Home Forums General Discussion Suggestions Regarding British Artillery and it's ability to observe.

Viewing 2 reply threads
  • Author
    • #10257

      I like playing as the Brit Arty, but i feel like Mr. Prince is too valuable to use as a sniper, too weak to use as an infiltration and sabotage unit, and too stationary and limited to use as a spotting tool.

      That, and it could be interesting to have the brit spotting vehicles be separate. Rather than one upgrading into the other, (replaced really), it could be instead that both vehicles are accessible at once.

      If stealth is needed, take the bren carrier. If increased bombardment, take the sexton carrier, and if map coverage is needed, take both and put them on either edge of the map.

      Finally, I think it could be asked that Counter Battery be a non-timed ability. The player would designate their desired battery as a CB battery and it wound function as such until it engages an enemy artillery unit, rather than stopping the function after X amount of seconds.

      The OKW gets mostly off map strikes and rocket based strikes, that’s their schtick.
      The Yanks get anywhere coverage with their peculiar method of doing artillery, at a high ammo cost.
      The Russians get one spotting vehicle as is expected

      and so I think the idea of having multiple spotting vehicles for the British could give that faction an interesting playstyle.



    • #10986

      Right, second time cause this site bullshitted me out of my first response, eating it without posting which is kinda infuriating not gonna lie so it’s going to take on a more negative tone. TLDR at the bottom.

      Let’s face it, British Artillery is garbage right now. It lacks the speed into action as the OKW artillery doctrine or the U.S. Doctrine, and while similar to the Soviet doctrine, lacks the striking power. This sucks, big time. I have the solution however. We look to what the British did to fix this troublesome issue. Was it increasing the firepower? Not really, infact 25 pounders are kinda dinkly and weak. Was it extreme accuracy? Again, not so much, more of a German thing from what I can tell. The British solution was Concentration, more later.

      The big thing for the Brits is being able to get a LOT of guns on target. The British had higher ranks as their observers who were entrusted to utilize certain code-words that when uttered, would prioritize that barrage order. Through a neat little site, I was able to find the following: “These concentrations were known as Mike (regiment), Uncle (division), Victor (corps), William (army) and Yoke (AGRA) targets and always initiated by the radio call “Mike Target, Mike Target, Mike Target” (or Uncle, etc) that galvanised CPs and guns to action.”

      I do have a suggestion if this were to play off realistically. Since any observer could call in heavy strikes, with certain strikes being represented by a major or above, it wouldn’t be unreasonable to have some guns be temporarily taken away from the player. For example, If the player has 3, 25 pounder positions set up (+ the HQ base one), representing 8 guns, and they aren’t using them, then the firing animation and sound may play for 1-3 of these batteries, representing them hitting priority targets of other divisions, regiments or such. These guns would be ‘taken away’ from the player, just as guns that are recharging, in counter-battery mode, or are already fulfilling a fire-mission aren’t available. However, when the player were to call down a VICTOR target (as is already in game but dramatically under-powered!), it should be devastating after a fair delay.

      I mentioned a lot of guns and how devastating it would be, and it really was.

      In game currently, a Victor Target strike is 8, 25 pounders. However, that term has significance and does mean something. Historically, it represented far more. So rather than 8 dinkly guns firing on a Victor Target call relatively quickly, it should be instead about a 30 second pause before “… All available 216 field guns of an entire corps zeroed in on the…” target. Ideally, “with a good rate of fire, a ‘Victor’ shoot [should] literally place a thousand shells or so on a German position inside of a minute”. That’s a lot of dinkly!

      This would be a fascinating play style, yet let’s think of this through the experience of the match. Mid-game, one sets up their artillery after skirmishing with the enemy. Sets up AT mines, and does scouting with their engineer squads. After the skirmishing, the Brit player would have quite a few Generals Credit points (forgive me, I’m not sure of the proper name). Ideally if this were to go through, Victor Target would have to be doubled in terms of credit costs. Purchasing that, the player observes an enemy armour group floundering in the mines and calls a Victor strike onto that area.

      Now, since the player only has at this point the Headquarters Battery (which needs to be able to track kills by the way), that Victor Target would only be 2 guns normally. However, since it would be modified, it would be instead 216 guns.

      However, the player lacks the other batteries in this example, and for balance reasons, it would be fair to assume that the other ‘units’ off map haven’t setup quite as quickly either. Thus, with only 1 out of the possible 4 batteries available, they’d only get a 1/4 of the guns (NOT shells, just to be clear), so 54 guns firing (presumably the amount of shells they currently fire for a regular battery, I think it’s like 5-6 or something).

      Now, the battle advances. As the player gets additional batteries built, they get more of a proportion of the Corps fire plan. Thus, with one HQ battery, they get 54 guns firing.
      HQ plus an additional built battery? 108 guns.
      HQ plus two batteries? 162
      The full pull, three built batteries and the HQ? The full Corps load of 216 guns firing.

      Now, to be fair, some may call this overpowered.
      I would disagree.

      No 1. 
      It takes a helluva long time to setup and it would be proportionally expensive, being double both in cost of the required generals credits as well as the ammo usage.

      No 2.
      As the British placed pride of place to fire-rate rather than accuracy, the spread on this would be <span style=”text-decoration: underline;”>fairly large</span>, although it would be timely.

      The Victor Target Barrage in game is only 8 guns when it should be 216. Fix that so this doctrine isn’t a chore to play in comparison to the OKW Rocke- pardon, their Artillery doctrine.

      • This reply was modified 1 month ago by ZeeDesertFox. Reason: Site ate my first response
    • #11136

      I agree with giving both observers to the player for the reasons that you wrote.

      That other stuff, multiplying batteries is just too much meta and would be also too op. Maybe increase the number of shells to 1,5 or 2 times is fine, but that’s all. 3 batteries are fine right now, they stun tanks, even the heaviests and kills infantry also ROF can ben be high if you have the ammo for it because you can call in A battery, then B battery then C, and when C finishes you can call in again A battery.

      Realism is important, but gameplay is more important because this is a game after all 🙂

      • #11276

        Right, I’ve come to the conclusion that this would be difficult to implement as I outlined above.

        Perhaps the Victor Target Ability could be changed to being the following:
        Requires all 8 guns (3 batteries + HQ battery).
        Needs 500 Ammo.
        Wide area of effect, utilizes the correct number of 216 guns with 5-6 shells each.

        I’ve found the British Arty to be under-powered in comparison to other arty doctrines, particularly the US and OKW arty doctrines. This would both boost this faction, as well as being realistic.

Viewing 2 reply threads
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.