Artillery Support

[BronzeElemental]

Why can't we order in mortar strikes or long-range ground support? It's a vital part of large scale warfare that has been missing from PS for as long as I've played. We need high-angled indirect fire!

What if squad leaders could call it in on specific spots or mark targets for bombing runs? What if there are missile strikes that people can call in from time to time as a reward for capturing objectives or maybe kill streaks?

[Coreldan]

I would prefer this to be actually player driven thing. Like take the concept of Flails (but preferably a whole new vehicle that is more like real artillery) and improve on that making the teamwork between the commanders and the artillery guy somehow better.

So yes, but I think the artillery-thingies should still need a player to operate.

[Death2All]

Anything that remotely resembles the Flail is bad news.


Although they did hint at a possible "siege" ability for your tank further in the skill tree.

[Valdae]

We had the Flail. And it was annoying as hell.

As for missile strikes, well, we have this instead:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KZ9LUTrUo_Y&feature=related

[WarChimp130]

I wouldn't be surprised if we did see it. I mean we had the Flail(which people hated if I remember correctly), but I'd like to see another incarnation of an artillery vehicle and Infantry used Mortars. How much ass would that kick to be able to lob shells into CY's from up on hills?

I guess to a certain extent the Scorpion served this need, but it was kind of shitty and annoying.

[CutterJohn]

I'm not terribly keen on the long range style artillery in a flail as a playstyle. It has little redeeming gameplay quality. Point at reticle, fire, wait 20s for kill spam. Not very compelling.


A short ranged mortar for clearing out nasty infantry infestations might not be bad.

[Rbstr]

Don't start the kill streaks nonsense again. Higby already said we weren't getting COD-style streak bonus things.

I'm all for some better artillery options.
But don't make it out like these things don't exist in some form. What is an OS if not a called in high angle artillery strike analogue?
Honestly, if more artillery shows up it should be player served. Like the flail but more like a howitzer. So you can actually blow it up and prevent its use.
Man portable mortars would also be cool.

Also: Squadleaders have things called waypoints, which can be used to mark specific spots...what exactly new are you suggesting there?

[Valdae]

That said I liked the mortar strikes in BC2. At least it gave players a chance to get the hell out of the way, unlike insta-death flail.

[DviddLeff]

So you want to call in a magic artillery strike or bombing run... when you could just ask a real player to fire the cannon or man the bombers?

Ridiculous.

Manned artillery such as mortars and bombers should be a part of the game; and it should be totally teamwork dependant. Oh, and the OS should be removed from PS2, unless you can have a player in orbit firing the cannon...

[BronzeElemental]

I was kinda meaning that the squad leader marks a target for bombardment/bombing/whatever and then if someone else from the same empire completes that request both the squad leader AND the player who completed it get a bonus of some kind (extra xp or whatever).

That way you have incentive for people to actively help each other. Also we have unmanned drones and unmanned airstrikes/missile strikes in the real world and PS is supposed to be set in a future with more advanced technology so it makes sense that you should be able to call down SOMETHING without another player having to sit around in a chair waiting to push a button.

[WarChimp130]

I also agree that they shouldn't make it so long ranged like the Flail. Something with shorter range.

[HELLFISH88]

I for one liked the flail, it was the most "realistic" game artillery I have ever seen in term's that it was still operated by a player, accommodating laze targeting and a ludicris range.

[basti]

The Flail was awesome, heck the flail is awesome.

It requires at least one guy to actually fire the thing, and one guy to find and pinpoint targets.

What sucked was the ability to just spam them at certain points. Having 5-10 flails bombing a base over long long range made it impossible to pull vehicles, means you cant actually kill the flails. A much slower ROF would fix that. Let a single hit do much more damage, taking out everything it hits directly and damaging everything close quite heavly, but make those shots count, like with a ROF of 1 shot per minute. On top of that, let people require that the target is lazed in order to shoot. That pretty much denies to possibility of spamming that thing, and forces players to cooperate to use it.

In addition, make the atillery easy to kill, very easy to kill.

[DashRev]

The Flail was awesome, heck the flail is awesome.

It requires at least one guy to actually fire the thing, and one guy to find and pinpoint targets.

What sucked was the ability to just spam them at certain points. Having 5-10 flails bombing a base over long long range made it impossible to pull vehicles, means you cant actually kill the flails. A much slower ROF would fix that. Let a single hit do much more damage, taking out everything it hits directly and damaging everything close quite heavly, but make those shots count, like with a ROF of 1 shot per minute. On top of that, let people require that the target is lazed in order to shoot. That pretty much denies to possibility of spamming that thing, and forces players to cooperate to use it.

In addition, make the atillery easy to kill, very easy to kill.

I'm also pretty fond of the flail, although I would never use it myself in its current iteration. I think if you took the current flail, slightly increased the projectile speed and added a requirement for the target to be lazed by someone in the area, you might see more players open up to it.

If you designed it like that, you'd see virtually no random flail spam, and it would actually require teamwork (like a Libby or Vulture) rather than luck.

It would also add another role for cloakers to fill in large-scale open-field. Find an AMS or a Lodestar, laze it, and watch as the flail projectile comes roaring in and clears everything out.

[Zerikin Loukbel]

Making artillery that had multiple shells with smaller splash radius like a real arty would also make it better. When the first shell hits you can try and run for cover at least.

[Traak]

Missile-deployable minefields.

Mines that aren't lethal, but annoyingly damaging. And can still be taken out by jammers.

Mortars sound nice. Something you actually have to aim properly, not point at a wp and click.

[Treerat]

Making artillery that had multiple shells with smaller splash radius like a real arty would also make it better. When the first shell hits you can try and run for cover at least.

A reasonable suggestion instead of mindless "it's not HA Surgile so it's skillless!"... *keels over in shock*.

Seriously, I think you are about the first person I've seen whose suggestion wasn't basically "I want artillery so restricted it won't ever be used" with different window dressing. Artillery by it's nature is a "spam" weapon - the more rounds you can put into the target zone the greater the chance of destroying the target and keeping the survivors heads down. Take that ability to suppress troops out of cover away, and artillery loses it's greatest contribution to battle.

The problem I saw with artillery in Planetside as it was implemented (aka the Flail) was that is was more effective and more often used as a self-propelled gun than as true field artillery. Primarily because the interface didn't allow for any communications, asset searchers, or information exchange beyond the platoon level and none between platoons. A key part of modern artillery (since most often the actual gun/ launcher isn't that different from their 1940's precursors) is the fire control and communications systems. That allows for a almost direct line between the requesting unit and the battery best able to respond. Imagine if a squad in a tower that was camped by 4 tanks could see which Flail units were in range to bombard the area outside them, could send the request and coordinates to the Flail pilot(s) and receive confirmation back that artillery fire was inbound. It would radically alter how siege situations work; no longer would it be safe to simple park outside the door after the OS and thus actual breaching tactics become more important.

[Coreldan]

That could require it's own "artillery chat"/request system or something, cos at least currently a lowbie person has little ways to communicate with someone they dont know/arnt squadies/outfitties with unless I'm missing something.

On another note, it might be a thing that should be done by CRs anyways.

[dm Akolyte]

Make the flail only be able to fire when locked onto a laze beacon. But let the flail user see the beacons of anybody in the empire.
Increase the speed/damage of the projectile and make it more accurate, but decrease refire rate. Let the flail user see where the shot is landing. (Follow the shot, like the SPMA in UT2k4)

So if there's a tower camping vanguard, if someone sneaks out and lazes the target, they can have a massive artillery strike come in the clear it out.

The issue remaining is camping the vehicle pad. A slower refire means there would be a big enough gap between shots to pull a vehicle. But having to constantly repair the pad is super annoying, and with a big line you're pretty screwed.

[Volw]

First of all, I don't like being killed by something I can't see. In fact, most of people don't, that's why all-bar-flail vehicles in PS require line of sight.

The biggest issue with artillery can be seen on Flail example.

If it's powerful, then it *will* be spammed and therefore made OP.

If it's sub-par, to balance out 'spammability' of it, then no-one will bother using them.

[dm Akolyte]

The solution to that is to make it situationally powerful.
So implement restrictions that make it fufill a very specific role, but let it do that very well.

Say, destroying camping, stationary vehicles.

[Volw]

The solution to that is to make it situationally powerful.
So implement restrictions that make it fufill a very specific role, but let it do that very well.

Say, destroying camping, stationary vehicles.

SADARM rounds could potentially work ....

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/munitions/sadarm.htm

[Treerat]

Make the flail only be able to fire when locked onto a laze beacon. But let the flail user see the beacons of anybody in the empire.
Increase the speed/damage of the projectile and make it more accurate, but decrease refire rate. Let the flail user see where the shot is landing. (Follow the shot, like the SPMA in UT2k4)

So if there's a tower camping vanguard, if someone sneaks out and lazes the target, they can have a massive artillery strike come in the clear it out.

The issue remaining is camping the vehicle pad. A slower refire means there would be a big enough gap between shots to pull a vehicle. But having to constantly repair the pad is super annoying, and with a big line you're pretty screwed.

Slow refire would make it really difficult to open up other aspects of artillery. One of the ways modern artillery can be very destructive is to fire at such a high rate of fire that combined with decreasing the angle of elevation multiple shells can land nearly simultaneously. Fast rates of fire also allow artillery to fire off it's round then move to another location to avoid counter-battery fire (see below).

I think part of the v-pad camping problem (which I personally found annoying as hell no matter if it was flails, liberators, reavers, or CRs with OS'es doing the camping) is poor design of facilities. Bases in Planetside had been laid out before ideas such as the flail or liberator were barely concepts, which put most vehicle pads out in the open and under the assumption that few people would reach CR4/5 and even fewer would be willing to waste an OS just for extra kills. If the bases are designed better this time, things like v-pads should be either in enclosed areas (ex. tech plant facilities) or have at least partial overhead coverage and be well-defended by the installations own AA defenses. At the minimum that would make actually camping a v-pad a much greater challenge entailing a high degree of risk and some serious planning (ex. think a fail gunner/ spotter team who are good enough to consistently put a fail round down the vehicle tunnel of a tech plant).

Another part of that problem is how Planetside handled large-scale communications. One of the big "checks" if you will on modern artillery (and the reason why more and more of it is self-propelled) is that when the artillery shoots it gives away it's location. And once the location of a hostile battery is known it has a short life expectancy due to the enemy directing counter-battery fire from it's own artillery as well as air strikes, special operations units, and other forces towards that area to destroy it. Key to that is for someone who notices the artillery or can figure it's flight path (and thus it's point of origin) being able to relay that information to the people in charge so they in turn can allocate assets to the enemy batteries destruction and direct those assets to the enemy artillery's location. It is at that communications part that Planetside failed.

As someone who used the Mosquito as a scout I would often find enemy flails (sometimes with AA MAXes or Skyguards escorting them) who were shelling bases and inform the people commanding our troops on the continent of their location through CR1-2 chat (in the hope of it being /sitrep'ed up the chain) or via a tell. The problem was that 9 out of 10 times, the information was either lost in the deluge of combat, or the CRs couldn't figure out the location beyond the grid reference. The few times they did get the information and knew where to direct forces, getting that information to the right forces was nearly impossible. If a CR would call for a reaver squad to dislodge the flails at so and so, they would either get none or two reavers who would be destroyed by the escorting AA (as the rest assumed someone else was on it) or every single reaver in the fight would go there (leaving the base without any air cover). What would have made it easier would have been if a "continental commander" could receive reports of sighted enemy units, see which units under him had the equipment to fulfill his request, send the "mission" to those units along with the needed information, then receive a confirmation of mission acceptance/ completion.

I really think a LOT of the problems people have with large-scale combat assets such as artillery is that FPS's are still trying to use the command tools of Counterstrike; tools intended to relay information between a handful of people break down when you've gotten 100+ people on a side all trying to pass and making requests for information and there is no way to effectively get that information to those that need it in a timely manner. Hopefully, now that command will be a full-time role not something chased for extra toys, the developers will make sure to include more ways to share information between all levels without the need for the players to resort to third-party voice applications.

[Treerat]

Different type of rounds (and different types of artillery... MLRS) would be a good twist too.

Even now there are precision-guided rounds (Excalibur), FASCAM (field artillery scatterable mines), and cluster rounds for artillery. Plus multiple types of artillery (the guns & howitzers people think about when thinking artillery, rocket artillery, and mortars).

If artillery could only carry so many types of rounds and each was highly effective against a particular type of target but relatively weak against others, it would cut down on some of the "just spam and pray" tactics (like what tanks do to doors today) without making it something that no one wants to use. Combine that with better communication tools so that artillery can be found and killed in a reasonable amount of time and I doubt artillery would be any less disruptive to players than snipers and OS's were and I don't remember hearing any of the people complaining about artillery whining about those.

[Rbstr]

I feel like we should have two sets of arty.

One that's a conquerable, so it's at a base or near one and you can fight over it...that would be fairly powerful to control...but you've still gotta have a dude (or a few so it's got more than a single target) in it. Like a wall turret but bigger.

Two some self propelled deal, mostly an anti-infantry thing - perhaps cluster munitions, sitting duck to air/tanks/close infantry.

Both require a signal of some kind to fire...like a beacon that can be thrown like a nade or something.

[Aractain]

My view of arty is pretty simple.

It is a playstyle rather than a 'weapon'. Support orientated which means a larger focus on putting pressure on enemys rather than killing noobs.

Camera shells to aim and view effect on target but you usually fire lots of smaller rounds and there is no way to hit even a large vehicle reliably.

[PsychoXR-20]

I wouldn't mind seeing mortar strikes, as long as said mortars are a capturable object that ones empire must control to use.

How you would go about calling in the strike I have no idea, obviously everyone and their mother shouldn't be able to call in a mortal strike at will, and commanders will still have access to orbital strikes, so giving them the only access to mortars seems a bit unfair/overkill/redundant.

Perhaps the mortars could require multiple gunners, who then take in requests from the field, but must all agree on the target before firing can commence.

Perhaps everyone can choose where they would like a mortar strike to be called in, then when an area has a certain amount of "votes", that's where it happens.

Or maybe it's completely automated and randomly fires on the heaviest concentration of enemies within it's range.

Add in a long delay between each strike, as well as a initial delay when the mortars are captured and I don't think it would be too overpowered (key word is 'too').

[Kietharr]

I think the Flail shouldn't even be in this game tbh, I hope none of that core combat alien crap comes back, instead make a few faction artillery vehicles

NC: Self propelled Howitzer, primary fire shoots HE-Anti Armor shells, secondary fire shoots frag shells.

TR: MLRS style 6 rocket mobile rocket launcher, fires both AV rockets and cluster rockets for AI purposes

VS: Something kinda like the flail, but with a secondary fire that shoots cluster flux pods. Also more VS, less Alien style.

All would need to deploy like the flail to fire.

As for mortars, no. Infantry shouldn't have artillery/tank level power because they're so much more mobile, all it took was a reaver or two to go hunting to clean up a few flails but you'd need a good deal more to clean up infantry mortars hiding in forests and whatnot.

[BronzeElemental]

As for mortars, no. Infantry shouldn't have artillery/tank level power because they're so much more mobile, all it took was a reaver or two to go hunting to clean up a few flails but you'd need a good deal more to clean up infantry mortars hiding in forests and whatnot.

Just like real life then.

[Firefly]

First of all, I don't like being killed by something I can't see. In fact, most of people don't, that's why all-bar-flail vehicles in PS require line of sight.

The biggest issue with artillery can be seen on Flail example.

If it's powerful, then it *will* be spammed and therefore made OP.

If it's sub-par, to balance out 'spammability' of it, then no-one will bother using them.
Yes. Because Flail spam is a huge game-breaker right now. In fact, last night I was playing and my Reaver got shot down by a Flail round. And then when our Galaxy was taking off, it got capped by a Flail round. And when I was on Searhus down at Iva, they had a billion Flails parked up on the rim of the volcano hurling magical artillery down into the base. And the other day, and the day before that, and a week ago, when I was playing the game lagged out because of all the Flail Trails in the sky.

:rolleyes:

People don't seem to understand the difference in weapons system. Tanks are OP compared to a pistol or a rifle. A rifle is OP compared to a knife. A Liberator bomb (correctly applied on-target) is OP compared to a tank round. Hey here's an idea, let's just make all weapons in the game REGARDLESS of their prime function do exactly two points of damage. That way everyone is equal, and we can all hold hands and sing Kumbaya and talk about our feelings!

Artillery is a weapon of warfare. It has its uses, and yes it's supposed to be OP under specific circumstances. And right along with that, it has incredible vulnerabilities. Without even talking about real life, let's just look at the Flail. Hmm, where to begin. Well, if I happen to spot outbound Flail fire in my Reaver or Mossie, I will immediately track it back and open fire. He's locked into a set-up position, so that's a few seconds of free kill. Then he's got to run away, and I'm pretty sure I can plod along right behind him and take him out because his massive cannon o' doom is useless in a straight-up fight.

[Lunarchild]

<long post>
Another part of that problem is how Planetside handled large-scale communications. One of the big "checks" if you will on modern artillery (and the reason why more and more of it is self-propelled) is that when the artillery shoots it gives away it's location. And once the location of a hostile battery is known it has a short life expectancy due to the enemy directing counter-battery fire from it's own artillery as well as air strikes, special operations units, and other forces towards that area to destroy it. Key to that is for someone who notices the artillery or can figure it's flight path (and thus it's point of origin) being able to relay that information to the people in charge so they in turn can allocate assets to the enemy batteries destruction and direct those assets to the enemy artillery's location. It is at that communications part that Planetside failed.


So, in Planetside 2, could not the automatic mission generation system help with this as well? It could automatically generate missions to take the thing out I'd think.

But I agree that it would be a whole lot more interesting if there are more proper ways to counter artillery.

[ShowNoMercy]

keep flail range, nerf the accuracy, make it 3-5 round burst, and the driver or another person has to get out and manually reload shells. Additionally the vehicle would not be re-loadable while in the firing position, it would have to be in the driving/loading position. Ideally it would take about 20-30 seconds between firings that way and the driver would not be able to hit the same target twice unless directed to do so by an additional laz targeting.

Sound fair? would make for some sweet bombardments and at the same time prevent door camping. Artillery should be used on open field targets anyways since there is no destructible buildings.

***x202a;Band of Brothers- German Artillery Barrage***x202c;&rlm; - YouTube

[Volw]

Yes. Because Flail spam is a huge game-breaker right now. In fact, last night I was playing and my Reaver got shot down by a Flail round. And then when our Galaxy was taking off, it got capped by a Flail round. And when I was on Searhus down at Iva, they had a billion Flails parked up on the rim of the volcano hurling magical artillery down into the base. And the other day, and the day before that, and a week ago, when I was playing the game lagged out because of all the Flail Trails in the sky.

:rolleyes:


Trollin' are we?

You may have to L2R if not.

The biggest issue with artillery can be seen on Flail example.

If it's powerful, then it *will* be spammed and therefore made OP.

If it's sub-par, to balance out 'spammability' of it, then no-one will bother using them.

In case you don't remember or simply didn't play 'back then', Flail used to be quite powerful (not OP) after it was released, which lead to having Flail spam everywhere. Having main exits and vehicle terminals Flail spammed was SO much fun. Almost like BFRs.

At some point Flails got nerfed and since then, they're not being used as much. Even though they have their uses, 2 Reavers can most of the time do the same job - much faster.

[nathanebht]

Good discussion on an interesting topic. Artillery and mortars are such a part of a large battlefield. And I remember fondly, being perched on a mountain near a battle in a Flail.

However, I feel that artillery would not be good for gameplay. Its not fun being killed by something with no warning and which you can't defend against. Perhaps being able to activate a personal artillery shield along with an automated "incoming" alert would help?

[MrDawkins]

What about the old scorpion? Fire it over the wall, detonate, watch spray take everyone to half HP and run for cover.

Little did they know they were never safe

FIRE AGAIN!
killspam

[Talek Krell]

Didn't they mention mortars as a potential vehicle upgrade? I rather liked that idea, especially with combat being moved away from bases. I could see rigging out a deli with a gun and a mortar to support an infantry assault.

[Peacemaker]

No flail. Id love to see mortars, and howitzers though. Tow behinds. Unable to move unless a tow vehicle does it.

[BronzeElemental]

Mortars seem very popular.
TR get a multi-barrel mortar and/or cluster rounds.
NC get one giant bigboy mortar.
VS get one fruity plasma damage-over-time deal or something.

[cashfoyogash]

First off I am going to list the certain types of artillery missions;

Counterbattery fire: delivered for the purpose of destroying or neutralizing the enemy's fire support system.

Counterpreparation fire: intensive prearranged fire delivered when the imminence of the enemy attack is discovered.

Covering fire: used to protect troops when they are within range of enemy small arms.

Defensive fire: delivered by supporting units to assist and protect a unit engaged in a defensive action.

Final Protective Fire: an immediately available prearranged barrier of fire designed to impede enemy movement across defensive lines or areas.

Interdiction fire: placed on an area or point to prevent the enemy from using the area or point.

Preparation fire: delivered before an attack to weaken the enemy position

Suppression fire: that degrades the performance of a target below the level needed to fulfill its mission. Suppression is usually only effective for the duration of the fire.

Field artillery is the single most important piece of equipment in war fare, it always has been. Used in every conflict excluding the panama conflict due to the tree canopy. You cant have a mass war simulation game and exclude indirect fire.

So what you are killed by something you cant see. Take cover and call in for counterbattery fire. Shout at your chain of command till you get the attention of someone to take notice of the enemies artillery halting your outfits assault. This isnt call of duty if you want to kill things you can only see go play that and run around and spam shotgun shells every where. This game provides all types of support roles it should include the most important support role ever.

The flail was a horrible attempt at field artillery, it should be available without a vehicle mod and not able to fire from across the whole map. It should be able to be safe well behind your front line. It should not be able to kill anything in a close proximity to it. Meaning artillery in PS2 should only be effective when firing from long distances so you cant park it outside a base door and pummel it. The shells should only arm after traveling so many meters.

Artillery in PS2 should be more dependent upon a forward observer. It should also require something more advanced then a simple laze pointer so you can change how high the shells will arc. It should involve something that takes skill to use so not everyone can pull one and spam it. Artillery is necessary in this game though. You should be able as a commander to order an interdiction fire mission on a bridge or hill to keep the enemy from traversing over it or taking up position on elevated terrain.

[BronzeElemental]

First off I am going to list the certain types of artillery missions;
/snip loads of good stuff
Artillery in PS2 should be more dependent upon a forward observer. It should also require something more advanced then a simple laze pointer so you can change how high the shells will arc. It should involve something that takes skill to use so not everyone can pull one and spam it. Artillery is necessary in this game though. You should be able as a commander to order an interdiction fire mission on a bridge or hill to keep the enemy from traversing over it or taking up position on elevated terrain.

This is basically everything I wanted to say about it. Without artillery it doesn't feel like a true battlefield to me.

[Aractain]

It would be cool to have some kind of intel vehicle that can pinpoint enemy artilery positions from their incoming fire and distrobute that info (a red icon on the map) to players to go kill.

[Bags]

keep flail range, nerf the accuracy

Yes, we need to make the flail even MORE likely to massacre friendlies.

[Vancha]

I could see artillery existing, but it'd need to be short enough range that you're likely to have LOS/access to it. Imagine a morter on the hill east/northeast of Nzame for example.

[cashfoyogash]

LOS on artillery defeats what artillery is... its behind the lines support indirect fire... the only thing that needs to change is the fact you can use it to spam doors with flail from 50m out. The shells need to have to travel a certain distance before they become armed. The self propelled artillery should not be an all terrain vehicle and as fast as the flail. It should be slow like an ams.

It should require a forward observe to pinpoint grid coordinates and relay them back to the battery. Where the gunner would then be able to input them into some kind of device and then fire the gun. You should be able to change the elevation of the barrel and the size of the charge used to be able to arc the shot as needed.

If you make it so the artillery is more than just a point and click weapon itll make it so only a select few can master its proper use. Regardless field artillery being used as a long range spam shot weapon is necessary.

[FastAndFree]

If the field artillery was not a normal vehicle but rather something that you deploy on the field like an AMS, and then operate while standing next to it (being vulnerable to everything from cloakers to snipers to intrepid aircav)...

Well that's never gonna happen, but I like the idea :)

[Vancha]

LOS on artillery defeats what artillery is... its behind the lines support indirect fire...
Hence why I added the /accessible

The problem with the flail was that it could fire from too far. It could spam a door/vterm while sitting somewhere that might be unassailable.

Having artillery firing from somewhere like the Nzame hill I mentioned, or the forests of Kisin/Tore/Leza/Dagda, or the mountain at Girru, or the ridge around Caer etc. etc.

These are all places I can imagine artillery being useful, while remaining vulnerable. That sort of range would seem about right to me.

[cashfoyogash]

I was responding to the guy who said artillery should be line of sight only, which would be mortars only and on the front lines. I agree with what you have said. I dont believe PS2 artillery should be able to fire as far as the flail can but still be able to be relatively safe behind the front lines but still accessible to enemy raids on artillery positions so therefor artillery should only be able to be deployed in areas where all other vehicles are able to access.

In my mind a self propelled artillery vehicle should be slow like an ams and when deployed its stationary like the siege tank in starcraft 2. Also it should have relatively light armor which would allow raids on the positions to be more successfully. I wouldnt want the artillery to be unstoppable, i just want it to be a tool used in war fare as it is today. Like in bridge crossing or widely used road intersections or used to keep the enemy from taking position on an elevated hill.

[Warruz]

Artillery i really want in this game but it must be player driven and part of keeping it balanced is having other players marking for you.

Part of balancing long range artillery should be in its placement, pushing it requires multiple people or a vehicle.

Shorter the range the less in the requirement in functioning/moving/power.

So Long Range Artillery= 3 people to move or one vehicle(must be atleast a buggie), longest range, largest impact, requires spotter for accuracy.

Mid Range(think howitzer)= 2 people to move or vehicle(ATV), ,mid ranger,Medium Impact, no spotter needed

Short Range(Morter) = 1 person/Portable, Short range, Small Impact, guess and check.

[Aractain]

The problem with spotter/shooter gameplay is that its slow and boring for the majority of people that want to do it. And "balancing" something by making it not very fun is... dumb.

All squads should have the ability to setup a artiliery waypoint which auto locks in the fireing solution and gives a good camera view of the area.

On thier own artilery should be able to fire a floating camera that lats for 3 minuets or so. It has more of a top down angle with a limited field of view and not great zoom length. Aiming would be realativly slow, not mouse response - much slower.

Accuracy would be bad enough there was no way to accuratly hit a vehicle but not so bad you miss the zoomed in view completly.

Getting kills would be rare - would need some other way to award XP and make them feel like they are making a difference.

[Entertain Me]

I would love to be part of an artillery group or something of that sort, maybe we would only be allowed to fire our weapons after someone designated the target area from the frontlines? This would eliminate the possibility of spam-artillery.

Or maybe it could be done similarly to BF2 where AI artillery is shared by the commanders and can be taken out by the enemy and be repaired by friendlies. Commanders can only use it once every few minutes.

[exLupo]

The problem with spotter/shooter gameplay is that its slow and boring for the majority of people that want to do it. And "balancing" something by making it not very fun is... dumb.

Laze and mortar gameplay got a lot of love in Tribes. Using "needs teamwork to be effective" is the same argument people use against the prowler. However, that only applies to that unit because its two analogues require less coordination.

When lazing becomes a requirement, you get people who enjoy doing it because then they're a critical component in a shortly inbound deathbomb. Some people (see: medics in TF2 or Gal specialists in PS1) enjoy support roles. Balancing game components around teamplay is not a bad thing. Arguably, the lack of teamwork-necessary components was a problem in PS1 that, with the skill/class system, seems to be being rectified in PS2.

[DxC]

Im quite sure that Artillery is a nice idea but if anything PS1 taught us was that the flail was quite franky the most anoying thing on the field countless times seeing the shots coming in moving out of the way and still getting hit by it /sigh

However artillery would be a nice idea for the game shaking up the defenders before or during tank battles etc nice idea.