Thoughts on artillery mechanics and how to improve them

[thelizardofdoom]

Their is a difference between forward drops and helo rushes. The only thing people are concerned about/considered broken, is the actual helo rush.

[James-Bond]

trying to catch up on a lot said,

very pedantic about what an actual helo rush is, get some quick early recon, hold some points back, if rush is happening spawn AA?
(i'm not pro)

some ideas, although pretty much repeating whats been said in the last page or 2.
- original base spawn, units were invulnerable for 10s when spawning .
- base spawn can't be capped
- if base spawn didn't need a CV (could call in reinforcements, if cv isn't in spawn you don't get income though)

not sure about how to help cheaper arty,
I like top-end arty or mortars because i like accuracy / not wasting supplies. (I don't like using MRLS much either)

I haven't played SD, so don't know much about the front line system, but sure it take away from sneaking forces? e.g motorized units down a flank

Compared to WG:EE people seems a lot lazier when it comes to defending CV's behind the front line imo, even a few cheap units & recon/ near CV zone can alert or stop most infiltration's.

[Gen3ralAustria]

trying to catch up on a lot said,

very pedantic about what an actual helo rush is, get some quick early recon, hold some points back, if rush is happening spawn AA?
(i'm not pro)

some ideas, although pretty much repeating whats been said in the last page or 2.
- original base spawn, units were invulnerable for 10s when spawning .
- base spawn can't be capped
- if base spawn didn't need a CV (could call in reinforcements, if cv isn't in spawn you don't get income though)

not sure about how to help cheaper arty,
I like top-end arty or mortars because i like accuracy / not wasting supplies. (I don't like using MRLS much either)

I haven't played SD, so don't know much about the front line system, but sure it take away from sneaking forces? e.g motorized units down a flank

Compared to WG:EE people seems a lot lazier when it comes to defending CV's behind the front line imo, even a few cheap units & recon/ near CV zone can alert or stop most infiltration's.

Cheaper artillery is only effective when either used in large concentration (for example the early M109 models) or good micro near the front (mortars). All in all, even best artillery has it's problems, although less than the cheap ones.

As for the CV's and them defending, it is my opinion that most of them are killed by artillery and/or planes while they are behind the own combat line. Rarely through enemy ground troops operating behind the line.
A suggestion would be to as mentioned before give the FOB a small AA (20mm gun or something like that) as it would keep helicopters somehow in bay but not completly.
No one is really guarding a CV anymore, only when it is really necessary (which it isn't most of the time). Their value decreased since ALB and maybe this is why. Some put transport vehicles they don't need to "protect" the CV but they are of little use.

[thelizardofdoom]

I doubt that anything less than an higher end AA gun would work. The AA has to kill helos, if it doesn't kill fast all you have is 1 out of 10 helos being stunned, which is not really significant. Perhaps make the AA gun very killy but small range.

Has anyone considered that we make high end artful better(faster fire time, more acc, higher ROF.) And then bringing the lesser arty closer to the level higher end ones are right now.

[Mike]

A suggestion would be to as mentioned before give the FOB a small AA (20mm gun or something like that) as it would keep helicopters somehow in bay but not completly.

Not if it was the super OP Vulcan!

[Razzmann]

There is no space between "OP" and "Vulcan" !

[Gen3ralAustria]

Not if it was the super OP Vulcan!

Well we can't give them a Patriot missile box surrounded by four Vulcan ground positions, only the Vulcans would make REDFOR enthusiasts cry around.
True, an Oerlikon is not enough as it is too short and less effective but I don't see any middle ground that would be sufficient in any way as a missile position would again be too much.
Ony option is either a 20mm or (when we could arrange it with RED) a 30/35mm position (Gepard and Tunguska guns)...

@thelizardofdoom: making high end artillery even better to strengthen the weaker is the same problem as now. When you have the option you would take in 95 of 100 cases the better piece.
The only way I see it is to either strengthen the bad and mediocre pieces so they have better stats and possibilities or weaken the high end pieces.
Most of the time you only see high-end units because you want to hit and kill without wasting too much on supplies.

[FrangibleCover]

The obvious NATO fixed AA emplacement, if we are to have a generic one, is the Oerlikon 35mm. Damn near everyone operated those things. They're already statted up in game on the Gepard, Guntank and Marksman.

I'm not sure what the equivalent Pact system is though, the only two things I'm coming up with off the top of my head are the ZU-23-2, which isn't really good enough and the S-60, which is a static ZSU-57-2 and definitely not good enough.

[thelizardofdoom]

The other option is give it a manpad. I still don't see why making whatever weapon it is very short ranged, unable to shoot at planes and quite strong is undesirable.

[chykka]

Auto cannons are always good to have, to defend against helicopters. As AA is a one trick pony most of the time, Autocannons are a bit safer to deploy however. They just need to have a position where they don't get hit out of the engagement range.