Jump to content


PLEASE JUST REMOVE ARTY

artillery arty remove

  • Please log in to reply
383 replies to this topic

Poll: How much to you hate ary (575 members have cast votes)

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

How do you feel about arty as it stands in WoT?

  1. Voted I have absolutely no problem with artillery (326 votes [56.70%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 56.70%

  2. Voted Arty is toxic and should be removed (210 votes [36.52%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 36.52%

  3. I rage quit to arty often. (39 votes [6.78%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 6.78%

Vote Hide poll

Mikosah #161 Posted Dec 07 2018 - 19:36

    Major

  • Players
  • 17582 battles
  • 4,479
  • Member since:
    01-24-2013

View PostVooDooKobra, on Dec 06 2018 - 20:16, said:

 

tbh what classes are necessary?  TD, how necessary are they?  and really without arty how necessary are light tanks?  and heavy tanks hoe necessary are they?  the jobs of lights and heavies can be done more efficiently by mediums.  but you did hit a big point, the time and money.  had this been in beta with people wanting it removed it would have been a simpler task than now, WoT would simply have to pay too much for compensation and the time frame for easy removal is gone.  if they were to remove it i do not believe that the amout of people that will leave the game over it would be less than what we get back.  look at AW, they moved arty to PvE and the small amount returning players did nothing to help the pvp queue times

 

 

You could look at it another way- that lights, mediums, heavies, and TDs aren't so radically different and there's a fair amount of overlap between the tasks that they'll regularly undertake. For instance, a fast medium can more or less play as a light tank, and some heavily armored TDs are often brawling with the heavies. As the meta shifts, particular roles may increase or decrease in importance but the tanks themselves can adapt by playing a little bit differently or receiving minor balance changes. Even in the most extreme possible example of a whole class getting removed, all the tanks that belonged to that class could conceivably be re-classed as something else without much actually changing in-game. 

 

Arta on the other hand is so much at the mercy of the indirect-fire mechanic that the same does not apply to it at all. For it to be even remotely adapted to any other role simply could not happen so long as it has the indirect-fire, because all other roles demand direct line of sight to the enemy to do whatever they're doing. But many of the conventional tanks could undertake the HE-support role without indirect fire, hence the comparison to machines like the Hetzer and KV-2. 

 

So frame question not so much as "do we need arta?" but instead as "do we really need indirect-fire?"

And I still do not see a clear reason why indirect-fire is a prerequisite to WoT gameplay functioning properly.



ProfessionalFinn #162 Posted Dec 07 2018 - 19:37

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 26328 battles
  • 2,248
  • Member since:
    02-23-2016

View PostCardboardJedi, on Dec 06 2018 - 19:35, said:

all arguments aside, if arty players really want to impress us stop drowning yourselves when to jig is up and die like warriors in battle

 

Die like a warrior in a make believe digital game of entertainment?  Get a grip Pal.

Wtornado #163 Posted Dec 07 2018 - 19:52

    Captain

  • Players
  • 32451 battles
  • 1,458
  • Member since:
    04-24-2011

STEAM will be making lots of money at Christmas time with me with their X_MAS super specials!!!!.

 

Arty turns me away from investing in this game anymore completely

and it was an investment.

 

WG well their stocking will be empty.

 

New computer before spring too :)



WhineMaker #164 Posted Dec 07 2018 - 20:51

    Major

  • Players
  • 38553 battles
  • 6,447
  • [WHAAA] WHAAA
  • Member since:
    04-21-2011

View PostWtornado, on Dec 07 2018 - 10:52, said:

STEAM will be making lots of money at Christmas time with me with their X_MAS super specials!!!!.

 

Arty turns me away from investing in this game anymore completely

and it was an investment.

 

WG well their stocking will be empty.

 

New computer before spring too :)

 

Buh bye Felicia!!!

 

Were you actually expecting a return on your "investment", other than fun and entertainment? Seriously?

 

Should I move some of my portfolio into WoT gold, premium time and tanks? :confused:

 

View PostMikosah, on Dec 07 2018 - 10:36, said:

 

You could look at it another way- that lights, mediums, heavies, and TDs aren't so radically different and there's a fair amount of overlap between the tasks that they'll regularly undertake. For instance, a fast medium can more or less play as a light tank, and some heavily armored TDs are often brawling with the heavies. As the meta shifts, particular roles may increase or decrease in importance but the tanks themselves can adapt by playing a little bit differently or receiving minor balance changes. Even in the most extreme possible example of a whole class getting removed, all the tanks that belonged to that class could conceivably be re-classed as something else without much actually changing in-game. 

 

Arta on the other hand is so much at the mercy of the indirect-fire mechanic that the same does not apply to it at all. For it to be even remotely adapted to any other role simply could not happen so long as it has the indirect-fire, because all other roles demand direct line of sight to the enemy to do whatever they're doing. But many of the conventional tanks could undertake the HE-support role without indirect fire, hence the comparison to machines like the Hetzer and KV-2. 

 

So frame question not so much as "do we need arta?" but instead as "do we really need indirect-fire?"

And I still do not see a clear reason why indirect-fire is a prerequisite to WoT gameplay functioning properly.

 

Don't like the arty mechanic in WoT? WoT Blitz is ready and waiting for you to download so you can enjoy all the arty free games you require... :great:

 

 

 

 



makoko_hero #165 Posted Dec 07 2018 - 21:20

    Private

  • -Players-
  • 761 battles
  • 1
  • Member since:
    07-03-2017

what i dislike about arty now is that it doesn't let u die, instead it shoots u ,nearly kills u, and leaves you with a bunch of damaged modules and injured crew members. its also really annoying when Ur driver is injured, Ur engine damaged, and tracks damaged. it annoyed me to the point where i wish somebody would tk me to put me out of my misery. but to be honest i don't think arty should be removed. its a fun part of the game that makes u watch ur every move knowing that if u go out into the open u could be shot. so i say keep arty.:)



Mikosah #166 Posted Dec 07 2018 - 23:59

    Major

  • Players
  • 17582 battles
  • 4,479
  • Member since:
    01-24-2013

View PostWhineMaker, on Dec 07 2018 - 13:51, said:

 

Don't like the arty mechanic in WoT? WoT Blitz is ready and waiting for you to download so you can enjoy all the arty free games you require... :great:

 

 

Not a fan of game forums where others disagree with you? You can always play minesweeper instead.

Surehoof #167 Posted Dec 08 2018 - 00:29

    Corporal

  • -Players-
  • 31188 battles
  • 20
  • [GR-W] GR-W
  • Member since:
    04-18-2016

Personally I think arty is a good addition to the game that adds a bit of variety, I do think some stuff needs to be tweaked on it. First I think that battles should be limited to 2 arty per battle, for the simple fact that being perma-stunned simply isn't fun game play, at the very least if that change isn't made, it would be nicer to have diminishing returns from stuns. The problem mainly exists at higher tiers, since the large splash radius makes it near impossible to be in a position of cover from artillery. Perma-stun and tracked is even less fun. One should say that if there are three artillery in the battle, it may also not be possible to be in cover, given the different angles of fire the each may have.

 

In any battle with three opposing arty, being spotted first on your team is usually a quick trip back to the garage, so an entire team playing with the goal of "don't be spotted first" frequently doesn't make for dynamic game play.

 

On the side of playing arty, it would be nice if there were more options to do in combat. Personally I like the idea of a siege mode, a 2 second transition isn't much of a disadvantage. Individual animations for some of the heavier arties would be a neat addition. To offset such a mode, it would be nice if the artillery's view range increased in such a mode to give better warning to approaching enemies. Smoke and illumination mechanics would also be nice, or for some to have better direct fire capabilities (ie: standard zoom mode in addition to indirect mode) to give more variation between the tech tree lines.



Derpomagix #168 Posted Dec 08 2018 - 01:33

    Sergeant

  • -Players-
  • 5343 battles
  • 185
  • Member since:
    11-06-2017

I wonder how many threads it'll take before people realize that WG doesn't give a damn about what players think, and that arty will never go away...? 

I reckon another 1278 should get us to that point, don't you think?

 

OP - when 61% of the voters agree that arty is fine, your argument doesn't have much ground to stand on, LOL.



Powerwise #169 Posted Dec 08 2018 - 01:36

    First lieutenant

  • -Players-
  • 12861 battles
  • 541
  • Member since:
    04-16-2011

View PostAltivoMaximus, on Dec 06 2018 - 08:23, said:

Arty was added to the game to reduce camping.. all I feel comfortable doing in any game with more then one arty is camp these days. If I'm on the front lines theirs a pretty good chance I'm losing at least a third of my HP to arty., especially in a medium. 

If WG is so [edited]worried about keeping the [edited]arty population of players playing, you might as well call is WorldofClickers because I'm getting close to just not playing until arty is removed or drastically changed... again. Why do we need the stun? just remove the stun and keep the damage where it is. I'm not upset for hitting for 300 in my tier 10 arty. why would i be? I'm sitting at the back of the map like a [edited].

 

Id' be OK with them removing it and compensating arty players accordingly. If anything arty promotes camping. 

WhineMaker #170 Posted Dec 08 2018 - 02:16

    Major

  • Players
  • 38553 battles
  • 6,447
  • [WHAAA] WHAAA
  • Member since:
    04-21-2011

View PostMikosah, on Dec 07 2018 - 14:59, said:

 

Not a fan of game forums where others disagree with you? You can always play minesweeper instead.

 

Have you looked in a mirror lately?

 

Since you have so many issues with the full pc version of WoT. Which, unfortunately for you, includes arty. You should go play WoT Blitz, arty free, all the time... :great:

 

 

 

I have no need to play Minesweeper, but thanks for the suggestion anyways. I can cope with all the mechanics contained in WoT, and fully enjoy the game with arty... ;)

 

View PostPowerwise, on Dec 07 2018 - 16:36, said:

 

Id' be OK with them removing it and compensating arty players accordingly. If anything arty promotes camping. 
 

 

I'd be okay with removing the anti arty whine club, from WoT, and sending them to WoT Blitz for their arty free games...

 



Exiledcrow #171 Posted Dec 08 2018 - 02:42

    Major

  • Players
  • 50351 battles
  • 2,528
  • [GURUS] GURUS
  • Member since:
    11-26-2011
LOL people KEEP rolling out their stupid, "get rid of arty" polls and keep losing, freaking hilarious, keep it up! :arta::trollface:

Tibors_Tractor #172 Posted Dec 08 2018 - 11:51

    Corporal

  • -Players-
  • 27691 battles
  • 16
  • [-VETS] -VETS
  • Member since:
    01-16-2015
Arty becomes a problem at when there is more than 2 in a game.  For me the game play is more enjoyable when I can use more of the map instead of everyone trying to get to the limited number of arty safe spots on any map.  I also find the stun mechanic ridiculous.  Simple fix:  limit he number per game and make them the way they were before patch 9.8

Rocker_Box #173 Posted Dec 08 2018 - 12:56

    Staff sergeant

  • -Players-
  • 9133 battles
  • 302
  • Member since:
    12-22-2017

View PostSabot_Fun, on Dec 08 2018 - 11:51, said:

Arty becomes a problem at when there is more than 2 in a game.  For me the game play is more enjoyable when I can use more of the map instead of everyone trying to get to the limited number of arty safe spots on any map.  I also find the stun mechanic ridiculous.  Simple fix:  limit he number per game and make them the way they were before patch 9.8

 

With three skilled arty players facing you I'll clue you in on something,  on most maps your arty safe spot doesn't exist! 

 

I'll bet you just love playing on Paris don't ya?



MrShermanTanker #174 Posted Dec 08 2018 - 13:08

    Private

  • -Players-
  • 1329 battles
  • 5
  • Member since:
    03-20-2015
Bruh

You do realise all those videos of artillery gloriously getting all 15 kills is [edited]and only happens in very rare circumstances right

The actual reality of playing Artillery is beautifully shown here:

https://youtu.be/oIO-o2pzghA

OMG!! HE (Panzer Sfl. IVb Driver) KILLED A TANK ON 11 HEALTH IN ARTILLERY AND DESTROYED A LIGHTLY ARMOURED TANK DESTROYER WHO STUPIDLY DROVE UP TO HIM DIRECTLY PLS REMOVE ARTY!1!1!1!1!
Yeah, after he missed almost every shot he fired or was blocked by cover the enemy tanks were behind. This is the true painful reality most artillery drivers face, and not some stupid fantasy where all their shots hit with zero aim and have a 5 seconds reload and can shoot over all cover that artillery haters live in

Plus that video above shows him shooting and getting a direct hit on an enemy tank and it doesn't get one shotted, resulting in his demise

shinglefoot #175 Posted Dec 08 2018 - 17:10

    Major

  • Players
  • 25063 battles
  • 3,484
  • Member since:
    02-07-2013

     Grinding the hell outa my m40/m43...

I hope the tier 9 is even better, it sure looks to be.:great:

 

See you on the battlefield:honoring::izmena:



WhineMaker #176 Posted Dec 08 2018 - 18:11

    Major

  • Players
  • 38553 battles
  • 6,447
  • [WHAAA] WHAAA
  • Member since:
    04-21-2011

View Postshinglefoot, on Dec 08 2018 - 08:10, said:

     Grinding the hell outa my m40/m43...

I hope the tier 9 is even better, it sure looks to be.:great:

 

See you on the battlefield:honoring::izmena:

 

Much, much better!!!

 

Faster reloads, more DPG, more mobility, the turret, did I mention the turret... 

 

 

And it drags tier 8's into higher tier battles... :arta: 



ProfessionalFinn #177 Posted Dec 08 2018 - 18:34

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 26328 battles
  • 2,248
  • Member since:
    02-23-2016

View Postshinglefoot, on Dec 08 2018 - 08:10, said:

     Grinding the hell outa my m40/m43...

I hope the tier 9 is even better, it sure looks to be.:great:

 

See you on the battlefield:honoring::izmena:

 

The grind is worth it!  You will love the M53/M55, screen-shot is mine.



VooDooKobra #178 Posted Dec 08 2018 - 19:03

    Major

  • Players
  • 10033 battles
  • 5,954
  • [MOVE] MOVE
  • Member since:
    04-23-2011

View PostWtornado, on Dec 07 2018 - 11:52, said:

STEAM will be making lots of money at Christmas time with me with their X_MAS super specials!!!!.

 

Arty turns me away from investing in this game anymore completely

and it was an investment.

 

WG well their stocking will be empty.

 

New computer before spring too :)

 

so let me understand you, what you are saying is unless WG gives those who like arty and who are unable to play anything out a giant middle finger and removes something you dont like you will be spending your money elsewhere

 

View PostMikosah, on Dec 07 2018 - 11:36, said:

 

You could look at it another way- that lights, mediums, heavies, and TDs aren't so radically different and there's a fair amount of overlap between the tasks that they'll regularly undertake. For instance, a fast medium can more or less play as a light tank, and some heavily armored TDs are often brawling with the heavies. As the meta shifts, particular roles may increase or decrease in importance but the tanks themselves can adapt by playing a little bit differently or receiving minor balance changes. Even in the most extreme possible example of a whole class getting removed, all the tanks that belonged to that class could conceivably be re-classed as something else without much actually changing in-game. 

 

Arta on the other hand is so much at the mercy of the indirect-fire mechanic that the same does not apply to it at all. For it to be even remotely adapted to any other role simply could not happen so long as it has the indirect-fire, because all other roles demand direct line of sight to the enemy to do whatever they're doing. But many of the conventional tanks could undertake the HE-support role without indirect fire, hence the comparison to machines like the Hetzer and KV-2. 

 

So frame question not so much as "do we need arta?" but instead as "do we really need indirect-fire?"

And I still do not see a clear reason why indirect-fire is a prerequisite to WoT gameplay functioning properly.

 

I think we as a player base tend to try and over think things, i mean i remember playing shooters with the noob tube.  was it needed?  no, was it hated?  yes, did people get mad and demand the game be changed to how they want to play?  no.  I believe that with a reasonable blast radius and a way to further combat stun you have a good step to something players will tolerate.  id doesnt matter if arty did 1 dmg and took 10 minutes to reload there will still be those who dont like it.  I have stated it before, if the player base would have been wanting it removed in beta instead of so far down the line it would have been more plausible.   now you have to deal with quite a bit of compensation, and even then you cant really replace the time spent.  as well by removing arty and its indirect fire you are removing that one class that some players are able to play and thus forcing them out of the game which is not fair.

shinglefoot #179 Posted Dec 08 2018 - 20:15

    Major

  • Players
  • 25063 battles
  • 3,484
  • Member since:
    02-07-2013

View PostWhineMaker, on Dec 08 2018 - 13:11, said:

 

Much, much better!!!

 

Faster reloads, more DPG, more mobility, the turret, did I mention the turret... 

 

 

And it drags tier 8's into higher tier battles... :arta: 

 

View PostProfessionalFinn, on Dec 08 2018 - 13:34, said:

 

The grind is worth it!  You will love the M53/M55, screen-shot is mine.

 

     Nice...really liking this one so far. Decent accuracy, much better than the m12.

Chiapetofdoom #180 Posted Dec 08 2018 - 21:37

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 16330 battles
  • 33
  • Member since:
    05-08-2013

 

SU-14-1 MAX CHEESE here. Check me, I play it far too often. I am not going to tell you to switch to blitz or something like that crap...

 

Admission first, then some possible options for people who are upset:

 

There is no denying in a tier 7 match maker that a 203mm, avg 1050 damage, 26 meter volcano explosion is not cheese as hell. Even smaller aoe can be cheese. You will not find cover on most maps to save you from that unless you go out of your way to cramp yourself against a large building or wall. I can still probably aoe the crap out of you there. Thankfully (not to me) some of the walls and buildings have been expanded. Most still do not line up perfectly enough for a bored arty player to simply try new spots or angles to mix up enemy teams.

 

I personally enjoyed what I considered a buff in the last arty change. Not only do I do more aoe, I stun more, and get more xp and credits from allies blasting enemies. I'm causing module damage, making people spend repair kits when my team will be happy knowing they can track them later without worry, etc.

 

OPTIONS (there are a few):

 

Try playing passive scouting lights some: A good arty will still nail you waiting for you to pop up in a location on your zipping around route. I passive scout a lot and if you move far enough forward in small tanks you can often find bushes and locales no one would assume you are in. Passive scouting is not trash, even if you are forced to fall back to your own line - your extensive view range will help spot for tank destroyers (whom hopefully know to fall back, fire, then move back up so they don't fire once and die...)

 

Play high camo tank destroyers. There are plenty around. Russia especially has lots of velveeta like the SU-152. I have stopped waves of enemy teams now and then just using that thing. Binocs and nets are your friends.

 

OTHERWISE:

 

Yes it sucks. Mediums have a chance when they dance around a lot. Heavies you just have to take it most the time. You are a piñata if you don't cling to cover.

Superheavies/doomturtle can often absorb the shots with little damage if rngjezuz is with you.

 

BOTTOM LINE:

 

Artillery fire keeps people from going places. It makes some people relocate across an entire map just to avoid it. You can halt a ton of hesitant players in what little cover they can find instead of charging the open.

 

Is this good for overall gameplay? I'm not sure. While I enjoy helping my team hold out, it certainly does not stop people from simply taking cover. When there are 2-3 arty trained on the exit to a city or mesa edge, I don't know many people who want to go around that, especially if there are even 1-2 tanks to trade hp with as well.

 

Full disclosure, I believe arty promotes taking cover, and cautious game play. It narrowly defines where you can flank an enemy (hull down restricted to fighting around corners, etc.)

One arty per team would be plenty, just enough to aid someone if they cant pen a tank they are fighting, and desperately need help tracking and damaging them otherwise.

 

No trolling intended in this post, just possibly sad realism.

 

Edit:typos because I'm a doofus.

 







Also tagged with artillery, arty, remove

1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users