StarDestroyer.Net BBS

To add to the hilarity, Wargaming claims they originally added it to "punish camping." Yes, you heard that right. Because arty is apparently going to be shooting at the undetected guys it can't even see that arebehind cover and concealment, rather than the detected tanks attempting to advance.

I'm really enjoying the Crusader. It claims to be a light tank but acts more like a medium, and can chew up the enemy rear areas given half a chance.

Victory!
Battle: Murovanka Friday, April 05, 2013 6:26:22 PM
Vehicle: Crusader
Experience received: 1,860 (x2 for the first victory each day)
Credits received: 20,642
Battle Achievements: Mastery Badge: "Ace Tanker"

I liked the Crusader too. Armor is pitiful, but that gun...quite nice when you get the chance. One of the few light-mediums I actually enjoyed.

The Vortex Empire wrote:To add to the hilarity, Wargaming claims they originally added it to "punish camping." Yes, you heard that right. Because arty is apparently going to be shooting at the undetected guys it can't even see that arebehind cover and concealment, rather than the detected tanks attempting to advance.

This is what I mean by fundamentally broken. I don't think the impact artillery had on the game is what they intended (I mean fairly obviously given how broken it was for ages) but it's hard to imagine how they expected it to work any other way. It doesn't help that they apparently don't have gametypes that encourage good flow or prevent camping like modern shooters. Its worth remembering that heaps of gametypes emerged specifically to avoid 'camp the rocket launcher' play.

Could you imagine if they got even just a little bit creative and created a push map that had say three neutral capture points? That would at least mean that arty has to try and split focus or risk a flank falling.

Most players can't handle the idea of two flanks. Or flanking, for that matter.

It would be a disaster.

It couldn't be that much worse than when an entire defending team rushes the enemy spawn...

Jub wrote:It couldn't be that much worse than when an entire defending team rushes the enemy spawn...

And that is why I've had Assault disabled since the option was available.

I still manage to have good games on the 'new' game types, but sometimes I do consider just turning them off.

Encounter is fine, Assault is just a heavily imbalanced mode.

Encounter tends to lead to people lemming rushing the point or abandoning the hill though.

Encounter maps still generally run roughly 50-50 win rates though, whereas Assault is usually more like 60-40 in favour of the defenders. It's a useless bullshit gamemode as it stands and needs replacing with something else.

Imperial528 wrote:Most players can't handle the idea of two flanks. Or flanking, for that matter.

It would be a disaster.

I think that having a more advanced game type would force them to learn. Hopefully.

Vendetta wrote:Encounter maps still generally run roughly 50-50 win rates though, whereas Assault is usually more like 60-40 in favour of the defenders. It's a useless bullshit gamemode as it stands and needs replacing with something else.

It'd be really interesting if they stacked the matchmaking to favor the attackers- say, if the average tier of the attacking armor was 0.5 to 1 tier above that of the defenders.

After 8 consecutive losses today, I don't have quite your optimism for the WoT playerbase Simon.

Victory!
Battle: Siegfried Line Saturday, April 06, 2013 10:49:21 AM
Vehicle: T-150
Experience received: 1,714
Credits received: 41,338
Battle Achievements: Radley-Walters's Medal, Steel Wall, Top Gun, Sniper

This is not a thing that should ever be allowed to happen - most of my team got outflanked and destroyed in the field. I was the only one to go town - and how weird is that? - and I ended up fighting off their whole team as it arrived piecemeal... got nine kills, my two favorites being when a T3 arty rammed me and killed itself, doing no damage, and when the the Jagdpanzer I'd been playing peekaboo with forgot that a 107 can penetrate his frontal armor and decided to slug it out. Ended the match with 31hp.

I fucking HATE high tier arty and Batchat. The last games with my IS-8, it's either oneshot or close to it by GwTiger or something similar, or a Batchat pumps 6 shells into my ass and kills me while I reload after that first round I put into him. I just need 8000 xp more to unlock that IS-7.

Esquire wrote:Victory!
Battle: Siegfried Line Saturday, April 06, 2013 10:49:21 AM
Vehicle: T-150
Experience received: 1,714
Credits received: 41,338
Battle Achievements: Radley-Walters's Medal, Steel Wall, Top Gun, Sniper

This is not a thing that should ever be allowed to happen - most of my team got outflanked and destroyed in the field. I was the only one to go town - and how weird is that? - and I ended up fighting off their whole team as it arrived piecemeal... got nine kills, my two favorites being when a T3 arty rammed me and killed itself, doing no damage, and when the the Jagdpanzer I'd been playing peekaboo with forgot that a 107 can penetrate his frontal armor and decided to slug it out. Ended the match with 31hp.

That's a new one. I've seen people ditch the field in favor of rushing the city...but never the reverse.

What made it especially weird was that it was an encounter battle - the entire point was to capture the city.

Esquire wrote:What made it especially weird was that it was an encounter battle - the entire point was to capture the city.

The usual logic being that the enemy team can't capture the city if they're dead. Lots of Encounter maps are actually decided quite a way from the cap circle.

True, but I've never seen everybody entirely ignore the objective that way before. Usually at least a couple go for the circle.

The point of arty is to give heavy tanks something to be afraid of. Otherwise it would be World of Heavy Tanks and everyone would be bored or sad.

Hawkwings wrote:The point of arty is to give heavy tanks something to be afraid of. Otherwise it would be World of Heavy Tanks and everyone would be bored or sad.

Heavies are already countered by the greater firepower of TDs and the greater mobility of mediums, arty isn't needed for that. Arty arguably punishes mediums even more than heavies, since they have far less armor and are far more vulnerable to splash.

As I've said before...if any tank I have is meant to be countered by arty, it would be the KV-4. Big, slow, and too much armor for the average tank.

Yet...arty doesn't worry me as much as in the DB. In the DB, one hit is enough to do some serious damage, while the KV-4 can shrug off multiple hits from the arty I run into. However, TD's can quite merrily pen me, and mediums can take advantage of my glacial turret traverse to flank me.

The Vortex Empire wrote:Heavies are already countered by the greater firepower of TDs and the greater mobility of mediums, arty isn't needed for that. Arty arguably punishes mediums even more than heavies, since they have far less armor and are far more vulnerable to splash.

Tell that to most maps with absurd chokepoints and only one or two ways to reasonably advance. Flanking in a medium? Only if the enemy team is stupid and you are lucky and have the right map for it and aren't spotted early.

And since mediums and TDs counter heavies so well I guess that's why the top clan wars teams run them.

Maps such as? Every map I've ever played has opportunities all over the place for flanking.

Clan Wars is an entirely different environment than pubs, but top clan wars teams do run them. Your typical team is made up of E5s as an MBT, T57s for support fire, T-62As as a combat medium, Bat Chats as a scout medium, and whatever arty. TDs only get less use because they lack the flexibility and mobility to be useful in the current CW metagame, not because they don't counter heavies well. And depending on the map, TDs do get used regularly, mainly the E4 or 268, and I'd count the E-100 in with them since it plays most closely to a T110E4.