Mobile (towed) Artillery

[hotcoffe]

From what I know of ground game play based on mostly spawn camping.... and I don't think its a good idea to add arty to spawn campers arsenal.... -1

[Sabre]

From what I know of ground game play based on mostly spawn camping.... and I don't think its a good idea to add arty to spawn campers arsenal.... -1

You'd have to mass quite a bit of arty around the spawn point, since the actual spawn location is randomly dispersed around the point. Remember that my suggestion is one gun to a player.  So, it would be more effective to spawn-camp with tanks instead.  Plus, armored top GVs are not nearly as vulnerable to indirect arty fire as the arty is to direct fire from the spawning tanks.  If on the other hand the arty sets up close enough to engage spawning GVs with direct fire, the advantage would still be to the spawning tank.  However, if it became an issue, HTC could always open up the spawn dispersion a bit more.

[Blinder]

I like the idea but I would also like to see SPARTY added along with it.

How about the M7 Priest, M12 GMC, Sexton, Wespe & Hummel.

And add a few assault guns too:

M4(105) Sherman, JSU-152, SU-76, StuG III, StuG IV, Brummbär and Sturmtiger.

 

[Sabre]

I'm game, Blinder! Bring 'em on!

[wpeters]

I like the idea but I would also like to see SPARTY added along with it.

How about the M7 Priest, M12 GMC, Sexton, Wespe & Hummel.

And add a few assault guns too:

M4(105) Sherman, JSU-152, SU-76, StuG III, StuG IV, Brummbär and Sturmtiger.

 

+1

P.S>   Need a jeep with a bazooka

[jeffdn]

Remember that my suggestion is one gun to a player.

What was the "order of battle" for artillery in World War 2, on average? How was it broken down, as in, what was the smallest group -- four guns? I think that would be cool, to be able to set up a mobile battery.

[Mister Fork]

+1. Tis always been a need of this game.

[MK-84]

Battling in TT earlier I was parked near an enemy base plinking tanks as they upped and For quite some time someone was raining down artillery fire on the base from what had to be an M4 calliope.  He had to have been at his own base to continually respawn when he ran out of rockets because this went on for atleast 10 minutes until someone got sick of me camping their field and bombed me   While this was going on I had several thoughts and observations.
Atmosphere wise it was really really cool to see rocket rounds landing in a steady fire all over the enemy base. Especially knowing it was coming from another friendly player.
He can easily hit the enemy base from his friendly base while sitting on concrete. So artillery range may be an issue
I do not think he destroyed a single target while I was there, although some rounds had to have at least damaged something.  But accuracy and aiming is definitely a problem.
Rockets are almost invisible when fired from an M4 making it essentially impossible to determine where the fire is coming from.

It appears a catch22 situation unless alot of things were changed. If artillery is added currently it would be ineffective without a proper way to aim and direct fire. But if that was changed there would be no need to even attack an enemy base as artillery  (even now with our calliope) can hit many of the enemy bases from their own base.
Actually with proper spotting, directions and a good amount of practice a couple of players in theory could wipe a vbase off the map without ever leaving the concrete of their own base

[Tinkles]

Battling in TT earlier I was parked near an enemy base plinking tanks as they upped and For quite some time someone was raining down artillery fire on the base from what had to be an M4 calliope.  He had to have been at his own base to continually respawn when he ran out of rockets because this went on for atleast 10 minutes until someone got sick of me camping their field and bombed me   While this was going on I had several thoughts and observations.
Atmosphere wise it was really really cool to see rocket rounds landing in a steady fire all over the enemy base. Especially knowing it was coming from another friendly player.
He can easily hit the enemy base from his friendly base while sitting on concrete. So artillery range may be an issue
I do not think he destroyed a single target while I was there, although some rounds had to have at least damaged something.  But accuracy and aiming is definitely a problem.
Rockets are almost invisible when fired from an M4 making it essentially impossible to determine where the fire is coming from.

It appears a catch22 situation unless alot of things were changed. If artillery is added currently it would be ineffective without a proper way to aim and direct fire. But if that was changed there would be no need to even attack an enemy base as artillery  (even now with our calliope) can hit many of the enemy bases from their own base.
Actually with proper spotting, directions and a good amount of practice a couple of players in theory could wipe a vbase off the map without ever leaving the concrete of their own base

I was thinking if we ever did get artillery that it would have a system similar to the 8Inchers of the fleets.

Click on the map and fire, then adjust accordingly. Spotters would be used, and if it was the same system as the 8in, then it would be relatively simple to aim.

[Bino]

 

http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,326777.0.html

[R 105]

About the only thing I liked about world of tanks was the artillery. The problem for Aces High would be a fire directional system. Everything we now have is direct line of sight firing. A working FDC (Fire Directional Center) is the hard part. I would rather see towed anti tank guns like the German 75mm. 

[Tinkles]

http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,326777.0.html

   I like.

[MK-84]

I was thinking if we ever did get artillery that it would have a system similar to the 8Inchers of the fleets.

Click on the map and fire, then adjust accordingly. Spotters would be used, and if it was the same system as the 8in, then it would be relatively simple to aim.

Sort of how I would imagine it too.  But gameplay wise what happens when it becomes easy to destroy an enemy base without leaving yours?

[Tinkles]

Sort of how I would imagine it too.  But gameplay wise what happens when it becomes easy to destroy an enemy base without leaving yours?

Simply don't give it too long a range.

As for how to do it and what needs to be done. I'm not sure yet.

The easiest thing I can think of now is pretty much the M4's 'range of fire' for the commanders view.  As for the 8incher method of 'map attack' as I call it, I'm not sure what range to put on that.

If it's too short, then what is the point of having it?  If it's too long, then it's overpowered and would be the only thing used.

Delicate balance. Not sure as to how to balance this weapon without making it nerfed and everything else obsolete.

[MK-84]

Simply don't give it too long a range.

As for how to do it and what needs to be done. I'm not sure yet.

The easiest thing I can think of now is pretty much the M4's 'range of fire' for the commanders view.  As for the 8incher method of 'map attack' as I call it, I'm not sure what range to put on that.

If it's too short, then what is the point of having it?  If it's too long, then it's overpowered and would be the only thing used.

Delicate balance. Not sure as to how to balance this weapon without making it nerfed and everything else obsolete.

     The tank guns we currently have can already can reach from base to base in many cases.  It is balanced by not having a sight that can adequetly aim at such distances and not having line of sight to see where the shells hit.  On the current map today we do have LOS from one base to another through a gap in the trees.  (in TT) That means I can up an M4 and destroy a VH having never left my own fields concrete. Aiming could still be relatively easily established outside of game parameters. (assuming LOS to target)
     Obviously(?) adding artillery support would either be useless if there is not at least a rudimentary way to aim, but game breaking if there is one.  Reducing the range of artillery for game balance seems to me to go against the grain from what AH is.
     This is how I would do it.
     Give all non LOS GV's targeting capability that is a mix of ingame ship bombardment, and bomber calibration.  Perhaps add a system msg if a structure is hit but not destroyed. I am thinking something that takes some time to "dial in" but afterwards is rewarding in ability to do damage.
     All non LOS GV's with such capability can not spawn from a VH and must use a vehicle spawn point.
     Non LOS fire should show in a similar way to cruiser or destroyer fire. (.i.e giving away the position) I say this because I think artillery fire should be very effective, but very risky.
     Landed dmg should be a system message.
     Currently HE tank shells have a very limited splash damage, so only the closest of direct hits really does much damage (try taking out troops with an HE round ).  Perhaps there could be a small incentive to keep a base under constant bombardment?