Jump to content


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


  • Please log in to reply
123 replies to this topic

Rigour67 #101 Posted Mar 25 2019 - 20:08

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 27706 battles
  • 340
  • [RIB] RIB
  • Member since:
    08-30-2013

View PostWhiteBishop, on Mar 25 2019 - 19:01, said:

 

Where is the lie? If pointing out your flaws deems me a 'troll' (and a racist apparently) and you ignored the rest of the post, you're no better, and acting so sanctimonious makes you look incredibly shallow.

 

I simply repeat my previous answer.

If you are unable to understand that your statement absurdly distorted what I said (I at no point suggested that everyone was a racist, nor that you were, although your description that racism may be "tepid" does pose some interesting questions) then we won't be able to have a productive conversation.
If you do understand that but deliberately chose to lead with your statement anyway, then the troll shoes fit.

 



leeuniverse #102 Posted Mar 25 2019 - 21:00

    Major

  • Players
  • 38646 battles
  • 8,015
  • [LAMP] LAMP
  • Member since:
    01-30-2013

My detailed thoughts on the proposed changes...

 

http://forum.worldoftanks.com/index.php?/topic/600700-dear-wargaming-the-proposed-spg-changes-my-feedback/

 

Just not even close to what's needed.  A negligible bandaid that fixes nothing.



I_QQ_4_U #103 Posted Mar 26 2019 - 05:39

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 22553 battles
  • 6,784
  • Member since:
    10-17-2016

View PostRigour67, on Mar 25 2019 - 16:11, said:

This thread is a pretty good example of how difficult it is for WG to get any sort of intelligent/useful feedback from the player base.

 

The OP's posting is thoughtful and sober, and we went down into the racism cesspool with the trolls pretty fast.

 

There's clearly a base of players who dislike arty and will not be happy with any change short of its complete removal.

 

Leaving them out of the discussion, I can see why people dislike the stun mechanic.  But almost no-one is showing any evidence with data to support the notion that SPGs are too powerful pre this coming nerf.  It's all very much anecdotes which reflect their personal biases.

Would we nerf any other class like this without data?

So Ok we're dialing the stun mechanic down a notch, well and good.
Will there be anything buffed to compensate?  WG is coy about that but rest assured, any "improvements" to SPG performance to compensate for the stun nerf will be greeted with howls of dismay by the SPG haters.  WG can't really win here.
 

 

There's really no point in trying to have a discussion with irrationalists, might was well talk to a wall.

Altwar #104 Posted Mar 26 2019 - 06:29

    Major

  • Players
  • 58304 battles
  • 5,236
  • [-GNR-] -GNR-
  • Member since:
    04-24-2011

View Post3bagsfull, on Mar 25 2019 - 09:52, said:

Seriously, arty isn't a tank.   It has to dig spades to let the earth absorb the recoil forces which are orders of magnitude higher than any tank uses - and has to be to make those rounds fly as high and as far as they do.    Understand that first.   Arty is not a tank, never has been, never will be.

 

Neither are tank destroyers or wheeled vehicles and yet they are here because World of Tanks is actually World of Tanks is a massively multiplayer online game featuring combat vehicles from the mid-20th century.

 

In a PvP game, if you allow players to target and eliminate other player with no possible chance of ever immediately being able to retalliate - you have to BALANCE that vehicle so it doesn't destroy the gameplay.    That much is a given no matter the game.    

 

That is your foundation for any balancing of the arty class.    WoT created arty to be an indirect sniper, which is 180 degrees from what the class is in real life.   It would be the equivalent of giving Light Tanks the armor of a Heavy Tank, the gun of a Heavy Tank and still allowing them to have all the advantages of the Light Tank class - it would be imbalanced and would need to be rebalanced lest it be a complete mockery.

 

You reference real life and this immediately is where your statement falls unravels.  In a game where:

  • first aid kits bring dead crew personnel back to life
  • vehicle tracks are repaired in seconds
  • vehicles that never existed beyond a blueprint (if that) roam about the battlefield
  • various building structures withstand collisions with multi-ton vehicles and their munitions without a mark
  • vehicles whose guns can pass thru structures and each other without harm or collision
  • vehicles can flip over and roll back on their tracks without the slightest harm to their crew......

​there are plenty of mechanics within the game that don't mirror their real life equivalents.   To choose one without considering the others is fairly much not understanding that this is an arcade game and not a simulator

--------------

 

There are only 2 ways to balance arty.

1)  Reduce the amount in a battle to sensible support levels and allow them to keep their damage.

2)  Rebalance them so that 2-3 of them cannot destroy the balance of the game

 

They have chosen not to do #1.

 

How does a class restricted to a team composition of 20%, at most, destroy a game?  When they fire perhaps a third as often, and less than half as accurate, are for the most part too slow to handle direct combat and have to plot ahead to avoid it, and retain but a fraction of hit points as compared to other vehicles, even light tanks which are often smaller and in some cases have less armor?

 

Perhaps if players were more inclined to push the battle lines, perhaps sacrifice some of their vehicle's hit points to gain an advantage for their team over another, SPGs would be less of an issue.   The longer a battle continues, the greater the chance slow firing SPGs will have to significantly impact it.     Perhaps mix things up instead of going to the very same locations on a map, selecting known sniping areas or thinking that parking out in the open is an acceptable battle tactic.



driveinman #105 Posted Mar 26 2019 - 19:30

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 15584 battles
  • 30
  • [1STVC] 1STVC
  • Member since:
    08-17-2013

View Post3bagsfull, on Mar 24 2019 - 23:02, said:

 

I'm just going to comment on this section.   I'll give you the perspective of a real life artilleryman as I spent 15 years in Field Artillery.

 

1)  Artillery is not protected, it is supporting a fluid front and moves with that front (North, South, East or West).   In other words once you get into your first position you should already be mentally prepared to move.   In real life, even an average joe can easily discern enough information from an inbound artillery shell impact to give their own forces all the information they need to zero in on where that shot came from - fast.      

2)  When a flank falls, if you are not already gone you are DEAD (and most likely your Forward Observer is dead too).    You are too slow, unarmored, fire too damn slow and do not have the gun sight and turret needed to track targets with.    

3)  Real SPG's actually dig in with spades, to let the earth absorb the vast majority of the recoil those big guns produce.    Once you drive off spades and think you can fire willy-nilly you are nuts - you will likely seriously damage your carriage in short order.   It's not a tank, it's artillery - it uses MASSIVE charges to make those rounds fly as far as they do and with that brings MASSIVE recoil forces.   Your equilibrator seals will scream like a banshee till they simply tap out.

 

When you hit "Battle" in WoT know two things:

1)  YOU are responsible for your own protection and that starts at the battle countdown screen.   Read the minimap, understand the flow of the battle and read when you need to get out of dodge.  

2)  If the enemy gets past your forces in the area you occupy, you are dead.   Your only hope is that the enemy is absolutely stupid enough to drive straight towards your muzzle break - and even then you've already been spotted and should expect your peers on the other team to be licking the Cheetos off their fingers, popping a cold one and singing Here Comes the Rain.

 

 

Right on! Finally a well expressed statement on topic. 

 



LeepII #106 Posted Mar 26 2019 - 21:42

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 23637 battles
  • 193
  • [VETO] VETO
  • Member since:
    06-01-2013
I've worked my way up to 3 tier X arty, now to find I will yet again get nerfed for a small portion of the population. 

Rommelman1 #107 Posted Mar 26 2019 - 22:56

    Sergeant

  • -Players-
  • 23109 battles
  • 121
  • [VDLS] VDLS
  • Member since:
    02-10-2017

If they are going to change how an HE round stuns , then they change ALL HE ROUNDS NOT JUST ARTY ROUNDS !!!!

THE STUPID DERPS SHOULD DO LESS STUN ALSO !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!



SquishySupreme #108 Posted Mar 26 2019 - 23:56

    First lieutenant

  • -Players-
  • 3639 battles
  • 677
  • Member since:
    10-29-2018

View Post3bagsfull, on Mar 25 2019 - 00:02, said:

 

I'm just going to comment on this section.   I'll give you the perspective of a real life artilleryman as I spent 15 years in Field Artillery.

 

3)  Real SPG's actually dig in with spades, to let the earth absorb the vast majority of the recoil those big guns produce.    Once you drive off spades and think you can fire willy-nilly you are nuts - you will likely seriously damage your carriage in short order.   It's not a tank, it's artillery - it uses MASSIVE charges...

 

... That only do 20 damage for a direct hit?

MASSIVE charges - virtually no damage on a direct hit?  

This is the actual problem.



CheapWine #109 Posted Mar 27 2019 - 01:41

    Sergeant

  • -Players-
  • 16808 battles
  • 129
  • Member since:
    11-06-2016
Arty just makes the game less fun to play. Ya I know WG.net could give a flying F what I think.

GRINCH7777 #110 Posted Mar 27 2019 - 05:29

    Captain

  • Players
  • 47843 battles
  • 1,041
  • [SHUSH] SHUSH
  • Member since:
    10-02-2011

View Postdriveinman, on Mar 26 2019 - 12:30, said:

 

Right on! Finally a well expressed statement on topic. 

 

 

......you're as clueless as he is....his excuse is he has less than 3K games....you've got 15K and and a 48% win rate so shove off til you show you know wththis game is about.

commander42 #111 Posted Mar 27 2019 - 06:17

    Major

  • Players
  • 26839 battles
  • 5,231
  • [T-R-P] T-R-P
  • Member since:
    07-08-2013
I agree with you generally OP but your friend is getting his hopes up about a reasoned discussion helping WG not make the situation worse.

Arty has already been generally nerfed way too far, any more nerfs need to come with a lot of buffs since the class,  as it is, is already UP.


Also a reasoned discussion about artillery on this forum? since when does this happen.

Griffon327327 #112 Posted Mar 27 2019 - 09:54

    Captain

  • Players
  • 89250 battles
  • 1,183
  • [NVRDY] NVRDY
  • Member since:
    10-20-2012

View PostxxBigbacon, on Mar 24 2019 - 02:23, said:

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. 

 

yup .... and lets not all forget they will add yet another nerf and people who have not got their obj 260 campaign tank already will never get it because they can never complete that 200 second stun mission or any light tank missions about being not spotted because of wheeled tanks                                             

 

all these changes affect campaign missions

 



thorus08 #113 Posted Mar 27 2019 - 12:55

    Staff sergeant

  • Beta Testers
  • 29012 battles
  • 362
  • [200IQ] 200IQ
  • Member since:
    12-28-2010

View PostRed_Miles, on Mar 23 2019 - 20:22, said:

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 1. 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, 2. 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.

 

1.  You see it as a nerf to the stun mechanic but you say that the mechanic was given to SPG's to transition them to a support class.  Most PvP games that have support classes have forms of CC (root, stun, mesmerize, slows, etc.).  In just about every major PvP game I've played with such mechanics there is almost always negative returns on reapplication by the same player or from another, and if not, they have counters (such as cleanse) to clear the effect from friendly players.  The only way that happens currently is with a medkit, that has a timer for reuse.  I don't see a problem with that.

2.  It's not a nerf to stun.  It's adding negative returns to stun for the benefit of game play for anyone that get's stunned (including other SPG's).  It's a QoL improvement of the game for a mechanic that should have been considered when it was designed or released.

 

It looks like there are legitimate nerfs to SPG's happening, and we are still waiting to see if/when/how other individual SPG characteristics are changed, however, complaining about negative returns on stuns should not be the focus on any complaint.  Negative returns on debuffs and CC are common practice for PvP games, and they are common for a reason. 



Rigour67 #114 Posted Mar 27 2019 - 14:37

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 27706 battles
  • 340
  • [RIB] RIB
  • Member since:
    08-30-2013

Not to state the obvious, but isn't every SPG player with any sense just going to wait now and launch their shot so that it lands a split-second after the present stun on a tank ends?  Using the extra time to let the aim circle get even smaller, perhaps.

I say this not to pooh-pooh the proposed change but just to suggest that it will cause a small change in SPG player tactics. 
It will not even remotely come close to satisfying the SPG haters.

The other modifications to SPG "characteristics" (about which WG is being rather typically coy) may very well prove to be the far more significant change.

Wouldn't be the first time they buried the lead. 



GRINCH7777 #115 Posted Mar 28 2019 - 06:16

    Captain

  • Players
  • 47843 battles
  • 1,041
  • [SHUSH] SHUSH
  • Member since:
    10-02-2011

View PostRigour67, on Mar 27 2019 - 07:37, said:

Not to state the obvious, but isn't every SPG player with any sense just going to wait now and launch their shot so that it lands a split-second after the present stun on a tank ends?  Using the extra time to let the aim circle get even smaller, perhaps.

I say this not to pooh-pooh the proposed change but just to suggest that it will cause a small change in SPG player tactics. 
It will not even remotely come close to satisfying the SPG haters.

The other modifications to SPG "characteristics" (about which WG is being rather typically coy) may very well prove to be the far more significant change.

Wouldn't be the first time they buried the lead. 

 

.......none of the stuns lasts long enough on higher level arty to do that....if you hit a really good stun with most arty that stun will be long over by the time you reload.....I wouldn't give a sh&7 if the stun went away altogether just give me back my damage instead of the sh& damage my hits cause now....and limit arty to 2 per team.

billyzbear #116 Posted Mar 28 2019 - 08:43

    Sergeant

  • -Players-
  • 47889 battles
  • 145
  • [TL-DR] TL-DR
  • Member since:
    12-24-2016

I hate arty, but arty should be on the battlefield. 

Three is too many maybe two. 

I think they should change what the arty sees on the battlefield. Have like a two or three second delay. This way they can't hit a tank on the run but can still hit the campers. Like when you are playing frontlines and you call in an arty strike, there is a delay. 

Stun, maybe, like four seconds but not twelve. 

 

 

 



SquishySupreme #117 Posted Mar 29 2019 - 08:54

    First lieutenant

  • -Players-
  • 3639 battles
  • 677
  • Member since:
    10-29-2018

View Postthorus08, on Mar 27 2019 - 12:55, said:

 

1.  You see it as a nerf to the stun mechanic but you say that the mechanic was given to SPG's to transition them to a support class.  Most PvP games that have support classes have forms of CC (root, stun, mesmerize, slows, etc.).  In just about every major PvP game I've played with such mechanics there is almost always negative returns on reapplication by the same player or from another, and if not, they have counters (such as cleanse) to clear the effect from friendly players.  The only way that happens currently is with a medkit, that has a timer for reuse.  I don't see a problem with that.


The issue is that as a "support" class, it will now be so weak versus the others that it's effectively 3 tiers below the top.
That is, A T6 SPG after the newest nerf will effectively be a T5 light tank with no engine in a battlefield full of T6-T8 things that can either ignore it or swat it with impunity.  "Support" like this is basically you are a Cleric that the party uses as a healing stick and has no combat ability.  There's a reason NOBODY plays that class now - it sucks to just be in the back actually doing nothing except the occasional bit of help.

The real issue is not stun but the falloff is now going to be twice as fast and go down to 0.05% at the edge, requiring twice the precision to do splash damage, and an overall 20% reduction on average, as a result.  Splash damage is calculated before armor is factored in, so that 20% is closer to a 50% reduction versus heavies.  T6 vs a T8 heavy - you hit 5 ft from it - do 20 damage instead of 40 like before.  FOR A 600 "Damage" gun.

You literally might as well just play anything else.  If they implement this nerf and don't give us something in return, I will simply play nothing but OP clown cars and convince every SPG player that I know to do the same until they come to their senses.   You don't like SPGs?  We all can just switch to those instead and REALLY wreck the game balance.  4 or 5 wheelies on a team - sounds fine to me if I can't play SPGs effectively any more.


Edited by SquishySupreme, Mar 29 2019 - 08:54.


scHnuuudle_bop #118 Posted Mar 29 2019 - 09:08

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 21003 battles
  • 3,720
  • Member since:
    05-03-2016

Okay, I have to ask.

 

Why is this update being treated like some huge relevant change to arty?. They announced they would do just this, after a period with stun in the game.

 

 

It made some minor changes to the stun. 

A few vehicles had some small changes, but overall, it is a non event.

 Is there more to this?


Edited by scHnuuudle_bop, Mar 29 2019 - 09:09.


Omega_Weapon #119 Posted Mar 29 2019 - 21:08

    Major

  • Players
  • 52943 battles
  • 2,609
  • [GRIEF] GRIEF
  • Member since:
    11-15-2011

View PostscHnuuudle_bop, on Mar 29 2019 - 03:08, said:

Okay, I have to ask.

 

Why is this update being treated like some huge relevant change to arty?. They announced they would do just this, after a period with stun in the game.

 

It made some minor changes to the stun. 

A few vehicles had some small changes, but overall, it is a non event.

 Is there more to this?

 

Its not a massive nerf, but its still noteworthy. The fact that any nerf is being applied to the most underperforming class though is the real issue.

scHnuuudle_bop #120 Posted Mar 29 2019 - 21:18

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 21003 battles
  • 3,720
  • Member since:
    05-03-2016

View PostOmega_Weapon, on Mar 29 2019 - 21:08, said:

 

Its not a massive nerf, but its still noteworthy. The fact that any nerf is being applied to the most underperforming class though is the real issue.

 

Oh good, I thought my reading capabilities fell. 

Yes, they are reducing stun effectiveness, but it does seem pretty minor. When they gave us the stun , it was announced they were going to give it a year and then adjust, so I was sort of expecting this.

 

I assumed people got a bit excited when they read the entire news about the artillery re-balance. 

I had to read it twice, as it sounded like they were going to re-9.18 us. But they were just reviewing the history of changes so far. And this update deals only with the stun.

 

Grumble grumble, another nerf. You are correct, we do not need more reductions, even minor. 






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users