Jump to content


What do you think about the arty rebalance announcement?


  • Please log in to reply
62 replies to this topic

Poll: Arty rebalance anyone? (127 members have cast votes)

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

What do you think about the new arty rebalance?

  1. About time (14 votes [11.02%])

    Percentage of vote: 11.02%

  2. Not enough (24 votes [18.90%])

    Percentage of vote: 18.90%

  3. Yay!! (8 votes [6.30%])

    Percentage of vote: 6.30%

  4. Just remove sky cancer altogether. (48 votes [37.80%])

    Percentage of vote: 37.80%

  5. Can't vote cause I'm crying (14 votes [11.02%])

    Percentage of vote: 11.02%

  6. Huh? Someone said bacon? (19 votes [14.96%])

    Percentage of vote: 14.96%

Vote Hide poll

AverageWannabe #1 Posted Mar 22 2019 - 19:01

    Captain

  • -Players-
  • 6910 battles
  • 1,528
  • Member since:
    11-21-2018

let's see how that goes...

 

:arta::arta::arta::arta::arta::arta:


Edited by AverageWannabe, Mar 22 2019 - 19:03.


NutrientibusMeaGallus #2 Posted Mar 22 2019 - 19:04

    Major

  • Players
  • 22674 battles
  • 5,663
  • [FILOX] FILOX
  • Member since:
    10-26-2012
  I think they should have used this opportunity to cap arty at 2 per side not 3....

LeaveIT2Beaver #3 Posted Mar 22 2019 - 19:07

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 37174 battles
  • 9,884
  • [J4F] J4F
  • Member since:
    07-04-2014
Honestly, I think it was a "make work" project at the home office to keep somebody's name up on the project board that is not doing crap to fix the crap. 

Bad_Oedipus #4 Posted Mar 22 2019 - 19:09

    Captain

  • -Players-
  • 44898 battles
  • 1,589
  • [PL1AD] PL1AD
  • Member since:
    08-09-2014

I’m crawling along in my Maus equipped with spall liner.  I get a direct hit by French SPG for 0 damage + 16 second stun.  Annoying though no big deal.  Twenty seconds later, they fart in my general direction again, this time they hit another tank just inside 8m away from mine.  My crew is stunned for 11 seconds, no damage of course.  A lightly armored Progetto sitting next to me is also stunned for about the same time and no damage. 

 

I would like to see minimum stun duration behave more like damage, dropping significantly based on distance of center of explosion and affected by armor.  

WG could consider some of tanks as a 2m rock or a wall (Type 4,5 Maus and E100) shielding smaller tanks form the blast… though it may be to tough calculate, even for Belorussian math wizzes.

 

Another consideration is to limit 2 SPGs per team.  I’ve been in games where 3 artillery players per side kept 10 tanks in permanent stun (4 Bat Chats total).  Note that in Front Line we were limited to 3 of those things per side, on bigger map and twice the team size.  SPG annoyance factor was close to null, though it seamed that everyone wanted to play it.

 

Just my thoughts on this subject.


Edited by Bad_Oedipus, Mar 22 2019 - 19:10.


the_Deadly_Bulb #5 Posted Mar 22 2019 - 19:10

    Major

  • Players
  • 27000 battles
  • 6,593
  • [WCTNT] WCTNT
  • Member since:
    03-11-2014

Another biased poll.

 

 

A poll that's of any use has options to cover all sides of a debate.

Yours is biased and therefore just a form of self soothing.

 

Afraid to put in a "no change was needed" or "return arty to its former glory"? :sceptic:



F4U_wingman #6 Posted Mar 22 2019 - 19:31

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 86143 battles
  • 970
  • [T-GBU] T-GBU
  • Member since:
    10-17-2013

View Postthe_Deadly_Bulb, on Mar 22 2019 - 10:10, said:

Another biased poll.

A poll that's of any use has options to cover all sides of a debate.

Yours is biased and therefore just a form of self soothing.

Afraid to put in a "no change was needed" or "return aryy to its former glory"? :sceptic:

 

I agree.... this is a "political poll" with only one agenda and one outcome. 

HondoDuke #7 Posted Mar 22 2019 - 19:39

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 29808 battles
  • 35
  • [DNGR] DNGR
  • Member since:
    07-07-2011
WG has already failed with this idea, instead of rebalancing arty as a whole they are nerfing one mechanic. Lucky for them most people dislike arty players enough that no one will really care about arty players receiving less xp and credits per battle. I'm sure its going to break the missions too.

scHnuuudle_bop #8 Posted Mar 22 2019 - 19:44

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 20650 battles
  • 3,720
  • Member since:
    05-03-2016

Well, this is a whole lot of fuss over nothing.

 

The stun has a very minor change, and other than that a few very minor updates to a few selected vehicles.

 

You really need to read the changes.

https://worldoftanks...lancing-032119/

 

I want some more premium artillery, not little tweaks to the stun, or changing the shell speeds of the CGC.

 

Anyway, have some bacon, whatever you are excited about is not happening.



gpc_4 #9 Posted Mar 22 2019 - 20:03

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 42993 battles
  • 4,717
  • [DHO-X] DHO-X
  • Member since:
    07-06-2014
This rebalance hardly changes anything. Minor arty nerf. Which is fine by me; I'm comfortable with the current state of SPGs.

the_Deadly_Bulb #10 Posted Mar 22 2019 - 20:15

    Major

  • Players
  • 27000 battles
  • 6,593
  • [WCTNT] WCTNT
  • Member since:
    03-11-2014

View Postgpc_4, on Mar 22 2019 - 11:03, said:

This rebalance hardly changes anything. Minor arty nerf. Which is fine by me; I'm comfortable with the current state of SPGs.

 

So I guess you didn't listen to the entire vid, or comprehend the meaning of,

"Also the characteristics of some vehicles will be re balanced for their performance to be readjusted after the stun mechanic changes

These changes will effect both specific vehicles and entire groups of vehicles.

We hope that players playing both with and against these vehicles see these as positive steps forward."

 

Its not over yet. Now comes the readjustment of various vehicles and groups of vehicles.

You're OK with some of your tanks being changed too?

We'll see. :hiding:



gpc_4 #11 Posted Mar 22 2019 - 20:23

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 42993 battles
  • 4,717
  • [DHO-X] DHO-X
  • Member since:
    07-06-2014

View Postthe_Deadly_Bulb, on Mar 22 2019 - 20:15, said:

 

So I guess you didn't listen to the entire vid, or comprehend the meaning of,

"Also the characteristics of some vehicles will be re balanced for their performance to be readjusted after the stun mechanic changes

These changes will effect both specific vehicles and entire groups of vehicles.

We hope that players playing both with and against these vehicles see these as positive steps forward."

 

Its not over yet. Now comes the readjustment of various vehicles and groups of vehicles.

You're OK with some of your tanks being changed too?

We'll see. :hiding:

 

Yes, I am comfortable, and in favor, of WG working to keep the game balanced.

F4U_wingman #12 Posted Mar 22 2019 - 20:27

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 86143 battles
  • 970
  • [T-GBU] T-GBU
  • Member since:
    10-17-2013

View PostscHnuuudle_bop, on Mar 22 2019 - 10:44, said:

Well, this is a whole lot of fuss over nothing.

 

The stun has a very minor change, and other than that a few very minor updates to a few selected vehicles.

 

You really need to read the changes.

https://worldoftanks...lancing-032119/

 

I want some more premium artillery, not little tweaks to the stun, or changing the shell speeds of the CGC.

 

Anyway, have some bacon, whatever you are excited about is not happening.

 

Agree ... need premium tier 8 ARTY for Front Line :)

the_Deadly_Bulb #13 Posted Mar 22 2019 - 20:28

    Major

  • Players
  • 27000 battles
  • 6,593
  • [WCTNT] WCTNT
  • Member since:
    03-11-2014

View Postgpc_4, on Mar 22 2019 - 11:23, said:

 

Yes, I am comfortable, and in favor, of WG working to keep the game balanced.

 

Very gracious of you.

I await your evaluation of these changes once you actually know what they are. 



thorus08 #14 Posted Mar 22 2019 - 20:36

    Staff sergeant

  • Beta Testers
  • 28819 battles
  • 350
  • [200IQ] 200IQ
  • Member since:
    12-28-2010

View Postthe_Deadly_Bulb, on Mar 22 2019 - 14:28, said:

Very gracious of you.

I await your evaluation of these changes once you actually know what they are. 

I'm not sure what you're expecting of him.  You expect him to be "up in arms" over other changes they may implement but haven't directly stated yet?

He even stated how he feels about what we do know currently...

 

View Postgpc_4, on Mar 22 2019 - 14:03, said:

This rebalance hardly changes anything. Minor arty nerf. Which is fine by me; I'm comfortable with the current state of SPGs.

Stating how you feel about what you DO know and not overreacting to things you DON'T know is pretty level headed, not gracious.  People from both sides need to relax a little.  There could be more to come, there might not be, or after testing they may tone some of the changes back.


Edited by thorus08, Mar 22 2019 - 20:42.


Flarvin #15 Posted Mar 22 2019 - 20:41

    Major

  • Players
  • 54241 battles
  • 16,099
  • Member since:
    03-29-2013

View PostscHnuuudle_bop, on Mar 22 2019 - 13:44, said:

Well, this is a whole lot of fuss over nothing.

 

The stun has a very minor change, and other than that a few very minor updates to a few selected vehicles.

 

You really need to read the changes.

https://worldoftanks...lancing-032119/

 

I want some more premium artillery, not little tweaks to the stun, or changing the shell speeds of the CGC.

 

Anyway, have some bacon, whatever you are excited about is not happening.

 

That is ~20% reduction in damage for arty. 

 

I would say 20% reduction in damage is a little more than nothing. 



the_Deadly_Bulb #16 Posted Mar 22 2019 - 20:43

    Major

  • Players
  • 27000 battles
  • 6,593
  • [WCTNT] WCTNT
  • Member since:
    03-11-2014

View Postthorus08, on Mar 22 2019 - 11:36, said:

I'm not sue what you're expecting of him.  You expect him to be "up in arms" over other changes they may implement but haven't directly stated yet?

He even stated how he feels about what we do know currently...

 

Stating how you feel about what you DO know and not overreacting to things you DON'T know is pretty level headed, not gracious.  People from both sides need to relax a little.  There could be more to come, there might not be, or after testing they may tone some of the changes back.

 

It says in your sig that you play mostly Mediums.

 

Keeping in mind that I am not an arty player and have no anti or pro arty sentiments please consider the following.

How would you feel if WG decided to nerf the entire Medium Class, across all nations, because the player base didn't like being damaged by Mediums?

How would you feel if they did this a number of times?

 

Try to be honest.

Avoid whataboutery if at all possible. :honoring:



thorus08 #17 Posted Mar 22 2019 - 21:04

    Staff sergeant

  • Beta Testers
  • 28819 battles
  • 350
  • [200IQ] 200IQ
  • Member since:
    12-28-2010

View Postthe_Deadly_Bulb, on Mar 22 2019 - 14:43, said:

 

It says in your sig that you play mostly Mediums.

 

Keeping in mind that I am not an arty player and have no anti or pro arty sentiments please consider the following.

How would you feel if WG decided to nerf the entire Medium Class, across all nations, because the player base didn't like being damaged by Mediums?

How would you feel if they did this a number of times?

 

Try to be honest.

Avoid whataboutery if at all possible. :honoring:

 

I think I've dabbed in all classes quite a bit, also currently with the m53/55(T92 unlocked), GCG, and 261, so it's not like I've spent my SPG time in only low tier games or in the "OP only" SPG's such as an m44.

 

You're rationalizing the changes with the premise that changes are only based on a single factor, such as changing the entire medium class because "because the player base didn't like being damaged by Mediums?".  I don't believe WG would change an entire class based on a single factor, but there could be an argument that I would reasonably make for the entire medium class, at least at tier 10.  It's a common argument that their view range often eclipses LT's of their same tier and should be adjust down slightly or LT's view increased slightly.  So I guess if you asked how I felt about the entire class of mediums getting a change such as reducing view range to make LT's more relevant then, I would say "ok!".

 

From what we know right now (they left it open about possible further changes to individual SPG's), the way I'm looking at the approach of WG

1. The changes to stun is more based on QoL improvements for other players, and not necessarily balancing SPG's themselves

2. The damage dropoff for splash I think WG is using as a balancing factor directly for SPG's.  While minor, they must feel the damage dropoff wasn't enough near the very ends of the splash radius.

 

That's my honest opinion.  There's no "whatifferyaboutwhatatod" :medal: Medium view range could be nerfed, lots of heavies could be nerfed by being given actual frontal weakspots.  Given how meta shifts entire classes could, and probably should, be re-balanced every once in awhile.  Hell, I'd take an alpha nerf across the board for any vehicle with over ~390 alpha.

 



the_Deadly_Bulb #18 Posted Mar 22 2019 - 21:14

    Major

  • Players
  • 27000 battles
  • 6,593
  • [WCTNT] WCTNT
  • Member since:
    03-11-2014

View Postthorus08, on Mar 22 2019 - 12:04, said:

 

I think I've dabbed in all classes quite a bit, also currently with the m53/55(T92 unlocked), GCG, and 261, so it's not like I've spent my SPG time in only low tier games or in the "OP only" SPG's such as an m44.

 

You're rationalizing the changes with the premise that changes are only based on a single factor, such as changing the entire medium class because "because the player base didn't like being damaged by Mediums?".  I don't believe WG would change an entire class based on a single factor, but there could be an argument that I would reasonably make for the entire medium class, at least at tier 10.  It's a common argument that their view range often eclipses LT's of their same tier and should be adjust down slightly or LT's view increased slightly.  So I guess if you asked how I felt about the entire class of mediums getting a change such as reducing view range to make LT's more relevant then, I would say "ok!".

 

From what we know right now (they left it open about possible further changes to individual SPG's), the way I'm looking at the approach of WG

1. The changes to stun is more based on QoL improvements for other players, and not necessarily balancing SPG's themselves

2. The damage dropoff for splash I think WG is using as a balancing factor directly for SPG's.  While minor, they must feel the damage dropoff wasn't enough near the very ends of the splash radius.

 

That's my honest opinion.  There's no "whatifferyaboutwhatatod" :medal: Medium view range could be nerfed, lots of heavies could be nerfed by being given actual frontal weakspots.  Given how meta shifts entire classes could, and probably should, be re-balanced every once in awhile.  Hell, I'd take an alpha nerf across the board for any vehicle with over ~390 alpha.

 

 

You are unique among unicums. :honoring:

 

 

I think if Meds were given the nerf bat across the board there would be a firestorm by the majority.

Then again I'm still waiting for the prammo shoe to drop.

 

Some have already said the prammo adjustment is a buff to heavily armoured tanks, now there are also some who are saying the same about this step.

I'm very curious to see exactly what the followup steps will be. The part where the adjust specific vehicles and groups of vehicles to re balance after these changes.

 

For myself all it means is that I will likely abandon the desire to complete Campaigns with Honours and instead go with using orders to avoid the arty missions as much as possible.

I don't really enjoy arty now, so this will pretty much cause me to abandon all hopes for this class as it pertains to me.

Seems like this is WGs desire.



thorus08 #19 Posted Mar 22 2019 - 21:34

    Staff sergeant

  • Beta Testers
  • 28819 battles
  • 350
  • [200IQ] 200IQ
  • Member since:
    12-28-2010

View Postthe_Deadly_Bulb, on Mar 22 2019 - 15:14, said:

I think if Meds were given the nerf bat across the board there would be a firestorm by the majority.

Then again I'm still waiting for the prammo shoe to drop.

 

Some have already said the prammo adjustment is a buff to heavily armoured tanks, now there are also some who are saying the same about this step.

I'm very curious to see exactly what the followup steps will be. The part where the adjust specific vehicles and groups of vehicles to re balance after these changes.

I think the prammo "problem" is a symptom of a combination of the holy trinity that WG has created, corridor maps, new tanks with insignificant or nonexistent(in some cases) frontal weak spots, and our current MM.  Now that I think about it, typically when they release an individual tank that's seen as OP adjustments are made somewhat slow (see for the obj264v8 changes, that should have been seen day 1).  SPG's were reworked quite awhile ago in 9.18?  If these changes were brought up not long after 9.18 there probably would be less reactionary opinions. 

 

Waiting this long made people pretty comfortable with our current mechanics(of those that enjoyed it that is).



WeSayNotToday #20 Posted Mar 22 2019 - 21:38

    Captain

  • -Players-
  • 23075 battles
  • 1,009
  • Member since:
    04-08-2015

Another poll that could be labelled an "whining anti-arty poll."

 

My vote is, "Nerfs currently not needed."






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users