Jump to content


Option to play battles with no artillery


  • Please log in to reply
214 replies to this topic

n4cer67 #201 Posted Yesterday, 09:57 PM

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 17056 battles
  • 2,067
  • [NAAP] NAAP
  • Member since:
    10-18-2010

View PostRickEdwards, on Nov 12 2018 - 14:41, said:

 

People like you are crazy; you just jump to the most extreme possible thing, even though it has no actual bearing on the conversation. Balancing things is hard, but it is something games need to try to do; some classes are unfair, discounting arty, but all of the other classes are not anywhere near as unbalanced as arty. All of the other classes take, at the very least, a somewhat decent amount of skill to play well; arty does not. All other classes also have a feasible way to counter play them; arty, once again, does not. Also, removing things from the game that are unbalanced is something that needs to be done and has been done in the past, like with the WT auf. E100. "The game is not fair, deal with it" is such a dumb thing to say; if everyone thought like that, we'd all still be living outside as nomads because no one would have discovered that they could use fire to stay warm and cook food; they would have just went "it's cold at night; oh well, we just have to deal with it."

 

Whaa, whaaa, people like you are the real crazies. If SPG's take no skill then I would think that would be your main class. All classes at times can't be countered especially if you get in view of camo'd TD's are Hvy's and they focus fire you and you're dead within seconds, where's their counter? Oh wait there's not because you're dead. Nerfers would still be living like nomads rubbing their sticks together complaining because the other groups figured out how to use flints and tinder.

Edited by n4cer67, Yesterday, 10:07 PM.


Backfire_ #202 Posted Yesterday, 10:20 PM

    Captain

  • Players
  • 28047 battles
  • 1,996
  • [X-OUT] X-OUT
  • Member since:
    03-08-2013

View Postn4cer67, on Nov 12 2018 - 15:57, said:

 

Whaa, whaaa, people like you are the real crazies. If SPG's take no skill then I would think that would be your main class. All classes at times can't be countered especially if you get in view of camo'd TD's are Hvy's and they focus fire you and you're dead within seconds, where's their counter? Oh wait there's not because you're dead. Nerfers would still be living like nomads rubbing their sticks together complaining because the other groups figured out how to use flints and tinder.

 

It isn't a case that SPG's take no skill, simply they have a higher skill floor and a lower skill ceiling (the difference in performance between a bad, average and good player is a tighter cluster than say medium tanks).  They're easier to become 80% effective in and have very limited game play between shots (just moving/looking for cb).  If you really want to see it this is reflected in hard data when you compare the DPG of top SPG players to that of average or bad SPG players and compare that data to similar data regarding heavies/meds/etc.  This is fact.

What the SPG class really needs is another rework to have something more to the class to better differentiate a good SPG from an average player from a noob.  Things like flare or smoke rounds that could have some strategy of optimal usage would help as an example.  Reducing the RNG (but without just making them OP), limiting arc more to force better movement throughout the match, etc could all help with that as well.

To the OP, your suggestion obviously wouldn't work because anyone not playing in an SPG would opt out of them unless its perhaps a light tank driver with certain missions.

Fly_Guy8791 #203 Posted Yesterday, 10:24 PM

    Staff sergeant

  • -Players-
  • 16054 battles
  • 381
  • Member since:
    06-16-2015

View Postdunniteowl, on Nov 12 2018 - 10:48, said:

So then, you are essentially admitting that the Arty Mechanics are NOT the issue

 

 

 

No. I specifically mentioned and expressed that arty mechanics are the issue. Try reading again.

 

I added that maps make it worse, and the issue would be less extreme if the maps where not trash. Again, you are trying to put words in my mouth that I did not say.


Edited by Fly_Guy8791, Yesterday, 10:28 PM.


Fly_Guy8791 #204 Posted Yesterday, 10:25 PM

    Staff sergeant

  • -Players-
  • 16054 battles
  • 381
  • Member since:
    06-16-2015

View PostWhineMaker, on Nov 12 2018 - 13:06, said:

 

Then go play WoT Blitz... :facepalm:

 

Arty free, all the time... :child:

 

Your simple and viable workaround, is ready and waiting for you to download, for free, no less... :great:

 

Go play Ships if you want to toss HE at people.

 

Saying "go play blitz" effectively translates to "I know you are right and don't have any real argument".

 


Edited by Fly_Guy8791, Yesterday, 10:29 PM.


n4cer67 #205 Posted Yesterday, 10:27 PM

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 17056 battles
  • 2,067
  • [NAAP] NAAP
  • Member since:
    10-18-2010

View PostBackfire_, on Nov 12 2018 - 15:20, said:

 

It isn't a case that SPG's take no skill, simply they have a higher skill floor and a lower skill ceiling (the difference in performance between a bad, average and good player is a tighter cluster than say medium tanks).  They're easier to become 80% effective in and have very limited game play between shots (just moving/looking for cb).  If you really want to see it this is reflected in hard data when you compare the DPG of top SPG players to that of average or bad SPG players and compare that data to similar data regarding heavies/meds/etc.  This is fact.

What the SPG class really needs is another rework to have something more to the class to better differentiate a good SPG from an average player from a noob.  Things like flare or smoke rounds that could have some strategy of optimal usage would help as an example.

To the OP, your suggestion obviously wouldn't work because anyone not playing in an SPG would opt out of them unless its perhaps a light tank driver with certain missions.

 

Each class requires their own skill levels and mindsets. If players would play their class and work as a team it would improve game play but that would be a big If. The SPG's could use a view range, reload and damage buff and it would be nice to maybe have smoke rounds so they could target a gap to help conceal the teams movement from spotters.

Backfire_ #206 Posted Yesterday, 10:33 PM

    Captain

  • Players
  • 28047 battles
  • 1,996
  • [X-OUT] X-OUT
  • Member since:
    03-08-2013

View Postn4cer67, on Nov 12 2018 - 16:27, said:

 

Each class requires their own skill levels and mindsets. If players would play their class and work as a team it would improve game play but that would be a big If. The SPG's could use a view range, reload and damage buff and it would be nice to maybe have smoke rounds so they could target a gap to help conceal the teams movement from spotters.

 

Better even would be flare rounds to lower camo values within X distance of where you land it and degrading as its further away/over time as it burns out.  This could help break 1 line prok stalemates and such.  Might even have SPGs actually help vs. campers lol.

Fly_Guy8791 #207 Posted Yesterday, 10:52 PM

    Staff sergeant

  • -Players-
  • 16054 battles
  • 381
  • Member since:
    06-16-2015

View PostAltwar, on Nov 12 2018 - 12:43, said:

 

Well aren't you the charmer?

Who are you to say that SPGs shouldn't be in the game?   A dev?   Some managerial position within Wargaming?  No?  

Then you are a player like the rest.  You can have your opinion but it won't change that there are 5 classes in the game.

Game works just fine with all 5 and has since the start.    If you don't agree and don't enjoy it, you are welcome to move on.

Or stay and play and figure out some other elegant fix because your previous suggestion was nonsense.

And I'll remain here as I was before your account was here and likely after yours leaves too.  

 

I don't need your permission to have an opinion on something. And I don't have to enjoy every aspect of a game to enjoy the game. The truth is plane for everyone to see. The only reason to resist the option of playing without arty is... Most players would chose to play without it and it would effectively remove the class from the game.

 

As for being a "charmer". When people try to misrepresent what I am saying, I point it out.

Thanks.


Edited by Fly_Guy8791, Yesterday, 10:58 PM.


dunniteowl #208 Posted Yesterday, 11:07 PM

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 22618 battles
  • 4,926
  • Member since:
    09-01-2014

Well, I guess you don't really read your own words, because what I read was that you did cope and that you did play them and that you thought the problem was that maps were corridor funnel maps that force players to play a certain way.  Or am I missing something here?

 

By your own words, you said that was the case.  I'm pretty sure I didn't misread you.

 

Now if you insist that arty is broken and never should have been included, then all that other stuff was nothing more than sophistry to hide your inaccurate statements regarding arty.  In short, you are still wrong.

 

And if that is your position and that is all you can respond to in my response to you, then I am afraid nothing more can be rationally discussed.

 

Good Day to You, Sir.

OvO



Fly_Guy8791 #209 Posted Yesterday, 11:10 PM

    Staff sergeant

  • -Players-
  • 16054 battles
  • 381
  • Member since:
    06-16-2015

View Postdunniteowl, on Nov 12 2018 - 16:07, said:

Well, I guess you don't really read your own words, because what I read was that you did cope and that you did play them and that you thought the problem was that maps were corridor funnel maps that force players to play a certain way.  Or am I missing something here?

 

By your own words, you said that was the case.  I'm pretty sure I didn't misread you.

 

Now if you insist that arty is broken and never should have been included, then all that other stuff was nothing more than sophistry to hide your inaccurate statements regarding arty.  In short, you are still wrong.

 

And if that is your position and that is all you can respond to in my response to you, then I am afraid nothing more can be rationally discussed.

 

Good Day to You, Sir.

OvO

 

I said the mechanics of arty itself. I didn't say anything like "broken". I have no doubt arty as a class is functioning as it was programed/coded to do. When you read the comment I said I have no issue with vehicles being able to do damage to others. But they WAY arty does it is a problem.

 

No more can rationally be discussed? Fine, see you around the forums.


Edited by Fly_Guy8791, Yesterday, 11:13 PM.


dunniteowl #210 Posted Today, 12:54 AM

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 22618 battles
  • 4,926
  • Member since:
    09-01-2014

So, Fly_Guy8791, are you saying this isn't what you said:

I also think that arty would bother people less if the maps where not just corridors and hallways that makes predicting where the enemy will go very easy to do. It is very easy to sit and pre-aim a spot because you know someone will show up there.

 

I interpret that as you indicating the issue isn't so much arty, per se as it is map design.  That you think arty should or should not be in the game isn't at issue with this statement.  What it is, as I see it, an admission that arty isn't the issue, it's map design.  Those are your words.

 

If you can only focus on arty being the problem after you say something like this, then refuse to address anything other than saying you didn't say this, how can we rationally discuss the issue?  You as much as admit the real issue is map design.

 

All the rest of your position is, as far as it can be told all about your FEELING that arty shouldn't be in the game at all.  Yet you offer no real REASON for why that is.


I am left to presume that the real issue, then, is what I said about Loss of Agency.

 

Then, when I post something reasonable and rational, your only response is, "I didn't say that. I only ever said arty should not be in the game," what am I left to consider?  You totally ignored everything else, even though it was based on what you said you didn't say.  This means that, for whatever reason, you will not address those issues that you said you didn't say.

 

This means we cannot have a rational discussion, because you will not do so.  If this were not so, you would at least have acknowledged the points I made based on what you said you didn't say, even though you did say it.  I can only conclude, as you presented no other clear points other than your feelings and what you didn't say that you did say that there is no way to have a rational discussion on it.

 

We are left, then, at an impasse where your argument boils down to, "I don't like arty."

 

That pretty much ends the discussion, I'd say.

 

This is why I posted my last response to you.  If you won't actually engage and won't admit you made an admission that arty isn't necessarily the real issue, other than how you FEEL about it, then it's pretty much over.  Would you not say?

 

 

OvO

 

 



Fly_Guy8791 #211 Posted Today, 01:09 AM

    Staff sergeant

  • -Players-
  • 16054 battles
  • 381
  • Member since:
    06-16-2015

View Postdunniteowl, on Nov 12 2018 - 17:54, said:

So, Fly_Guy8791, are you saying this isn't what you said:

I also think that arty would bother people less if the maps where not just corridors and hallways that makes predicting where the enemy will go very easy to do. It is very easy to sit and pre-aim a spot because

Does that change the part where I said:

"I don't like the fundamental mechanic of arty, (shooting across the map from behind hard cover)"

Shooting people across the map from behind cover, doesn't belong in the game.

 

ARTY is the issue. HOW IT FUNCTIONS is the issue. The maps make it worse. Is that easy enough to follow now? Just because I said that maps make the arty problem worse does NOT mean that arty isn't a problem.

 

And you feel that arty isn't a problem. I agree we are at a impasse.


Edited by Fly_Guy8791, Today, 01:20 AM.


RickEdwards #212 Posted Today, 03:34 AM

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 25557 battles
  • 159
  • [NISHI] NISHI
  • Member since:
    07-10-2013

View Postn4cer67, on Nov 12 2018 - 21:57, said:

 

Whaa, whaaa, people like you are the real crazies. If SPG's take no skill then I would think that would be your main class. All classes at times can't be countered especially if you get in view of camo'd TD's are Hvy's and they focus fire you and you're dead within seconds, where's their counter? Oh wait there's not because you're dead. Nerfers would still be living like nomads rubbing their sticks together complaining because the other groups figured out how to use flints and tinder.

 

Lol, no; it wouldn't be my main class. I have fun by being challenged, not by brainlessly clicking in a class that's basically guaranteed to do damage on each shot. I played arty before the splash increase cause it actually took some amount of skill to damage moving targets, especially since I played the Obj. 261 with AP. As for other tanks not being able to be countered? No, if there's a camoed tank you can't spot, you just don't poke on it; you can't hit it, but at the same time it can't hit you. You can also possibly flank in that situation. Any other tank you can see, you can fight back. They are all counterable. With arty, there is none of that; it can hit you almost all of the time and you can't hit it almost all of the time. The only "counter play" is to either sit behind a rock for the entire game or sit in a bush and hope you don't get spotted the entire game. Also, the rock you're hiding behind has to be large enough that the arty can't just shoot to the side of it and splash you for 400 damage.

 

Also, rubbing sticks together can indeed produce fire; next time make an analogy that actually means something. Also, I am assuming you mean flint and steel, which is far more advanced than makes sense in this analogy; people stopped being nomads far before they got to that point.


Edited by RickEdwards, Today, 03:35 AM.


n4cer67 #213 Posted Today, 06:05 AM

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 17056 battles
  • 2,067
  • [NAAP] NAAP
  • Member since:
    10-18-2010

View PostRickEdwards, on Nov 12 2018 - 20:34, said:

 

Lol, no; it wouldn't be my main class. I have fun by being challenged, not by brainlessly clicking in a class that's basically guaranteed to do damage on each shot. I played arty before the splash increase cause it actually took some amount of skill to damage moving targets, especially since I played the Obj. 261 with AP. As for other tanks not being able to be countered? No, if there's a camoed tank you can't spot, you just don't poke on it; you can't hit it, but at the same time it can't hit you. You can also possibly flank in that situation. Any other tank you can see, you can fight back. They are all counterable. With arty, there is none of that; it can hit you almost all of the time and you can't hit it almost all of the time. The only "counter play" is to either sit behind a rock for the entire game or sit in a bush and hope you don't get spotted the entire game. Also, the rock you're hiding behind has to be large enough that the arty can't just shoot to the side of it and splash you for 400 damage.

 

Also, rubbing sticks together can indeed produce fire; next time make an analogy that actually means something. Also, I am assuming you mean flint and steel, which is far more advanced than makes sense in this analogy; people stopped being nomads far before they got to that point.

 

LOL, all classes are clickers. Some clickers just aim and reload faster than others and unlike SPG's the majority always hit their targets unless RNG screws them over. A camouflaged tank can still shoot, what world are you living in to think they can't?

No i did not mean flint and steel. I know stick rubbing can eventually produce fire but striking flint together (produces sparks) into tinder (flammable material) produces fire much quicker.

RickEdwards #214 Posted Today, 03:56 PM

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 25557 battles
  • 159
  • [NISHI] NISHI
  • Member since:
    07-10-2013

View Postn4cer67, on Nov 13 2018 - 06:05, said:

 

LOL, all classes are clickers. Some clickers just aim and reload faster than others and unlike SPG's the majority always hit their targets unless RNG screws them over. A camouflaged tank can still shoot, what world are you living in to think they can't?

No i did not mean flint and steel. I know stick rubbing can eventually produce fire but striking flint together (produces sparks) into tinder (flammable material) produces fire much quicker.

 

I said to not poke a camoed tank; as in, don't go in there line of fire and take a different route to flank them to get close and spot. See? Counterable. Arty? No, it just shoots you around or over cover. Not counterable. And while all tanks need to click to shoot, obviously, the main factor determining if you do well in all tanks but arty is positioning; how well you can hit a target is largely pointless; almost anyone can hit a target, and that is why arty takes basically no skill; especially when you consider that you do not even have to hit the target to damage it in arty.

 

As for banging 2 Flint rocks together? It produces Sparks, but not enough to actually start a fire, sooo idk where you're going with that since you can't actually start a fire like that.



Fly_Guy8791 #215 Posted Today, 08:07 PM

    Staff sergeant

  • -Players-
  • 16054 battles
  • 381
  • Member since:
    06-16-2015

View Postdunniteowl, on Nov 12 2018 - 17:54, said:

So, Fly_Guy8791, are you saying this isn't what you said:

I also think that arty would bother people less if the maps where not just corridors and hallways that makes predicting where the enemy will go very easy to do. It is very easy to sit and pre-aim a spot because you know someone will show up there.

 

I interpret that as you indicating the issue isn't so much arty, per se as it is map design.  That you think arty should or should not be in the game isn't at issue with this statement.  What it is, as I see it, an admission that arty isn't the issue, it's map design.  Those are your words.

 

If you can only focus on arty being the problem after you say something like this, then refuse to address anything other than saying you didn't say this, how can we rationally discuss the issue?  You as much as admit the real issue is map design.

 

All the rest of your position is, as far as it can be told all about your FEELING that arty shouldn't be in the game at all.  Yet you offer no real REASON for why that is.


I am left to presume that the real issue, then, is what I said about Loss of Agency.

 

Then, when I post something reasonable and rational, your only response is, "I didn't say that. I only ever said arty should not be in the game," what am I left to consider?  You totally ignored everything else, even though it was based on what you said you didn't say.  This means that, for whatever reason, you will not address those issues that you said you didn't say.

 

This means we cannot have a rational discussion, because you will not do so.  If this were not so, you would at least have acknowledged the points I made based on what you said you didn't say, even though you did say it.  I can only conclude, as you presented no other clear points other than your feelings and what you didn't say that you did say that there is no way to have a rational discussion on it.

 

We are left, then, at an impasse where your argument boils down to, "I don't like arty."

 

That pretty much ends the discussion, I'd say.

 

This is why I posted my last response to you.  If you won't actually engage and won't admit you made an admission that arty isn't necessarily the real issue, other than how you FEEL about it, then it's pretty much over.  Would you not say?

 

 

OvO

 

 

 

That may be what you interpret it to mean. But that isn't what it is saying.

 

ARTY is the issue. That is what I was saying. AGAIN, maps make it worse but are not the cause of the issue. Arty is the cause of the issue. If you cannot grasp this point then there is NO REASON to have any kind of discussion.

 






3 user(s) are reading this topic

2 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users


    Fly_Guy8791, n4cer67