Jump to content


Proposed SPG changes: Why they are a bad idea as presented.


  • Please log in to reply
123 replies to this topic

Red_Miles #1 Posted Mar 24 2019 - 02:22

    Corporal

  • -Players-
  • 2646 battles
  • 62
  • Member since:
    10-03-2014

I am posting at the urging of a friend, who seems to think that reasonable explanations may actually have some influence on the changes and what Wargaming will do.  I wish I had his enthusiasm, but here we are.

 

Artillery used to be massive alpha damage, massive burst damage.  When artillery hit an enemy tank, it was usually the last thing that got to hit them in that round.  Yes, this was frustrating, yes this was overpowered.  We artillery players deserved a lot of the crap we got, because our vehicles were very much overpowered.

 

Which is why I was wholly embracing of the 9.18 changes.  I liked the idea of being switched to a more support role.  I liked the idea of doing less damage, but potentially enabling my allies to do more damage - I liked the idea of being able to fire more frequently, with more accuracy, with that tradeoff.  And I have enjoyed my time playing artillery since the SPG rework.

 

I will, however, point out several things the game has done that has indirectly nerfed the capabilities of artillery to contribute to a victory, chief among those things, the introduction of the armored car lines and the ability for consumables to instantly remove the stun condition.

 

In the case of the latter, allowing first aid kits to remove the stun condition means that our primary mechanic now that our damage has been nerfed can be completely counteracted on a cooldown, and an intelligently playing enemy may well only present themselves as a possible target while that item is on cooldown.  This, coupled with our long reload, long aim, and shell travel time, means that we frequently miss, leaving stun inflicted as our only thing we succeeded in doing for the 30 second reload before we took the shot and the 30 second reload we now have to wait through to try again.  That this stun can then be removed with an ability that is on a cooldown means that our ability to contribute drops spectaculary in fights where targets are able to FAK and undo our minute of work.

 

In the case of the former, artillery is frequently treated as a disposable commodity by many teams, undeserving of any dedicated protection by their teammates.  This is unfortunate, because this is exactly the attitude that armored cars exist to exploit.  They are very fast, very hard to hit targets, especially for artillery acting in self-defense.  The number of times I have been deleted from a game within the first 5 minutes of it by an armored car that then proceeds to kill all the other artillery in the back lines before zooming back out while our teammates are preoccupied is quite high.  This was exactly the behavior that the ELC bis was nerfed away from being able to commit to, but the armored cars do everything the ELC bis used to do, and do it even bigger and better than it did when fully upgraded.

 

The point isn't to whine about armored cars, the point is that their mere existence in a match leaves the often unprotected and ignored artillery at a severe disadvantage.

 

In short: We die fast and often against even middling armored car players.  Our only contribution is frequently the stun damage we inflict, which is then negated with a FAK the second the debuff becomes crucial in helping stop the stunned tank.

 

The proposed SPG changes are...  Problematic, because they are presenting a situation where our ability to contribute to our team's victory through the stun mechanic we were given in trade for our old ridiculously high damage is being massively nerfed, and in addition, many SPGs seem to be under consideration for individual tuning that will make their reload slower, their accuracy lower, and their trajectory slower, leading to longer reloads and more missed shots, with a lowering of our stun contribution as well.  This is very close to undoing everything we were given for reducing our potential damage so drastically in the SPG rework, leaving artillery neutered.  I have seen reports on various player stat aggregating websites that clearly show that even with our stun mechanic, because of team attitude towards artillery, we are as a class the most underperforming class of vehicle with the lowest ability to contribute to a victory compared to all other types of vehicle.  Our stun is the only mechanic we have that enables us to stay where we are on those stats - without it, we will slip even lower.

 

Without some kind of bonuses, some kind of buffs, to offset what is being proposed, you will make artillery even more unrewarding than it can currently be for artillery players.  Think carefully about how you approach the implementation of these proposed changes, Wargaming.  It very much looks like these changes are geared towards putting us back in the same reload, accuracy and difficulty hitting enemies as we used to have, while nerfing the stun ability we were given in exchange for sacrificing our damage, and if you do that, SPG will cease to be playable as a class, because our contribution to our team will be so negligible we will simply be more effective in any other vehicle.  This quote from the novel Ender's Game is, I feel, growing very close to being a summary of what is being to the SPG class of vehicles with these changes.

 

Ender's Game, Orson Scott Card

 "Hey!" he shouted as Anderson moved away. "What is it next time? My army in a cage without guns, with the rest of the Battle School against them?"

 

 


Edited by Red_Miles, Mar 24 2019 - 02:25.


2MOEJOE #2 Posted Mar 24 2019 - 02:40

    First lieutenant

  • -Players-
  • 4080 battles
  • 602
  • Member since:
    11-28-2017
I don't care.

Wingnuttz33 #3 Posted Mar 24 2019 - 02:47

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 22043 battles
  • 267
  • [SCRUU] SCRUU
  • Member since:
    05-14-2011

 A nice thought out, cool headed Post +1

I agree here.

 

I like playing Arty, I can also play the other lines, but i am not that good.

And i don't really enjoy playing them.

And i shouldn't have to settle or move to another tank type.

IF Wargaming needs to go this route, so be it.

I see the writing on the wall for my departure.

One less Artillery player, no loss.

 

Ah, more time for my '65 GTO



NutrientibusMeaGallus #4 Posted Mar 24 2019 - 02:58

    Major

  • Players
  • 22674 battles
  • 5,663
  • [FILOX] FILOX
  • Member since:
    10-26-2012
:popcorn:

Altwar #5 Posted Mar 24 2019 - 03:01

    Major

  • Players
  • 58277 battles
  • 5,222
  • [-GNR-] -GNR-
  • Member since:
    04-24-2011

View Post2MOEJOE, on Mar 23 2019 - 17:40, said:

I don't care.

 

Posting shows you do.

 

View PostWingnuttz33, on Mar 23 2019 - 17:47, said:

 A nice thought out, cool headed Post +1

I agree here.

 

I agree with your sentiment towards the OP's post.  Unfortunately it is likely to be a whisper amongst the usual threads and comments seen here.

As a remedy against what may ail the game, I feel this change is poorly aimed and a response to those most vocal rather than taking a true measured look.

Not in favor of it.



9999bc #6 Posted Mar 24 2019 - 03:03

    First lieutenant

  • -Players-
  • 38546 battles
  • 705
  • Member since:
    07-01-2014
Nice post. Too bad forum is full of whiners and WG is full of incompetent developers.

jt1alta #7 Posted Mar 24 2019 - 03:17

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 43450 battles
  • 673
  • Member since:
    01-15-2014

Nicely put OP.

For the most part Arty players seem to be the ones that don't complain and whine about the game.

I don't like the stun feature personally and wouldn't mind seeing it removed. I understand that a large amount of explosive exploding on a tank is going to effect the crews performance but it isn't a feature that makes sense in a fast moving game. It is like a 20 second " rub your nose in it " feature that is annoying to the player hit. When I get stunned I play through it but the twicher players get upset and it should be a game that is enjoyable for all. I'd rather be punched in the nose than be rubbed with sandpaper and salt so as a player I'd rather see a return to something closer to pre 9.18.

I am going to wait and see before leaving, as I really enjoy this game, but I left AW when it dropped arty and a lot of talented people were working on game dev. there, but in trying to satisfy the most vocal players, they ended up with just a mess.

 



xxBigbacon #8 Posted Mar 24 2019 - 03:23

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 9408 battles
  • 2,564
  • [GNZX1] GNZX1
  • Member since:
    02-03-2015
Dumb thing is all they really need to do is limit spgs to maybe 2 tops per team. Sure lower stun durations, nit a huge deal but the biggest spg complaint is the 3 per side. 

PzAbt505 #9 Posted Mar 24 2019 - 03:40

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 14465 battles
  • 645
  • Member since:
    06-04-2011

I just want them to allow SPGs to platoon together again. Its completely unfair that a single class gets excluded. I dont mind the way medical kits work, let my target use them instantly to remove stun. Just means they are now extremely vulnerable to crew loss and the impacts of a down loader or gunner will be magnified all because they coundnt wait a few seconds.

 



Crypticshock #10 Posted Mar 24 2019 - 04:05

    Captain

  • Beta Testers
  • 19321 battles
  • 1,022
  • [TROBS] TROBS
  • Member since:
    03-13-2011

Block Quote

 In the case of the latter, allowing first aid kits to remove the stun condition means that our primary mechanic now that our damage has been nerfed can be completely counteracted on a cooldown, and an intelligently playing enemy may well only present themselves as a possible target while that item is on cooldown

 

...but you are getting that tank(s) to use their kits early. That is helping the team big time. It's like trying to get track shots on people out of position just to get them to burn a repair kit. Kitting out of 1 stun every 90 seconds is no different than repairing a track, ammo rack, fuel tank or putting out a fire.

 

While, yes, your alpha did get nerfed you were given more consistent ways of dealing damage. Reload was made shorter. The aim time and dispersions were made better. You were given a much larger splash radius. (easier to splash multiple tanks)



F1O1 #11 Posted Mar 24 2019 - 04:17

    Captain

  • Players
  • 60 battles
  • 1,583
  • [SAMUS] SAMUS
  • Member since:
    01-11-2012

lt does not matter.  And yes, we do not care.

 

Artillery requiring excessive defensive forces, is as stupid as it is, proof that it is a buffoon tank that does not belong. lt removes tanks from participating, in a first person shooter direct fire game, removes a tank from acquiring key positions and spotting, Etc. Artillery is terrible for this game, always has been, and does not belong. Minor nerfs are not what artillery needs. Artillery needs removal. Compensation can be accordingly given.

 

People do not want artillery contributions to win a game. They want people in tanks, with a brain, to help out. They want a tanks reliable gun, a tanks view range, a tank in great position, a tanks HP to share damage. They don't want an artillery sitting on the sideline, virtually not participating at all.

 

 



Omega_Weapon #12 Posted Mar 24 2019 - 04:21

    Major

  • Players
  • 52880 battles
  • 2,597
  • [GRIEF] GRIEF
  • Member since:
    11-15-2011

View PostCrypticshock, on Mar 23 2019 - 22:05, said:

While, yes, your alpha did get nerfed you were given more consistent ways of dealing damage. Reload was made shorter. The aim time and dispersions were made better. You were given a much larger splash radius. (easier to splash multiple tanks)

 

More enjoyable to carry like a boss once in a while than to have a small impact on the match consistently.

YANKEE137 #13 Posted Mar 24 2019 - 04:31

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 13886 battles
  • 6,505
  • [6-ACR] 6-ACR
  • Member since:
    08-17-2015

Little changes every two years only prolong the suffering for everyone.

 



Burning_Haggis #14 Posted Mar 24 2019 - 04:32

    Major

  • Players
  • 45741 battles
  • 2,108
  • [NOBA] NOBA
  • Member since:
    04-09-2013

View PostRed_Miles, on Mar 23 2019 - 19:22, said:

I am posting at the urging of a friend, who seems to think that reasonable explanations may actually have some influence on the changes and what Wargaming will do.  I wish I had his enthusiasm, but here we are.

 

Artillery used to be massive alpha damage, massive burst damage.  When artillery hit an enemy tank, it was usually the last thing that got to hit them in that round.  Yes, this was frustrating, yes this was overpowered.  We artillery players deserved a lot of the crap we got, because our vehicles were very much overpowered.

 

Which is why I was wholly embracing of the 9.18 changes.  I liked the idea of being switched to a more support role.  I liked the idea of doing less damage, but potentially enabling my allies to do more damage - I liked the idea of being able to fire more frequently, with more accuracy, with that tradeoff.  And I have enjoyed my time playing artillery since the SPG rework.

 

I will, however, point out several things the game has done that has indirectly nerfed the capabilities of artillery to contribute to a victory, chief among those things, the introduction of the armored car lines and the ability for consumables to instantly remove the stun condition.

 

In the case of the latter, allowing first aid kits to remove the stun condition means that our primary mechanic now that our damage has been nerfed can be completely counteracted on a cooldown, and an intelligently playing enemy may well only present themselves as a possible target while that item is on cooldown.  This, coupled with our long reload, long aim, and shell travel time, means that we frequently miss, leaving stun inflicted as our only thing we succeeded in doing for the 30 second reload before we took the shot and the 30 second reload we now have to wait through to try again.  That this stun can then be removed with an ability that is on a cooldown means that our ability to contribute drops spectaculary in fights where targets are able to FAK and undo our minute of work.

 

In the case of the former, artillery is frequently treated as a disposable commodity by many teams, undeserving of any dedicated protection by their teammates.  This is unfortunate, because this is exactly the attitude that armored cars exist to exploit.  They are very fast, very hard to hit targets, especially for artillery acting in self-defense.  The number of times I have been deleted from a game within the first 5 minutes of it by an armored car that then proceeds to kill all the other artillery in the back lines before zooming back out while our teammates are preoccupied is quite high.  This was exactly the behavior that the ELC bis was nerfed away from being able to commit to, but the armored cars do everything the ELC bis used to do, and do it even bigger and better than it did when fully upgraded.

 

The point isn't to whine about armored cars, the point is that their mere existence in a match leaves the often unprotected and ignored artillery at a severe disadvantage.

 

In short: We die fast and often against even middling armored car players.  Our only contribution is frequently the stun damage we inflict, which is then negated with a FAK the second the debuff becomes crucial in helping stop the stunned tank.

 

The proposed SPG changes are...  Problematic, because they are presenting a situation where our ability to contribute to our team's victory through the stun mechanic we were given in trade for our old ridiculously high damage is being massively nerfed, and in addition, many SPGs seem to be under consideration for individual tuning that will make their reload slower, their accuracy lower, and their trajectory slower, leading to longer reloads and more missed shots, with a lowering of our stun contribution as well.  This is very close to undoing everything we were given for reducing our potential damage so drastically in the SPG rework, leaving artillery neutered.  I have seen reports on various player stat aggregating websites that clearly show that even with our stun mechanic, because of team attitude towards artillery, we are as a class the most underperforming class of vehicle with the lowest ability to contribute to a victory compared to all other types of vehicle.  Our stun is the only mechanic we have that enables us to stay where we are on those stats - without it, we will slip even lower.

 

Without some kind of bonuses, some kind of buffs, to offset what is being proposed, you will make artillery even more unrewarding than it can currently be for artillery players.  Think carefully about how you approach the implementation of these proposed changes, Wargaming.  It very much looks like these changes are geared towards putting us back in the same reload, accuracy and difficulty hitting enemies as we used to have, while nerfing the stun ability we were given in exchange for sacrificing our damage, and if you do that, SPG will cease to be playable as a class, because our contribution to our team will be so negligible we will simply be more effective in any other vehicle.  This quote from the novel Ender's Game is, I feel, growing very close to being a summary of what is being to the SPG class of vehicles with these changes.

 

 

 

 

Afraid to post from primary, opinion dismissed.

cKy_ #15 Posted Mar 24 2019 - 04:48

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 4329 battles
  • 2,292
  • [PUBBY] PUBBY
  • Member since:
    09-29-2018

Oh no, they are changing artillery by a whole 5%... What ever shall we do??

 

Some people.



cKy_ #16 Posted Mar 24 2019 - 04:51

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 4329 battles
  • 2,292
  • [PUBBY] PUBBY
  • Member since:
    09-29-2018

View Postjt1alta, on Mar 24 2019 - 14:17, said:

Nicely put OP.

For the most part Arty players seem to be the ones that don't complain and whine about the game.

I don't like the stun feature personally and wouldn't mind seeing it removed. I understand that a large amount of explosive exploding on a tank is going to effect the crews performance but it isn't a feature that makes sense in a fast moving game. It is like a 20 second " rub your nose in it " feature that is annoying to the player hit. When I get stunned I play through it but the twicher players get upset and it should be a game that is enjoyable for all. I'd rather be punched in the nose than be rubbed with sandpaper and salt so as a player I'd rather see a return to something closer to pre 9.18.

I am going to wait and see before leaving, as I really enjoy this game, but I left AW when it dropped arty and a lot of talented people were working on game dev. there, but in trying to satisfy the most vocal players, they ended up with just a mess.

 

 

That's because the typical artillery player doesn't know enough about the game to complain. They have absolutely no clue what's going on. Look at WhineMaker or SchudleBop or whatever his name is. 

 

One of them thinks that Blitz is an appropriate alternative to PC WoT.

 

The other thinks that to outplay someone, one has to simply shoot them (just once, not even kill them, just shoot them).



cKy_ #17 Posted Mar 24 2019 - 04:52

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 4329 battles
  • 2,292
  • [PUBBY] PUBBY
  • Member since:
    09-29-2018

View PostWingnuttz33, on Mar 24 2019 - 13:47, said:

One less Artillery player, no loss.

 

You couldn't be more correct. 



cKy_ #18 Posted Mar 24 2019 - 04:54

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 4329 battles
  • 2,292
  • [PUBBY] PUBBY
  • Member since:
    09-29-2018

View PostPzAbt505, on Mar 24 2019 - 14:40, said:

I just want them to allow SPGs to platoon together again. Its completely unfair that a single class gets excluded. I dont mind the way medical kits work, let my target use them instantly to remove stun. Just means they are now extremely vulnerable to crew loss and the impacts of a down loader or gunner will be magnified all because they coundnt wait a few seconds.

 

 

How is it unfair? Is it somehow more fair for 2 or 3 buddies to co ordinate their attacks on helpless, lumbering heavy tanks from relative invulnerability? No, it isn't. Next.

9999bc #19 Posted Mar 24 2019 - 05:00

    First lieutenant

  • -Players-
  • 38546 battles
  • 705
  • Member since:
    07-01-2014

View PostcKy_, on Mar 24 2019 - 04:54, said:

 

How is it unfair? Is it somehow more fair for 2 or 3 buddies to co ordinate their attacks on helpless, lumbering heavy tanks from relative invulnerability? No, it isn't. Next.

It’s fair to gang up any tanks in this game because both teams are given the same opportunities. Next. 



cKy_ #20 Posted Mar 24 2019 - 05:06

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 4329 battles
  • 2,292
  • [PUBBY] PUBBY
  • Member since:
    09-29-2018

View Post9999bc, on Mar 24 2019 - 16:00, said:

It’s fair to gang up any tanks in this game because both teams are given the same opportunities. Next. 

 

​I'm sorry, what other tanks stun your crew completely hindering the capabilities of your vehicle? Also, I notice you completely ignored the "relative invulnerability" part of my statement. Anything to further your point, I guess.




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users