Jump to content


And people think the LefH is overpowered...

M44

  • Please log in to reply
59 replies to this topic

atila_xD #41 Posted Sep 05 2018 - 15:59

    First lieutenant

  • -Players-
  • 7722 battles
  • 670
  • [200IQ] 200IQ
  • Member since:
    10-13-2014

View PostEmperorJuliusCaesar, on Sep 02 2018 - 11:46, said:

 

So "good" that it's getting nerfed according to WG.

Nerfing an arty? Damn wish came true!!! Thx 4 news dad



shaggy996 #42 Posted Sep 05 2018 - 16:44

    Captain

  • Players
  • 45431 battles
  • 1,395
  • [THUGZ] THUGZ
  • Member since:
    11-17-2012

View PostHOTA_CHATON, on Aug 31 2018 - 14:32, said:

The only reason the complain about the leaf blower, is the rate of fire.  M44 is good but not OP.

 

Think what you will. WG has already said they are looking at it. 

PanzerLeader_2 #43 Posted Sep 05 2018 - 16:57

    Sergeant

  • -Players-
  • 17461 battles
  • 173
  • [T-D] T-D
  • Member since:
    01-01-2015
The M44 is still good, but nowhere near as good as it was before the 9.18 arty nerf.  Before that it had HEAt shells that had ~240 mm pen and 700 alpha along with much better HE shells than it has now.  It certainly was OP.  Le field howitzer, as Hurk pointed out, is the only arty that wasn’t nerfed in 9.18, which is why it has a great WR curve.

black_colt #44 Posted Sep 05 2018 - 20:19

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 4005 battles
  • 2,822
  • Member since:
    01-11-2015

View PostPanzerLeader_2, on Sep 05 2018 - 07:57, said:

The M44 is still good, but nowhere near as good as it was before the 9.18 arty nerf. Before that it had HEAt shells that had ~240 mm pen and 700 alpha along with much better HE shells than it has now. It certainly was OP. Le field howitzer, as Hurk pointed out, is the only arty that wasn’t nerfed in 9.18, which is why it has a great WR curve.

 

IIRC the Tier III Sexton I did not get nerfed in 9.18 as well ...

 


Edited by black_colt, Sep 05 2018 - 20:19.


Kerosedge #45 Posted Sep 05 2018 - 20:26

    Captain

  • Players
  • 21224 battles
  • 1,391
  • [CRIMZ] CRIMZ
  • Member since:
    05-05-2013
It can permanently track you. That is why it really is OP.

spud_tuber #46 Posted Sep 05 2018 - 20:59

    Major

  • Players
  • 56429 battles
  • 7,584
  • Member since:
    08-26-2013

View Postblack_colt, on Sep 05 2018 - 08:45, said:

 

Thanks for the cogent, concise, and relevant post - very insightful.  Appreciate the graphs which help me understand your points.

 

 

Note from the graphs that, relative to their normal performance, bad players consistently do better in arty than good players.  That could be seen as evidence the concept is at least in part broken. 

 

However, there are plenty of tanks were the opposite happens as well, including most autoloaders. Does that mean those tanks are also broken?  



Flarvin #47 Posted Sep 06 2018 - 01:46

    Major

  • Players
  • 53644 battles
  • 15,122
  • Member since:
    03-29-2013

View Postspud_tuber, on Sep 05 2018 - 14:59, said:

Note from the graphs that, relative to their normal performance, bad players consistently do better in arty than good players.  That could be seen as evidence the concept is at least in part broken. 

 

However, there are plenty of tanks were the opposite happens as well, including most autoloaders. Does that mean those tanks are also broken?  

 

It would seem the arty tank curve graphs show that arty has less impact on who wins. Given bad players out perform in relation to good players. 

 

Tanks with graphs were the opposite is true, have greater than normal impact. 



spud_tuber #48 Posted Sep 06 2018 - 05:03

    Major

  • Players
  • 56429 battles
  • 7,584
  • Member since:
    08-26-2013

View PostFlarvin, on Sep 05 2018 - 18:46, said:

 

It would seem the arty tank curve graphs show that arty has less impact on who wins. Given bad players out perform in relation to good players. 

 

Tanks with graphs were the opposite is true, have greater than normal impact. 

That is certainly what the graphs imply to me as well.  Which, it can easily be argued, makes either case somewhat unbalanced separately from whether they are overall OP, UP, or balanced.  

 

The person I was responding to earlier asked for any logical argument that would support "arty is broken".  This seemed a data driven option that was easy to point out.  It is hardly a conclusive argument, but it was an easy one.  It is also much less complicated and subjective than trying to describe how arty effects gameplay and whether that is good or bad, a discussion I've long since decided I wasn't going to get deeply involved in any more.



Flarvin #49 Posted Sep 06 2018 - 05:26

    Major

  • Players
  • 53644 battles
  • 15,122
  • Member since:
    03-29-2013

View Postspud_tuber, on Sep 05 2018 - 23:03, said:

That is certainly what the graphs imply to me as well.  Which, it can easily be argued, makes either case somewhat unbalanced separately from whether they are overall OP, UP, or balanced.  

 

The person I was responding to earlier asked for any logical argument that would support "arty is broken".  This seemed a data driven option that was easy to point out.  It is hardly a conclusive argument, but it was an easy one.  It is also much less complicated and subjective than trying to describe how arty effects gameplay and whether that is good or bad, a discussion I've long since decided I wasn't going to get deeply involved in any more.

 

Definitely could be argued that tanks that over/under impact who wins, could be considered an issue. Got the data that shows there are sets of tanks that meet the definition of over/under impacting. 

 

The subjective part, is what should the threshold for ‘broken’ be. But that is something that would require a deeper look, before I make an opinion. 



EmperorJuliusCaesar #50 Posted Sep 09 2018 - 07:36

    Major

  • Players
  • 35075 battles
  • 5,439
  • [EOR] EOR
  • Member since:
    03-16-2014

View PostDuqe, on Sep 05 2018 - 01:31, said:

View Postblack_colt, on Sep 04 2018 - 16:10, said:

 

Are you so unsure that your opinion cannot withstand review and criticism that you need to lash out at others and call them names?

 

Please prove your statement that ALL artillery is broken in a cogent, concise and relevant matter.

 

 

I've been dying on this hill for 7 years now, artillery apologists haven't revised their arguments once in that time, so I'm not willing to hear the fallacy-ridden crap any longer to be honest.

 

Arty clearly isn't that bad considering you're still playing the game.  26 thousand battles....it can't be that bad.  It's not going anywhere so it's best to just get used to it.  People aren't going to stop playing it.



EmperorJuliusCaesar #51 Posted Sep 09 2018 - 08:19

    Major

  • Players
  • 35075 battles
  • 5,439
  • [EOR] EOR
  • Member since:
    03-16-2014

View PostTrauglodyte, on Sep 05 2018 - 01:49, said:

View PostI_QQ_4_U, on Sep 02 2018 - 16:58, said:

 

They never said they were nerfing it, just keeping an eye on it. I think it may be the best SPG in the game tier for tier(in a field that mostly sucks) but I don't understand why people always think that just because something is good or even best, means it needs to be nerfed. Basically the M44 is middle of the road, all the things that make up it's performance are average, a jack of all trades. The only stats that it excels in over the other tier 6's are gun elevations and traverse limits with the latter being the biggest plus. Everything else is on par with it's peers.

 

The combination of alpha, reload, general speed, gun elevation, gun arc, and cost make it broken.  It is like the Grille at tier 5 - it can fire over everything with a massive alpha only it has a wide enough arc to where it doesn't have to reposition to fire and it is stupidly fast.  WarGaming typically hammers SPGs that have turrets/semi-turrets/wide gun arcs because of the advantage that it gives.  This is why the GW Panther is trash, at tier 7 and why the M53/M55 has less DPM than the GW Tiger while having similar alpha.  The combination of speed and gun arc demands an overall nerf in performance.  In this case, though, the M44 doesn't have the nerf.  Truth be told, the reload on the M44 should be about 23 seconds, give or take, to compensate for its positives.  The SPG is, by definitely, acceptable outside of one lever being pulled which needs to be DPM.

 

View Postblack_colt, on Sep 04 2018 - 16:50, said:

 

Excellent call-out in regards to the term [over-powered] - in your opinion what would make each class of vehicle over-powered?

 

This is such a large question that I'd say that it is impossible to answer.  You could argue that high tier Russian Mediums are OP because of their combination of alpha, speed, soft gun stats, and turret armor along with the small sizes of maps and dedicated engagement areas.  Does that make the tank OP or is it the combination of variables?

 

In the case of this discussion, the M44 is OP compared to its peers.  The Russian SU should have its DPM because it has a retarded gun arc and the Bert, while having a bit too high of DPM, is also acceptable because of the lack of daze effect and the gnat like damage.  In comparison, the leFH (which is actually a German tank but whatever) is both broken and OP because it has stupid armor, stupid vision, stupid reload, and two types of ammo that no other SPG has access to in the game.  THAT makes it both.  Why they haven't fixed that is beyond me.  It is probably the same reason that WG doesn't resize the E25 despite continuously selling it multiple times a year.

 

LefH is a premium, premiums don't get nerfed.  You don't know this already?  They're not gonna nerf prems and get sued again.



spud_tuber #52 Posted Sep 09 2018 - 17:03

    Major

  • Players
  • 56429 battles
  • 7,584
  • Member since:
    08-26-2013

View PostEmperorJuliusCaesar, on Sep 09 2018 - 00:36, said:

 

Arty clearly isn't that bad considering you're still playing the game.  26 thousand battles....it can't be that bad.  It's not going anywhere so it's best to just get used to it.  People aren't going to stop playing it.

The next time you want to post something negative about random MM, I suggest you think about this, only replace arty with random MM and 26 with your battle count.

 

I do find it ironic that some of your pro arty statements are so easily applied to the MM debate as well.  The above, WG saying it isn't going away, and the 'go play blitz'->'go play strongholds' are the 3 that pop immediately to mind. 



o7o7o7o7o7o7o7o7o7o7o7o7 #53 Posted Sep 09 2018 - 18:31

    First lieutenant

  • -Players-
  • 424 battles
  • 865
  • [ITDED] ITDED
  • Member since:
    01-23-2015

lefh is horrible. 0 splash, 0 stun. the only time it does damage is if it directly hits the tank. and anything with any armor you will do 5-50 damage per shot, on a direct hit.

 

its not unusual to run out of ammo and barely scrape 200 damage at the end of the game.

 

no other artillery in the game can run out of ammo and have nothing to show for it.

 

 



Anublister #54 Posted Sep 09 2018 - 18:43

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 68159 battles
  • 926
  • [--T--] --T--
  • Member since:
    05-26-2013

View PostDuqe, on Sep 02 2018 - 10:49, said:

All artillery is broken, some are overpowered while being broken.

 

You are free to disagree, just like how people are free to think the earth is flat and vaccines cause autism. But like those people, you shouldn't be allowed to think so dangerously as you do.

 

I'm glad you're not President, or Dictator. I'll just keep my head down around you Mr. Thought police.

Anublister #55 Posted Sep 09 2018 - 18:47

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 68159 battles
  • 926
  • [--T--] --T--
  • Member since:
    05-26-2013

View PostTrauglodyte, on Sep 04 2018 - 18:49, said:

 

The combination of alpha, reload, general speed, gun elevation, gun arc, and cost make it broken.  It is like the Grille at tier 5 - it can fire over everything with a massive alpha only it has a wide enough arc to where it doesn't have to reposition to fire and it is stupidly fast.  WarGaming typically hammers SPGs that have turrets/semi-turrets/wide gun arcs because of the advantage that it gives.  This is why the GW Panther is trash, at tier 7 and why the M53/M55 has less DPM than the GW Tiger while having similar alpha.  The combination of speed and gun arc demands an overall nerf in performance.  In this case, though, the M44 doesn't have the nerf.  Truth be told, the reload on the M44 should be about 23 seconds, give or take, to compensate for its positives.  The SPG is, by definitely, acceptable outside of one lever being pulled which needs to be DPM.

 

 

This is such a large question that I'd say that it is impossible to answer.  You could argue that high tier Russian Mediums are OP because of their combination of alpha, speed, soft gun stats, and turret armor along with the small sizes of maps and dedicated engagement areas.  Does that make the tank OP or is it the combination of variables?

 

In the case of this discussion, the M44 is OP compared to its peers.  The Russian SU should have its DPM because it has a retarded gun arc and the Bert, while having a bit too high of DPM, is also acceptable because of the lack of daze effect and the gnat like damage.  In comparison, the leFH (which is actually a German tank but whatever) is both broken and OP because it has stupid armor, stupid vision, stupid reload, and two types of ammo that no other SPG has access to in the game.  THAT makes it both.  Why they haven't fixed that is beyond me.  It is probably the same reason that WG doesn't resize the E25 despite continuously selling it multiple times a year.

 

Is that your mouth or your butt talking? I can't tell.

Anublister #56 Posted Sep 09 2018 - 18:48

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 68159 battles
  • 926
  • [--T--] --T--
  • Member since:
    05-26-2013

View PostKerosedge, on Sep 05 2018 - 19:26, said:

It can permanently track you. That is why it really is OP.

 

take two repair kits? (oops! enlightenment!) :rolleyes:

Anublister #57 Posted Sep 09 2018 - 18:56

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 68159 battles
  • 926
  • [--T--] --T--
  • Member since:
    05-26-2013

View Postblack_colt, on Sep 04 2018 - 20:09, said:

LeFH18B2

 

The LeFH18B2 has significantly higher values in multiple categories compared to Tier VI - e.g. DPM and access to other ammo types - but has significantly lower values for Forward Speed, Reverse Speed, Power/Weight, and Radio Range. 

 

So for the LeFH18B2 to be overpowered the following question must be answered:

 

Do the significantly lower mobility and radio range offset the DPM, lower Tier, and access to other ammo types to make the vehicle significantly better in terms of in-game play?

 

If so, then the argument that it is overpowered is very strong. 

If not, then it is not overpowered.

 

Remember each player has different play-styles in-game for each vehicle so their perspective will be different depending on this.

 

I tend to agree with most of your posts here but I don't think mobility is much of an issue with arty. I've found the LeFH18B2 to be a great annoyance in the hands of a skilled player, but I wouldn't necessarily nerf it. There are other issues with game balance I'm more passionate about and arty isn't one of them. 

o7o7o7o7o7o7o7o7o7o7o7o7 #58 Posted Sep 09 2018 - 18:57

    First lieutenant

  • -Players-
  • 424 battles
  • 865
  • [ITDED] ITDED
  • Member since:
    01-23-2015

View PostAnublister, on Sep 09 2018 - 18:48, said:

 

take two repair kits? (oops! enlightenment!) :rolleyes:

 

but i wanna run food! so i give up the med kit and then it kills my crew? welp

Anublister #59 Posted Sep 09 2018 - 18:59

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 68159 battles
  • 926
  • [--T--] --T--
  • Member since:
    05-26-2013

View PostFlarvin, on Sep 06 2018 - 04:26, said:

 

Definitely could be argued that tanks that over/under impact who wins, could be considered an issue. Got the data that shows there are sets of tanks that meet the definition of over/under impacting. 

 

The subjective part, is what should the threshold for ‘broken’ be. But that is something that would require a deeper look, before I make an opinion. 

 

Tanks pale in comparison to skill mismatch. If I can out spot you and keep you at distance you are going to lose, period.

Flarvin #60 Posted Sep 09 2018 - 19:19

    Major

  • Players
  • 53644 battles
  • 15,122
  • Member since:
    03-29-2013

View PostAnublister, on Sep 09 2018 - 12:59, said:

Tanks pale in comparison to skill mismatch. If I can out spot you and keep you at distance you are going to lose, period.

 

Crew skill or player skill? 

 

If crew skill. Then any crew skill bonus is applied to the tank’s view range. As well as optics and binos. 

 

Without food, crew skills can give ~7.5% bonus to view range (10% with vents). Equal to the optic bonus if vents are mounted, and less than binos. Seems equipment can have more of an impact on out spotting, than crew skill. 

 

If you mean player skill. Yes a player with superior knowledge of the vision mechanics, can use it to their advantage. 







Also tagged with M44

1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users