Why has indirect fire have such a big role in games?

Why?

Its unhealthy inconsistent and all decided by dice rolls.

Packs and leigs should have stayed in the trash bin, why did we not only add accuracy buffs, but SUPPRESSION to them?

Remember the 120 motor relic? the one that was nerfed into the trash bin because of its random squad wiping game deciding skill-less atomic shells?

Remember precision strike, how we decided squad wipes on demand was hurting this game?

the nerf that erased the B4 from the game?


Why did we do a 180 from all of this progress to buff Leigs and pack howitzers into the #1 meta?


What the hell am I suppose to do as wher? Whats the counter against getting pinned from across the map?

Where is the game going?

Why?

Its unhealthy inconsistent and all decided by dice rolls.

Packs and leigs should have stayed in the trash bin, why did we not only add accuracy buffs, but SUPPRESSION to them?

Remember the 120 motor relic? the one that was nerfed into the trash bin because of its random squad wiping game deciding skill-less atomic shells?

Remember precision strike, how we decided squad wipes on demand was hurting this game?

the nerf that erased the B4 from the game?


Why did we do a 180 from all of this progress to buff Leigs and pack howitzers into the #1 meta?


What the hell am I suppose to do as wher? Whats the counter against getting pinned from across the map?

Where is the game going?

WHy are you making this after isgs and pack howitzers were nerfed into uselessness.

WHy are you making this after isgs and pack howitzers were nerfed into uselessness.

attack order is not hard lol

WHy are you making this after isgs and pack howitzers were nerfed into uselessness.

I've only used the Pack so far and I didn't find it useless at all. In fact it honestly feels the same, just needs manual positioning, which isn't that hard imo.

Fine fine. Played a few games, it doesnt feel as OP. People arent spamming them anymore. I dont play with artillery, and especially hate playing against it. So even though I hate overnerfed units. I can live with artillery getting nerfed.

Because indirect fire was very important in the historical battles that inspired COH?


If anything the game understates the importance of indirect

Because indirect fire was very important in the historical battles that inspired COH?


If anything the game understates the importance of indirect

Good, you think turtling up and blasting each other to kingdom come from long range is at all fun? Screw real life, artillery is skilless and unavoidable when it comes down like rain and without warning. I like my battles to be about unit positioning thank you. Not who is better at slinging explosives.

OP asked the question I gave him an answer.


I do wonder though why you are playing a WW2 game in the first place given that many of the elements that make it a WW2 game mean you aren't going to like it.

OP asked the question I gave him an answer.


I do wonder though why you are playing a WW2 game in the first place given that many of the elements that make it a WW2 game mean you aren't going to like it.

Thats not just ww2, thats war. Not every war game emulates that constant nearly never ending shelling of artillery that is seen in real life for a reason. Nobody wants to play through that. Artillery should be for hitting key points. Not be cheap, and not be plentiful or too accurate.

Artillery wins battles, unfortunately it's not as sexy as tanks or infantry or easy to understand.

It would be interesting to see what genuinely good artillery gameplay would be like

Good, you think turtling up and blasting each other to kingdom come from long range is at all fun? Screw real life, artillery is skilless and unavoidable when it comes down like rain and without warning. I like my battles to be about unit positioning thank you. Not who is better at slinging explosives.

And you think that JUST TURTLING UP is better?

Artillery is avoidable - I tell you this as I've played Soviets using T1 double sniper squad (yeah, ~40hp 2 man, if hit usually both dies). I've managed to babysit them up to vet3 both several times and lost them more frequently to enemy flanks rather than to laser-guided LeIG shells.

I've used ML-20 recently too and I've found that there are 2 types of OKW players:
1) A-move queens, who get brutally punished when they mass-retreat all their stuff at once (because controlling each single unit is hard)
2) guys that always position their infantry around cover that scattered around

ML-20 built on CP-8 have got 70+ kills against first type and about 20-30 against second one (my experience based on my 5 recent 4v4 games).

How slinging explosives prevents you from winning using good positioning?

Artillery wins battles, unfortunately it's not as sexy as tanks or infantry or easy to understand.

It would be interesting to see what genuinely good artillery gameplay would be like

Unfortunately, COH2 logic is nothing like reality, USF: best indirect (inf commander), OH best air support (CAS), OKW has more manpower than Soviet. Artillery ingame is nothing like reality, heck even vCOH indirect is more realistic than the current meta of field arty, a 75mm shell can deal more dmg than 120mm mortar, Soviet 152mm deals the same dmg as America 105mm.

Thats not just ww2, thats war. Not every war game emulates that constant nearly never ending shelling of artillery that is seen in real life for a reason. Nobody wants to play through that. Artillery should be for hitting key points. Not be cheap, and not be plentiful or too accurate.

Dude, nobody and you are absolutely different things. Artillery was part of war, it is "a god of war", so it must be presented here.

And you think that JUST TURTLING UP is better?

Artillery is avoidable - I tell you this as I've played Soviets using T1 double sniper squad (yeah, ~40hp 2 man, if hit usually both dies). I've managed to babysit them up to vet3 both several times and lost them more frequently to enemy flanks rather than to laser-guided LeIG shells.

I've used ML-20 recently too and I've found that there are 2 types of OKW players:
1) A-move queens, who get brutally punished when they mass-retreat all their stuff at once (because controlling each single unit is hard)
2) guys that always position their infantry around cover that scattered around

ML-20 built on CP-8 have got 70+ kills against first type and about 20-30 against second one (my experience based on my 5 recent 4v4 games).

How slinging explosives prevents you from winning using good positioning?

You think I dont have good positioning? I can do it, but I am having the least fun out of any vs artillery players. Slip up for even a second and poof the squad is lost. The very presence of artillery is so annoying because if im not being super careful with all my units at any given point, a surprise squad wipe could happen anywhere on the map. Its dumb how hard it is to set up units to get wipes (like quick combined assaults, nade placement, flanking around into retreat points) while arty just clicks on an area and the RNG explosive rain will just one shot squads and rain down on buildings. Artillery is the weapon of the skilless.

I've got nothing against a mortar or 2. But anything beyond that is just pure faggotry.

Artillery wins battles, unfortunately it's not as sexy as tanks or infantry or easy to understand.

It would be interesting to see what genuinely good artillery gameplay would be like

Have you played Blitzkrieg 2?

It had quite simple, but important logistics part of the game.
Field artillery call-in came in form of trucks with artillery attached to them.
Those trucks could also resupply any unit with ammo.

On small maps on 1941-42 year field artillery models could fire for only about half of a map.
On huge maps (8 players) even 1945 year models could fire for half of map.

As battle goes on and you dive into enemy territory or when enemy break through your flank with light armor you should quickly reposition your artillery using those trucks.

Rocket artillery ran out of ammo in 2 volleys and should be resupplied.

When truck ran out of ammo resource it would automatically drive to closest strategic point and refill so it wasn't much of micro tax.

Hunting down truck with camouflaged elite infantry was quite real deal.

Artillery itself was as deadly as in CoH2 but also missed as much as well.


I find Blitzkrieg 2 artillery play quite good. Sadly, can't find any good video of that

You think I dont have good positioning? I can do it, but I am having the least fun out of any vs artillery players. Slip up for even a second and poof the squad is lost. The very presence of artillery is so annoying because if im not being super careful with all my units at any given point, a surprise squad wipe could happen anywhere on the map. Its dumb how hard it is to set up units to get wipes (like quick combined assaults, nade placement, flanking around into retreat points) while arty just clicks on an area and the RNG explosive rain will just one shot squads and rain down on buildings. Artillery is the weapon of the skilless.

I've got nothing against a mortar or 2. But anything beyond that is just pure faggotry.

Our perception of CoH2 differs because we play different game modes. You mostly 2v2 player and I am 4v4 player. As your playercard tells me - you've played 4v4 only as Wermacht. If you'd played allies more you'd know how it is hard to break through well reinforced positions of Wermacht without artillery.

But you were on recieving end so I understand your frustration with artillery, but without artillery 4v4 games would be Axis field of dominance: camp with MG42, bunkers, Pak-40, OKW trucks, long ranged heavy TDs, dive in and out with durable tanks, vetting and slowly draining opponents MP as well as VPs - wehraboo's wet dream.

Though I agree that surprise squad wipe can be quite frustrating and with Wermacht it happens much often that with other factions.

You think I dont have good positioning? I can do it, but I am having the least fun out of any vs artillery players. Slip up for even a second and poof the squad is lost. The very presence of artillery is so annoying because if im not being super careful with all my units at any given point, a surprise squad wipe could happen anywhere on the map. Its dumb how hard it is to set up units to get wipes (like quick combined assaults, nade placement, flanking around into retreat points) while arty just clicks on an area and the RNG explosive rain will just one shot squads and rain down on buildings. Artillery is the weapon of the skilless.

I've got nothing against a mortar or 2. But anything beyond that is just pure faggotry.

"Artillery adds dignity to what would otherwise be a vulgar brawl." -Frederick II of Prussia

I am very glad for the changes to the ISG/Pack H that was just made because they were over-performing. I don't want artillery to be just mortars because one that kills theme of having massive engagements with shells/rockets soaring over heads and two as others have said, when an enemy turtles up on an area, the best method of punishing them and forcing them to move or die is with heavy artillery. I find that heavy artillery/rockets actually promotes fluid gameplay precisely because it punishes the turtles....if I play soviets and 2v2-4v4 and I don't see an Ostheer CAS commanders then I usually go Terror for the KV-8/shocks/ML-20 and have a field day against campy players.

With the most recent change to ISG/Pak H i think the indirect fire part of the game is as good as it has ever been.

I read a book called "The Last Full Measure: How Soldiers Die in Battle" and in that book, which traces warfare from ancient times (through the Iliad) to modern day. In the WWII section, there was one frightening statistic: 50% of all casualties were caused by indirect fire.

I believe that artillery is an integral part of coh. That being said, I think heavy artillery (anything larger than 155mm) shouldn't be build-able in game, but used as call-ins (like most artillery pieces are).

I think one thing that would be interesting to do would be, in the original factions, to swap the rocket artillery with the emplacements and put the rocket artillery into commanders. The rocket artillery is much more effective than traditional artillery simply because a player is able to instantly saturate an area with rockets, while traditional artillery is more about area denial or destroying fortifications.

I think every faction should get some sort of field howitzer and/or mortar and the overall effectiveness of them should be reduced (at least in terms of accuracy; German mortar sniping moving infantry is absurd).

Another note about artillery is the craters; heavy call in artillery (240mm, railway) should create huge craters with heavy cover.

indirect fire should play a big role in games, but with the current popcap system, adding more diverse artillery options would only serve to allow players to specialize in an area in large team games, and force players in smaller game modes to choose wisely.

In general, Artillery should be more accessible but also restricted both in terms of popcap and accuracy while still maintaining effective damage.

If there is some magic set of numbers Relic could come up with for these units that would minimize insta-wipes of lone squads in heavy cover yet allow artillery to accurately hit blobs, that would be an amazing step forward in strategy.

I read a book called "The Last Full Measure: How Soldiers Die in Battle" and in that book, which traces warfare from ancient times (through the Iliad) to modern day. In the WWII section, there was one frightening statistic: 50% of all casualties were caused by indirect fire.

I believe that artillery is an integral part of coh. That being said, I think heavy artillery (anything larger than 155mm) shouldn't be build-able in game, but used as call-ins (like most artillery pieces are).

I think one thing that would be interesting to do would be, in the original factions, to swap the rocket artillery with the emplacements and put the rocket artillery into commanders. The rocket artillery is much more effective than traditional artillery simply because a player is able to instantly saturate an area with rockets, while traditional artillery is more about area denial or destroying fortifications.

I think every faction should get some sort of field howitzer and/or mortar and the overall effectiveness of them should be reduced (at least in terms of accuracy; German mortar sniping moving infantry is absurd).

Another note about artillery is the craters; heavy call in artillery (240mm, railway) should create huge craters with heavy cover.

indirect fire should play a big role in games, but with the current popcap system, adding more diverse artillery options would only serve to allow players to specialize in an area in large team games, and force players in smaller game modes to choose wisely.

In general, Artillery should be more accessible but also restricted both in terms of popcap and accuracy while still maintaining effective damage.

If there is some magic set of numbers Relic could come up with for these units that would minimize insta-wipes of lone squads in heavy cover yet allow artillery to accurately hit blobs, that would be an amazing step forward in strategy.

Reducing cool down of all built field artillery by 30-40% and then reducing damage a little and shell quantity to 3-4 would make it less an all or nothing unit and make its damage output more consistent as well as you could use it to support offensives more

Because indirect fire was very important in the historical battles that inspired COH?


If anything the game understates the importance of indirect

+1

However, I don't approve of suppression on leIG and Pakhowis.

artillery is skilless... I like my battles to be about unit positioning thank you. Not who is better at slinging explosives.

So there is some skill involved after all?

I hated Sittard summer too but that is the map, not the game. And íf one faction is supposed to be more aggressive like the usf and work in the same game, we can't have suppression on leIG, or pakhowi.