in the games you play?  1 in 10?  More?  Less?  Treat them as another threat you have to look out for, and try your best to exploit it, like the best players do.

 

And while they're concentrating on one tank, the rest of the team is destroying theirs

 

Not necessarily, and that's not relevant to the conversation. That person being focused is having zero fun.

 

Not every arty is a T92, either.  I've been focused on (gawd knows why, I'm not that good), so I've gotten better at going where arty can't get at me.  Learning experience.

 

There are plenty of maps where being "arty safe" is impossible while still impacting the battle. When I said "limit arty to 1 per battle" I wasn't soliciting advice from you (a worse player) or anyone else-- I was making a suggestion that I believe would truly make the game better for everyone.

 

You can be removed from battle just as quickly by sticking your nose out in front of three TD's as you can by getting hit by three arty

 

The TDs have to see me to hit me. Arty can click on me from the other end of the map, where I have no chance of retaliating.

 

People forget that the medkits remove the stun effect, too

 

Med kits recharge every 90 seconds (or 60 seconds for the large ones). If you're being perma-stunned the med kit isn't helping you after the 2nd hit.

 

When the number of arty wasn't limited, people grinding out the lines would populate (later at night for the NA server) the teams with more arty than other tanks.  So be thankful you don't have that

 

So just because this game used to be even dumber, I should be happy that it's better but still awful? "It used to be worse" is not an excuse for any currently bad condition.

 

You are never going to get everything you want. 

 

That's not true-- if I decide that instead of playing this game while it has 3 arty focusing me each game, I would prefer to do something else, I've gotten what I wanted. Not only that, your argument isn't even logically based. You're saying "oh, you asked for something? Too bad, for no reason other than because you asked for it" and it makes no sense.

 

You can't remove arty these days,

 

Yes they can. Devs can do whatever they want with the game. 

 

there are a number of players who have invested time and effort into them

 

There are methods of compensation for people that have arty which have been discussed ad nauseam on this forum and in other places. I won't bother rehashing those arguments here, but suffice to say that there are plenty of methods of compensation.

 

when they are so very bad at actually delivering damage these days (you really are lucky with most arty to actually hit a third of the time

 

Good players can still do damage in arty. Your point is a fallacy.

 

Tanks and TD's, unless you're a really bad shot, average 66 to 75% hit rates. 

 

Not the point of this conversation and totally off topic, but false nonetheless. Plenty of players in plenty of different tanks have a higher hit rate than 60-75%. You have absolutely no data for the points you're making-- you've simply made up statistics that roughly correspond to what you think sounds right and jives with your personal, anecdotal experiences. 

 

And the arty that are more accurate tend to be the less lethal. 

 

Again, false and also vague. Object 261s (the most accurate arty in the game) can still one-shot KO plenty of tanks.

 

Rare for an FV304 to one shot a tank these days in my experience.  Usually have to whittle it down, because the other player doesn't move from where he is). 

 

Exactly, the "whittling down" means that player is being perma-stunned or perma-tracked. The player doesn't move because if they do they'll just be hit by other artillery or by other players by taking up a less advantageous position. Your highest tier arty is tier 7, so you really have no idea what you're talking about.

 

How many times does arty actually take you out in the games you play?  1 in 10?  More?  Less? 

 

Many more. If you become skilled enough to be XVM-focused you'll start dying to arty more often.

 

Treat them as another threat you have to look out for, and try your best to exploit it, like the best players do

 

You can't "look out" for arty, because they don't have to see you to hit you. You're missing the point completely, as is the tradition on this forum.



Kenshin2kx #36 Posted Apr 04 2018 - 17:45

    Major

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

pickpocket293:

 

"I'm not suggesting that the current formula be condensed to 1, I'm suggesting only ONE arty per match with no other balance changes. That arty can still support the team and dig out a hull-down tank but it isn't oppressive. 3 arty is oppressive, even moreso now than it was before the stun mechanic was added. "

 

Kenshin2kx:

 

... to which I reply ... next to pointless for the reduced function artillery ... one arty per side (per the present set of performance constraints) would render arty in most cases COMPLETELY IRRELEVANT ... by this I mean that the arty would at best be equivalent of a really bad TD that would do its best to distract players with its singular shot volume.  The point being ... arty was likely nerfed to the condition its in as a nod to what WG thinks is 'balance' ... as such, any drastic change in the numbers of a vehicle participating would/SHOULD ... have formulaic implications that would intervene to prevent blatant and catastrophic imbalance in a class.

 

Now to be clear, I don't particularly like the mechanics that WG has imposed to 'balance' vehicles in WoT as a whole ... but IF they are going down that path ... then it's only logical IMHO to do so - globally and with class consistency across the board.

 

Now, my personal druthers ... would be the opposite of your suggestion ... remove a mandatory constraint like 1 only ... and apply 'fog of war' random occurrence.   Ask yourself ... what is the likelihood to fight in (literally) any battle and have EXACTLY the same number on each side ... further that there is a forumula for tier banding within the match.  Why not have it as the GENERAL average for 15 vs 15 ... where at the throw of the war god's dice ... it may turn out as 13 to 15 - with a correspondingly variable team makeup.   Now where does the gaming part come in? ... simply in how the player PLAYS the circumstance - win or lose, how well the player actually PLAYS their vehicle in that random match ... where a team win would give the primary benefit ... but also where individual initiative (win or lose) has a MUCH higher reward than accorded to at present.

 

Now this does not mean it has to be BRUTALLY random ... WG could still impose a reasonable limit to how wide the variance (say for instance no 1-10 x 15) ... just on a more global and fundamental level that would mimic an actual encounter ... and not another round of checkers.

 

 


Edited by Kenshin2kx, Apr 04 2018 - 17:59.


DistrictMedia #37 Posted Apr 04 2018 - 19:45

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 17199 battles
  • 18
  • Member since:
    04-04-2013

A thing that WG can implement to help Arty in the current mode and meta (and i think it's an easy to mod) is that the closer you are to the target the more damage you would do and the further you are then you would do less damage. This would have some benefits:

- Arty would be a little bit more inclined to move and to actively participate in order to have the possibility to one-shot in the face another tank
- Arty would have more chances to defend themselves (one-shot) when swarmed by light tanks
- Arty from the other side of the map would have lesser impact on tanks that cannot retaliate thus be less of a pain

Just an opinion by an arty player for the community... Any thoughts?
 


 



pickpocket293 #38 Posted Apr 04 2018 - 20:25

    Captain

  • -Players-
  • 28549 battles
  • 1,000
  • [FD_UP] FD_UP
  • Member since:
    05-14-2015

View PostKenshin2kx, on Apr 04 2018 - 08:45, said:

Kenshin2kx:

 

... to which I reply ... next to pointless for the reduced function artillery ... one arty per side (per the present set of performance constraints) would render arty in most cases COMPLETELY IRRELEVANT ... by this I mean that the arty would at best be equivalent of a really bad TD that would do its best to distract players with its singular shot volume.  

 

 

Yep, exactly. I'm ok with this. Arty can still get in the games and dig out a hull-down camper, but it has less impact on the game overall... Which is good, IMO.

 

I should edit to add this:

 

One person in their arty with my proposed "1 per side" max would have the same impact that they've always had. They will still be shooting stuff. The *overall* impact of the game will depend less on artillery though, since there will be 1 and not 3. I think that's a good move. That way Malinovka and other maps are less impacted by having 3 enemy arty, but your one guy in the back in a T92 can still dig people out and help the team win.


Edited by pickpocket293, Apr 04 2018 - 20:47.


Kenshin2kx #39 Posted Apr 04 2018 - 23:04

    Major

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

View Postpickpocket293, on Apr 04 2018 - 09:25, said:

 

Yep, exactly. I'm ok with this. Arty can still get in the games and dig out a hull-down camper, but it has less impact on the game overall... Which is good, IMO.

 

I should edit to add this:

 

One person in their arty with my proposed "1 per side" max would have the same impact that they've always had. They will still be shooting stuff. The *overall* impact of the game will depend less on artillery though, since there will be 1 and not 3. I think that's a good move. That way Malinovka and other maps are less impacted by having 3 enemy arty, but your one guy in the back in a T92 can still dig people out and help the team win.

 

Hmmm ... okay, I can understand your logic, but personally, I don't quite see it that way ... 

 

Thing is, I think that WG shouldn't have introduced the class to begin with ... but they did, and people <literally> bought into the concept.  Keep in mind that WG has implied and even stated a time or two that the classes should be equal (and rightly so for game and player rights consistency)  ... now limiting arty to 1 per match ... might seem tempting, the question becomes, is this fair.

 

If anything, I propose the opposite ... make the game more random (this has the basic effect of nullifying the argument of contrived equality) Next, lessen the contrived nature of balance in favor of a more self regulating model of 'realistic' compromise in terms of applied vehicle tech and  performance.  Do this, and IMHO see the issue of artillery (and a lot of other issues) ... fade away because they become irrelevant and a non issue.  In short, the game would be more challenging, less predictable, and just possibly geared to a longer term of industry viability and profit.  



pickpocket293 #40 Posted Apr 04 2018 - 23:48

    Captain

  • -Players-
  • 28549 battles
  • 1,000
  • [FD_UP] FD_UP
  • Member since:
    05-14-2015

Hmmm ... okay, I can understand your logic, but personally, I don't quite see it that way ... 

 

Thing is, I think that WG shouldn't have introduced the class to begin with ... but they did, and people <literally> bought into the concept. 

 

I agree that the game would probably be better without arty, but that's not what we're talking about. With a hard cap of 1 per team arty players can still play their games but less people's days are ruined when they're playing other tanks. The topic of total removal is the far end of the spectrum and I'm suggesting a middle-ground that would probably keep everyone happy. I'm not sure what your point is here-- they added it and incentivized people to play it (campaign missions, etc) and now most people play it in at least a limited capacity. That doesn't mean it's good for the game.

 

 

Keep in mind that WG has implied and even stated a time or two that the classes should be equal (and rightly so for game and player rights consistency)  ... now limiting arty to 1 per match ... might seem tempting, the question becomes, is this fair.

 

Fair to whom? If there's only one light tank on each team in a game, do those light tank players feel like they're being cheated? I don't follow your logic here at all about fairness. It's not like 1 arty relies on the other arty teammates to do what they do. Furthermore, the argument could be made that artillery MUST be limited to 1 per game because the indirect fire mode that the class has inherently makes it that much more powerful than any other class.

 

 

If anything, I propose the opposite ... make the game more random (this has the basic effect of nullifying the argument of contrived equality) Next, lessen the contrived nature of balance in favor of a more self regulating model of 'realistic' compromise in terms of applied vehicle tech and  performance.  Do this, and IMHO see the issue of artillery (and a lot of other issues) ... fade away because they become irrelevant and a non issue.  In short, the game would be more challenging, less predictable, and just possibly geared to a longer term of industry viability and profit.  

 

I don't understand any of what you're saying here, and I'd like to think I have a good grasp of the english language. 







Also tagged with Arty, Artillery

2 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 2 guests, 0 anonymous users