Gameplay: Squad Remote Artillery Vehicles

[Sirisian]

How about you can drive an artillery vehicle to a safe spot and deploy and get out. (Have an engineer defend it with CE). Then take a special "weapon" from the trunk (or grab it from a terminal and it links to your vehicle or squad's vehicles). It has fire modes to cycle between artillery pieces if there are more than one in the squad/platoon and allows you to switch between anti-infantry and anti-armor shells, but the basic idea is you click on an object and it tags the ground and launches a shell. There's a reload delay for each artillery piece.

A squad could use these as a group or even set up say 5 pieces if they wanted and let a single cloaker go into a base and use them. They're weak so they need to be protected but they allow clean ranged attack.

Note it would launch one shell only when you click. It wouldn't keep firing.

The tag distance would be 50 meters.

Uses include destroying terminals, destroying AMS you find, and killing people/vehicles sitting still.

Also they're would be a cool UI element for them so you could see who owned each of them and who was the last to use it and the current reload time on a progress bar.

[exLupo]

Concerns:
If the AOE is large, squads will use these and spam.
If the AOE is small, it may infringe on man-held launchers.

Removing the "because it's cool" aspect, what new role does this weapon serve? Non-vehicle origin AV = shoulder launchers. Would this be a higher damage, outdoor only, stationary only version of the same?

New ideas need to have a point, not be redundant and need to take into account the "what if 50 people did it" factor.

[Sirisian]

Originally Posted by exLupo

Concerns:
If the AOE is large, squads will use these and spam.
If the AOE is small, it may infringe on man-held launchers.

Removing the "because it's cool" aspect, what new role does this weapon serve? Non-vehicle origin AV = shoulder launchers. Would this be a higher damage, outdoor only, stationary only version of the same?

New ideas need to have a point, not be redundant and need to take into account the "what if 50 people did it" factor.

Good points. Yeah I was imagining small precise hits that deal a lot of damage. It serves as a long range assist for squads. The travel time makes it different than normal infantry AV in that upon tagging a target you must wait for the shell to travel through the air.

Regarding the "50 people did it" it's not that big of a problem. It requires a person to actually fire a shell by tagging a target location for each shell so someone must be at the target. Killing that person or simply flying and destroying the artillery vehicle would suffice to stop the threat.

I think it opens up some room for hitting stationary targets without bringing in the huge AOE of an orbital strike since the artillery would be a precise damage weapon. For instance, if you saw a plane you could just tag it with your squad's available artillery and it would get hit. A cloaker in this sense could sneak up to a sniper (or even a regular player at 50 meters) and tag their location. I'm imagining a tail on the artillery that goes for a ways so it's possible for someone see these shells or hear them before they hit. They might not realize before it's too late that they were the target.

Also regarding the "it's cool" factor I think it would make the skies on a continent look amazing having these fly through the air while you fly or drive vehicles.

Also regarding another problem someone mentioned "so these could easily take out wall turrets?". Wall turrets and AA could shoot these down. I think that's fair if they travel slowly.

[Atuday]

Originally Posted by exLupo

Concerns:
If the AOE is large, squads will use these and spam.
If the AOE is small, it may infringe on man-held launchers.

Removing the "because it's cool" aspect, what new role does this weapon serve? Non-vehicle origin AV = shoulder launchers. Would this be a higher damage, outdoor only, stationary only version of the same?

New ideas need to have a point, not be redundant and need to take into account the "what if 50 people did it" factor.

I would so join a 50 man artillery team. And then I would sit there in a skygaurd and wait. As for the spam part of it I imagine players will do what they have always done when there is a lot of shell spam from tanks and artillery, which is hide under a rock. The goal of artillery fire is a:kill something big or lots of small things over an area, b:force someone to hide from the attack, and c:be bait for my skygaurd camping ass.

[Talek Krell]

I understand why people like artillery, but can't help but think it doesn't work well for the purposes of the game. One of the reason OSes were problematic I think was just that they became so common, so I can't really get behind artillery that's intended to be the more available (even if more limited) version of an OS.

[cashfoyogash]

Originally Posted by exLupo

Concerns:
If the AOE is large, squads will use these and spam.
If the AOE is small, it may infringe on man-held launchers.

Removing the "because it's cool" aspect, what new role does this weapon serve? Non-vehicle origin AV = shoulder launchers. Would this be a higher damage, outdoor only, stationary only version of the same?

New ideas need to have a point, not be redundant and need to take into account the "what if 50 people did it" factor.

First off "what ifs" are horrible. Shouldnt go by "what if" because there are a million and one negative "what ifs".

Second you cant use the what if 50 ppl did it thing. What if 50 ppl did the same thing with everything? If you have 50 maxes or 50 prowlers or 50 of anything being used in an organized manner is going to look very OP... unless it is 50 people using a REK... either way you cant do the what if 50 ppl do it because i know 50 prowlers is pretty OP but they will still be in the game.

[exLupo]

Originally Posted by cashfoyogash

If you have 50 maxes or 50 prowlers or 50 of anything being used in an organized manner is going to look very OP... unless it is 50 people using a REK... either way you cant do the what if 50 ppl do it because i know 50 prowlers is pretty OP but they will still be in the game.

The basic concept of throwing out potential problems with masses of people is not a bad thing. Especially in a game like this where, if masses of people doing the same thing leads to easy kills, it will happen.

It's a balance check and one worth doing. The OS example above is perfect in this case. The OS is an extremely potent tool and, in the beginning, was used only in the most dire of situations. Usually to kill a key AMS. However, roll it up to today and you have people deploying The Ultimate Weapon versus single snipers.

Also look at EVE. The Titan and it's full grid AOE Doomsday weapon. In the beginning a Titan was something you were scared shitless about seeing but was rare enough that you usually just heard about one being fielded. So rare in fact that the first time one was actually killed, CCP placed its wreck as a permanent structure in space. Eventually, they became so common that large engagements had one or more and every fleet required ships that could withstand a DD attack, this eliminated almost every non-battleship and cut into fleet diversity. In the end, CCP had to totally change the way DDs work (now a single target, anti-capital weapon). Why did it happen? Because CCP thought "It's so expensive, takes so long to make and even longer to train for that they'll always be rare." They were very, very wrong.

Factoring in proliferation in your balance equation is extremely important and moreso as the thing you're examining grows in power.

[Scow2]

I wouldn't mind some sort of automated Flail+Laze-type thing that requires a Command Cert to use, like a poor-man's Orbital Strike. Something that can be used to break hard targets such as structures, or as moderately-large AOE attack that can scatter infantry: Too small an AOE to kill loose formations, too much travel time to kill single infantry or moving vehicles, and too much time to wait for the projectile to land to bother with killing idiots.

However, instead of giving it a short-ranged lazer-thing, it needs to be able to paint a target anywhere you have line-of-effect... possibly with a bright blue red or green line extending from the point-of-impact to the general direction of the Lazer-pointing guy, with a corresponding bright dot at it's muzzle. I figure it would be too much hassle to set up and manage (gotta set up the Artillery somewhere "safe", ensure it's facing the right direction, and has line-of-effect to the target), to be spammable, but it could serve a role in giving somewhat-reliable Area and Camper Denial (Aiming it at chokepoints in the terrain, breaking "bunkers", breaking deep-set turrets, or giving certain Tanks incentive to stop camping and keep moving.

It would be highly situational, with enough drawbacks to keep it balanced (In theory), and enough firepower to keep it viable. The lazer lights up the Artillery spotter, making it possible to disable at that point, and if that fails, Airstrike the gun itself.

[Brusi]

I love artillery...

Higby alluded to no flails (or indirect fire) in PS2, stating that Gunships and Liberators would play this role.

I really like the idea of Artillery in the game tho, so maybe there will be like a seige tank more or something at least.

Still not sure how i feel about giving every individual the chance to gain orbital strike type attacks again like in PS... I like the teamwork aspect of the flail. I think it keeps things balanced.

Perhaps a recon skill that allows for danger close fire that must then be launched by someone with another skill (command or whatever) from mobile artillery, a player created base or orbital platform? Some alternative to single player devastation anyway.

PS: the guy calling for supporting fire should get the majority of the kill exp... not the firer

[Sirisian]

Originally Posted by Brusi

Higby alluded to no flails (or indirect fire) in PS2, stating that Gunships and Liberators would play this role.

Yeah this is definitely an indirect fire system even though it requires LOS for the person tagging locations so I think this conversation is dead. I imagine the developers already read it also.

Originally Posted by Brusi

I really like the idea of Artillery in the game tho, so maybe there will be like a seige tank more or something at least.

One thing this idea gets rid of is the boringness associated with gunning a flail. Set it up and forget it until you need it is what I prefer. Also this forces the user to target things with LOS making it take a little more skill to use especially if you're being shot at. I like the idea of seeing a person behind a rock at tagging their location. Chances are they'd see the shell coming but when they don't it's a nice feeling that you used a bigger strategy available than just run and gun. I'm big into giving players a lot of choices since it separates how people handle things.

Originally Posted by Brusi

Still not sure how i feel about giving every individual the chance to gain orbital strike type attacks again like in PS... I like the teamwork aspect of the flail. I think it keeps things balanced.

Indeed I'm against OS type attacks. I thought this idea would be a lot fairer and promote more teamwork use with a shared system.

[Traak]

How about artillery that has two positions, and has to be aimed more like real artillery? You can aim, but you can't shoot from the aim seat, and can't aim from the shooting seat. With two guys, it has a higher ROF, but it is still possible to laboriously set it up, aim it, and shoot it with one guy by switching seats.

[Stardouser]

OK, I'm liking this based on IRC discussion. Squad members can place a fixed artillery weapon and it counts as their vehicle, so they cannot then pull a vehicle. The artillery will then respond to lase requests by members of the placer's squad.

If anyone wonders about the necro, we are discussing this in IRC.

And they are fixed, so they cannot move, and can only fire if a person has line of sight. They provide an excellent target for aircraft or spec ops teams behind the lines.

Oh, and by the way. I am told that Flails in PS1 had THIRTY METER blast radius. No wonder people cry about them. Cut that to 5 meters for these.

[Baneblade]

In my opinion, the Flail would have been perfectly balanced if the driver had to laze the targets themselves each time to fire a shot.

So if artillery works like that, it won't be silliness.

[Stardouser]

Originally Posted by Sobekeus

In my opinion, the Flail would have been perfectly balanced if the driver had to laze the targets themselves each time to fire a shot.

So if artillery works like that, it won't be silliness.

If the driver is lazing the targets, it's a direct fire weapon...unless he's getting out and leaving it parked somewhere, which doesn't make sense.

Artillery is fine, the game needs strategic aspects, not everything has to be a gunfight at high noon where you have a chance to outdraw your opponent. Artillery is a strategic deployment, sending aircraft out to "scud-hunt" shall we say is a strategic response.

[Baneblade]

Originally Posted by Stardouser

unless he's getting out and leaving it parked somewhere, which doesn't make sense.

That is exactly what I'm suggesting. It makes as much sense as field artillery existing does in a war that would have space ships that can vaporize entire bases...