Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Wishlist => Topic started by: HORSEMAN on August 16, 2011, 04:54:48 PM
-
I wonder how much more interesting having artillery would be? There are quote a few vehicles as it is but it would bring a more strategic battleplan to the forefront. Thoughts?
HORSEMAN
-
I dont think towed artillery would be worth it.
But Self propelled Artillery way the Preist with the 105mm or the Sexton i think would make great add ons just imagine it right now a Battery of 8 to 12 guns sitting about 10 or 12 KM back while a jeep near the town or base calls in a fire mission.
nowif they do ever add it, People would really have to work together on using Artillery that means some one in charge to be the Battery Commander and he would have to be a veteran of the map know the distance and he would have to be exprienced in Artillery Tactics. That Also goes to the forward operation observer team. or FOO team
-
Very good points! People tend to argue about how detailed the game is getting or can get for that matter but I like to think of it as reality. To have more components available would intensify the strategy needed to excel in the game. Yes?
HORSEMAN
-
Only if its in the 6" range (around 150mm) would be kinda uselss against town otherwise.
-
I dont think towed artillery would be worth it.
But Self propelled Artillery way the Preist with the 105mm or the Sexton i think would make great add ons just imagine it right now a Battery of 8 to 12 guns sitting about 10 or 12 KM back while a jeep near the town or base calls in a fire mission.
nowif they do ever add it, People would really have to work together on using Artillery that means some one in charge to be the Battery Commander and he would have to be a veteran of the map know the distance and he would have to be exprienced in Artillery Tactics. That Also goes to the forward operation observer team. or FOO team
or just simplify it with a "land mode" like system
-
I would love to see this. But to make it kinda easy mode, it should be line of sight. Kinda like C&C. If you have a spotter "jeep" you could get very accurate shots off. No line of sight and your using "land mode" like the task group does. Would be fun trying to find the spotter or spotters in a il-2. Imagine finding the arty hoard sitting behind a hill. I think I would go from 6 o'clock to 12 in a second. :devil
-
Like I said. Give us the Hummel or the M12. Since they'res 6"ers, woul would probably get the shell trail and land gunner mode.
-
Only if its in the 6" range (around 150mm) would be kinda uselss against town otherwise.
105 not worth it? how?
-
If you can't destroy buildings with splash damage, that means you'll need many guns firing many rounds according to a spotter. You'll have to get each gun on target 1 at a time, since you can't know whos shell fell short, whos is long, and whos is dead on target. Very time consuming and gives defenders a long time to kill the spotter or just up an M8 kill the artillery.
So by using the more effective direct fire method, you've defeated the purpose of artillery, and might as well ask for the 105mm on the sherman if all you want is the larger cannon, since you'll be using it in the same way.
Guns in the 150mm range are also more likely to recieve shell trails than guns in the 105mm range. This gives a better chance of detection by following the shells screaming in. It would also help encourage using them as long range, indirect fire weapons, since sitting 7 miles back of your target is a lot safer when your own fire gives away your possition.
They'll also be more effective against CV's than a 105mm weapon. It would encourage CV's to be used in a more historicly-accurate way. They would also help prevent quick smash-and grab base captures, as well as the NOE undefended base sneaks. You can fire on town anywhere from within a 7-10 mile radius, meaning the attackers have to work harder, or come up with other methods to take the base.
So to simplify, 105mm isn't worth it (IMO) for 4 main reasons.
1) lower effectivness against town using indirect fire, and hence a likely use of these guns for direct fire, which is almost opposite their intended purpose.
2) easier detection and and counter battery fire, as well as increased likelyhood of historical usage.
3) increased effectiveness against CV's means they can't sneak to within 6000yds of the shore, launch fighters, and quickly horde the base before anyone notices them.
4) They would also be more effective against countering the horde and NOE sneaks due to their larger blast-radius and longer range (you can shell the map room from spawn-in). It will require greater strategic preperation and planning to take the base. But on the upside (from the WiN teH wArz :rock! dweeb's prespective) you'll also be able to smash up targets such as shore batterys, towns, hangers, etc. with greater ease.
It will also encourage strategey such as out flanking a tough-to-take base so you have multiple spawns for the enemy to watch, giving your artillery a better chance to survive an hit the town and base. Artillery will add many new and interesting aspects to the game, as well as encouraging out-fighting and out-smarting your opponents instead of out-manning them.
-
If you can't destroy buildings with splash damage, that means you'll need many guns firing many rounds according to a spotter. You'll have to get each gun on target 1 at a time, since you can't know whos shell fell short, whos is long, and whos is dead on target. Very time consuming and gives defenders a long time to kill the spotter or just up an M8 kill the artillery.
So by using the more effective direct fire method, you've defeated the purpose of artillery, and might as well ask for the 105mm on the sherman if all you want is the larger cannon, since you'll be using it in the same way.
Guns in the 150mm range are also more likely to recieve shell trails than guns in the 105mm range. This gives a better chance of detection by following the shells screaming in. It would also help encourage using them as long range, indirect fire weapons, since sitting 7 miles back of your target is a lot safer when your own fire gives away your possition.
They'll also be more effective against CV's than a 105mm weapon. It would encourage CV's to be used in a more historicly-accurate way. They would also help prevent quick smash-and grab base captures, as well as the NOE undefended base sneaks. You can fire on town anywhere from within a 7-10 mile radius, meaning the attackers have to work harder, or come up with other methods to take the base.
So to simplify, 105mm isn't worth it (IMO) for 4 main reasons.
1) lower effectivness against town using indirect fire, and hence a likely use of these guns for direct fire, which is almost opposite their intended purpose.
2) easier detection and and counter battery fire, as well as increased likelyhood of historical usage.
3) increased effectiveness against CV's means they can't sneak to within 6000yds of the shore, launch fighters, and quickly horde the base before anyone notices them.
4) They would also be more effective against countering the horde and NOE sneaks due to their larger blast-radius and longer range (you can shell the map room from spawn-in). It will require greater strategic preperation and planning to take the base. But on the upside (from the WiN teH wArz :rock! dweeb's prespective) you'll also be able to smash up targets such as shore batterys, towns, hangers, etc. with greater ease.
It will also encourage strategey such as out flanking a tough-to-take base so you have multiple spawns for the enemy to watch, giving your artillery a better chance to survive an hit the town and base. Artillery will add many new and interesting aspects to the game, as well as encouraging out fighting and out smarting your opponents instead of out-manning them.
There is splash damage, fire a 75mm next to a pair of buildings then fire again to see the results - its called "Someone who actually has be in a tank"
-
There is splash damage, fire a 75mm next to a pair of buildings then fire again to see the results - its called "Someone who actually has be in a tank"
yeah plus IL be in a lvt and sometimes i don't even hit the building and it will blow, imagen how much powerful it would be in a 105, indirect or not
-
yeah plus IL be in a lvt and sometimes i don't even hit the building and it will blow, imagen how much powerful it would be in a 105, indirect or not
I am not going to knock Jager, however my biggest problem is some of the "knowledge" he comes up with, doesn't chive with what goes in the main arena.
Anyone can have 10 tank kills in the MA and consider them selves to be an expert, however I see enough garbage time and time again that I really have to question whether anything he comes up with is legit.
There is splash damage which comes with the weight of the round coming in, It takes quite a few hits with a .303 round to take down a building (because it takes a certain amount of damage to kill a building) - however You can drop a 100lb bomb next to a building to cause splash damage, the same as you drop a 75mm round next to it.
I am not sure what the statistics are on the damage caused by splash damage, but the majority of the towns I take down are because I will fire a round 5 feet in front of a pair of buildings, and watched the 2nd round destroy both buildings.
Assuming there is a splash damage, I would believe a single hit from a 105mm Howitzer (given the weight of the HE shell) would easily destroy one building and heavily damage a second.
My Biggest problem with Artillery is how can you make it historically inaccurate as it was?
-
Katyusha ftw.
-
I'm saying that you can't fire a shell and then see:
It takes two direct or near- hits with a 75mm to kill a building. With the new towns, theres a lot of open space between those buildings. Once you take the town-centers down you'll be wishing for the extra splash damage a 150mm would give.
Butcher, could you elaborate on what exactly is 'garbage'? Perhaps I'm misjudging player reactions, I've never been particularly good at that, but a 150mm WOULD be more effective against towns, a 150mm WOULD be more effective against carriers, a 150mm WOULD be more effective against troops (If they give us artillery, there should be round randomization dependent on range).
-
Only if its in the 6" range (around 150mm) would be kinda uselss against town otherwise.
Not quite sure why you assume anything smaller then 150mm is useless against town, the 75mm we have is more then useful if not over useful.
-
My Biggest problem with Artillery is how can you make it historically inaccurate as it was?
I'm sure its programable, i remember when the osty used to fire straight shots and the second round would always follow the exact path of the first and so on. They have it different now. I'm sure theres facts we can pull.
-
Like I said. Give us the Hummel or the M12. Since they'res 6"ers, woul would probably get the shell trail and land gunner mode.
why? so you can shoot 10 rounds of 155 vs the Priest's armament of 60-70 105 rounds?
-
why? so you can shoot 10 rounds of 155 vs the Priest's armament of 60-70 105 rounds?
What about the M4(105) or StuG-10.5cm - both would make good direct artillery tanks, and enclosed armor, however I am still interested to see how accurate the shots will be also splash damage would have to be tweaked, Mainly what I've been doing is firing a 75mm round in the middle of the road and letting the splash damage take out clusters of buildings at a time, however if they can make the artillery inaccurate (unless close range) then I am all for it, problem is the Easy Mode of Artillery is what I don't want to see, one person at 6k away could take out an entire base without making it flash vs now we have to bring the tanks to the town to barrage it.
-
Butcher,
As always you raise great points! In WWII there were many varibles that played a role in how accurate artillery was as you know toward the end of the war German artillery had many problems with the rounds not being milled properly or the brass ( or rather lack of the metal brass ) casings would expand in the breech making consistant fire a serious problem. But in normal conditions or even OPTIMUM condition's WWII artillery still wasn't overly reliable. As far as settings in arena, and how one person might take down a base, my argument remains one of map size and quantity of bases. This may be getting off of the "beaten path" but if you reduce the number of bases, it makes it significantly harder to "take a base" or in effect apply a ridiculous amount of damage without being detected. Everyone strives for realism, but I know of NO theatre in WWII that had so many bases in such close proximity as some of the maps we have here. Reduce the bases, ( even if you expand the area ) and you force manned targets, increase confrontation and degree of difficulty, then by definition you are dedicated to apply strategy...if you want to win that is! To proove my point what is one of the biggest complaints in the arena? Take a base and then it is left unmanned only to be lost again. This game in my opinion should not be checkers...it should be chess! That would be why WWI took the allies 4 years to win. I welcome any and all input guys...especially yours Butcher. By the way...I am sure glad I have the privilage to fight with you and not against you!
HORSEMAN
-
That would be why WWI took the allies 4 years to win.
Sorry for the typo WWII LOL
-
Alright, useless isn't the right word. But how effective are 5" guns on town when firing BVR? And they're about 127mm's.
So it all comes down to wether we want the 105mm sherman, or if we want an actual artillery piece, to be used as such.
And I'm sure we can coad randomization into the shell's flight path. Bullets have it, why not shells?
-
If you can't destroy buildings with splash damage, that means you'll need many guns firing many rounds according to a spotter. You'll have to get each gun on target 1 at a time, since you can't know whos shell fell short, whos is long, and whos is dead on target. Very time consuming and gives defenders a long time to kill the spotter or just up an M8 kill the artillery.
well to tell you the truth its not hard to get all those guns on target.
1. The spotter will call in on the battery for one gun to range in. in this case using the (land mode) like system
2. if he's off or if the spotter wants the rounds in closer he would just have to bracket him
3. once the spotter likes the shot he would call in the number of rounds during Fire for Effect.
4. by this time the leader gunner gives his range and bearing. and all the guns fire the amount of rounds the spotter has given.
see if you decide to start up a Field Battery you just need to make sure your spotter is experianced with calling in indirect Fire and he can help make the group be very effective with 105, 155, 25 pdr, anything, if HTC brings in the Artillery
-
Alright, hadn't thought of that. Would work depending on the range (a degree can be quite large depending on how far out you go). At the end of their range, they could easily be pouring fire onto an empty hill
-
Calling in and adjusting artillery fire is one of the easiest things to do did it from the top of a tank for many years. Theirs several ways to call a fire mission and if you have registered your TRP's you don't even have to hove eyes on the target. And in real life artillery shells leave no trail in the air.
Just an idea on using artillery in the game, you chose M7 105mm you spawn in with 4 gun battery and after you set your guns you grab a jeep that has a clipboard with a map of bases that are in range of your guns and a compass readout and 4 buttons up, down, left, right. And a button that says adjust fire, you push that button and one gun fires one round and you adjust with the other buttons. After you get on target you have a Fire for effect button and a box to set the number of rounds say you want 20 rounds you would type in 20 and punch the fire buttons and your guns fire 5 rounds per gun. Its just a thought pretty easy and close to real life.
-
I'm not sure if HTC can coad, what is in effect, a drone 6 miles away from you. Not saying they can't do it, but it seems that such a system would be extremely complex to coad.
-
That's true but a 4 gun battery would be really the only way artillery would work.
-
I keep saying this..... 150mm range of guns. Larger blast radius and higher damage means that it is more effective against town, carriers, and damn near every target. Theres a good chance we could kill lighter armored vehicles such as the M8, and maybe the panzer, with a near-direct hit.
It would eliminate the need for 'batteries' tied to a jeep spotter.
-
What about this?
Artillery would require a spotter vehicle.
The closer the vehicle is to the intended target the more accurate the arty fire would be.
The Arty vehicles would have a map of the town, base or strat as part of its fire control. You would simply click on the map where you want your rounds to land.
No spotter and no fire.
A close spotter and you can count on your rounds landing within a 25 yard perimeter.
Use a spotter that is farther away and your rounds may land within a 75 yard perimeter and so on.
-
Just an idea on using artillery in the game, you chose M7 105mm you spawn in with 4 gun battery and after you set your guns you grab a jeep that has a clipboard with a map of bases that are in range of your guns and a compass readout and 4 buttons up, down, left, right. And a button that says adjust fire, you push that button and one gun fires one round and you adjust with the other buttons. After you get on target you have a Fire for effect button and a box to set the number of rounds say you want 20 rounds you would type in 20 and punch the fire buttons and your guns fire 5 rounds per gun. Its just a thought pretty easy and close to real life.
huh i guess when it comes to calling in fire the canadians and americans are different when i was on work up for overseas last year. our Arti guys were telling us when you call in fire for effect. each gun would fire theamount of rounds.
so instead of saying 20 rounds fire for effect, we would say 5 rounds and each gun would fire 5 rounds, and they would stagger there shots so it was a none stop barrage no break in the mission where the enemy was getting hit.
and the canadians still follow alot of Artillery Tactics from the Brits
-
If you can't destroy buildings with splash damage, that means you'll need many guns firing many rounds according to a spotter. You'll have to get each gun on target 1 at a time, since you can't know whos shell fell short, whos is long, and whos is dead on target. Very time consuming and gives defenders a long time to kill the spotter or just up an M8 kill the artillery.
So by using the more effective direct fire method, you've defeated the purpose of artillery, and might as well ask for the 105mm on the sherman if all you want is the larger cannon, since you'll be using it in the same way.
Guns in the 150mm range are also more likely to recieve shell trails than guns in the 105mm range. This gives a better chance of detection by following the shells screaming in. It would also help encourage using them as long range, indirect fire weapons, since sitting 7 miles back of your target is a lot safer when your own fire gives away your possition.
They'll also be more effective against CV's than a 105mm weapon. It would encourage CV's to be used in a more historicly-accurate way. They would also help prevent quick smash-and grab base captures, as well as the NOE undefended base sneaks. You can fire on town anywhere from within a 7-10 mile radius, meaning the attackers have to work harder, or come up with other methods to take the base.
So to simplify, 105mm isn't worth it (IMO) for 4 main reasons.
1) lower effectivness against town using indirect fire, and hence a likely use of these guns for direct fire, which is almost opposite their intended purpose.
2) easier detection and and counter battery fire, as well as increased likelyhood of historical usage.
3) increased effectiveness against CV's means they can't sneak to within 6000yds of the shore, launch fighters, and quickly horde the base before anyone notices them.
4) They would also be more effective against countering the horde and NOE sneaks due to their larger blast-radius and longer range (you can shell the map room from spawn-in). It will require greater strategic preperation and planning to take the base. But on the upside (from the WiN teH wArz :rock! dweeb's prespective) you'll also be able to smash up targets such as shore batterys, towns, hangers, etc. with greater ease.
It will also encourage strategey such as out flanking a tough-to-take base so you have multiple spawns for the enemy to watch, giving your artillery a better chance to survive an hit the town and base. Artillery will add many new and interesting aspects to the game, as well as encouraging out-fighting and out-smarting your opponents instead of out-manning them.
the M4/75 HE rounds kill quite effectivly from over 1k away. what makes you think something bigger couldnt kill with splash damage? 105mm would be perfect for town killing.
-
Goto a CV, and start firing away at the town with the 5" (127mm) guns. Its much more difficult and time consuming than using the 8" ers.
-
Goto a CV, and start firing away at the town with the 5" (127mm) guns. Its much more difficult and time consuming than using the 8" ers.
im sure once you get a range, its alot easier, bigger doesnt always mean better. and those 5" guns kill town buildings in 1 hit, wether its close splash damage or if its a direct hit. also, who says that the arty will be the same as a CV aiming mode?
-
If you want to use a 105mm gun as a direct fire cannon, then go start your own thread and ask for the 105mm Sherman. This thread is about artillery for the purpose of beyond visual range fire.
And my point is that while you can kill buildings with it, its very difficult to target a specific area of town. Granted you are moving, but you're rarely further out than 8000yds or so. Now imagine trying to target a specific cluster of buildings at 7 1/2 miles.
-
If you want to use a 105mm gun as a direct fire cannon, then go start your own thread and ask for the 105mm Sherman. This thread is about artillery for the purpose of beyond visual range fire.
And my point is that while you can kill buildings with it, its very difficult to target a specific area of town. Granted you are moving, but you're rarely further out than 8000yds or so. Now imagine trying to target a specific cluster of buildings at 7 1/2 miles.
i dont think the OP was asking to fire from that extreme of a distance.
-
You've reached that conclusion because.....?
Depending on what your aiming at (town or base) and what direction your spawning in from, 7 1/2 miles isn't enough range to hit the target.
For example, on NDisles, if you spawn in from A1 heading towards V2, you would be out of range. If you drive much closer than your maxiumum range, you'll be under fire from their spawn heading toward V1.
-
You've reached that conclusion because.....?
Depending on what your aiming at (town or base) and what direction your spawning in from, 7 1/2 miles isn't enough range to hit the target.
For example, on NDisles, if you spawn in from A1 heading towards V2, you would be out of range. If you drive much closer than your maxiumum range, you'll be under fire from their spawn heading toward V1.
so you dont want to do any work other than kill your engine and start dropping shells?
-
I don't mind work. Aiming a shell at a 10m x 10m square from 8 miles back isn't what I'd call easy. But I don't want to have to have a spotter overhead adjust my fire onto each little cluster of buildings.