Jump to content


What would you do with Arty?

Ewww Arty No one Reads Tags Anyways

  • Please log in to reply
138 replies to this topic

Poll: What would you do with Arty? (169 members have cast votes)

You have to complete 100 battles in order to participate this poll.

How would you change artillery?

  1. Remove it. (60 votes [35.50%])

    Percentage of vote: 35.50%

  2. Roll back the stun mechanics. (17 votes [10.06%])

    Percentage of vote: 10.06%

  3. Rework it in some way( Please explain.) (30 votes [17.75%])

    Percentage of vote: 17.75%

  4. Not change it, it's fine as it is. (45 votes [26.63%])

    Percentage of vote: 26.63%

  5. I just roll with the punches. (14 votes [8.28%])

    Percentage of vote: 8.28%

  6. Check box to play with/without arty. (3 votes [1.78%])

    Percentage of vote: 1.78%

Vote Hide poll

WhineMaker #41 Posted Sep 13 2018 - 08:43

    Major

  • Players
  • 33871 battles
  • 3,797
  • Member since:
    04-21-2011

View Postmrmojo, on Sep 12 2018 - 23:41, said:

 

It is very rational and in one move offers a solution to a ongoing problem.

 

People who like arty would always choose to play with arty (whether they are playing a tank or a SPG)  and people who don't would choose to play arty free.

 

I see 6 of your most played tanks are arty - why would you choose arty free? It seems to be something you like playing...

 

 

 

 

 

 

Your arty free option already exists, so no checkbox is needed... :ohmy:

 

Can you say "WoT Blitz"?

 

Sure you can... :facepalm:

 

 

Thus making your request entirely irrational... 

 



mrmojo #42 Posted Sep 13 2018 - 08:44

    Major

  • Players
  • 20035 battles
  • 2,503
  • [-LEG-] -LEG-
  • Member since:
    07-24-2011

View PostWhineMaker, on Sep 13 2018 - 15:40, said:

 

Go play WoT Blitz... :ohmy:

 

Arty free, all the time...

 

Made just for YOU and those unable to handle the full pc version of WoT... :child:

 

Whinemaster, dude, I was just posting in a topic asking what I would do with Arty.

 

What would you choose?

 

I see 8 of your most played tanks are arty? You could choose "Arty in Game" and you would be in Whinemaster heaven!



mrmojo #43 Posted Sep 13 2018 - 08:48

    Major

  • Players
  • 20035 battles
  • 2,503
  • [-LEG-] -LEG-
  • Member since:
    07-24-2011

View PostWhineMaker, on Sep 13 2018 - 15:43, said:

 

Your arty free option already exists, so no checkbox is needed... :ohmy:

 

Can you say "WoT Blitz"?

 

Sure you can... :facepalm:

 

 

Thus making your request entirely irrational... 

 

 

Wasn't a request, just a suggestion, that has as far as I can see no negative implications whatsoever.

 

And it would remove the ongoing complaints about arty.

 

 



I_QQ_4_U #44 Posted Sep 13 2018 - 09:36

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 17751 battles
  • 3,411
  • Member since:
    10-17-2016

View Postmrmojo, on Sep 13 2018 - 08:41, said:

 

It is very rational and in one move offers a solution to a ongoing problem.

 

People who like arty would always choose to play with arty (whether they are playing a tank or a SPG)  and people who don't would choose to play arty free.

 

I see 6 of your most played tanks are arty - why would you choose arty free? It seems to be something you like playing...

 

 

 

 

 

 

 Read what I wrote, if I WASN'T in an SPG of course I would want no SPGs, especially in something slow, just like I wouldn't want anything that I would have a problem with in any kind of tank. How many people would choose to have no Japanese heavies if they were playing a heavy? No invisible TD's in case thy get open maps? No light tanks if they were playing SPG's?

 

 The whole reason irrationalists don't like SPG's is it doesn't let them play lazy. Bad players usually just make big mistakes that SPG's take advantage of then rage about it and good players can't exploit strong positions for extended periods of time to up their stats and rage about that. I'd love to have a really good hull down tank and no SPG's, I could just park behind something to protect my hull and farm damage without worrying about HE raining down on my head. I'm sure nobody would come here and cry about the cancer of tanks with strong turrets then.


Edited by I_QQ_4_U, Sep 13 2018 - 09:37.


Asassian7 #45 Posted Sep 13 2018 - 09:39

    Major

  • Players
  • 24903 battles
  • 11,553
  • [YOUJO] YOUJO
  • Member since:
    12-26-2011
I would make any movement of the reticule give massive bloom, though I would dramatically increase the aim time purely for the difference between that movement bloom and the current bloom it would get for the same reticule movement, while leaving the aim time otherwise as normal. (Say, if it blooms from 0.5 say, to 1.0 on moving the reticule, and takes 5 seconds to aim back in, it would instead bloom it to 2.0 for the same movement, but the 2.0-1.0 aim time would be say 2 seconds, while the 1.0-0.5 aim time would still be 5 seconds? Or maybe buff it a bit, say 3-4 seconds) or maybe make it more dynamic, moving the reticule very slowly or a very small distance would still cause huge bloom, but with a very short, talking 1 second aim time, whereas moving further distances or moving it faster makes the aim time longer the more/faster you move it.

The point of this would be to discourage aiming at constantly moving targets, people playing agressively, etc, while not harming the ability to hit stationary targets. In an attempt to actually make arty work as intended and stop camping. It would make being on the move a much safer defense from arty than it currently is, even just in a straight line.

To compensate, I suppose making arty more accurate would be fair. My idea is very rough and theory only, so testing would have to be done to find a balancing point. IMO stun mechanic can stay, I think WG is right when they say using arty against groups of enemies, rather than focusing a single target, is the way to go.

And then Id make it 2 arty per team. In CW, having more than 2 arty is extremely rare. In which case having more than that in pubs is pointless.

And do something to limit how often you get multi arty games. Seriously, 90% of the battles Ive played in the last 2 weeks have had 3 arty per side. Its rediculous.

_Gungrave_ #46 Posted Sep 13 2018 - 09:56

    Major

  • Players
  • 42202 battles
  • 16,299
  • [X-OUT] X-OUT
  • Member since:
    12-07-2011

View PostAsassian7, on Sep 13 2018 - 09:39, said:

I would make any movement of the reticule give massive bloom, though I would dramatically increase the aim time purely for the difference between that movement bloom and the current bloom it would get for the same reticule movement, while leaving the aim time otherwise as normal. (Say, if it blooms from 0.5 say, to 1.0 on moving the reticule, and takes 5 seconds to aim back in, it would instead bloom it to 2.0 for the same movement, but the 2.0-1.0 aim time would be say 2 seconds, while the 1.0-0.5 aim time would still be 5 seconds? Or maybe buff it a bit, say 3-4 seconds) or maybe make it more dynamic, moving the reticule very slowly or a very small distance would still cause huge bloom, but with a very short, talking 1 second aim time, whereas moving further distances or moving it faster makes the aim time longer the more/faster you move it.

The point of this would be to discourage aiming at constantly moving targets, people playing agressively, etc, while not harming the ability to hit stationary targets. In an attempt to actually make arty work as intended and stop camping. It would make being on the move a much safer defense from arty than it currently is, even just in a straight line.

To compensate, I suppose making arty more accurate would be fair. My idea is very rough and theory only, so testing would have to be done to find a balancing point. IMO stun mechanic can stay, I think WG is right when they say using arty against groups of enemies, rather than focusing a single target, is the way to go.

And then Id make it 2 arty per team. In CW, having more than 2 arty is extremely rare. In which case having more than that in pubs is pointless.

And do something to limit how often you get multi arty games. Seriously, 90% of the battles Ive played in the last 2 weeks have had 3 arty per side. Its rediculous.

 

I've seen some CCs tracking the arty per game for X number of battles and yeah 3 arty occurs far too often. Also its rare to have no arty but somewhat common to have games where its only 1 arty in the entire match where the other team doesnt get an arty.

 

Just shows you how FUBAR the MM is now.



mrmojo #47 Posted Sep 13 2018 - 10:12

    Major

  • Players
  • 20035 battles
  • 2,503
  • [-LEG-] -LEG-
  • Member since:
    07-24-2011

View PostI_QQ_4_U, on Sep 13 2018 - 16:36, said:

 

 Read what I wrote, if I WASN'T in an SPG of course I would want no SPGs, especially in something slow, just like I wouldn't want anything that I would have a problem with in any kind of tank. How many people would choose to have no Japanese heavies if they were playing a heavy? No invisible TD's in case thy get open maps? No light tanks if they were playing SPG's?

 

 The whole reason irrationalists don't like SPG's is it doesn't let them play lazy. Bad players usually just make big mistakes that SPG's take advantage of then rage about it and good players can't exploit strong positions for extended periods of time to up their stats and rage about that. I'd love to have a really good hull down tank and no SPG's, I could just park behind something to protect my hull and farm damage without worrying about HE raining down on my head. I'm sure nobody would come here and cry about the cancer of tanks with strong turrets then.

 

I get it - You like arty but wouldn't play it if you had a choice.

HalfPastZulu #48 Posted Sep 13 2018 - 10:29

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 23870 battles
  • 822
  • [ITE] ITE
  • Member since:
    10-02-2013

View PostBlazzy, on Sep 12 2018 - 23:16, said:

just slight tweaks like the above.  Its pretty stupid when arty is splashing the building your behind doing zero damage but your getting stunned for the full duration...

 

Actually thats pretty realistic. Do you think you would be safe behind a building if a IRL artillary round hit that building?

HalfPastZulu #49 Posted Sep 13 2018 - 10:36

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 23870 battles
  • 822
  • [ITE] ITE
  • Member since:
    10-02-2013

View Post_Gungrave_, on Sep 13 2018 - 03:56, said:

 

I've seen some CCs tracking the arty per game for X number of battles and yeah 3 arty occurs far too often. Also its rare to have no arty but somewhat common to have games where its only 1 arty in the entire match where the other team doesnt get an arty.

 

Just shows you how FUBAR the MM is now.

 

I couldn't agree more.

 

Just face it. The path to full research is considerably slowed by an unfavorable MM. Why should they fix it when so many are willing to pay to skip it?

 

I would be interested to see arty per game numbers for prem vs. standard account.



shinglefoot #50 Posted Sep 13 2018 - 10:41

    Major

  • Players
  • 22843 battles
  • 3,091
  • [LONER] LONER
  • Member since:
    02-07-2013

     Grind every line and make the better ones keepers, that's what I do.

 

It's fun.



Staz211 #51 Posted Sep 13 2018 - 10:47

    Major

  • Players
  • 25882 battles
  • 3,618
  • Member since:
    06-11-2012

View PostI_QQ_4_U, on Sep 13 2018 - 03:36, said:

 

 Read what I wrote, if I WASN'T in an SPG of course I would want no SPGs, especially in something slow, just like I wouldn't want anything that I would have a problem with in any kind of tank. How many people would choose to have no Japanese heavies if they were playing a heavy? No invisible TD's in case thy get open maps? No light tanks if they were playing SPG's?

 

 The whole reason irrationalists don't like SPG's is it doesn't let them play lazy. Bad players usually just make big mistakes that SPG's take advantage of then rage about it and good players can't exploit strong positions for extended periods of time to up their stats and rage about that. I'd love to have a really good hull down tank and no SPG's, I could just park behind something to protect my hull and farm damage without worrying about HE raining down on my head. I'm sure nobody would come here and cry about the cancer of tanks with strong turrets then.

 

Arty players calling anyone else lazy is always one of my favorite things. 

Norse_Knight #52 Posted Sep 13 2018 - 11:21

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 19523 battles
  • 248
  • [HROW] HROW
  • Member since:
    03-25-2014
I would make it even more of a support roll. Want it to stop camping? Make it shoot an illumination round with a small radius that will spot enemies in that area. Give it smoke round that could assist in the team advancing. Give arty options outside simply shooting a damaging, make it help the team in other ways too.

ProfessionalFinn #53 Posted Sep 13 2018 - 11:22

    First lieutenant

  • -Players-
  • 21617 battles
  • 816
  • Member since:
    02-23-2016
The fix?  Go back to 9.17 artillery capabilities.  This nerf was bad.

SwedishBob_ #54 Posted Sep 13 2018 - 11:24

    Sergeant

  • -Players-
  • 2879 battles
  • 195
  • [MOVE] MOVE
  • Member since:
    05-20-2017
Buff the begeesus out it for more whiners to post on the forum   :great:

pepe_trueno #55 Posted Sep 13 2018 - 11:29

    Major

  • Players
  • 41221 battles
  • 6,332
  • Member since:
    05-21-2011

replace it with command tanks that have little to no defensive guns, great mobility, camo and  view range  and of course the hability to call arty strikes on areas they are close by say 500 mts around or have line of sight

 

basicaly  command tank will be a step further from what we saw in frontlines:  call for arty strikes (5-10 small caliber HE over an area) aswell as support skills like air recon.

 

main diference will be that arty strikes spread will be diferent depending on situation, for instance calling in an arty strike on a target one dosent have line of sight will make the area significantly wider, if arty strike is targeting an area or a tank we arent spoting directly it will get a medium dispersion and if the arty strike is targeting a tank we are directly spoting it will get a rather small dispersion. 

 

 


Edited by pepe_trueno, Sep 13 2018 - 11:30.


Kerosedge #56 Posted Sep 13 2018 - 14:09

    Captain

  • Players
  • 20368 battles
  • 1,097
  • [CRIMZ] CRIMZ
  • Member since:
    05-05-2013
It's fine as it is. Only ones yelling are the plebs and the high and mighty.

One set just don't understand it at all.

The other think it's unfair to their mad skillz.
 

782GearUSMC #57 Posted Sep 13 2018 - 14:35

    Major

  • Players
  • 27294 battles
  • 3,596
  • Member since:
    09-03-2013

Block Quote

Reduce the amount per match.  Three is way too may.  At any tier. 

 

Yep, one per team.



_Gungrave_ #58 Posted Sep 13 2018 - 16:22

    Major

  • Players
  • 42202 battles
  • 16,299
  • [X-OUT] X-OUT
  • Member since:
    12-07-2011

View PostHalfPastZulu, on Sep 13 2018 - 10:36, said:

 

I couldn't agree more.

 

Just face it. The path to full research is considerably slowed by an unfavorable MM. Why should they fix it when so many are willing to pay to skip it?

 

I would be interested to see arty per game numbers for prem vs. standard account.

 

Spending money on the game is irrelevant as you'll still encounter the same general experiences.

_SIDEBURN_ #59 Posted Sep 13 2018 - 16:53

    Sergeant

  • -Players-
  • 9681 battles
  • 233
  • [LYKOS] LYKOS
  • Member since:
    07-15-2014

View Posttod914, on Sep 12 2018 - 18:41, said:

6. Reduce the amount per match.  Three is way too may.  At any tier.

 

+1  Reduce to 2 and it would be fine as is.  This eliminates perma stunning and would still allow supporting fire from arty on multiple flanks or focused on a single flank.

JenniferGoines #60 Posted Sep 13 2018 - 17:42

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 43828 battles
  • 271
  • [DD214] DD214
  • Member since:
    08-24-2013
I voted remove it but honestly if xvm were banned or you could private your stats then I'd grudgingly live with it. I'm not even a super player but you can count on it that if I have the best stats on the team and enemy has xvm I will be focused the whole battle.

I run xvm just to see if enemy arties have it. When they don't the game is so much more fun.




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users