Theoretical Artillery

Senyu · 2012-07-10, 01:17 PM

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

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 · 2012-07-10, 01:38 PM

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 · 2012-07-10, 01:49 PM

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 · 2012-07-10, 01:52 PM

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

Broadside · 2012-07-10, 01:55 PM

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 · 2012-07-10, 02:00 PM

Originally Posted by 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.

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

Broadside · 2012-07-10, 02:01 PM

Originally Posted by Bags

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

Yet more intuitive IMO.

Sephirex · 2012-07-10, 02:02 PM

Originally Posted by Bags

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 · 2012-07-10, 02:13 PM

Originally Posted by Sephirex

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 · 2012-07-10, 02:15 PM

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 · 2012-07-10, 02:17 PM

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 · 2012-07-10, 02:34 PM

Originally Posted by Sephirex

... 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 · 2012-07-10, 02:42 PM

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 · 2012-07-10, 02:47 PM

Originally Posted by Peacemaker

Counters to artillery

2. Spec ops team

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

vVRedOctoberVv · 2012-07-10, 02:56 PM

Originally Posted by Bags

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

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