Indirect Artillery Vehicle

[Staticelf]

For those not familiar with constructive criticism it goes like this...
"Your idea stinks...but maybe if you did X it would be more viable"

If its a bad idea in your opinion how could it be modified to be a better idea...not just dismissed.

[Canaris]

Originally Posted by Staticelf

Canaris...thank you for dismissing my opinion...which begs the question why are you posting here then as this post IS my opinion on a new vehicle idea.

you have the wrong of it, I'm not dismissing the idea of artillery out of hand, that I'll discuss and debate, what I dismiss is your opinion of just throwing out over a decades worth of gaming experience and lessons just because you consider it old. that I won't even entertain.

[Sledgecrushr]

Ok so we can have indirect artillery pieces ingame. So keeping in mind the teamwork element of this cannon here are some gameplay ideas.
1- cannon itself must be hooked up to the back of a sunderer to be transported
2- once the cannon is unhooked from the sunderer it can be moved into a firing position
3- after the cannon is in its firing position the cannon round can be loaded
4- before firing your cannon you have to mathematically figure a firing resolution using standard artillery calculations

[ringring]

The instance where I think artillery would be useful is in breaking up large armour zergs.

e.g. TR/NC/VS zerg is capturing an outpost. The outpost is overrun defenders are stuck inside the spawns and outside is a mass of infantry and armour.

Artillery from an nearby base targets the 'zerg' and degrades their armour by removing mbt's before they move out to the next outpost.

It requires artillery with similar 'powerz' to the flail, it must require spotters (something whereby if a spotter isn't coupled with the artillery piece it's accuracy is appalling) and it's requires players to play tactically.

[Staticelf]

Much better guys...i like where you are going sledge. An artillery piece that can link with the sundy then "deploy" to fire. Needs to be short enough ranged so that you can't shoot it from most of the bases and hit another base.

What about this...its a sunderer utility (or the slot where AMS is?) so when sunderer "deploys" the gun spawns behind it (like how an engi deploys a turret)

[Baneblade]

It doesn't matter what the pros of artillery will be because the cons of it will drown them utterly.

[Staticelf]

Im sure their could be a crew element. A loader must be near (loads like hacking a terminal) and the firer controls the aim. (Prob need a basic North-South/East-West click system to aim cant be too complicated)

[Whiteagle]

Originally Posted by Staticelf

Much better guys...i like where you are going sledge. An artillery piece that can link with the sundy then "deploy" to fire. Needs to be short enough ranged so that you can shoot it from most of the bases and hit another base.

What about this...its a sunderer utility (or the slot where AMS is?) so when sunderer "deploys" the gun spawns behind it (like how an engi deploys a turret)

Had an idea like that back in Beta...

Originally Posted by Staticelf

Im sure their could be a crew element. A loader must be near (loads like hacking a terminal) and the firer controls the aim. (Prob need a basic North-South/East-West click system to aim cant be too complicated)

Hmmm... Perhaps the Gunner has to make use of a Map Screen with a circle or cone that indicates the general area where his shot will land?

[Staticelf]

Again baneblade...if there are cons then there are ways to mitigate them.
I know I know "solve problem make brain hurt...say problem much easier!"

[Staticelf]

For those who are worrying about artillery spamming spawn rooms...let me play Statics advocate here...(and solve your Con for you)
How about defensive artillery "turrets" then...inside amp stations or techplants. A battery of three or four of them that can shell the surrounding area (but cant quite reach any spawn rooms in that base or surrounding bases) and they would be hackable/destroyable of course!

[Ruffdog]

I think its a moot point mate because as soon as you open with a spam cannon like that, you'll have a bajillion pissed off air boys following the fire back and coming to you for an XP piñata.

[Whiteagle]

Originally Posted by Ruffdog

I think its a moot point mate because as soon as you open with a spam cannon like that, you'll have a bajillion pissed off air boys following the fire back and coming to you for an XP piñata.

But then wouldn't it require Anti-Air support?

Which would then require Anti-Tank Support?

Which would then require Anti-Infantry Support?

[Staticelf]

Originally Posted by Whiteagle

But then wouldn't it require Anti-Air support?

Which would then require Anti-Tank Support?

Which would then require Anti-Infantry Support?

Uh oh! Sounds like we are getting dangerously close to something that encourages combined arms combat.

Ruffdog that is EXACTLY what I want them to do.

I am 1000% for encouraging combat that isnt "guys standing outside of spawnroom trying to kill guys standing inside of spawn room."

Getting planetside away from "myshotgun vs yourshotgun as we meet around a corner in a base (winner repeats until dead)" is the whole point of this new weaponry.

[Phantomdestiny]

Originally Posted by Whiteagle

But then wouldn't it require Anti-Air support?

Which would then require Anti-Tank Support?

Which would then require Anti-Infantry Support?

= profit meta-game (take a drink)

[Baneblade]

Originally Posted by Staticelf

Again baneblade...if there are cons then there are ways to mitigate them.
I know I know "solve problem make brain hurt...say problem much easier!"

You must be new around here or you would know that when an idea isn't totally a bad one, I do try to make it work. Artillery is a very good idea if you want to ruin the game. And besides that, PS2 maps aren't big enough for artillery. I mean, MBTs can already shell targets 1000 m away... and so can Libs. So what niche is the Artillery going to fill that isn't already taken?