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

elitewardog #201 Posted Dec 10 2018 - 18:27

    Corporal

  • -Players-
  • 47611 battles
  • 92
  • Member since:
    12-10-2014
The Leaf Blower  will be out during the Christmas OPs this year.....wait for it.....Let the whiners begin....HA HA HA

WhineMaker #202 Posted Dec 10 2018 - 18:39

    Major

  • Players
  • 38631 battles
  • 6,503
  • [WHAAA] WHAAA
  • Member since:
    04-21-2011

View Postelitewardog, on Dec 10 2018 - 09:27, said:

The Leaf Blower  will be out during the Christmas OPs this year.....wait for it.....Let the whiners begin....HA HA HA

 

Is it a coincidence, WG will be offering a topical cream/ointment to relieve some of the butthurt of the anti arty whine club, in the premium shop at the same time... :arta:

 

 

What a great marketing idea... :coin:



Trauglodyte #203 Posted Dec 10 2018 - 19:16

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 23747 battles
  • 3,813
  • [GSH] GSH
  • Member since:
    06-04-2016

View PostKeepYourselfSnazzy_xD, on Dec 10 2018 - 09:58, said:

I like how all the not so good players under-performers on this thread are defending such a broken mechanic cuz they probably can't play any other tank. That's just me tho...

 

I like how the try-hards try to bash on peoples' stats when said players are only good in the broken tanks in this game.  In case you missed it, I'm talking about you.  Your stats are very good - better than mine.  But, in looking at your stats, something really shines through:  everything of note that is keeping your stats alive is horribly broken.  Which is ironic because you're very good in the IS-7, Obj 140, T54, T-10, etc.  Yet, you're mediocre in the Mutz, Skorpion G, IS-6, IS-3, etc. and the stats on lesser tanks are all tomato red.  I mean, I'm REALLY impressed by your 400+ games in the Pz. I C and just as equally impressed by that 45% win rate and 850 wn8 in the IS-6.  Well done!

 

So, do you really want to sling crap at people because I can do this all day!  Yes, almost all of my tanks are green versus your mostly blue.  Big deal!  But, don't go acting like you're something special when you don't have the capacity or "skill" to make the actually difficult tanks work.



ProfessionalFinn #204 Posted Dec 10 2018 - 19:20

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 26391 battles
  • 2,265
  • Member since:
    02-23-2016

View PostTrauglodyte, on Dec 10 2018 - 10:16, said:

 

I like how the try-hards try to bash on peoples' stats when said players are only good in the broken tanks in this game.  In case you missed it, I'm talking about you.  Your stats are very good - better than mine.  But, in looking at your stats, something really shines through:  everything of note that is keeping your stats alive is horribly broken.  Which is ironic because you're very good in the IS-7, Obj 140, T54, T-10, etc.  Yet, you're mediocre in the Mutz, Skorpion G, IS-6, IS-3, etc. and the stats on lesser tanks are all tomato red.  I mean, I'm REALLY impressed by your 400+ games in the Pz. I C and just as equally impressed by that 45% win rate and 850 wn8 in the IS-6.  Well done!

 

So, do you really want to sling crap at people because I can do this all day!  Yes, almost all of my tanks are green versus your mostly blue.  Big deal!  But, don't go acting like you're something special when you don't have the capacity or "skill" to make the actually difficult tanks work.

 

QuickyBaby has excellent insight into the only reason anyone would resort to stat-shaming.  Found in the 1st minute of the vid.

 

 



WhineMaker #205 Posted Dec 10 2018 - 19:42

    Major

  • Players
  • 38631 battles
  • 6,503
  • [WHAAA] WHAAA
  • Member since:
    04-21-2011

View PostTrauglodyte, on Dec 10 2018 - 10:16, said:

 

I like how the try-hards try to bash on peoples' stats when said players are only good in the broken tanks in this game.  In case you missed it, I'm talking about you.  Your stats are very good - better than mine.  But, in looking at your stats, something really shines through:  everything of note that is keeping your stats alive is horribly broken.  Which is ironic because you're very good in the IS-7, Obj 140, T54, T-10, etc.  Yet, you're mediocre in the Mutz, Skorpion G, IS-6, IS-3, etc. and the stats on lesser tanks are all tomato red.  I mean, I'm REALLY impressed by your 400+ games in the Pz. I C and just as equally impressed by that 45% win rate and 850 wn8 in the IS-6.  Well done!

 

So, do you really want to sling crap at people because I can do this all day!  Yes, almost all of my tanks are green versus your mostly blue.  Big deal!  But, don't go acting like you're something special when you don't have the capacity or "skill" to make the actually difficult tanks work.

 

Shots fired... :hiding:

 

 

+1



scHnuuudle_bop #206 Posted Dec 10 2018 - 20:43

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 21501 battles
  • 3,720
  • Member since:
    05-03-2016

View PostFireplace4, on Dec 10 2018 - 16:36, said:

 

Ask anyone who is good at this game (I am not good by the way, not trying to claim that I am) and they will tell you that they can pretty reliably hit blind shots on hidden TDs, I even hit 1 every couple of games (the situation doesn't arise all that often where I am hit without knowing where they were to begin with). Line up the damage marker with your reticule and all you have to do is guess the Y axis which generally isn't hard (look for the bushes). The problem I'm pointing out is that while TDs need a clear line of site to hit you while arty does not. A TD cannot hit you past render range or past buildings or rubble. It takes skill for a TD to avoid detection while firing, they have to be in a good position, pull back behind bushes. Arty does not need to use skill to avoid detection while firing for the vast majority of the game. They can just sit at the back of the map where no one can see them. When a TD shoots you then you ALWAYS have the OPPORTUNITY to shoot back at him. This is almost bever true with arty, you almost never have the OPPORTUNITY to shoot back

Lining up what? When are you supposed to accomplish this magic? Before or after you seek cover?

For a start, that damage indicator last a few seconds. Second, even the smallest of movement on your part it becomes worthless. And the shot direction is overwritten with any new shots.

Which rock, shoot at which side of the rock? That bush, or the one further up the hill? How about the rock at the bottom of the hill? Perhaps was just passing through and took a shot while moving. Did he back down the hill, or move a bit forward?

This is a hypothetical event, it can be replicated in test maps.  Never seen a replay, just youtube controlled tests. It is just a myth or at best, exaggerated beyond belief. 

 

You keep bring up, line of sight. These cannons have different lines of fire, both a TD and artillery would need LoF. not sight.

 

Neither example has any line of sight, none, no line of sight. It means they cannot see each other. There are things blocking the view. Sight, seeing.

TD, tank, artillery, an aardvark, if they cannot   see, it means they cannot be seen.

 

A TD hidden behind bushed has the same line of sight as an artillery behind a hill. none.

 

Targeting, impossible to target an enemy not seen, only one way, be it, TD, tank, artillery, or an aardvark, they must be spotted to be targeted.

 

Even after being spotted, the victim may not be able to target whether TD or arty. Members of his team may.  a teammate frequently,can retaliate for you. It maybe more successful, if all that map knowledge was put to pointing out these dangers to the team, rather than attempting low probability blind shots.

 

Frequently, due to game conditions and the strategies in various maps. Prok is a good example. Those on the hill , most shoot down on spotted enemies out in the field, often right at the edge of render ranges. Vice versa. From the field you cannot see the unspotted enemies shooting at you.

 

Even more important, from the top of that hill, given unlimited range, a TD or tank, should be able to decimate the enemy team, based on mini map dots, get zoomed in, use map knowledge, pick the bush you "know" has the spotted enemy,well out side of the render range. Game would be a lot quicker. Why does this never happen? 

 

A player "who knows what they are doing," should be able to successfully, blind shoot pretty well any bush within LoF and beyond their render range.

 

 


Edited by scHnuuudle_bop, Dec 10 2018 - 21:13.


ProfessionalFinn #207 Posted Dec 10 2018 - 21:23

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 26391 battles
  • 2,265
  • Member since:
    02-23-2016

Just learned machine guns, yes MGs, have been used as indirect fire weapons. In my current read of the wonderful book, "Sons of Freedom- The Forgotten American Soldiers Who Defeated Germany in World War I", the Americans learned this the hard way.  The Germans were expert machine gunners.  Their detailed study of the topography and knowledge of ballistics allowed them to target Yanks on the reverse side of a hill by using the arch of the Mauser 7.92 round to their advantage.  Indirect fire by a machine gun, what a concept.  https://www.basicboo.../9780465093922/

 

FULL DISCLAIMER.  Since WoT is a game of entertainment and as such rightly deploys unrealistic capabilities,  IMO it matters not if constructs are "real" or "unreal".  What is highly amusing however that a "real" construct like indirect fire is often portrayed as "unreal" by those who embrace crazy constructs crew-member death to life and self-healing tracks.

 

 



Trauglodyte #208 Posted Dec 10 2018 - 21:33

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 23747 battles
  • 3,813
  • [GSH] GSH
  • Member since:
    06-04-2016

View PostProfessionalFinn, on Dec 10 2018 - 21:23, said:

Just learned machine guns, yes MGs, have been used as indirect fire weapons. In my current read of the wonderful book, "Sons of Freedom- The Forgotten American Soldiers Who Defeated Germany in World War I", the Americans learned this the hard way.  The Germans were expert machine gunners.  Their detailed study of the topography and knowledge of ballistics allowed them to target Yanks on the reverse side of a hill by using the arch of the Mauser 7.92 round to their advantage.  Indirect fire by a machine gun, what a concept.  https://www.basicboo.../9780465093922/

 

FULL DISCLAIMER.  Since WoT is a game of entertainment and as such rightly deploys unrealistic capabilities,  IMO it matters not if constructs are "real" or "unreal".  What is highly amusing however that a "real" construct like indirect fire is often portrayed as "unreal" by those who embrace crazy constructs crew-member death to life and self-healing tracks.

 

 

 

There was a picture that I saw, and I can't freaking find it, of a bunch of Pershings lined up on an incline being used as makeshift artillery pieces during the Korean War.  When in a pinch, make due with what you've got.  Anyway, to your point of using MGs as indirect fire, it isn't much different than using a hard sight on the M203 grenade launcher which is nothing more than the same sight that they used on rifles back in the 1800's.

ProfessionalFinn #209 Posted Dec 10 2018 - 21:35

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 26391 battles
  • 2,265
  • Member since:
    02-23-2016

View PostTrauglodyte, on Dec 10 2018 - 12:33, said:

 

There was a picture that I saw, and I can't freaking find it, of a bunch of Pershings lined up on an incline being used as makeshift artillery pieces during the Korean War.  When in a pinch, make due with what you've got.  Anyway, to your point of using MGs as indirect fire, it isn't much different than using a hard sight on the M203 grenade launcher which is nothing more than the same sight that they used on rifles back in the 1800's.

 

Yet indirect fire is disabused and characterized as artificial by some on this forum.  Odd isn't it.

ProfessionalFinn #210 Posted Dec 10 2018 - 21:38

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 26391 battles
  • 2,265
  • Member since:
    02-23-2016

Pershing used for indirect fire video...



Spanktankk #211 Posted Dec 10 2018 - 21:54

    Major

  • Players
  • 37149 battles
  • 11,110
  • [KFB] KFB
  • Member since:
    04-19-2011
my new siggy, in yellow.

russoLF #212 Posted Dec 10 2018 - 22:44

    Corporal

  • -Players-
  • 16540 battles
  • 12
  • [T1T4N] T1T4N
  • Member since:
    10-20-2015
1 arty by battle 

Double_O7 #213 Posted Dec 10 2018 - 23:22

    First lieutenant

  • -Players-
  • 6076 battles
  • 655
  • Member since:
    01-29-2012

View Postshinglefoot, on Dec 06 2018 - 07:26, said:

     Arty whiners need to go...

And when they do....there won't be any salty tears to drink, and the game will be dead



WhineMaker #214 Posted Dec 10 2018 - 23:41

    Major

  • Players
  • 38631 battles
  • 6,503
  • [WHAAA] WHAAA
  • Member since:
    04-21-2011

View PostDouble_O7, on Dec 10 2018 - 14:22, said:

And when they do....there won't be any salty tears to drink, and the game will be dead

 

In your opinion only...

 

Might make the forums and chat less toxic as a result... :great:

 



Moridin_707 #215 Posted Dec 10 2018 - 23:58

    Staff sergeant

  • -Players-
  • 20466 battles
  • 408
  • Member since:
    04-26-2015
This poll just demonstrates that arty haters are the loud minority. 

Victam #216 Posted Dec 11 2018 - 00:47

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 9268 battles
  • 59
  • [TG] TG
  • Member since:
    06-10-2011

View PostESQD_Pugnax, on Dec 06 2018 - 08:05, said:

 

“player requested features” “data”....

 

Yo.....where'd you pull the avatar from?

Mikosah #217 Posted Dec 11 2018 - 01:04

    Major

  • Players
  • 17582 battles
  • 4,494
  • Member since:
    01-24-2013

View PostVooDooKobra, on Dec 08 2018 - 12:03, said:

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.

 

For the record I was one of those guys who thought COD4 and MW2 were on the cusp of being masterpieces if not for needless game design mistakes like the noobtubes. That is exactly my position both for those games and this one- that mechanics like these were simple mistakes and nothing more. Had the respective devs just not included them in the first place, their products would have been even more successful both critically and financially. And the only thing keeping these mistakes alive today is just the investment that players have already made. 

 

As for the notion that if so players should have demanded the removal of arta from the earliest days of beta testing, to that I say that WoT is incredibly counterintuitive and even devoted players need time to properly figure it out. I myself thought arta was great when I was new to the game because at that stage of my career my tactics were incredibly underdeveloped. It took months to finally understand and accept that matches aren't won or lost through fine marksmanship, they're won or lost through movement and positioning. Lo and behold, by the time the first batches of good players were just figuring this out several years ago is when we started to see the rise of the anti-arta sentiment. Not simply that arta is obnoxious and unnecessary, but that it tricks players who don't know any better into thinking they can just park in spawn and be 'tactical' via the left mouse button alone.

 

And as of the players who are physically incapable of playing any other class, believe it or not I do have some sympathy for them. But they're a very tiny minority here. The far more common arta player is the kind who is fully capable of using both hands at the same time but just isn't in the mood to. Many of my colleagues would likely attribute this to stupidity and ignorance, but I think the answer is something much simpler. Laziness.



Double_O7 #218 Posted Dec 11 2018 - 01:15

    First lieutenant

  • -Players-
  • 6076 battles
  • 655
  • Member since:
    01-29-2012

View PostWhineMaker, on Dec 10 2018 - 16:41, said:

 

In your opinion only...

 

Might make the forums and chat less toxic as a result... :great:

 

Mmmmm. No. 

 

Like it or not, arty is causing players to leave wg completely, or going to play blitz (which would still take players from wot pc and kill the game). 

 

Look around on the web and arty is clearly discussed as an issue worldwide. Even the Russians hate it. Even if you ask in game what people think about arty, most of them, even some of the ones playing arty, will say they hate it. A lot of arty haters just leave and don't even bother with the forums. 

 

 



Double_O7 #219 Posted Dec 11 2018 - 01:23

    First lieutenant

  • -Players-
  • 6076 battles
  • 655
  • Member since:
    01-29-2012

View PostVooDooKobra, on Dec 08 2018 - 12:03, said:

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.

 

This was recognized as an issue as far back as 2012, if not earlier. There was a huge forum post (I forget who wrote it) about why arty is bad and doesn't belong in the game. Wargaming just called him a krayfish and ignored him along with all the others arguing for arty removal


Edited by Double_O7, Dec 11 2018 - 01:25.


shinglefoot #220 Posted Dec 11 2018 - 01:27

    Major

  • Players
  • 25072 battles
  • 3,484
  • Member since:
    02-07-2013

View PostDouble_O7, on Dec 10 2018 - 20:23, said:

 

This was recognized as an issue as far back as 2012, if not earlier. There was a huge forum post (I forget who wrote it) about why arty is bad and doesn't belong in the game. Wargaming just called him a krayfish and ignored him along with all the others arguing for arty removal

 

     Your new poll is crap and your tears are delicious...

Edited by shinglefoot, Dec 11 2018 - 01:27.






Also tagged with artillery, arty, remove

1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users