Jump to content


Artillery Opinion: Unpopular

Artillery Arty

  • Please log in to reply
142 replies to this topic

HellsB3lls #101 Posted Sep 08 2019 - 01:16

    Corporal

  • -Players-
  • 3063 battles
  • 70
  • Member since:
    04-07-2019

It's interesting to see such strongly argued opinions on what is or isn't a "tank" when it looks like the official US DoD dictionary of military terms doesn't even address what seems to be a vague term, at best.

 

Also, in the militaryfactory.com breakdown of "Armor by Type,"  TDs are not listed as tanks.

 

 

TDs and SPGs are listed in several over-lapping categories and are usually listed in the same category. I haven't done an exhaustive search to see if they are also listed in some of the "Tanks" categories.

 

 



theSparatan117 #102 Posted Sep 08 2019 - 01:19

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 11144 battles
  • 899
  • [F0XEY] F0XEY
  • Member since:
    12-26-2013

View PostHellsB3lls, on Sep 07 2019 - 19:16, said:

It's interesting to see such strongly argued opinions on what is or isn't a "tank" when it looks like the official US DoD dictionary of military terms doesn't even address what seems to be a vague term, at best.

 

Also, in the militaryfactory.com breakdown of "Armor by Type,"  TDs are not listed as tanks.

 

 

TDs and SPGs are listed in several over-lapping categories and are usually listed in the same category. I haven't done an exhaustive search to see if they are also listed in some of the "Tanks" categories.

 

 

 

Given that most Tank Destroyers are built on tank platforms, (the hull), this is a really weak argument... just saying.



HeraldricKnight #103 Posted Sep 08 2019 - 01:23

    Captain

  • Players
  • 8751 battles
  • 1,011
  • Member since:
    11-05-2012

View PostProfessionalFinn, on Sep 08 2019 - 00:10, said:

Sorry to be blunt with you but there is no Cyrillic language.

 

 

Uh, yea there is, it's the basis around almost every Slovakian dialect. All of those languages are based around the Cyrillic alphabet, which makes those language Cyrillic. Seriously, stop being dumb. 



ProfessionalFinn #104 Posted Sep 08 2019 - 01:24

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 26347 battles
  • 2,253
  • Member since:
    02-23-2016

View PostHellsB3lls, on Sep 07 2019 - 16:16, said:

It's interesting to see such strongly argued opinions on what is or isn't a "tank" when it looks like the official US DoD dictionary of military terms doesn't even address what seems to be a vague term, at best.

 

Also, in the militaryfactory.com breakdown of "Armor by Type,"  TDs are not listed as tanks.

 

 

TDs and SPGs are listed in several over-lapping categories and are usually listed in the same category. I haven't done an exhaustive search to see if they are also listed in some of the "Tanks" categories.

 

 

The original US definition stated a TD could not have a machine gun.  In function, the US TDs countered enemy armor primarily in defense.  After WWII, the US Army

decision was made to replace TDs with general purpose tanks.  George Patton argued for this from the get-go.  McNair was a big TD proponent. Russians and Germans and later the Swedes were into the turret less design. 
TDs are pretty much passe.  SPGs have replaced towed artillery. 



ProfessionalFinn #105 Posted Sep 08 2019 - 01:25

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 26347 battles
  • 2,253
  • Member since:
    02-23-2016

View PostHeraldricKnight, on Sep 07 2019 - 16:23, said:

 

Uh, yea there is, it's the basis around almost every Slovakian dialect. All of those languages are based around the Cyrillic alphabet, which makes those language Cyrillic. Seriously, stop being dumb. 

There are Cryllic based languages but no Cryillic language per your claim.  Big difference.  Sorry.

 

Cy·ril·lic

adjective
denoting the alphabet used by many Slavic peoples, chiefly those with a historical allegiance to the Orthodox Church. Ultimately derived from Greek uncials, it is now used for Russian, Bulgarian, Serbian, Ukrainian, and some other Slavic languages.
noun
the Cyrillic alphabet.

 


Edited by ProfessionalFinn, Sep 08 2019 - 01:27.


HeraldricKnight #106 Posted Sep 08 2019 - 01:30

    Captain

  • Players
  • 8751 battles
  • 1,011
  • Member since:
    11-05-2012
Language built on the alphabet you simpering idiot. It is literally impossible to be this stupid. Impossible. Yet, you keep defying the term. 

Edited by HeraldricKnight, Sep 08 2019 - 01:30.


ProfessionalFinn #107 Posted Sep 08 2019 - 01:43

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 26347 battles
  • 2,253
  • Member since:
    02-23-2016

View PostHeraldricKnight, on Sep 07 2019 - 16:30, said:

Language built on the alphabet you simpering idiot. It is literally impossible to be this stupid. Impossible. Yet, you keep defying the term. 

"Cyrillic and English are both languages."  Sorry but your claim is patently false.  Cyrillic is not a language.  Cyrillic is an alphabet and writing system used by over 50 unique disparate languages.  

 



HellsB3lls #108 Posted Sep 08 2019 - 01:44

    Corporal

  • -Players-
  • 3063 battles
  • 70
  • Member since:
    04-07-2019

View PosttheSparatan117, on Sep 07 2019 - 19:19, said:

 

Given that most Tank Destroyers are built on tank platforms, (the hull), this is a really weak argument... just saying.


I wasn't really stating an opinion one way or the other on what fits the definition of a "tank". Just posting what I observed from one seemingly-reliable source. I have no idea whether it is the final word in the matter. I thought it was interesting that the DoD doesn't have a definition for "tank", where so many on the forum seem to have a very clear idea of what the term encompasses, and when there actually seems to be a lot of gray area.



Kliphie #109 Posted Sep 08 2019 - 01:50

    Major

  • Players
  • 33023 battles
  • 5,608
  • [GFLC] GFLC
  • Member since:
    07-20-2012

View PostProfessionalFinn, on Sep 07 2019 - 19:43, said:

"Cyrillic and English are both languages."  Sorry but your claim is patently false.  Cyrillic is not a language.  Cyrillic is an alphabet and writing system used by over 50 unique disparate languages.  

 

 

In the scope of the argument, is that distinction relevant to the core of the discussion on translations?



HeraldricKnight #110 Posted Sep 08 2019 - 01:59

    Captain

  • Players
  • 8751 battles
  • 1,011
  • Member since:
    11-05-2012

View PostProfessionalFinn, on Sep 08 2019 - 00:43, said:

"Cyrillic and English are both languages."  Sorry but your claim is patently false.  Cyrillic is not a language.  Cyrillic is an alphabet and writing system used by over 50 unique disparate languages.  

 

 

They're not disparate, they all stem from Slovakian ancestry that have diverged slightly as they migrated, but kept their heritage through the Cyrillic alphabet, making all of those languages Cyrillic. Just like you could also say the English, French, German, Portuguese, and Spanish languages all have ancestry in Latin. 

 

View PostKliphie, on Sep 08 2019 - 00:50, said:

 

In the scope of the argument, is that distinction relevant to the core of the discussion on translations?


No, Finn is just trying to make another stupid argument because I wasn't sure what language was being translated between the CEO and the journalist, so I focused on the alphabets used. 

 

View PostHellsB3lls, on Sep 08 2019 - 00:44, said:


I wasn't really stating an opinion one way or the other on what fits the definition of a "tank". Just posting what I observed from one seemingly-reliable source. I have no idea whether it is the final word in the matter. I thought it was interesting that the DoD doesn't have a definition for "tank", where so many on the forum seem to have a very clear idea of what the term encompasses, and when there actually seems to be a lot of gray area.


Tanks are a unit in the military. Artillery are a unit in the military. They are completely separate. All you have to do is look at what they replaced in terms of military units.

 

For Artillery, it's the siege cannon.

For Tanks, it's horse-mounted cavalry. 

 

Tanks are a multi-purpose unit built on the theme of rapid deployment, much like horses were so pivotal since their domestication. They can perform a myriad of military maneuvers and, more importantly, hold ground.

 

Artillery does none of that. It is a single purpose unit with the only goal of throwing as much crap in one direction as possible with as little to no accuracy provided. The siege cannons weren't even considered apart of an army until the age of castles were over. 



ThaneTyrian #111 Posted Sep 08 2019 - 02:10

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 16738 battles
  • 143
  • Member since:
    03-02-2012
Ya'all are seriously amusing.  Like how far off topic has this OP gotten?  Anyone here need the LAST WORD or what?

Edited by ThaneTyrian, Sep 08 2019 - 02:10.


HeraldricKnight #112 Posted Sep 08 2019 - 02:13

    Captain

  • Players
  • 8751 battles
  • 1,011
  • Member since:
    11-05-2012

View PostThaneTyrian, on Sep 08 2019 - 01:10, said:

Ya'all are seriously amusing.  Like how far off topic has this OP gotten?  Anyone here need the LAST WORD or what?


It's not my fault the village idiots come pouring out of their basements because of one simple sentence. 



ProfessionalFinn #113 Posted Sep 08 2019 - 02:54

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 26347 battles
  • 2,253
  • Member since:
    02-23-2016

View PostKliphie, on Sep 07 2019 - 16:50, said:

 

In the scope of the argument, is that distinction relevant to the core of the discussion on translations?

It is relevant in that Mr. Knight claims the WoT phrase "sniper howitzer" is incorrectly translated because of the difficulty of translating from the Cyrillic language to English. 
You are right.  This thread has gone sideways and I will stop this inane debate.  I should never have tried to reason with this gentleman.  My bad. No more.



__WarChild__ #114 Posted Sep 08 2019 - 03:42

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 33388 battles
  • 6,077
  • [OPIC] OPIC
  • Member since:
    06-03-2017

OMG, I thought I put this thread to bed with my last post 3-4 pages ago.  I log on and see what's HOT and it's THIS thread.  LOL!!!

 

Y'all are too much.

 

IN B/4 I get banned (again) for something in this thread!  

 

:popcorn:



Zuikakoo #115 Posted Sep 08 2019 - 08:48

    First lieutenant

  • -Players-
  • 21920 battles
  • 679
  • Member since:
    02-11-2016
Wow this thread really got around.  Still more civil than most arty threads.  Maybe the mods won't nuke it?

Superheavy_Metal #116 Posted Sep 08 2019 - 17:59

    Corporal

  • -Players-
  • 4067 battles
  • 60
  • [SCAAR] SCAAR
  • Member since:
    02-10-2014
1 arty max having 2 uselesss tanks on a team is bad enough when players arent that skilled in the first place, 3 arty is just llike drinking a vial of aids

Sophist__ #117 Posted Sep 08 2019 - 18:40

    Private

  • -Players-
  • 3742 battles
  • 7
  • Member since:
    09-05-2014

View PostWhineMaker, on Sep 06 2019 - 22:09, said:

 

If you didn't already know, WoT Blitz has ZERO arty every game... :ohmy:


I did not know that. I just recently returned to the game and Blitz didn't exist when I last played. Since I left originally because of the dominance of arty and its negative effect on gameplay, I will have a look at Blitz. I was going to shut this account down again anyway. Thanks for the info.


Edited by Sophist__, Sep 08 2019 - 18:40.


leeuniverse #118 Posted Sep 08 2019 - 20:58

    Major

  • Players
  • 39861 battles
  • 8,122
  • [LAMP] LAMP
  • Member since:
    01-30-2013

I've always said, that the ONLY Way Arty is EVER going to be fixed to be "enjoyable" to play for Arty players, and not "hated" by Tankers is:

 

To help Tankers:

1. Triple HP Levels of all tanks (this fixes multiple complaints of the game including Arty irritation, but it also helps Arty by games not being over so quick and Arty player getting screwed as often occurs currently.)

2. Reduce Power Spread between Tiers of the same class in HP, Pen, Damage, Armor (tiers have only a 7% Max difference between each other).  (this makes it so lower tiers in a battle aren't so "weak", thus fixing other complaints of the game, but also making one less vulnerable to arty).

3. Max 1 Arty per side (however, with increased HP levels as above, 2 Arty might be tolerable, this would need to be tested)  Other than helping tankers, this also helps arty players by giving them more food not being taken by other arty.

4. Arty does Max 300 Damage to ANY tank (currently non-armored tanks are still able to be derped to **** ).

5. Arty shot Indicator, one that's accurate, not a "generalized" one like AW did, so you can know which way you likely need to move to avoid the shot.

 

To help Arty players:

1. HE Normalized more, so no more no damage hits or 15 damage hits, that's just stupid town.

2. Arty Speeds increased greatly so they can have a proper chance to defend themselves (make FV304 work like it used to in every way, just lower it's DPM, and there can be some more arty that work like it, bring back FUN to the game).

3. Sniper Mode (no the alt mode is not good enough)

4. 2-3 High Damage Rounds (like 700) to use for self-defense and when need to go TD mode that can ONLY be used in Sniper Mode.

5. Be Accurate like any other tank.

6. See 1 & 3 above for further improvements to the Arty player experience.

 

This off the top of my head would make the game actually enjoyable/tolerable for both Arty players and Tankers.

 

Armored Warfare did "some" of these things, and Arty was FAR more liked by both sides, however, AW didn't do a couple of them, the biggest being the HP, and a couple of other small needed improvements, and so Arty to some was still a problem.  But, it was 10 times better than WOT Arty, despite the flaws.  So, these things would most certainly work.



MikeThinks #119 Posted Sep 09 2019 - 03:25

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 7004 battles
  • 15
  • [REBRN] REBRN
  • Member since:
    05-12-2011

.......I say we need to limit the number  of heavy tanks, its just no fun to be a medium tank with 3-4 heavy tanks that I can't pen reliably.

 

We also need to limit the number of light tanks, and TDs.  Its no fun getting shot by someone who can see me but I can't see them...wheres the counter to getting hit by invisible tanks.

 

Not to mention there are just too many driving mediums now.  Why even have light tanks when mediums have higher DPM and the same view range?

 

........and on and on it goes as everyone whines that it would be perfect if only the game catered to my personal play style more.



Alpharius_____ #120 Posted Sep 09 2019 - 05:13

    Captain

  • -Players-
  • 21786 battles
  • 1,272
  • [-ZOO-] -ZOO-
  • Member since:
    02-21-2014
Capping arty per team at 1-2 is such a simple solution...





Also tagged with Artillery, Arty

1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users