Theoretical Artillery

[Senyu]

Please don't jump on the burning wagon just yet, I really think with this clip as an example there could be a place for artillery, albiet that works differently than those in PS1. Warning, it is a long read. Please read and give feedback from gameplay viewpoint of the game, I do not want this to turn into a spam, flame war agaisn't artillery. I am trying to come up with a possible real variation of artillery that would actually fit PS2. Here's my attempt.

Take a look here at 25:12
PlanetSide 2 - TwitchTV stream of Matt Higby - YouTube

That's some pretty good distance for vanguard tank to shoot and it honestly at a glance looks a little like a mobile artillery piece. But I'm seeing a possible implementation of artillery for this role. Ignoring any "realistic" comments, lets take a look here at the "gameplay" possibilites.

The suggested artillery concept is a mobile vehicle that takes a small time to set up that has range equal to and possible greater than the vanguards fire distance shown in the video, most likely a little bit farther since that is still close in vehicle distance but still a within sight shooting, no half continent away shots. Now this could possibly mean that the current vehicles would have to have their current firing distance reduced or have much greater bullet drop. This would put the current tanks into close to medium range of fire (in vehicle terms, not infantry close). In this video, that firing distance would then be considered to be long vehicle shooting range.


What this would mean is that there would be artillery and it would be viable with its appropiate gameplay weakness's and strengths. The artillery would most likely be within sight distance giving their position away. The key here is having LOS. And no matter how advantagous it is to have those artillery pounding the enemies defences, it giles the defenders to have a goal to eliminate them with a strike team or aircraft which in turn adds defenders to protect the artillery from being destroyed. I am not recommending power equal to the flail nor the firing distance. It should be more powerful than current MBT with of course all the drawbacks of being artillery such as slow reload, not dead eye accurate but rather small AoE area, and lack of mobility. A variety of shell types could be used as well.

With this artillery wouldn't be as OP or stupid of sitting half a continent away shooting giant beams of light, (it would be shells) and have its role in the battlefield. It wouldn't be able to zip around at a moments notice and it will not be viable in all situtations due to pace of the battlefield and positioning. But there would be instances like in the above video that it would be benifical and could add more to the gameplay

[Saifoda]

You can have its range be much greater than the 25:12 example in the video and still not be "half-continent," as it were. There's also no need for the direct los stuff -- kinda defeats the purpose of artillery, might as well keep it just tanks. As for the counters it would be very easy to tell where the artillery is firing from ("contrails" to the incoming rounds) and they'd have to setup in relatively open terrain, as they will need an area which they can shoot high angle fire (the best way to make this balanced -- again with the long time-to-target and high visibility of the incoming rounds) which means little-to-no tree canopy, meaning they won't be well camouflaged. This will make them very vulnerable to air-to-ground counterattack; if they want to keep the arty alive they'll have to setup plenty of defenses, primarily AA, to keep the arty pieces of alive. This means more and more troops away from the frontlines just to guard the arty; if it's that important to maintain it to that empire/outfit/platoon, then they will do that, if not, then maybe they pull artillery, maybe they don't. Either way, I am for artillery.

[Rico Suave]

I recall back in BF1942 and BF Vietnam that the artillery worked by having a recon designate an area with his binoculars. The artillery would right click to get a view of the area (it was on a time limit) and be able to fire and adjust where his shells land. Now the inherent problems with something like that in this game is with the sheer amount of people you don't want to have to flip through multiple target areas, so there could be a limiting factor like only accepting ones from your squad.

I do agree with Saifoda, you can give the arty a longer range, there'd just need to be contrails on the shell to give a direction and allow for counter-battery fire. I'd love to see arty in game.

On a side note, in BF: Vietnam you could use choppers to airlift artillery pieces around the map. I could imagine that they could have both mobile (like in 1942) and immobile artillery in game.

[Bags]

If you want artillery use a vangaurd on a mountain overlooking the fight.

[Broadside]

I'm all for a designated mobile artillery vehicle in game. It could work just like BF3's mortars in that you open up a minimap that shows possible range and move a cross hair around it to choose your target. It would be a fairly easy vehicle to come up with ways to cert and customize it between upgrading range, shell capacity, damage, area of effect, turret movement speed etc.

[Bags]

I'm all for a designated mobile artillery vehicle in game. It could work just like BF3's mortars in that you open up a minimap that shows possible range and move a cross hair around it to choose your target. It would be a fairly easy vehicle to come up with ways to cert and customize it between upgrading range, shell capacity, damage, area of effect, turret movement speed etc.

Doing it BF3's way is less skillfull than how PS1 did it...:huh::huh::huh::huh:
:rolleyes:

[Broadside]

Doing it BF3's way is less skillfull than how PS1 did it...:huh::huh::huh::huh:
:rolleyes:

Yet more intuitive IMO.

[Sephirex]

If you want artillery use a vangaurd on a mountain overlooking the fight.

Couldn't point the cannon high enough to get a proper arcing shot, and can't point the cannon low enough for a direct non-arcing shot from that high.

Personally, I hate the idea of artillery in PS2. Getting shot at by somebody I can't see or possibly hope to hit is not my idea of a fun time. Shooting at people that can't see me is not my idea of a fun time either, but unfortunately the only counter to artillery is more artillery.

[Senyu]

Couldn't point the cannon high enough to get a proper arcing shot, and can't point the cannon low enough for a direct non-arcing shot from that high.

Personally, I hate the idea of artillery in PS2. Getting shot at by somebody I can't see or possibly hope to hit is not my idea of a fun time. Shooting at people that can't see me is not my idea of a fun time either, but unfortunately the only counter to artillery is more artillery.

That's why I suggested lower range of artillery but still farther than MBT's and requiring LOS. The LOS is very massive in PS2, the distance I'm thinking though for the artillery is like the top of the cliffs to the middle of the base in the E3 demo.
]
And I imagine it to be more mobile similar to the Swedish Archer Artillery.

[JesNC]

A mortar turret for the lightning would make a good compromise i think. Slow shells, huge arc, extremely squishy.

I'm still a fan of off-grid artillery/OS though. I think it keeps arty strikes more of a strategic tool.

[Peacemaker]

Counters to artillery

1. Aircraft
2. Spec ops team
3. More artillery
4. Limiting availability to artillery
5. Making them weak

I've always wanted artillery, and I think the best way to implement it is to make them engineer deployed high resource units. Towed behind a vehicle, immobile. Less a vehicle is used to move them. They would have to be defended as they would be easy picking for any type of attack. Limited field of fire, range is 1 1/4 hex. Automated, squad mates can use a designator to have fire missions, inaccurate, multiple shell types, limited ammo supply (needs resupply)

[Saifoda]

... unfortunately the only counter to artillery is more artillery.

False.

The bane of artillery is air. Historically, and in game, this will be true. Counter fire for artillery is more common in the Afghan (and formerly Iraq) theater right now because it is faster because we have/had permanent fobs there, and there are automated ways to do that (which would be very unfair for planetside 2 to have automated arty capabilities). On top of that all of the idf we took overseas either came from rockets or mortars -- nothing with a huge tube and a chassis to support it (like artillery). Artillery in the classical sense will have it's biggest issues be air; air is fast, and plenty of pilots will outfit their fighters for air-to-ground to take care of tanks; not to mention the libs and galaxy gunships if they're brought back. It'll be easy to figure out where the arty came from as they will be out in the open (as I said in my previous post) and their contrails will lead you right to them.

[vVRedOctoberVv]

No mini-map based artillery. Period. Point and click to win? Really? No.

A dedicated, strictly LoS based artillery is kind of pointless. A tank IS that kind of artillery already. If it's not BoV... then there's no point in it existing at all. You'd be ahead to get the tank.

[Bags]

Counters to artillery

2. Spec ops team



The counter to one person: an entire team of people! Brillaint! :rolleyes:

[vVRedOctoberVv]

The counter to one person: an entire team of people! Brillaint! :rolleyes:


If artillery is not done in a stupid fashion, it would not be "one person". It would be, at minimum, a driver + gunner and (somewhere) a forward observer. In which case it would be "a team of people to counter a team of people".

That's the thing, in RL, at any point... It's ALWAYS been a team of people. It's retarded games that make them solo kill whores. In RL, there's usually one or two people serving just as ammo loaders, although that would be taking it a BIT far for a game... LOAD! (clicks mouse) (gun fires) LOAD! (clicks mouse) LOAD FASTER YOU BASTARD, WE NEED THESE DOWN RANGE! (spams clicks mouse)... But I digress.


-edit

Actually, in RL, mobile artillery pieces can usually only carry 10-15 rounds. So there is a supply truck/convoy there, too, with people running ammo to it. So, he could run out there, fire for two or three minutes, and then bugger off to get more ammo (not TOO threatening) or there's a whole BUNCH of people there, who are frighteningly vulnerable unless there are EVEN MORE people there to guard them. Especially if ammo trucks explode nicely :)

[OutlawDr]

Take a look here at 25:12
Looks like we already have artillery in the game.
I wouldn't want any longer ranged or more powerful "artillery" than what we saw with those two vangaurds. If there is going to be a dedicated "artillery" vehicle, it should mount no more than a vanguard equivalent cannon (or there about). And DON'T nerf MBT's just so we can have more need for artillery vehicles.

[vVRedOctoberVv]

I agree, there's no need for them to fire WTFPWN cannons. They would mostly be in the nature of HE rounds. Relatively large AOE (compared to most weapons in this game), but ineffective against armored targets, persay. A tank unfortunate enough to catch a full salvo from multiple batteries would be toast, but he should be able to absorb a couple hits.

Artillery is a devastating weapon used against stationary targets, but it's also largely a SUPPRESSION weapon. It doesn't matter how effective it is, it's loud and scary and dangerous and nobody wants to go out there!

My thoughts on all this are contrary to reality, and presented in the form of "balance" and "fairness" for a video game. RL is quite different, but as we all know, this isn't RL. Or even a good mil-sim.

[TheGodCanine]

If you want a counter for Artillery you could always add Missile Defenders.

Stationary Turrets made to destroy any income long range missile/larger energy threat coming within the area.

Which adds another tactic,destroy the missile defenders to bring in the long range support.

[LtHolmes]

I am all for having different types of classes and roles in planetside 2. Seeing as it is a little more removed from the danger of the fight it is supporting with shell fire I think that is should have some restrictions or balancing done. This will keep it from being able to fire and spam to no end.

My idea is to make good use of team work to make artilery work well. Sniper/infiltrator could be used specifically to spot encampements or vehicles and relay the coordinates/map point to the artillery. Also the artillery should have some combination of less ammo/slower reload/less damage/time to impact/set up time. Some combination of those, not saying all of them, would help make it not seem unfair.

I think making it in conjunction with an infiltrator or some other spotting mechanic will help to keep it from being a TK machine or morons just spamming it all day really helping no one. Ultimately, I think it is a down the road subject anyway. Beta needs to be started and the current vehicles and combinations need to be tested to see how this all really plays out with a large population of players.

[vVRedOctoberVv]

@LtHolmes

I agree. It's not a gamebreaker by any means, and there are far more important things to iron out and balance.

[Senyu]

I think people are overthinking this and making it more complicated than it needs to be. This isn't something that needs a full crew of 5 people doing different things just to fire a single shot. If its to be implemented it needs to be simple. Much easier to balance.

[vVRedOctoberVv]

I think people are overthinking this and making it more complicated than it needs to be. This isn't something that needs a full crew of 5 people doing different things just to fire a single shot. If its to be implemented it needs to be simple. Much easier to balance.

No, of course not. What I presented was a driver and gunner, with a third person acting as a spotter, and the artie having limited internal ammo capacity. If they want to sit there for a long time, they'd have to bring in ammo. That's not particularly complicated.

[Timoshenko]

Then they would make it a crew served weapon so people arent running around solo pumping arty all over the place you do not need 5 people to use it but more like 2. That should be all the balanced it needs you need to work with people in order to use it effectively.


Another Idea i think would work is they say they are gonna have different size outposts/bases that can be attacked and used to capture the hex (asuming there are multiple bases in the hex). Why not make one of those bases a FSB (Fire Support Base) or a FOB. If you hold it you can support the defense or attack on the main base with fire from the FSB/FOB. Which would make Control over the smaller outposts vital to capture and hold.

[vVRedOctoberVv]

Then they would make it a crew served weapon so people arent running around solo pumping arty all over the place you do not need 5 people to use it but more like 2. That should be all the balanced it needs you need to work with people in order to use it effectively.


Another Idea i think would work is they say they are gonna have different size outposts/bases that can be attacked and used to capture the hex (asuming there are multiple bases in the hex). Why not make one of those bases a FSB (Fire Support Base) or a FOB. If you hold it you can support the defense or attack on the main base with fire from the FSB/FOB. Which would make Control over the smaller outposts vital to capture and hold.

That's a good idea. A couple bases on a continent that allow production/usage of artillery pieces, kind of like Tech Plants in PS1. It would provide a nice replacement for Orbital Strike spam, since you could only use what your faction controlled. No "every two bit CR5 can rain fire on short notice". It would take a dedicated act by the whole faction to take, hold, and use such a thing.

[wraithverge]

Guided artillery already exists in the game with a long cooldown, it's called drop pods ^_^

[Sephirex]

Guided artillery already exists in the game with a long cooldown, it's called drop pods ^_^

Not enough 'splosions.

[Timoshenko]

That's a good idea. A couple bases on a continent that allow production/usage of artillery pieces, kind of like Tech Plants in PS1. It would provide a nice replacement for Orbital Strike spam, since you could only use what your faction controlled. No "every two bit CR5 can rain fire on short notice". It would take a dedicated act by the whole faction to take, hold, and use such a thing.



I dont think it would take mass amount of troops to knock off of the the bases, an organized squad or more could knock it out quick if theres little resistance but the bases would be vital to defend so a decent defense can turn a skirmish into a siege which would be awesome.

[ZaBa]

If we were to get proper high-angle indirect-fire artillery units, giving their rounds really obvious trails as others have suggested would really be the best way to start on balance, since people's main complaint usually seems to be along the lines of "I can't shoot back"; maybe not in this life, but if you can call where the shots are coming from, you can get your mates to hot foot it over there and pop a cap in that arty's tinfoil-plated behind.

In terms of targeting, I'd look to the Long Tom mechanics from MechWarrior Living Legends: somewhat tricky to use properly, but devastating if you got a near or direct hit. Basically your allies spot targets in the normal fashion (i.e. just looking at them), and a box appears on your screen showing range. Changing the elevation of the gun changes the impact range (shown in a different box) and flight time (usually around 4-5 seconds).

While it sounds easy to just match up two numbers, the large shot lag and lack of any visual confirmation of where your shell landed (other than what your friends give you over voice chat, but in my experience "left a bit" isn't very helpful), plus the fact that most targets you can actually hit are moving would make it pretty hard to use effectively, though still worthwhile to break up armour columns and such.

For anyone particularly worried about base bombardment, the high-walled design of most of the medium-large bases that we've seen would mean only shells fired from very close range (extremely high angle) would actually be able to land inside the courtyard, which is as easy to counter as running outside with a fistful of boomers.


That sure was a lot of words about a feature we'll probably never see.

[CaptainRon]

Another defense you could use against Artillery is to give the bases a dome shield capabilities to deflect incoming shells (as for everything else, that's debatable) and in order to take the shield down, you gotta take down the generator that's operating that shield (maybe 1 or 3 shield generator, also debatable). Gives more secondary objectives to increase your chance of success for your primary objective.

I also like the idea of a 2 man crew so it's not a solo kill rates, but what is the driver gonna do when he's at his destination? Just sit there?

Having a guy do ammo run (like ANT runs in PS1) is an interesting trade-off as well, maybe give that job to the driver once he's at the location he wants to be at?

I think another good tradeoff for mobile artillery is once he's at the location he wants to set up, he needs to "unpack" his vehicles which takes time, like support beams to reduce the recoil of the main battery and what not... so when counter-attacks are incoming, he can't get away fast enough. (Think siege tank in StarCraft but with a longer unpacking timer minus the tank version.)

Definitely give the forward spotter for artillery to a 3rd person, have that person designate an area for suppression fire which then give the gunner of the artillery the right firing arc on his screen to land successful hits, has to be within range as well.

Perhaps give a deadzone range so the artillery can't fend off against troops incoming too close to the artillery? I mean as of right now from what I heard, everyone can carry C4 and the gunner is most likely gonna jump out and try to fight back, most likely failing. They could plant C4 on it and blow it up. (or hack it for their own use if they put that ingame).

Edit: Although, doing ammo runs may not be as exciting and I'm all for exciting gameplay. Another other options to give that person more duties? Like maybe set up some light defenses or something?

[vVRedOctoberVv]

@CAPTAIN RON

"Another defense you could use against Artillery is to give the bases a dome shield capabilities to deflect incoming shells (as for everything else, that's debatable) and in order to take the shield down, you gotta take down the generator that's operating that shield (maybe 1 or 3 shield generator, also debatable). Gives more secondary objectives to increase your chance of success for your primary objective."

That's not a bad idea, really.




"I also like the idea of a 2 man crew so it's not a solo kill rates, but what is the driver gonna do when he's at his destination? Just sit there?"

I don't suppose there's anything to stop you from driving it over there yourself, and then switching positions, but it has a serious downside. You're a sitting duck on the way unable to even ATTEMPT to fight back (not to mention reduced situational awareness) and then once you get there you'd be a sitting duck while you're shelling.
While a lot of idiots would probably "sit there", a more intelligent driver might take the time to set some defensive mines around, or perhaps stake out a spot nearby with an AA launcher. You know, make himself useful getting ready for whatever pissed off people come looking for payback.




"Having a guy do ammo run (like ANT runs in PS1) is an interesting trade-off as well, maybe give that job to the driver once he's at the location he wants to be at?"

No reason he couldn't. Trade off is as above. Better to have a third person run the truck. Or once you've more or less got your target zeroed in, the FOB could fall back and go fetch some extra ammo.





"I think another good tradeoff for mobile artillery is once he's at the location he wants to set up, he needs to "unpack" his vehicles which takes time, like support beams to reduce the recoil of the main battery and what not... so when counter-attacks are incoming, he can't get away fast enough. (Think siege tank in StarCraft but with a longer unpacking timer minus the tank version.)"

Also not a bad idea. Mobile artillery does kind of do this even now, to compensate for recoil. Go look up some pictures of 'em. More than a few have big claws to dig into the ground, especially the bigger ones. I doubt it takes a long time to deploy or retract, but it does render them immobile in the meantime.




"Definitely give the forward spotter for artillery to a 3rd person, have that person designate an area for suppression fire which then give the gunner of the artillery the right firing arc on his screen to land successful hits, has to be within range as well."

Ditto. Biggest problem with artillery at present is it's not done even remotely correctly.




"Perhaps give a deadzone range so the artillery can't fend off against troops incoming too close to the artillery? I mean as of right now from what I heard, everyone can carry C4 and the gunner is most likely gonna jump out and try to fight back, most likely failing. They could plant C4 on it and blow it up. (or hack it for their own use if they put that ingame)."

If the round is slow moving with a steep drop, it would be very difficult to use it up close, especially if you weren't ready for the attack. I don't think anybody has mentioned Flails being lethal at close range. I've never seen them do anything but die when somebody got close. Hell, I walked right up to one on foot and killed it, although I suppose he would incinerated me had he been able to get a shot off...




"Although, doing ammo runs may not be as exciting and I'm all for exciting gameplay. Another other options to give that person more duties? Like maybe set up some light defenses or something?"

No, it wouldn't be fun to have to constantly run back and forth. One truck would ideally hold at least a couple minutes worth of ammo, so he could do something else for a while. Even if one truck will last a long time, the more people involved and the more "stuff" sitting around, the easier it's going to be to find it all. But there has to be SOME sort of logistics involved to discourage people from just setting up out there and shelling for hours without having to DO anything.

A smart guy, like said, would busy himself helping defend/prepare the area. Not just standing around. If you got a bunch of people just "standing around" then something's wrong (with them).

Besides, the same guy doesn't have to do it EVERYTIME they use an artie, and he doesn't have to make EVERY run when they need ammo. Yeah, being a go-fer would get old. That's why it's a team vehicle. The whole concept of artillery is based on teamwork. Artillery by itself is useless. Everybody assigned to that piece helps take care of it for the five minutes it's alive before a Reaver kills it :P

[Froglicker]

IF artillery were to be added, it'd also need to be extremely slow to aim, along with having either a very slow ROF or slow reload (ex: 4round capacity, 1shot/2sec, 12-15sec reload). It'd keep it as more of an area suppression device instead of a sniper tank.

just my thoughts on the matter

[FPClark]

bf1942's arty system has been the only system I have ever liked in a game to be honest.

How to use artillery #2 (indirect fire), by OLI - YouTube


It took teamwork and took some shots to dial in so the enemy had time to react.

[Zidane]

If artillery is not done in a stupid fashion, it would not be "one person". It would be, at minimum, a driver + gunner and (somewhere) a forward observer. In which case it would be "a team of people to counter a team of people".

That's the thing, in RL, at any point... It's ALWAYS been a team of people. It's retarded games that make them solo kill whores. In RL, there's usually one or two people serving just as ammo loaders, although that would be taking it a BIT far for a game... LOAD! (clicks mouse) (gun fires) LOAD! (clicks mouse) LOAD FASTER YOU BASTARD, WE NEED THESE DOWN RANGE! (spams clicks mouse)... But I digress.


-edit

Actually, in RL, mobile artillery pieces can usually only carry 10-15 rounds. So there is a supply truck/convoy there, too, with people running ammo to it. So, he could run out there, fire for two or three minutes, and then bugger off to get more ammo (not TOO threatening) or there's a whole BUNCH of people there, who are frighteningly vulnerable unless there are EVEN MORE people there to guard them. Especially if ammo trucks explode nicely :)

This is by far the best idea I have heard!!!!! I think even having mortar teams would be awesome. Requiring 2 or 3 people to set it up and operate. You could then bring in the infiltration class to spot targets for the teams to take out:)

[Sledgecrushr]

My vote is no on spammable artillery. We have OS and I think thats going to be enough artillery for ps2.

[Accuser]

My vote is no on spammable artillery. We have OS and I think thats going to be enough artillery for ps2.

Indeed. Artillery is just too annoying to die from, particularly with the faster pace of PS2. At least with OS you can get out of the way!

[Saifoda]

Indeed. Artillery is just too annoying to die from, particularly with the faster pace of PS2. At least with OS you can get out of the way!

*facepalm* try reading the rest of the replies first.

[Accuser]

*facepalm* try reading the rest of the replies first.

I read all the replies on this thread and the other artillery thread. Artillery and BFRs just don't fit in PS2, no matter how much you want them.

[Saifoda]

I read all the replies on this thread and the other artillery thread. Artillery and BFRs just don't fit in PS2, no matter how much you want them.

Such an incredibly well crafted argument...

When you're ready to put on big boy pants and actually discuss the points rather than be one of the dozens of other double-digit IQ "no"-zergers, the rest of us actually trying to have a legitimate discussion on the merits, or lack there of, of a topic will be right here waiting.

[Marinealver]

I was thinking of a self propelled artelery piece that has a seperate gunner and driver spot (like the old MBT). The driver would hev to deploy before the gunner could shoot. so you could technically solo the vehicle or use both a driver and a gunner for slightly more manuverability. The TR will have a doubiled barreled gun that shoots rapidly, the VS will have a flail that has good range. The NC would have a MRLS (Multiple Rocket Launcher System) that fires a salvo of rockets for a better spread effect but take a little longer to get another salvo ready.

Indeed. Artillery is just too annoying to die from, particularly with the faster pace of PS2. At least with OS you can get out of the way!

You could see the wraith shots commming, almost like a NC guided pheonix cruise missle. Not to mention there was the whirl as it comes in to let you know incomming. Also if there was no laze pointer the round were terribly inacurate with a margin of error bigger than a cortyard. Most shots would miss by half an SOI.

Now the only big kill I got was 12 when I had a teammate laze pointed an nmy AMS. Now most other situations people would just pull out a CUD and OS the camp by them selves with no teamwork needed. So which is more broken, Arty that requires a spotter to be effective, or an OS for those elite players?

[Sledgecrushr]

We already have plenty of indirect fire built into the game that I know about. We have OS, ai mortar secondary guns, high altitude bombing...it would seem that the spam of indirect fire right now wih just those three is going to be quite fierce.

Imagine if you will a major battle happening. Hundreds of people fighting all at once. Now think how disorganized this mass of humanity is going to be. Now add a shitload of indirect munitions being used by thes unorganized peeps. Your own guys are going to repeatedly kill you with what we already have in the game. So no for me on any more of this artillery stuff.

[OutlawDr]

bf1942's arty system has been the only system I have ever liked in a game to be honest.

How to use artillery #2 (indirect fire), by OLI - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZAnuWkmxwXs)


It took teamwork and took some shots to dial in so the enemy had time to react.

Ha, I'd almost forgotten about that. I admit even though I not a big fan of artillery, I did not mind 1942s artillery system...hmmm. Even so I'd still reduce the range substantially to basically that of the MBT's main cannon range (but with the neato spotting camera).

[Goldeh]

Ha, I'd almost forgotten about that. I admit even though I not a big fan of artillery, I did not mind 1942s artillery system...hmmm. Even so I'd still reduce the range substantially to basically that of the MBT's main cannon range (but with the neato spotting camera).

Well how far does the cannon shoot if say you had a flat area or something?

[Timoshenko]

Imagine if you will a major battle happening. Hundreds of people fighting all at once. Now think how disorganized this mass of humanity is going to be. Now add a shitload of indirect munitions being used by thes unorganized peeps. Your own guys are going to repeatedly kill you with what we already have in the game. So no for me on any more of this artillery stuff.



Welcome to War 101? Mass Chaos in a battle. How do you know the ones using Artillery will be unorganized maybe they will be a unit working with there troops providing fire? Friendly fire happens in war just use more comms in the battle to avoid blue on blue. Maybe try to help those guys in artillery by telling them they are too short, too far, left or right.

[vVRedOctoberVv]

Welcome to War 101? Mass Chaos in a battle. How do you know the ones using Artillery will be unorganized maybe they will be a unit working with there troops providing fire? Friendly fire happens in war just use more comms in the battle to avoid blue on blue. Maybe try to help those guys in artillery by telling them they are too short, too far, left or right.

Assuming they'll listen to you or care :) I suppose grief mechanics would take care of that. If your gun locks when you kill three or four friendlies at a time, you'll be more careful where you shoot :)

[Goldeh]

From what I know from playing FPSs' anything that requires thought or care will not be used by most people. SO that limits arty right there.

[Ratstomper]

From what I know from playing FPSs' anything that requires thought or care will not be used by most people. SO that limits arty right there.

Artillery would only likely be used by outfits or other more organized groups anyway. Considering that PS2 takes the fight away from bases, there's much more viability for artillery than there was in PS1.

Artillery SHOULDN'T be used by most people, it's simply a part: tool for the war effort...

[vVRedOctoberVv]

Well, trying to use it excessively would turn south pretty quick... Artillery is great for blowing stuff up OVER THERE ----> But when a bunch of pissed off people show up over HERE <----- Things get ugly.

Just like now, you don't see lots of it (a few usually, but not tons). Part of the balancing is handled automatically in that most people don't want to do all the same thing. And if they for some reason DID all do the same thing, they die pretty quick. 400 foot zergers would die pretty quick if attacked by a comparative handful of tanks or air. 400 tanks (while troublesome) would take massive casaulties as other people started spamming air or whatever...

Yeah, by its nature, it somewhat is limiting itself to a handful of people who can/will use it properly, otherwise they'll get frustrated after the first couple times they die and won't want it anymore.

[Ratstomper]

I like artillery because it helps tie the whole continent into a fight instead of just "Ok, lets fight over this base. Ok, now lets fight over that base."

There's SO much more complexity and tactical depth in having to deal with artillery that may be firing on your base or on a field you have to cross. Should we send an air squadron to bomb it? Should we sneak in a spec ops team to disable and harass artillery batteries? What are our options on crossing a field or bridge that's being bombarded? Do we rush it with tanks? Do we send in bombers first?

Those are the things that makes PS2 a war simulator and not just another FPS. Well worth the fact that you may get killed every once in a while from half a continent away.

[vVRedOctoberVv]

I like artillery because it's existed for thousands of years. No reason to think it would suddenly disappear in the future. Although, if you want to be perfectly honest, all the griping about OS is over the top. If there were really space ships in orbit (or stations) with guns... It's highly likely they would participate in any fighting in this manner.

Only way artillery would not be present in some form is if technology had somehow changed to render it obsolete (like Orbital Strikes). On that note, I consider Orbital Strikes to be plentiful in PS1, but they really are not NEARLY so bad as people carry on about. And yes. I've been killed by them a number of times.

[Dloan]

We already have plenty of indirect fire built into the game that I know about. We have OS, ai mortar secondary guns, high altitude bombing...it would seem that the spam of indirect fire right now wih just those three is going to be quite fierce.

If there's so much indirect fire flying around, then it seems like it would be a good idea to introduce some kind of Point Defense emplacement to provide limited umbrella protection from rocket and large projectile bombardment.

Goalkeeper CIWS Gun System - YouTube

[RoninOni]

You want artillery?

Do it right.

No minimap firing.

no BF2 designate and get a camera.

No... you set angle and degree of your canon... and you fire.

On your HUD you see estimated range based on your canon elevation (provided even level... if target is higher it won't go as far, lower it goes farther.) and compass degrees.

You would then have to have a teammate in sight of the impact area to help you guide your shots using comms and comms alone.

ONLY way artillery would work IMO.

No cheesy minimap shooting.... that's just lame.

I could see mortar's as a potential as well. Same mechanics (ie; you're looking from your view trying to guess range and angle) just less range and damage

If there's so much indirect fire flying around, then it seems like it would be a good idea to introduce some kind of Point Defense emplacement to provide limited umbrella protection from rocket and large projectile bombardment.

Goalkeeper CIWS Gun System - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nY6nm-6eCzM)

Uhm... you are not going to shoot a high velocity shell out of the air.

Those defenses are for shooting ROCKETS and MISSILES out of the air which are much MUCH slower

[Sledgecrushr]

If there's so much indirect fire flying around, then it seems like it would be a good idea to introduce some kind of Point Defense emplacement to provide limited umbrella protection from rocket and large projectile bombardment.

Goalkeeper CIWS Gun System - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nY6nm-6eCzM)

Yup i love the aegis anti missile system. Once that thing is engaged it would take out almost any decent sized object in its defined kill zone. This thing is automated and far too powerful of a system to have in ps2.

[Superbus]

You want artillery?

Uhm... you are not going to shoot a high velocity shell out of the air.

Those defenses are for shooting ROCKETS and MISSILES out of the air which are much MUCH slower

Lol those guns are accurate enough with radar support to shoot a 60mm mortar out of the air. They have even shot high velocity 155mm rocket assisted rounds in tests. They aren't perfect but I've witnessed them in action while convoying to Balad Iraq, they do work.

Also the only way your system would work would be with a proper uniform grid system. Without that system its difficult to gauge ranges and elevations. Ultimately the best compromise of both systems would be a F.O. type cert that grants the artilleryman access to his view a la bf 1942. I agree however soldiers should not be revealed on a mini map what so ever, but my guess is they will do a bf3 system for this game, where if you shoot you reveal yourself.

[Dloan]

Uhm... you are not going to shoot a high velocity shell out of the air.

Those defenses are for shooting ROCKETS and MISSILES out of the air which are much MUCH slower

Maybe not with pathetic TR or NC technology, but I'm sure the VS can get the job done ;).

[RoninOni]

Lol those guns are accurate enough with radar support to shoot a 60mm mortar out of the air. They have even shot high velocity 155mm rocket assisted rounds in tests. They aren't perfect but I've witnessed them in action while convoying to Balad Iraq, they do work.

Also the only way your system would work would be with a proper uniform grid system. Without that system its difficult to gauge ranges and elevations. Ultimately the best compromise of both systems would be a F.O. type cert that grants the artilleryman access to his view a la bf 1942. I agree however soldiers should not be revealed on a mini map what so ever, but my guess is they will do a bf3 system for this game, where if you shoot you reveal yourself.

I stand corrected....

My original ideas stand though. I think that defense system would be OP lol

I think that artillery should have NO eyes on the target. Not with map targeting and most DEFINITELY not with air cams. Their view is of the vehicle they occupy, and they need to get the compass degree and firing angle (distance) right to hit their target.

This means any lone artillery is just blind firing. To get good effect you would need a spotter who would guide you in manually via comms. "Adjust fire, 50m farther, 30m left" or "On target, fire for effect"

No lazing, no auto assists. You're blind firing and relying on teammates to communicate with you to be effective.

Also, as mentioned, the need for overhead clearance, and lack of mobility while firing would make artillery prime targets for air vehicles.

Truly, the Liberator is supposed to act as the "artillery" as it were in the games current model.

[EisenKreutzer]

I am writing this reply having only read the OP, and not the rest of the thread.

While I do see the potential of the idea (and it is not a bad idea by any means), I feel this role is already covered by the tanks that are currently in the game. The video demonstrates this pretty clearly.

Dividing the roles, and allocating the artillery role to a separate vehicle while reducing the effectiveness of the current tanks over long distances isn't neccessarily a dumb idea. it could definitely work. But I personally think the current tanks would perform this task more than adequately, and I see no reason to change this. More is not always better. ;)

[DukeTerror]

Well I think the best artillery solution for PS2 at this stage would be the Sunderer as an upgrade path. The Sundy could sacrifice the 2 turrets for a larger indirect fire Arty Cannon and a reduced number of seats. A driver and gunner would be needed and it'd be a big and slow enough target for run and gun operations to be challenging.

I agree it should be largely a suppressive fire shot, with a wide fiery result only able to hurt infantry about 1/3 of health or so, depending on how fast it shoots. It will need to use spotters to aim, and the vertical fire arcs high enough that being inside will be mostly likely safe and using against a tank at close range foolish. Basically give or take what others have been saying about not being overpowered of a shot.