Arty

[Warhawks97]

Well its still an issue and even more than before. I respect the decision to reduce arty but lets be honest, the arty issue is bigger than ever before.

Wolf... the more you reduce the light and medium arty in other docs and the more you refuse adding small arty to several docs and the more you reduce arty power of non arty docs the more often players play heavy arty docs. Before that arty reduction agenda we faced teams wihout arty docs such as SE and CW arty but currently in every game we play we are facing heavy arty docs.
In my last two 4 vs 4 games as axis i did face even two CW arty docs (+ inf doc was using arty later as well)! Half of the team were arty players and more than half used more or less only arty.

To make it short (Wolf) your decision to limit arty and esspecially medium arty resulted in the the opposite. Now we have only arty doc which has arty (esspecially on ally side) at all. So even if you need just small arty to knock out a small combi of paks and mgs players in mid game the players must choose arty doc which then does only arty.


Also congrats that in teamfights there isnt much allied can do.

Using Tanks as offensive unit as allied? meh... bad idea as they get instantly schrecked and killed by medium paks. Not to mention even that axis teams often outspam the oppostion with Tank IV´s and JP´s. In first game we had just one arty doc and we got quickly overruned by Tigers, stuhs and JP´s. In the second game we build masses of Panthers but we faced double arty doc which killed all tanks. The only reason for allis to build tanks is to build anti inf tanks.

Using inf?.... only RAF commandos or 101st inf blobb. In fact allied game is reduced to arty, 17 pounder and sten commando/101st inf...maybe a jumbo in mid game....



Balance the arty better between docs and re-add some medium arty 75 mm/150 nebler and remove arty limit of howitzers. Otherwise people keep feeling helpless without arty docs.


Also do something with tank balance and esspecially the quanity/quality between axis and allies tanks.

I get really rid of that arty and the fact that in teamfights half of the players using powerfull arty doctrines.

[Wake]

It's just a side effect, and I don't know if that is good or bad.

The problem is that the allies can just prop up a 17 pounder and some HE shermans and the axis can sit by a Pak 40 and an MG42, and the enemy's attacks will fail almost every single time.

People aren't just going to throw their often expensive units at enemies in defensive positions, so they turn to artillery. It's basically an unspoken requirement that at least 1 player on every allied team goes British Artillery doc, and that if there is no PE Scorched Earth doc player on axis, the others must make up for it.

The best players in this game are also the best at using scouts. The main reason they use scouts is so they know where to shoot their artillery. Many times people will shoot artillery at places that they even think has a camouflaged AT gun or MG.

[Warhawks97]

CW arty doc is must since inf doc lost the arty power and since tank balance got messed up. Since the last patch and limitations even on axis side those going for at least for one SE in 90% in all games as well.

[Sukin-kot (SVT)]

Agree, stupid arty parties now happening more often than half year before.

[Wolf]

Well its still an issue and even more than before. I respect the decision to reduce arty but lets be honest, the arty issue is bigger than ever before.

Wolf... the more you reduce the light and medium arty in other docs and the more you refuse adding small arty to several docs and the more you reduce arty power of non arty docs the more often players play heavy arty docs. Before that arty reduction agenda we faced teams wihout arty docs such as SE and CW arty but currently in every game we play we are facing heavy arty docs.
In my last two 4 vs 4 games as axis i did face even two CW arty docs (+ inf doc was using arty later as well)! Half of the team were arty players and more than half used more or less only arty.

Ehm, how was exactly arty reduced in other than "arty" doctrines? Mortar limits? Really? I never saw anybody to use more than 2 75mm howitzers, so its not that. So where are airborne and armor lacking? How are "no" changes in them forcing you to use inf more?? What changes in raf doc regarding arty? none, what changes in RE? more/less effective avre against some units/buildings and I am not even sure if churchil wasn't already limited, not like anyone used them in numbers...

To make it short (Wolf) your decision to limit arty and esspecially medium arty resulted in the the opposite. Now we have only arty doc which has arty (esspecially on ally side) at all. So even if you need just small arty to knock out a small combi of paks and mgs players in mid game the players must choose arty doc which then does only arty.

PE already had limits. you probably didn't even noticed, because 3+ would be used in like 10% of games?, wespe costs more, how is that making them use more arty??? WH, again, not like anyone used more than 4 howitzers, they didn't use them at all, because of high costs. One less grille? Ah, thats surely the reason to use more arty...

Using Tanks as offensive unit as allied? meh... bad idea as they get instantly schrecked and killed by medium paks. Not to mention even that axis teams often outspam the oppostion with Tank IV´s and JP´s. In first game we had just one arty doc and we got quickly overruned by Tigers, stuhs and JP´s. In the second game we build masses of Panthers but we faced double arty doc which killed all tanks. The only reason for allis to build tanks is to build anti inf tanks.
Using inf?.... only RAF commandos or 101st inf blobb. In fact allied game is reduced to arty, 17 pounder and sten commando/101st inf...maybe a jumbo in mid game....

I don't understand how can you on one hand tell me that the limits = more arty, and on other hand actually say something I could agree with, but seems much more like real reason. The problem is, like you and Wake said, tanks get shrecked etc. so I think that the whole problem with arty/arty docs. is much simpler, they are just "clever". Why should you build xyz tanks and risk going against tigers/panthers/whatever, when you can bombard them from distance? Why should you wait for the heavy tanks as axis, when you can wespe them out of the map or snipe them with grille?? CW is kind of undermining the purpose of more munnition cost by having all arty fire for same price like one piece mostly, thats not right. There were supportive things to reduce army, like reducing bunkers durability etc., so again, not anything that should tell people get more arty.

Summary: Why the hell should limiting arty to limits which were not even used in 90% of games lead to more arty games? I already said, if there is something which is unbreakable without arty, it should be made destroyable in another way, this was done to bunkers f.e. However I can't do shit if people chose doctrine because its the easiest way / fun. And games including RA and SE are there far longer than "just now its unbelievably bad", I played myself a lot of RA long time too and I remember "we are fucked without RA" years back. And pleaaaase, just dont tell me that people play SE now because they don't have 5 nebels in terror...

[Krieger Blitzer]

Allies US inf and specifically Brits arty docs can rapidly and continuously use arty throughout the whole game period!! This game below very well shows u guys how the player TonyVE just kept spamming arty while his 2 mates were fighting! That was not cool and disastrous... Although btw Tony isn't really that good, I mean if a better player.. he would make us taste even more shit But whosoever noob in hell would lose after or by having 2 75mm arty trucks, 2 Priests and 2 107mm mortars???!!! OMG o.O And oh yeah, I forgot to mention about that he still can also get another 2 25p arty emplacements... Crap! What kind of arty limits r u talking about Wolf?

Also at the end of this game u can see how the KT died by a single Jackson! Are now those who deny what I say about that Allies actually need no any Aces in order to take out big German tanks, finally convinced?! LOL My Tiger Ace did stand longer than my mate's KT could! x_x

[Warhawks97]

I said that CW arty doc is a must more or less in earlier versions already and even more since PE is all about defending (TH spam).

In earlier versions you had either inf or CW arty. But not always CW arty. The inf doc had some powerfull arty with double 105 sherman and in the final step of the game when res were less an issue for inf doc it was possible to get enogh howitzer at any area of the map to break the Bunkers effectively. Right now 4 howitzers dont even reach any area of the map and also players are not sure were to build them. In old versions you had like 1 arround your own base to start the counterattack but worring about to have not enough arty to break the final defense line. Now its like.." Oh shit ive build my howitzer to near at my base and now i cant destroy the enemie bunkers staying a bit out of range".... Destroying own veted equipment is always a bad idea as you never know if you need it again later when the forntlines moving again.

Right now even inf doc is unable to break down defenses effectively. I tried that to use the 75 mm more often to avoid to place the howitzers on a place in early game which is bad in late game but still eats my unit cap. But it sucks as well as i always need MP for HQ´s in several houses, sometimes far away which then get "nebeled".


I also asked for more tactical light army to cruch paks and weapon crews but which are not effective to stop enemie tanks. This way games would have become more fluid, effective camping disruption without turning the game into a glory arty massacer.

I asked for tactical arty in US armor doc (e.g M8 scott as indirect fire weapon to break the early game 50 mm pak wall), i asked for 75 mm pack howitzer in motorpool for inf doc to break those eary Scout car/50mm/Mg42 wall but you refused.

I told you not to limit small/medium arty units such as 150 mm nebler, 75 mm leig/75 mm pak howitzers for allied and axis in non arty docs but you thought you know it better. When i gave critic on terror doc Nebler VT spam i did not want to limit neblers. A simple VT cost increase and longer cooldown would have been enough to avoid excessive use of VT against single units without making Terror doc unable to crack some defenses by their own.


I also asked to make paks more vulnerable to tank gunfire but got also refused for some reason.
I asked to do something with US armor doc so that this doc can follow its "purposes" by winning with quantity but still US is extrremly "fuel unfriendly" due to dozens of upgrades that cost fuel just enable them to get some masses and if armor doesnt spend this fuel for upgrades they donna die an upkeep death when having just two tanks.... and those two are easily eliminated by 50 mm pak by showing a performence of a single stug.


So if more docs would have some light and medium army to break down early game pak/mg walls but people would less often choose extrem arty docs.


I mean i give you a single sample of teamfight. In 90% of the games it looks like MG42/37 mm pak, scout car/50 pak and some grens and mobile Mg42 plattforms. Allies have no quantity yet and options to deal with are:

Inf off map strike but 150 ammo in early game is a lot and need to be placed very very well and need 2 CP that need to be collected somewhow.
CQC need houses and with bad luck it ends up next to a fixed scout or anything like that in its dead.
Commando glider or sappers may be an option and can kill Mg42 weapon crew but still mobile mg42 plattforms and first 20 mm vehicles will finish that little expensive adventure before it has any impact on enemie defense. It need to be very well combined with units of teammates and their vehicles.

The most choosed option is medium arty and who has medium arty? correct, arty doc with its 75 mm arty Halftrack. But once Arty doc is choosen priests comming soon and rather early than later 80% of axis units get killed my arty. First in late game other units like 101st, rifles and tankbuster can score good points and are a kind of vultures killing the remaining grens in pios and are rather gravedigger than units that decide the game which is done only by priests more or less.


So first when priests killed the TH spam, the Bunkers, the paks, the AA tanks etc then M10, 101st and aa tanks will fnish the little of the axis army that remains.

So remove limit of small arty units and stationary howitzers and if neccessary add small tactical arty to further docs such as tank doc.
Fix TH doc and make it into an offensive because right now it forces defensive playing and thus arty.
Fix the tank quality/quantity relation (expensive fuel upgrades, upkeep issues etc).
Make paks beeing oneshoted by enemie tank hits and other guns and make it more vulnerable to some hendheld at´s. That way a tank and vehicle horde would not get stopped by single pak.
Hendheld at weapon effectivness against tanks: Tanks would become more appealing to be used on assaults on fields without getting schrecked by single inf squads. Could be done with some long/medium range accuracy nerf in exchange for higher rof from ambush positions and also maybe some range decrease (-5 or -8).
Better and more effective way to collect wounded soldiers: That way people would try to exploit enemie defenses with some inf attacks as they would know that some of the lost soldiers would be kind of ressources that can be used to increase strenght of further inf attacks. Effective medical network and logistic decreased losses in wars. But as long as they know that every single wounded men is a loss they rather bomb entire areas where they only expect MG´s and requesting arty fire from arty doc teammates.

I said, instead simply reducing and limiting arty wherever possible rather try to fix the reasons for that and to give cost effective alternative ways.




@Tiger: Dont count only on your late game tiger. Win the early mid stage of the game and inf doc howitzers would die quickly and off map arty effectivness would decrease as cost would be shared over many units. Havent seen the replay but simply the given fact that you told me more than often eough that you go only for tigers is more than clear that you dont try that much to gain mid game controle and rather turst in your tigers to turn games. Then inf doc howitzers etc could become dangerous opponents

[Krieger Blitzer]

@Warhawks; It's ur fault u did not yet see the replay. I actually this time (not like usual) went for the Panzer 4 mass production and Stuhs not Tigers! It was a 3vs3 game on the map Road To Cherbourg which I strongly believe that it's a perfect map for such arty tactic like Tony used. However in team-fights u can't say that it was a specific player fault as I well realize it's about team play and combination.

But actually although I went for the Stuh path first, I had the enough score and xp that made me later at the end also able to get the Ace TIger. It did quickly kill 2 E8s, 1 Jackson and 1 75mm arty truck and then finally died by another Jackson after being immobilized by arty.. nevertheless, leaving that Jackson which killed the Tiger at half health! Also it's worth to mention that the same Jackson of half health few moments after killed the KT which missed 3 times with only 2 shots while the Tiger Ace was able to bounce 3 Jackson shots in total, on the other hand surprisingly the KT couldn't bounce any of the both impacted shots at it by that Jackson...

[Warhawks97]

@Warhawks; It's ur fault u did not yet see the replay. I actually this time (not like usual) went for the Panzer 4 mass production and Stuhs not Tigers! It was a 3vs3 game on the map Road To Cherbourg which I strongly believe that it's a perfect map for such arty tactic like Tony used. However in team-fights u can't say that it was a specific player fault as I well realize it's about team play and combination.

But actually although I went for the Stuh path first, I had the enough score and xp that made me later at the end also able to get the Ace TIger. It did quickly kill 2 E8s, 1 Jackson and 1 75mm arty truck and then finally died by another Jackson after being immobilized by arty.. nevertheless, leaving that Jackson which killed the Tiger at half health! Also it's worth to mention that the same Jackson of half health few moments after killed the KT which missed 3 times with only 2 shots while the Tiger Ace was able to bounce 3 Jackson shots in total, on the other hand surprisingly the KT couldn't bounce any of the both impacted shots at it by that Jackson...

sure its a bit luck and i consider the Ace Tiger as Better than a KT. Well i will look it. On road to cherbough, as long as allied hold the two ammo points and having one upgraded, Ammo is less a problem for arty and airstrikes unlike it is on many other maps. On that map i usually always try to push with my mates the middle fuel point and also mid allied ammo point to froce the enemie leaving flanks less protected. After that rushing flanks with PE vehicles, turning to mid and up to that time having booby traps and somtimes sobtage with SE. I always go for sabotage first on that map and if SE player managded to destroy the mid Ammo point as fast as possible the win is more or less sure. If you play as axis on road and Halfaya pass try to push one of their ammo points and disable those. Its the easiest way to win quickly.


Edit: off topic: you played high res. Check minute 8. Min 8-12 is the best for WE to attack as US has usually never anything at that time to counter Tank IV´s. Dont build officer, dont build FHQ and instead upgrade fuel point, dont upgrade final HQ upgrade and you could have up to 2 Tank IV´s and a Stug III. That would be definitely a match decider if you attack weaker enemie positons (flanks with less important res point). That would have forced the enemie to build 17 pounder emplacment quickly, maybe US would have build a pak quickly as well and your team would controled what the enemie has to do and where to go. What you should get ab bit earlier is a reccon but then go for Tank IV´s combined maybe with volks and AT squad. Its hard for allied and esspecially US to counter that early assault and only Jumbo could help at that time

Just my tipp.


Edit II:@Wolf: Maybe watch the first 13 mins of the game or 14. After a few mins (ok it was high but on low res its even worse) the defense was up which could be dealed with vehicles and normal use of inf. MG 42´s, paks and often the defense is even stronger but here arty doc interrup successfully further build up of defense with further paks and thats what i mean. When US players have just set up their second or third building they do usually face a mix of HMG´s, mobile MG plattforms and 37 and 50 mm paks and soon after first bunkers do follow somtimes. Their only hope then is pretty much the mortar carrier and this map is one which favors mortars and makes it thus a bit easier for US.
US at that point cant help themselves just by sane inf/vehicle combination unless all allied players using their vehicles and inf and gilder drops against a single part of the defense and single axis player.

The result was clear: after 8-9 mins the CW arty doc was the only one which could help with 75 mm arty halftracks.

So what i simply want or demand is that inf and maybe armor doc as well would be able to get some 75 mm out of the Motorpool just to crack that early game defense line and to turn the game into a stage of vehicle/inf combination with attacks and counter attacks and with combination of units. Simply to break down that camping phase and to turn it into a mobile warfare and strategy game and without turning the late game into a large priest arty party.

As long as 75 mm arty and othe light arty is limited, not available, very late available or whatever and as long as other than arty docs wont be able to deal with the early defense stage of the game the games the arty doc will always remain as a must. And once the arty doc is choosen its like: "Oh why risking my units when we already choosed arty doc anyway. Lets simply finish it with bigger and more arty".


More small tactical arty in all docs to break the early stage defense phase, enough arty power to crack extrem late game defenses at a single point available in more than only arty doc and some alternatives to crack paks and to use more usefull alternatives to arty would reduce arty. When i talk about enough arty to crack defense i mean that some docs should have enough firepower to make a breakthrough on a selected point of enemie defense without enable them to blow up every square meter and creating a map wide kill zone such as CW arty doc does. As a sample:

For Terror doc it could be unlimited nebelwerfer just that VT would cost 75-100 ammo and longer cooldown. That would allow a breakthorugh combined with Heavy tanks that can use that hole in enemie defense without exaggerating with excessive use of it against single snipers. Would require well tought combination of VT and other units.

For inf doc it could be a VT for 100 ammo but howitzers unlimited and also one or two priest/arty shermans. That would allow to crack even a strong defended area with bunkers followed by a large scale inf attack and small number of rangers which could use hole in the defense and flanking other defenses to blow those up with satchels would give some punch for late game defense breaking without being able to turn the entire map into a kill zone as shooting all the arty all the time would simply cost too much ammo.

For US armor doc it could be a combination of one, maybe two callis, cleaning an area of paks etc. Also maybe a combi of a calli, one or two jumbos (short barreld which would be moved from inf to armor doc) to clean stuf arround bunkers and combat engineers with flamethrower would clean trenches and blwoing up bunkers with explosive charges (combat engineers moved from inf to armor doc by losing rangers).

BK has good assault tanks and inf to do that, however, stupa as stuh reward would be cool for better late game punch against CW RE doc.

Def doc has arty with VT for that job.

Luftwaffe VT with 88 and also bomb run.

Airborne doc has satchels though it would be cool if bomber would fly in not only against vehicles and Tanks but also against bunkers and other defensive stuff and emplacments to clear up the path.

And RE maybe slighlty cheaper AVRE for more effective "step by step" push as intended.

But this scenario where heavy breakthrough aty is neccessary would be less likely if early light arty would break the early stage defense. Still it should be remain in docs as options.



This would help to reduce arty really! Give alternatives in gameplay but also alternatives in light tactical arty in other docs.

[Krieger Blitzer]

I could regard any Vet 4 Tiger tank with a Vet 3 commander as to be surely the best tank u may ever have in the game. Thanks for tips ^^

[V13dweller]

Artillery is a fact, and burden of every game.

Even in Men of War AS 2 (Which I recently picked up) artillery is used religiously.
AND, artillery in that game costs nothing, and they have a Free Fire mode, so if they have LOS on something, they will fire.
The only maintenance you need, it to keep it supplied with ammunition, which is easy and ridiculously cheap.

Plus, all artillery there can be towed by vehicles anywhere you want, and some can get AP round to attack tanks.


The point of this, is that artillery exists is most games in this genre, and you can't get rid of it.
People, naturally will always use the easy option, as this is low risk, high reward, you put nothing on the line when shelling someone from such a distance.

[Warhawks97]

Artillery is a fact, and burden of every game.

Even in Men of War AS 2 (Which I recently picked up) artillery is used religiously.
AND, artillery in that game costs nothing, and they have a Free Fire mode, so if they have LOS on something, they will fire.
The only maintenance you need, it to keep it supplied with ammunition, which is easy and ridiculously cheap.

Plus, all artillery there can be towed by vehicles anywhere you want, and some can get AP round to attack tanks.


The point of this, is that artillery exists is most games in this genre, and you can't get rid of it.
People, naturally will always use the easy option, as this is low risk, high reward, you put nothing on the line when shelling someone from such a distance.

I am playing vcoh as well since a few month and i dont have a huge problem with arty even when barrages are for free. It simply isnt the holy weapon to win. Its used in late game to finish enemie off and esspecially to stop the PE attacks. But simply going for arty never saves a day. Units moving much more and it takes a lot of skilled micro and unit combination to gain map controle and first then it is possible to to use arty effectively. Its more like rounding enemie forces up, surround them and then finishing with arty. Before that there are just too many units that are rather easy to replace.



@Wolf:

I did not talk about SE or CW. For SE i think its good that Wespe cost got increased to be more fair and shouldnt be changed but at the other side PE players cant use other units to achieve their goals and thus, as they spend 500 mp for wespe, they expect to kill more with it or having less options but thats basically a minor prob.


I am giving you sample how arty limit on other docs increases need for CW arty. Its also a psychologic effect on players and one that i made. In older versions CW arty was often used but less often and the inf doc was the arty backbone. SImply by the fact that the allied team could count on inf doc arty strenght to break heavy Bunker and 88 defense IF neccessary made player choosing other docs than CW. WE often used inf, RE and US armor doc in combination and we could be sure that in any case the inf doc player could simply get enough arty that can reach any area of the map to crack even heavy bunker defenses. To break one bunker effectively you need usually two howitzer shooting together or barrage after barrage. A single one cant destroy it as fast as it gets repaired. That inf doc had this capability means NOT that it got used and often there had been just 3 howitzers. And inf doc did not use only arty as inf doc had completely different cost effective alternatives to deal with enemie elite inf or whatever whereas CW arty doc starts killing everything with pin point arty.

I had a game with two very well skilled US players and we tried a game with 3 US and without CW. We knew that we had to play very well together and that we had just one way: forward and playing on full risk. Spamming rifles and jeeps and we took advantage of the knowledge about our two PE enemies that those dont build vehicles. We were scared that if we would get pushed back once or one mistake would have caused a loss and it was very close. We could barely avoid that axis build a bunker (they already got 5 50 mm paks) with a combination of airborne drop and cqc use. We knew that we had no doc in our team capable of killing defenses of several paks and bunker. If we would have known that inf doc would have enough arty punch for late game to crack all that possible defense stuff we were not forced to play such a powerplay.

The same psychological effect for the axis. In old versions i did play against allied teams without CW arty doc but still we could not simply build dozens of paks, couple of bunkers and 88 to win as they had often inf doc in their team. As we knew that inf doc would crush all our defenses if neccessary we did not play only defensively. But as we did play less defensive the inf doc used not more than single arty unit and the game was more a skilled mirco gameplay with several units in combination and inf doc arty was less effective in a mobile warfare but therfore their inf masses and rangers whereas CW arty uses arty in mobile warfare as well as most effective way simply due to its accuracy, abilties and power to barrage the entire map.
Last time when i played axis in a 3 vs 3 with and aganist randoms i realized that enemies had only inf, armor and RE doc. The only thing we had to do was to find out were the US has its two howitzers. After that i did build just for fun 3 bunkers out of their range with BK doc and my mate panther bunkers and 5 88´s and nothing could get dangerous to us. If i would have known that US is capable to realease an arty fire that could crack my defense into dust at every point of the map within seconds i would not have build my bunkers and all the paks. If i would know that more paks and bunkers= more arty from inf doc i would not evem try to camp arround. But now i or we as entire team can pretty much always do that when enemie has no CW arty.

The simple "If" can have a huge impact on players gamestyle. IF US inf doc would have the might to turn even the biggest defense into dust if neccesssary then allis player would dare to play less often CW with CW arty and axis would do less camping simply by knowing if they do that then inf doc (and maybe even other docs) has (have) the possibilites to kick their asses.


Same for Terror doc. As long as terror had the "if" possibility SE was considered as less neccessary and also allis were aware about the power. You only had to make sure that this "if" arty power is not always the most cost effective way for that particular doc but which was simply the fact for terror doc. So for terror doc a nebler VT spam should not be cost effective as long as enemie has not a very strong defense but instead we have stolen the most important defense breaker ability entirely.

For inf doc it was never the most cost effective way to build endless howitzer in every situation as they had cheap inf, good emplacments, good abilities for rangers and even jumbos. Producing 5 howitzers and 2 arty sherman was only effective for that doc when facing a heavy mix of bunkers+stupa and elephants and stuhs and stuff like that together.


For PE the old Tank doc simply carried the late game offensives of axis side. More offensives mean less arty as it is harder to hit moving targets which change directions as well. Also after this axis attack allis could push and facing less heavy ressistant. Now axis and esspecially TH doc need longer to form up an army for assault as they need more inf + a tankhunter which increases vulnerablity to get punished by arty during that time as players stand longer in ambushed positions with their tanks untill enough inf is build. The old doc could carry out more attacks with 1 Panther and 1 or 2 inf squads and had no need for a defense. Their defense was the attack. For US armor doc it did mean a more fair fight with quantity vs quality which also made arty support less neccessary for US armor doc to do any offensive act.



Dont underestimate psychologic effects on players and the "if" possibilties. I told you that if you limit arty units you would have to reduce number of almost every emplacment and bunker (not only MG upgrade) and other defensive stuff. Heavy Defense and heavy defense breaking arty have to keep in balance as well as small defense and small arty.

[Sukin-kot (SVT)]

Problem is that you reduced all posible variants to deal with some things. Warhawks is absolutely right about inf doc. Just look to a terror doc, it was good in late game and KCH with nebels VT could deal with swarms of commandos and airborn - now both nerfed and its simply very hard for terror to survive in middle game cause you really have nothing which can help against of masses elite inf. Defence doc was also good, bunkers with perma mg, 2 Grille or brumbaer which could kick RaF and airborn asses - now all nerfed. Accuracy of flaks with HE and stuhs also nerfed, they missing every second shot, or even worse, se sniper which was badass vs. inf - nerfed. Its easy as fuck to understand all this thigs, just have a 4vs4 match, alies always need cw arty cause its only way to stop masses of german heavy tanks in late game, and crash defences, axis always need SE to stop blobs of airborn and commando, which in late game transfroming to super humans and overunning all axis inf, immobolizing tanks and destroing fortifications with satchels, they always have retreat point just a few meters behind a front line (glyder or command team), retreating, reinforcing for seconds and pushing, pushing, pushing....luftwaffe and stormtroopes just getting outnumbered + extemly high looses cause of airstrikes. Same situation with alies, but with tanks. Tank doc cant deal with numbers of tanks from all docs, thats why brits build thousand of 17 pounders and Achileses and camping, camping, camping, than Priests getting 4 vet level and becoming super instant killer, game ends.

[Wake]

I've never actually had a game last long enough to get a vet 4 priest. I've gotten a couple to vet 3, but what happens at vet 4?

Are vet 4 priests so good that 1 shot kills all tanks?

[Sukin-kot (SVT)]

I've never actually had a game last long enough to get a vet 4 priest. I've gotten a couple to vet 3, but what happens at vet 4?

Are vet 4 priests so good that 1 shot kills all tanks?

It shots at pit point and with 2 sec. reload, first shot at tank --> immobolized, than dead.

[Warhawks97]

I've never actually had a game last long enough to get a vet 4 priest. I've gotten a couple to vet 3, but what happens at vet 4?

Are vet 4 priests so good that 1 shot kills all tanks?

Never ever? oO

Ive seen many and sometimes you see two priests with up to 15 tank kills and 100 inf kills etc. Sometimes up to 150. I dont know but ive actually always got vet 4 priests whenever i used them. Its brutal and not seldomly its worth trying to rush with a tiger to priests and to kill those on vet 4 and losing the Tiger. Axis tanks have no long live expectation when there is a vet 4 priest.


Terror doc need to be new with new squad instead kch that are versatile like other elite squads with good abilities and weapon upgrades for different situations. VT nebler ability should be powerfull enough to break defenses without cost and cooldown to be used vs single snipers or other weak targets. Also bit reworked tec tree.



Inf doc should be powerfull enough to break heaviest defense in late game as alternative doc to CW arty.


Regarding to def doc i dont think that they need endless bunkers with unkillable MG´s. I think def doc would be one of the great winners when build and reinforcment cost of regular inf (including grens) are better balanced compared to elites. US inf doc would have fair chance with rifles to take the fight on with luftwaffe inf and stormtooper. But also Def doc and terror would have usefull inf with cheaper grens when fighting commandos. So inf wouldnt be forced to use the arty strikes against axis elite inf and terror and def wouldnt be forced to use nebler spam and Grille to deal with commando and 101st airbornes.



US need to find its place in teamfights. Currently its seldomly played and their units play a minor role for a long part of the game. In fact they can only get some 101st inf blobbs in late game but RAF could do that as well just having better airstrikes and 17 pounders. So US are only the protectors of the priest and capture territories and killing what is left after arty party.


And as sukin said balance the tank fights in teamfights. Esspecially US tanks must become somehow worth to build without US armor doc cheap sherman upgrade. So that in teamfights all US docs would build some tanks to throw against enemie units such as brits does and axis does already. This way tank balance would be better. That could be done by making 76 shermans and guns a way more usefull against axis mediums (and maybe Hellact for all docs as unlock and M10 as basic 0CP tankbuster). In late game we then would have more 76´s vs panthers and tigers in a better quantity relation. But that would also "require" an axis kind of armor doc just that those simply combines axis Elite tanks while US goes for masses. The Panther spam of that doc wouldnt be that much OP as they would face simply more US Tanks than only the few of US armor doc. The Tankbuster would be an alternative when facing for example double US armor doc a heavy churchills etc.

[Yummy]

The biggest problem in 4v4 maps is too much resources income and the low cooldown of the artillery, which turns it in a deadly weapon and allows a constant use of if it in almost every skirmish, rathar a supportive function. In reality artillery shot 3-4 shots per minute. If wolf makes it that way in BK arty to shoot slowly, but without limits, then the gameplay of artillery doctrines would change from deadly snipers to supportive fire against emplacements and infantry blobing!! BUT then allies should have more reliable methods to deal with the german heavy armour - USA armour doctrine is pretty good but it just gets outspammed by germans because they have good tanks in every doctrine.
And at the moment I think CW artillery is the strongest and axis cant counter it easily, that's why everyone picks it in 3v3 and 4v4 . That happens, wolf, when you nerf single things without rebalaning the whole game. For example - Stupa... it was feared by RAF and infantry doctrine, now it is a joke and every one just head on it to kill it, think about it - nerfing heavily one thing without balancing the others.

[Wolf]

The biggest problem in 4v4 maps is too much resources income and the low cooldown of the artillery, which turns it in a deadly weapon and allows a constant use of if it in almost every skirmish, rathar a supportive function. In reality artillery shot 3-4 shots per minute. If wolf makes it that way in BK arty to shoot slowly, but without limits, then the gameplay of artillery doctrines would change from deadly snipers to supportive fire against emplacements and infantry blobing!! BUT then allies should have more reliable methods to deal with the german heavy armour - USA armour doctrine is pretty good but it just gets outspammed by germans because they have good tanks in every doctrine.
And at the moment I think CW artillery is the strongest and axis cant counter it easily, that's why everyone picks it in 3v3 and 4v4 . That happens, wolf, when you nerf single things without rebalaning the whole game. For example - Stupa... it was feared by RAF and infantry doctrine, now it is a joke and every one just head on it to kill it, think about it - nerfing heavily one thing without balancing the others.

You are making it sound like stupa is now 100% inaccurate. You just have to cover it instead of just having it as undestroyable fortress. It wasn't feared just by inf and RAF, it was feared by everyone, because of 100% accuracy, while being deadly to both tanks and inf. And again, why should DEFENSIVE doctrine have something like that?
Stupa is still usable, but you cant count on it on 100%, like most of the things in game.

[Warhawks97]

The biggest problem in 4v4 maps is too much resources income and the low cooldown of the artillery, which turns it in a deadly weapon and allows a constant use of if it in almost every skirmish, rathar a supportive function. In reality artillery shot 3-4 shots per minute. If wolf makes it that way in BK arty to shoot slowly, but without limits, then the gameplay of artillery doctrines would change from deadly snipers to supportive fire against emplacements and infantry blobing!! BUT then allies should have more reliable methods to deal with the german heavy armour - USA armour doctrine is pretty good but it just gets outspammed by germans because they have good tanks in every doctrine.
And at the moment I think CW artillery is the strongest and axis cant counter it easily, that's why everyone picks it in 3v3 and 4v4 . That happens, wolf, when you nerf single things without rebalaning the whole game. For example - Stupa... it was feared by RAF and infantry doctrine, now it is a joke and every one just head on it to kill it, think about it - nerfing heavily one thing without balancing the others.

stupa.... stupa is a close range support assault gun for inf against defenses. Its much better as it was and just missing apprioprate inf support which stormtooper could provide

And CW arty was not in every game in old games as long as inf had at least the option to break axis heavy defenses. Now no other doc except CW arty can break heavy defense and so they pick it up to be sure to handle strong axis defense if mid game failed.

And yeah, in teamfights axis team often builds as many or more battletanks and tankbuster than allied do. Would have helped if 76 sherman would be really a multipurpose tank and able to deal with counterparts in the same cost league.

and as long as CW arty is the only one able to get 75 mm arty in early-mid stage to deal with MG42, scout car+50 mm pak combos the decision to take CW arty is done at that stage already.


Rof: usually arty was shooting so fast that second shell was in the air before second came down. Still depending on calibre and distance.

Its strange that heavy calibres shoot as fast as light calibres and the heaviest calibre (Hummel) even faster than any other. Smaller arty could become more appealing due to higher rof.


Ressoruces: 4 vs 4 map do not provide more res. Inf fact, made in my test games on several 1 vs 1 maps, the ammo and fuel income was often higher than on large maps even when holding just slightly less than half of the map. So on 1 vs 1 fuel and ammo is often less an issue.

Only 3 vs 3 maps like reversed defense have a lot of ammo (and fuel), road to cherbourgh just a lot of ammo and many others rather average but not better than small 1 vs 1 maps. in fact i´ve never seen a large fuel point on 3 vs 3 and 4 vs 4 maps but often in 1 vs 1 and only one times in 2 vs 2 maps (autry). So this is not correct that large 4 vs 4 maps have more res. Regarding to fuel often less and much more spread over the map in small points.

[mg42slo]

Actually we used to think CW arty sucks:D, but we had strong comandos as alternative, few players get a positive statistic with those guys, i remember when you could kill even king tigers with comando piat squads, try taking out a pz4 now without standing behind a brick wall, since the tank mg will grind em up before the second shot... Its easy to say this or that should be stronger for whatewer reason but wheres the fun in realism. Warhawks you like to compare to vanila, but its really because its so easy to overrun everything. So for gameplay reasons at least tanks shouldn't be so strong against inf, where mgs are as strong as the stationary ones and the main gun accurately kills a scout or sniper the instant they become revealed. (and AT inf should have standard or maybe even lesser health). Also an reduce the damage of mgs, since before it was more viable to have an inf squad which had a higher damage output, and you could use it to attack. Something that i think is really an additional encouragement for camping is crusaders and perma HE tanks is every allied doc, so it doesn't make sense to engage in inf fights, this somehow masks the fact that all allied inf can be killed by pios. So brit gameplay is crusaders and 17 pounders regardless of doctrine and there will be plenty of those in every game, those make the base and are supported by aether air strikes or arty or a crock ace. The one thing you can always use is arty, but ok the essence of the problem lies in the fact that were right now kinda standing in-between dors, where i personally think the focus should be on dynamic inf fights (company of heroes after all), and not the best way to playing raf in spamming crusaders and fireflies using air strikes just to take out paks or heavies.

[Warhawks97]

Actually we used to think CW arty sucks:D, but we had strong comandos as alternative, few players get a positive statistic with those guys, i remember when you could kill even king tigers with comando piat squads, try taking out a pz4 now without standing behind a brick wall, since the tank mg will grind em up before the second shot... Its easy to say this or that should be stronger for whatewer reason but wheres the fun in realism. Warhawks you like to compare to vanila, but its really because its so easy to overrun everything. So for gameplay reasons at least tanks shouldn't be so strong against inf, where mgs are as strong as the stationary ones and the main gun accurately kills a scout or sniper the instant they become revealed. (and AT inf should have standard or maybe even lesser health). Also an reduce the damage of mgs, since before it was more viable to have an inf squad which had a higher damage output, and you could use it to attack. Something that i think is really an additional encouragement for camping is crusaders and perma HE tanks is every allied doc, so it doesn't make sense to engage in inf fights, this somehow masks the fact that all allied inf can be killed by pios. So brit gameplay is crusaders and 17 pounders regardless of doctrine and there will be plenty of those in every game, those make the base and are supported by aether air strikes or arty or a crock ace. The one thing you can always use is arty, but ok the essence of the problem lies in the fact that were right now kinda standing in-between dors, where i personally think the focus should be on dynamic inf fights (company of heroes after all), and not the best way to playing raf in spamming crusaders and fireflies using air strikes just to take out paks or heavies.

but honestly, which other options do i have as allied? its basically exactly that: HE tanks protecting 17 pounders and arty for the offense..... using "quantity superiority" to attack is fucked up against a single 50 mm pak somtimes and in combat wasted within a blink of an eye or the cheap tankbusters sitting in each corner and under each tree or even a single 88 gun. Not to mention all the effort in ressources to make this "quantity" possible. As i said the BK doc is the best tank spam doc so far together with TH doc and the only usefull option that remains is to build exactly dozens of aa tanks HE shermans to protect paks while arty does the rest of the work. And as you said the HE allied tanks more or less masks the fact that most allied inf would lose against axis pios at long and sometimes even mid range as they are made for close range fight. Without all those HE tanks and aa tanks the allied would have very hard times and whenever axis inf would attack the allied would need to send their inf to attack in order to get close. HE shermans and aa tanks are the only effective long range anti infantry weapons in late game. Even HMG´s start working properly on mid range mostly and on long range Even HMG squad behind green cover is losing against volks behind green cover unless its and emplaced HMG.

Using kinds of inf masses is also kinda usless. Insta pin by scout car that takes furthermore 4 zook hits when in fixed location. The late game inf doc rifle spam is the only real spam that can turn some games but is hardly enough to replace all the losses against two luft inf squads, even when you kill more of them as you lose rifle soldiers. The cheap ranger spam with vet upgrade helps a lot against axis elite inf but again has a lot of trouble when a single panther comes in or Tiger. The M10 might be an ption but since you controle many inf squads it requires very skilled playing to contrle those together with a fragile M10 which then is a better defense ambush weapon than an offensive option against a Panther. So even a large inf spam can push back axis elite but when heavy tanks are coming in or a medium supported by AA Tank its again camping arround paks while arty has to clean the path.



What you said about weaker MG´s. They should be, if possible, similiar or at least HMG´s with vehcile/tank mounted MG´s. Overall a high kill rate when enemie ignores suppression or when they have no cover. At the other side more suppression but low damage when enemie unit is suppressed behind yellow cover and very low of those are behind perfect green cover and suppressed. Tanks and vehicles would be pretty effective as infantry movment denial and not so easy to rush by hendheld AT weapons but also no infantry insta killers. I think that would be a lot of work and even too much when bk II is coming but maybe there it will work that way.

[Warhawks97]

*Continue from topic: posting.php?mode=quote&f=15&p=1193

What you propose is what you talked about many times over. Since you guys argue about what to do with arty, I was trying to provide possible new solution but I didn't realize that WH def already has it...

Why not to give it to everyone? Historical reasons? If it helps with gameplay, historical accuracy is secondary... Or because it already is in Def doc? In vCoH VT was also only in CW arty doc and now everyone with arty has it...

OK, kick out VT if you want. I just want to have the capabilities to crash heavy defenses if neccessary. Means to spare some ammo and MP when facing like 4 paks and HMG and emplacments and then crush them almost all at once. Such as you argue people should not solve all probs with arty and that arty shouldnt be all needed to win (which isnt and was never) i can also argue that using only defenses and defensive units/emplacment to win should also be not all that is needed but that is exactly that what is currently the case. Also i using arty actually only when really neccessary with inf doc but i dont lie when i am saying that in 3 vs 3 and 4 vs 4 maps 5-10 37 mm till 50 mm paks are fielded within the first 8-10 mins. The Time schwimms, scout cars etc do give to players when used just partly offensivley is enough to field a nice ammount of paks covered by mobile MG42´s. GL trying to break through this shit with rangers, rifles or vehicles. Untill you break thorugh that way 70% of your army is dead/destroyed regardless how well you played and the remaining 30% are just rushing frontally into the first enemie Tank.

And its simply not true that SE and and CW had been so often used as now. In old versions a team had been satisfied when someone said "I go inf/Terror/def doc". Right now there is a 10 min long debate in lobby which doc to choose and sometimes i am suggesting to play without these docs. Even when in lobby all agree on docs one player will say that he will choose CW arty or SE doc "just to be sure". There is a huge question mark about everyones head what to do when the suggested hard early push without CW arty doc or SE fails and the enemie is successfull in creating a decent defence. And in old versions nobody ever said that he will take CW arty or SE just to be sure to have enough arty support when enemies playing extremly defensively which is currently most players favorit style. I seldomly play without SE or CW arty and then only with high skilled micro players which are able to do teamfight without typing permanent in chat and then we play on full risk in early game and using everything in offense. The game then is either lost or won very fast.



about long range stuff: we then would have something i also dont want: Place arty in base and shoot till enemie base. Panzerblitz did talk about that in old forum if you remember and finally it was stated that strategic points first need to be taken, secured and equiped with new aty to reach the next and final enemie defense line. Also we all wanted that this shouldnt be changed so that arty can be fired from one base till enemie base. Only CW arty is partly able to do so and SE but thats ok for those docs.



Something else i want to suggest regarding to specific arty

Howitzers:

1.) Remove the new limits on Grille and increase back to 2, arty sherman back to two, 75 mm arty units, 150 mm nebler unlimited.
2.) Remove VT´s.
3.)Remove nebler from Luftwaffe. 88`s will become their new arty units: Salvo cost: 50-60 (smaller then 105 shells but as this weapon is also great in defense it seems fair to be less cost effective as arty unit than others)
4.) Increase emplaced howitzers HP/armor whatever. They are very weak compared to normal arty guns and other emplacments.
5.) 105 barrage cost up to 60. Long range ability from 75-85 (SE,DEF) and also for airburst abilties.
6.) Hummel also +10 on each ability
7.) smaller arty can stay at their current cost to make them more appealing. (75 mm)
8.) add pack howitzer to motorpool for inf doc. For airborne the Pak/Pack drop can be switched with supply drop which is unlocked before iirc.

Nebelwerfer

1.) 210 mm nebler unchanged.
2.) 150 mm nebler no limit.
3.) 150 mm nebler reduced cooldown/set up and dismantle/freezed time before and after every shot to increase flexibility and survivability.
4.) reduce 150 nebler ability cost to 45.
4.) Remove vertical fire of neblers which are vcoh remnant. I could not find any historical data confirming that they shot so extremely vertical.
5.) In order that neblers are not used like howitzers and to reduce their efficency as pionpoint counter arty with howitzer range they should be changed so that they rather act like Walking Stuka and Calliope: Bombing a larger area, weakening enemie defense and prepare for an assault or to be used in combination with an assult. Means slightly reduced range and a bit more spread (to make them less effective as counter arty and occassionally fireing arty which is not their puprose). Cheap build and shooting cost and better flexibility would allow to use them in 2-3 numbers and bombing an larger area from rather short range in preparation for an assult and retreating then.

Calliope

1.) Limit back to 2
2.) follwoing the purpose as neblers (should) have a reduce barrage cost by 5 (per ability). Currently its so far the most expensive arty but with low affect on defensive stuff. It is actually good to reveal some hidden units.


This would help against SE, CW doc arty overuse just because player "want to be sure" or, as i would say in german: "auf der sicheren saite sein" (to be at the save side) not to stuck in a situation where they cant break the enemie defense (if they succeed to build one up) when they havent choosed those docs.


Also why do you think that terror or inf would suddenly use only arty just because they have them in endless numbers? unlike CW arty inf and terror doc need arty mostly only against strong defenses. For everything else they have Tanks (Jumbo/Panther), inf (grens, rifles, ranger) an other stuff that can fight more cost effective than their arty which CW arty simply doesnt have.

[Yummy]

Oliver, I disagree with you. You just want to have artillery fests like before. Bunkers ARE MENT to protect against enemy artillery fire, not to be an easy "food" for them... You never play WM defense, only USA tanks and infantry, that's why you want to deal with them even easier, this is not fair, Oliver.

I like the 1 limitation of movable artillery, otherwise people won't build howitzers again. I said what i want to see:
- drop limitation of static howitzers;
- decrease the rate of fire of all artillery things and increase the cooldown, reduce the fired shells a bit;
- remove VT;
- Wolf nerfed Grille's accuracy, I think he should nerf Priest's accuracy a bit as well, it is unbeliavable good at the moment;
- Increase the price of movable artillery a bit.

Then artillery doctrine pickers MAYBE will have to micro their movable howitzers and will have less time to micro the fronline, which it should be the case. Many suggestions have been made, just Wolf needs to pick one and to test it, as I said this can be experemental, but at the moment the way artillery is... it's pretty bad.

[MarKr]

(continuing from the topic mentioned by Warhawks)

Yummy:
- greately increased range (about double of the basic) - this might be good, but then people might start to build howitzers in their base, which will make them unkillable by flanking with infantry or vehicles and might provokate base bombing and we don't want that. I think the current range is OK, but limitation does not allow to deploy enough howitzers when the fronline moves on.

Well, yes but what's curently keeping you from building arty in base and bombing things with VT ability? Since the "Long shot" ability wouldn't activate all emplacements at once, only the one you activate it on and would have lower number of shells for quite a high price, firing simultaneously with several of them at once would be much more costy than using the current VT.
As far as firing from base to base on smaller maps goes, I think that barrages can be restricted from using in enemy base sector...that would solve that.

Yummy:
- much longer cooldown - I agree, it is totally needed. At the moment you can shoot almost constantly with your howitzers.
- only about half the number of shells in a barrage - a half, idk, but we can surely see some reduction and reduction of rate of fire. As I said the big caliber artillery was able to shoot 2-3 shells per minuta of constant fire or a little more for rapid fire but then it has to cool pretty much time.
- slightly cheaper (-5 or -10 munition) - it can be cheaper than movable artilery, ya, since they are so much more accurate at least priest than static howitzers.

All these would only apply to the new "long shot" ability...or that's how I meant it. From what you wrote it seems as if you'd like to apply to the current abilities too. (Could be but that wasn't my point)

Kashbah:
The question is, will this only be applied to fix arty or also to mobile arty? (Priests, Hummels)

As I wrote "Each static arta piece would get..." . I don't think that mobile arta needs it. My point was to offer a way to make emplaced artillery more useful after the front moves. This way they could still fire and players wouldn't need to demolish them and build them closer to the front. Since Hummels and Priests can simply drive around the battlefield, adding a long range ability is kinda pointless there.

However what I proposed would present another problem - doctrines have VT unlocked in command tree. If it gets removed, what would replace it?

[Warhawks97]

Oliver, I disagree with you. You just want to have artillery fests like before. Bunkers ARE MENT to protect against enemy artillery fire, not to be an easy "food" for them... You never play WM defense, only USA tanks and infantry, that's why you want to deal with them even easier, this is not fair, Oliver.

I like the 1 limitation of movable artillery, otherwise people won't build howitzers again. I said what i want to see:
- drop limitation of static howitzers;
- decrease the rate of fire of all artillery things and increase the cooldown, reduce the fired shells a bit;
- remove VT;
- Wolf nerfed Grille's accuracy, I think he should nerf Priest's accuracy a bit as well, it is unbeliavable good at the moment;
- Increase the price of movable artillery a bit.

Then artillery doctrine pickers MAYBE will have to micro their movable howitzers and will have less time to micro the fronline, which it should be the case. Many suggestions have been made, just Wolf needs to pick one and to test it, as I said this can be experemental, but at the moment the way artillery is... it's pretty bad.

wtf? I am probably one of those who never uses arty or only if really neccessary.

Whats the result of reducing the number of shells fired by dropping salvo cost to grenade cost?
Result of your suggestion:

45 ammo for 105 slavo would cause cost drop of others down to 25 which is Grenade cost! current problem is that arty isnt sufficient to break a defensive emplacment entirely. Two 105 shooting at the same time are needed to break a normal 88 or 17 pounder emplacment or flak etc. A single howitzer is always only scratching a defensive emplacment which then get repaired before the howitzer can shoot again. So players dont aim at defensive stuff currently and search for more worthwile targets such as an inf squad or tank. With your suggestion to lower cost and shells per salvo and increasing cooldown you are JUST FORCING such behavior. 3 shots per salvo for Grenade cost and long cooldown barely scratches a defensive emplacment (esspecially def and RE emplacments) and long cooldown gives enough time for repairs. But the low cost (grenade cost) would just force that players will build howitzers eveywhere using it against every single inf squad! Thats simply BS.. sorry!

Increased barrage cost and more howitzers available would allow a worthwile costly punch against emplacments and bunkers but being unappealing to be used against everything! So where is your prob? i would say that you suggest arty party because dozens of howitzers at every corner of the map which shoot for grenade cost without enough punch to crack defenses would turn the game into a nasty small arty barrage game where every single men and square meter get bombed by nasty salvos while defenses ramain untouched or only scratched

I want arty powerfull and in enough numbers to crack extremly strong defenses (or immoblized super heavy tanks) but which is expensive enough to be not worth to be used against some single units.


The rocket arty may becomes cheaper but therefore less range and accuracy and supposed to be used in some numbers but close to the front to barrage an large area to prepare for an assault. Using those rocket arty from time to time without tactical sense and alone would be waste of ammo (due to bad accuracy) and riskfull (due to lower range).


So pls, do me the favour and think exactly about what you suggest and write and for what you blame me. Simply arty for grenade cost and unable to scratch defenses would really turn the game into arty party without tactical sense and being rather used against inf squads instead against defenses. Got it?


About grille, idk. If salvo and cost per unit would be high enough there wont be any spam or overuse. But i agree, some movable arty pieces could use some cost increase still.


@Markr: VT is good to crack a single bunker or RE emplacment or immoblized tanks or retreat point but thats it. To clean up an area from Paks and MG´s and flak emplacments walls its unsuited.