Jump to content


ATGM official thread

Atgm’s should go

  • Please log in to reply
383 replies to this topic

Boomer625 #101 Posted 27 January 2020 - 07:04 AM

    Senior Sergeant

  • Players
  • 14176 battles
  • 513
  • [MARDR]
  • Member since:
    03-20-2017
I do not have experiance in the German slow heavies, but avoiding them in the slow 20 kph EXP is comparable. I have also avoided missiles in the IS5 too.

boris55555 #102 Posted 12 February 2020 - 12:59 AM

    Honary Doctor of Meh

  • Players
  • 28273 battles
  • 3,710
  • [MINC]
  • Member since:
    11-30-2016
Officially the beginning of the end of this game. 3.8, 5.5, 6.7. 
:amazed:6.7/6.8/6.9/6.10/7.0 now we have LAME tanks w broken mechanic “Balancing” Missile tanks is a joke.
WATCH THE SPRING MISSILE TOURNAMENTS; SUPERHEAVIES & TRICK SHOTS. Top down non los magic “situational” missiles on a LAME platform is STILL poorly thought out. Urrrrgggg 

 

 

 


Bellatormonk #103 Posted 12 February 2020 - 04:13 AM

    Tinfoil Knight

  • Players
  • 29882 battles
  • 1,320
  • [MASHU]
  • Member since:
    04-12-2011
Real Mode for President!!!

Death__Valley #104 Posted 14 February 2020 - 02:04 PM

    Purveyor of Dad Jokes

  • Players
  • 21922 battles
  • 557
  • [FOGS2]
  • Member since:
    12-31-2011

@RibbleStripe I am shamelessly posting this in every missile thread I find because I think that in addition to the already planned nerfs announced for 6.8, this is the only way to balance the game while keeping ATGMs (even though my preference is to delete the round from the game). I pledge to not spend another dime until they are fixed or I quit the game because they refuse to fix a broken system in a timely manner. Copied post below, with suggestion in bold type.

 

Currently these tanks can be found front line holding a hill and firing missile at tanks directly over the peak from them, but that is unrealistic.
 

This is another justification, in my opinion, that these ATGMs need a time (distance travelled) buffer before the controls kick in. They were never meant to be used the way we use them in game. I know I sound like a broken record, but the ATGM guidance system takes time to activate (enough time for the missile to travel 730 meters). And according to Wikipedia (not always a reliable source of info) would they weren’t even installed in the T92. The ATGM need a time/distance travelled buffer BEFORE THE GUIDANCE SYSTEM ACTIVATES. It also SHOULD HAVE LINE OF SIGHT TO TARGET for controlling the missile. I would also recommend limiting the tank’s ammo capacity and then adding a gun option to NOT CARRY ATGM rounds and add capacity for more APCR, (which really happened in Vietnam).

 

In addition, the missile proved to have a very long minimum range. Due to the layout of the vehicle, the missile did not come into the sight of the gun/tracker system until it was 800 yards (730 m) from the vehicle, at which point it could start to be guided. Because of its maximum range of about 2,200 yards (2,000 m), the system was only effective within a fairly narrow span of combat distances.” - From the “M551 Shillelagh” wiki, link below

 

Aiming the missile was simple; the gunner simply kept his gunsight on the target, while electronics in the sighting system tracked the missile optically and sent corrections through an IR link (similar to a TV remote control). In general the gunners were able to achieve excellent hit rates.” - From the “M551 Shillelagh” wiki, link below

 

Armor units consisted solely of tanks (minus headquarters company) and mechanized infantry units consisted solely of M113s. In this role, the real problem with the Sheridan was its limited ammunition load; normally, only 20 rounds and 8 missiles; although, as the M551s in Vietnam service were not equipped with missiles or their guidance equipment, this increased the basic load of conventional rounds” - From “Sheridan” wiki, link below

 

“The only niche where the M551 Sheridan was not ideal was the medium and long-range anti-tank engagement. The muzzle velocity was so low that a HEAT round fired at longer ranges would have to be "lofted", making aiming difficult, and the flight time would be so long that a moving target would be very difficult to hit. However, it appeared there was a solution to this problem by equipping the tank with gun-fired anti-tank missiles. For longer range engagements a missile would be fired instead of a HEAT round, and although its velocity would also be relatively slow, the guidance system would make a hit highly likely anyway. The M551 Sheridan appeared to offer the best of both worlds; for infantry support the large calibre gun allowed it to fire full-sized artillery rounds and canister shot, while also giving it reasonable short-range anti-tank performance from the same gun.” From the “Tanks in the Cold War” wiki, link below

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MGM-51_Shillelagh

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T92_Light_Tank

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M551_Sheridan

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tanks_in_the_Cold_War


Edited by zcostilla, 14 February 2020 - 07:11 PM.

-INDEFINITELY ON HIATUS


Benaiah57 #105 Posted 21 February 2020 - 05:37 PM

    Lance-corporal

  • Players
  • 6916 battles
  • 20
  • [GOGO2]
  • Member since:
    06-16-2017

View Postboris55555, on 12 February 2020 - 12:59 AM, said:

Officially the beginning of the end of this game. 3.8, 5.5, 6.7. 

 

Absolutely agree and my WR reflects that.



TheDirtdart #106 Posted 22 February 2020 - 03:11 PM

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 20446 battles
  • 367
  • [82ABN]
  • Member since:
    11-21-2013

Howdy RibbleStripe. Were I to make a single recommendation, it would be for the gun tube to remain in line of sight with the target the entire time the missile is flying. The missiles you are replicating flew following infra red beams. If that beam is broken the missile would go out of control. The issue is that players are shooting missiles straight up and then seeking a target without direct line of sight. This is clearly changing the dynamics of tiers 8-10.

 

You put so much effort into being balanced and realistic in armor profiles, gun dispersion, etc. Why change the rules of physics (the missiles could not maneuver like that) for a single weapon?

 

Do you intend in the future to add missiles to the KpZ? 



_Crusader6_ #107 Posted 24 February 2020 - 07:05 PM

    The Society’s NA President

  • Players
  • 65627 battles
  • 13,601
  • [SURG3]
  • Member since:
    12-08-2014

View PostTheDirtdart, on 22 February 2020 - 10:11 AM, said:

Howdy RibbleStripe. Were I to make a single recommendation, it would be for the gun tube to remain in line of sight with the target the entire time the missile is flying. The missiles you are replicating flew following infra red beams. If that beam is broken the missile would go out of control. The issue is that players are shooting missiles straight up and then seeking a target without direct line of sight. This is clearly changing the dynamics of tiers 8-10.

 

You put so much effort into being balanced and realistic in armor profiles, gun dispersion, etc. Why change the rules of physics (the missiles could not maneuver like that) for a single weapon?

 

Do you intend in the future to add missiles to the KpZ? 


100% -- I am a missile tank supporter -- however I feel that a significant amount of players are effectively exploiting the missile mechanic.    The maneuverability of the missile in its current state is allowing for some players to use it like the T49A - and conducting poor mans artillery.   Now a large majority of players using this way are useless - which takes a tank out of the team (like most 40%ers anyway) - but some are very effective in using it this way -- and that creates a method to effectively nullify most common game tactics and techniques.

 

 



 
Tank Hoarder: 401 tanks in Garage:  412/413 Played Tanks Aced
 
NON LINE OF SIGHT MISSILES ARE AN AWFUL MECHANIC 
 
    Wallet Warrior: Loyal Original M60 owner
 
 

 


Texas_Tyrant #108 Posted 25 February 2020 - 10:14 AM

    Senior Sergeant

  • Players
  • 9628 battles
  • 907
  • [UTC]
  • Member since:
    08-02-2018

View Post__Crusader6__, on 24 February 2020 - 01:05 PM, said:


100% -- I am a missile tank supporter -- however I feel that a significant amount of players are effectively exploiting the missile mechanic.    The maneuverability of the missile in its current state is allowing for some players to use it like the T49A - and conducting poor mans artillery.   Now a large majority of players using this way are useless - which takes a tank out of the team (like most 40%ers anyway) - but some are very effective in using it this way -- and that creates a method to effectively nullify most common game tactics and techniques.

 

 


IMHO it keeps the game moving, you don't have heavies side scraping entire games.


We Want Israeli Tanks In Game! Merkava MK 1 Fits In Game!

"Remember the Alamo, remember Goliad" and tank with Vengeance!

Fun fact: There are 15 MBT in game already!

 


_Crusader6_ #109 Posted 26 February 2020 - 07:16 PM

    The Society’s NA President

  • Players
  • 65627 battles
  • 13,601
  • [SURG3]
  • Member since:
    12-08-2014

View PostTexas_Tyrant, on 25 February 2020 - 05:14 AM, said:


IMHO it keeps the game moving, you don't have heavies side scraping entire games.


It has more than enough mobility to nullify that aspect.

    I launch maybe 1 missile every 20 games -- and usually that is on a JPE (or similar) that is corner wedging - it then tracks him for no damage...

 

 

 



 
Tank Hoarder: 401 tanks in Garage:  412/413 Played Tanks Aced
 
NON LINE OF SIGHT MISSILES ARE AN AWFUL MECHANIC 
 
    Wallet Warrior: Loyal Original M60 owner
 
 

 


TheDirtdart #110 Posted 27 February 2020 - 01:44 AM

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 20446 battles
  • 367
  • [82ABN]
  • Member since:
    11-21-2013
Look at the footage of HRF on you tube where is slinging missiles to a tank 25m away by shooting them way off to the right and then I'd the target and the come flying right back. That is the part that I find an exploit. I rarely fire missiles, but when I do it is to slow down a heavy. Again, if the missile had to remain on the gun line, duration of flight, I think discussion goes away. 

boris55555 #111 Posted 06 March 2020 - 12:44 AM

    Honary Doctor of Meh

  • Players
  • 28273 battles
  • 3,710
  • [MINC]
  • Member since:
    11-30-2016
Hey Ribble....?
:amazed:6.7/6.8/6.9/6.10/7.0 now we have LAME tanks w broken mechanic “Balancing” Missile tanks is a joke.
WATCH THE SPRING MISSILE TOURNAMENTS; SUPERHEAVIES & TRICK SHOTS. Top down non los magic “situational” missiles on a LAME platform is STILL poorly thought out. Urrrrgggg 

 

 

 


BorisBaddenov #112 Posted 20 March 2020 - 07:13 PM

    3.8 Made me quit

  • Players
  • 26314 battles
  • 8,838
  • [NOGUD]
  • Member since:
    12-11-2015

View Post__Crusader6__, on 24 February 2020 - 12:05 PM, said:


100% -- I am a missile tank supporter -- however I feel that a significant amount of players are effectively exploiting the missile mechanic.    The maneuverability of the missile in its current state is allowing for some players to use it like the T49A - and conducting poor mans artillery.   Now a large majority of players using this way are useless - which takes a tank out of the team (like most 40%ers anyway) - but some are very effective in using it this way -- and that creates a method to effectively nullify most common game tactics and techniques.

 

 

 

Statements like that make me think you were an O1 

 

 

Peace-

Boris


I’ve noticed a strong lack of Spare Parts. Is that intended?

No, it is not. This problem will solve itself with time. Many players have several dozens of vehicles in their Garages, so they don’t have enough Spare Parts for the entire vehicle fleet. But you will gradually collect enough Spare Parts to unlock new slots for purchased tanks in time.


_Crusader6_ #113 Posted 20 March 2020 - 07:24 PM

    The Society’s NA President

  • Players
  • 65627 battles
  • 13,601
  • [SURG3]
  • Member since:
    12-08-2014

View PostBorisBaddenov, on 20 March 2020 - 02:13 PM, said:

 

Statements like that make me think you were an O1 

 

 

Peace-

Boris

Negative on the O 



 
Tank Hoarder: 401 tanks in Garage:  412/413 Played Tanks Aced
 
NON LINE OF SIGHT MISSILES ARE AN AWFUL MECHANIC 
 
    Wallet Warrior: Loyal Original M60 owner
 
 

 


BorisBaddenov #114 Posted 20 March 2020 - 10:42 PM

    3.8 Made me quit

  • Players
  • 26314 battles
  • 8,838
  • [NOGUD]
  • Member since:
    12-11-2015

View Post__Crusader6__, on 20 March 2020 - 12:24 PM, said:

Negative on the O 


Knew that.   We all remember how on top of things those O1s were :)

 

 

Peace-

Boris 


I’ve noticed a strong lack of Spare Parts. Is that intended?

No, it is not. This problem will solve itself with time. Many players have several dozens of vehicles in their Garages, so they don’t have enough Spare Parts for the entire vehicle fleet. But you will gradually collect enough Spare Parts to unlock new slots for purchased tanks in time.


One_Exorbitant_Purple #115 Posted 21 March 2020 - 12:35 PM

    The Cripple Who Is Whole

  • Players
  • 19827 battles
  • 382
  • [_V_]
  • Member since:
    03-12-2016

View Post__Crusader6__, on 26 February 2020 - 07:16 PM, said:


It has more than enough mobility to nullify that aspect.

    I launch maybe 1 missile every 20 games -- and usually that is on a JPE (or similar) that is corner wedging - it then tracks him for no damage...

 

 

 


and then there are people who only use missiles, and they sit in complete safety 25 meters in front of me. It shouldn’t have enough mobility to do that, maybe if it was 100 or 150 meters. And also, if wg made it so it could only be controlled in sniper mode it would probably be fine.



One_Exorbitant_Purple #116 Posted 21 March 2020 - 12:42 PM

    The Cripple Who Is Whole

  • Players
  • 19827 battles
  • 382
  • [_V_]
  • Member since:
    03-12-2016

View PostEricOtown, on 18 January 2020 - 10:23 PM, said:

Who says that indirect fire has no place in Blitz? It’s not easy to do. It requires a lot of skill and practice to consistently hit targets with indirect fire and it also takes the right situation. 
 

To hit targets consistently while you are behind cover, the enemy tanks need to be in view of your camera view so that you can place your reticle on the tank. On mobile, you can aim your turret into the sky or to the side so that when your missile fired initially it will take a trajectory so that it clears the cover that you see behind. Then you use the look around bar (only available on mobile as far as I know) to move your reticle onto your target. Using the look around bar will move your reticle but not your turret. Then hit the fire button. The middle will fire out in the direction your turret is pointing, clear the cover that you are behind, and then it will curve and head to whatever you are holding your reticle on using the look around bar. 

 

It takes a lot of practice and the right set up. I think the missiles adds a fun new dynamic to the game. 


That’s the point, you can use the free look, which is on PC and Mobile as far as I know, to control the missile for you. You say it’s hard to set it up but all you have to do is look up—free look onto the enemy—fire—let go of free look. Easy



_Crusader6_ #117 Posted 22 March 2020 - 09:31 AM

    The Society’s NA President

  • Players
  • 65627 battles
  • 13,601
  • [SURG3]
  • Member since:
    12-08-2014

View PostFallenCabbage3, on 21 March 2020 - 07:42 AM, said:


That’s the point, you can use the free look, which is on PC and Mobile as far as I know, to control the missile for you. You say it’s hard to set it up but all you have to do is look up—free look onto the enemy—fire—let go of free look. Easy


It has totally broken tier X tournament play.  
   



 
Tank Hoarder: 401 tanks in Garage:  412/413 Played Tanks Aced
 
NON LINE OF SIGHT MISSILES ARE AN AWFUL MECHANIC 
 
    Wallet Warrior: Loyal Original M60 owner
 
 

 


_Crusader6_ #118 Posted 22 March 2020 - 09:32 AM

    The Society’s NA President

  • Players
  • 65627 battles
  • 13,601
  • [SURG3]
  • Member since:
    12-08-2014

View Post__Crusader6__, on 22 March 2020 - 04:31 AM, said:


It has totally broken tier X tournament play.  
   


Also and perhaps more importantly for WG at this point, WHO at this time would buy SuperConqueror crates when you know that a missile can nullify your turret armor by landing on your roof?   
 

 



 
Tank Hoarder: 401 tanks in Garage:  412/413 Played Tanks Aced
 
NON LINE OF SIGHT MISSILES ARE AN AWFUL MECHANIC 
 
    Wallet Warrior: Loyal Original M60 owner
 
 

 


j_rod #119 Posted 22 March 2020 - 11:40 AM

    Better Looking Than Cletus

  • Players
  • 27601 battles
  • 1,821
  • [H0B0S]
  • Member since:
    05-04-2011

View Post__Crusader6__, on 22 March 2020 - 03:32 AM, said:


Also and perhaps more importantly for WG at this point, WHO at this time would buy SuperConqueror crates when you know that a missile can nullify your turret armor by landing on your roof?   
 

 


I would. And so would you. :P


If running my mouth determined my winrate, I'd be a Super Unicum
 

It was never fair... but it was fun! - Krietenstein34 

 


Texas_Tyrant #120 Posted 01 April 2020 - 12:05 PM

    Senior Sergeant

  • Players
  • 9628 battles
  • 907
  • [UTC]
  • Member since:
    08-02-2018

View Post__Crusader6__, on 22 March 2020 - 03:32 AM, said:


Also and perhaps more importantly for WG at this point, WHO at this time would buy SuperConqueror crates when you know that a missile can nullify your turret armor by landing on your roof?   
 

 

Did you change your opinion? I still like the missile tanks. I play quite a few tier 8 battles and no way is it broken.(Except from nubs.)

Texas_Tyrant


We Want Israeli Tanks In Game! Merkava MK 1 Fits In Game!

"Remember the Alamo, remember Goliad" and tank with Vengeance!

Fun fact: There are 15 MBT in game already!

 





2 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 2 guests, 0 anonymous users