Artillery Warfare

Do you have a balancing problem or do you want to make a suggestion for the game? You are at the right place.
Armacalic
Posts: 125
Joined: 09 Dec 2014, 02:04

Re: Artillery Warfare

Postby Armacalic » 05 May 2016, 18:25

MrEasyUK wrote:It is blatantly apparent that the RA doc needs improvement, being replied to like a moron doesn't help either, if these people cant see the problematic issues with the RA Doctrine, as a team player in PvP or skirmish then there is little point in raising the issue further.

All you see atm is players playing the stronger doctrines.. people might not like or take well to criticism, and if you think the responses here are positive or in the good of the mod then your kidding yourself. I have one issue and that's the RA doctrine, it is plain to see what I am saying.

I had a break from the game for over a year and some of the changes are good, some of them are not so good, the RA Doctrine is terrible in comparison to what it was and I used to Play RA all the time, that enjoyment for me has disapeared so what do i do, go play WM Def to get the ballance that Brit RA once had or stop playing?


Well, the problem here is...

Wait for it...

Wait for it...

It's blatantly clear only your opinion on the subject matters to you, regardless of what others mention. But I'll give you a piece of my mind anyways, since I'm already used to dealing with people that won't bother considering other's opinions at all and push their own agendas regardless of opposition.

Truth is that simply, the mod is meant to be played in teams of different doctrines that provide something different each. RA is not meant to stand on its own against other doctrines and win, for the longest time, it's been about playing a supportive role to other doctrines. The problem here is that your opinion is not based in truth to begin with, the changes to RA that have been made have been few and have not affected things that you are complaining about.

So you are complaining that something's changed when that something in question has NOT changed... strange, huh? Really wonder why people are not agreeing with you in light of this little fact.

Other things have changed a bit more, and that might be the problem for you here, it still doesn't have to do with RA or does it make RA a bad doctrine.

What has changed? Other doctrines have changed in an attempt to make the game more dynamic, players have adapted to that, and players who use RA often have adapted to THAT.

Paine
Posts: 12
Joined: 13 Apr 2016, 06:28

Re: Artillery Warfare

Postby Paine » 06 May 2016, 20:17

On the subject of Artillery:

It should have less impact on the game. This isn't the same as saying it should be less deadly.

I think the OP has an interesting idea because it makes artillery harder to use but keeps it as deadly as it is now.

Assume there is an even split of munitions in a 2v2, and one player has artillery doc on each side. The timing of manpower availability and munitions availability means that whenever one side attacks, the defending player will have two or more likely three artillery strikes available (off and on-map).

It is impossible to advance if your attack is getting hit by artillery every time you try to advance.

Very likely all of your inf units will be forced to retreat, or be 20-30% strength.

Very likely most tanks will be destroyed or heavily damaged.

This is only from artillery. Now the defending player's units force the remaining attack to retreat or be killed.

If the defending player decides to counter-attack, well, now the other side can use artillery to prevent that. It creates a kind of mind-numbing draw in an evenly matched game. I played one of these yesterday. I think we killed three king tigers before the game finally ended with one allied player leaving.

Making artillery harder to use would be a good way to make artillery less over powering in any battle.

Some other suggestions I have for doing this besides OP's:

limit on-map artillery to one
increase population cap cost by 100%
increase timer by 100% for on-map and 200% for off-map

kwok
Team Member
Posts: 1698
Joined: 29 Mar 2015, 05:22

Re: Artillery Warfare

Postby kwok » 10 May 2016, 15:37

Play bigger maps.

Paine
Posts: 12
Joined: 13 Apr 2016, 06:28

Re: Artillery Warfare

Postby Paine » 11 May 2016, 01:29

so on bigger maps the on map artillery is more vulnerable? what about AB/Luft bombs, they are just as effective at stopping assaults.

kwok
Team Member
Posts: 1698
Joined: 29 Mar 2015, 05:22

Re: Artillery Warfare

Postby kwok » 11 May 2016, 04:48

try covering an entire map with expensive AB/Luft units and abilities.

Paine
Posts: 12
Joined: 13 Apr 2016, 06:28

Re: Artillery Warfare

Postby Paine » 18 May 2016, 21:03

I played a 3v3 recently where every time a Tiger came out I hit it with P47s and it died. We had the munis OP though. It was a nice change from having to use 2 wolverines, an AT gun, 2 AT squads, stickies, Arty, and a Jumbo to kill one Tiger of course :D

Not balanced though, if some of the things suggested earlier were applied, it wouldn't be a one click counter.

User avatar
MrEasyUK
Posts: 21
Joined: 29 Feb 2016, 22:52

Re: Artillery Warfare

Postby MrEasyUK » 20 May 2016, 14:01

Armacalic wrote:
MrEasyUK wrote:It is blatantly apparent that the RA doc needs improvement, being replied to like a moron doesn't help either, if these people cant see the problematic issues with the RA Doctrine, as a team player in PvP or skirmish then there is little point in raising the issue further.

All you see atm is players playing the stronger doctrines.. people might not like or take well to criticism, and if you think the responses here are positive or in the good of the mod then your kidding yourself. I have one issue and that's the RA doctrine, it is plain to see what I am saying.

I had a break from the game for over a year and some of the changes are good, some of them are not so good, the RA Doctrine is terrible in comparison to what it was and I used to Play RA all the time, that enjoyment for me has disapeared so what do i do, go play WM Def to get the ballance that Brit RA once had or stop playing?


Well, the problem here is...

Wait for it...

Wait for it...

It's blatantly clear only your opinion on the subject matters to you, regardless of what others mention. But I'll give you a piece of my mind anyways, since I'm already used to dealing with people that won't bother considering other's opinions at all and push their own agendas regardless of opposition.

Truth is that simply, the mod is meant to be played in teams of different doctrines that provide something different each. RA is not meant to stand on its own against other doctrines and win, for the longest time, it's been about playing a supportive role to other doctrines. The problem here is that your opinion is not based in truth to begin with, the changes to RA that have been made have been few and have not affected things that you are complaining about.

So you are complaining that something's changed when that something in question has NOT changed... strange, huh? Really wonder why people are not agreeing with you in light of this little fact.

Other things have changed a bit more, and that might be the problem for you here, it still doesn't have to do with RA or does it make RA a bad doctrine.

What has changed? Other doctrines have changed in an attempt to make the game more dynamic, players have adapted to that, and players who use RA often have adapted to THAT.




Truth, are you out of your mind or just talk self important crap as an alternative to playing with your penis? Your saying the shermans are tough, and the RA Arty pieces are deletable and the dispersion of the shots has not changed... your saying the WM Def doc does not have all the versatilty of the RA doc and also has an Elephant and Strumtiger, please crawl back under your rock, your talking absolute crap.

The RA doctirne is a shambles and needs revising.

JimQwilleran
Posts: 1107
Joined: 07 Jan 2015, 15:05

Re: Artillery Warfare

Postby JimQwilleran » 20 May 2016, 14:28

Jeez, not only did it take you 2 weeks to come back to write this, but you also once again manged to post here another of your dreadful and meaningless "messages", that seem to require a master degree of psychiatry to get to understand them...

:!: :!: :!: :!: Moreover, you used a word "penis". This is a whole new level for our forum, congrats! :!: :!: :!: :!:

I don't think that anyone would care to continue that questionable pleasure of having a "discussion" with you.


Return to “Balancing & Suggestions”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 30 guests