Howitzers

increase the health why? the stuka is a counter to it. letting it survive is really unfair if it can be re crewed and repaired every time. the opponent would have to dive in for it. which isnt right

decrease the cost to 500 MP thats all.

maybe be more aggressive instead of wanting a static unit to do all the work

Health increase won't help at all - problem with howitzers is mostly not in their "big vunerability", cos... that's quite normal.

Problem is - Howitzers, as support guns, don't do their work good, cos they only deal damage, and deal it ineffectively. Random accuracy, long-time barrages, compared with insta-barrages of rocket platforms, all of that makes Howitzers really ineffective gun, specially if you keep in mind, that you have to say "No" to Heavy tanks or other kinds of very useful and agressive units for to get Howitzers.

Adding supression and direct hit criticals would make it better for it's role. Let it be same fragile, but also let it deal more problems to enemy, so it would worth such risks and big investments in that.

Making that cheaper or less vunerable won't solve problem at all. Right now howitzers are "overpriced vunerable harmless guns", after that they will be just "harmless guns". Main problem in that is not "overpriced" or "vunerable" - main problem is "harmless = useless". So, let's solve that before, and then we will see - would it be reasonable to keep such high price and low HP to those upgraded howitzers. Maybe it will be just right and balanced!

P.S. Sorry for some "strange" sentences in original post. Bad knowledge of english... On russian all that I said would sound little more understandable and better.

MissCommissar is right. Fixing the vulnerability still won't stop people from choosing rocket artillery over it every time.

Just look at the priest vs calliope. Priest doesn't have survivability problems, but everyone still prefers the calliope over the priest because it's simply better in every way. They shouldn't even be competing for the same exact role in the first place.

BreakingBrad has given one of the best suggestions to fix howitzer-play to date:
- Reduce their range drastically
- Also reduce their cost drastically
(something like 50%)

That way, you will only, realistically, use howitzers offensively when you want to besiege something in particular (e.g,. Brit sim-city, OKW-truck blob, etc).

This will lead to more interesting situations where:
- The howitzer is actually vulnerable to direct assault, since it is closer to the front.
- Countering the howitzer with one-click abilities will no longer be profitable.

Currently, we get the "I'll set this LeFH all the way in the back and camp around it with my pak-wall"-flavour type of Howitzers. These can only, realistically, be countered by commander offmap abilities. We don't want to overbuff these.

BreakingBrad has given one of the best suggestions to fix howitzer-play to date:
- Reduce their range drastically
- Also reduce their cost drastically
(something like 50%)

That way, you will only, realistically, use howitzers offensively when you want to besiege something in particular (e.g,. Brit sim-city, OKW-truck blob, etc).

This will lead to more interesting situations where:
- The howitzer is actually vulnerable to direct assault, since it is closer to the front.
- Countering the howitzer with one-click abilities will no longer be profitable.

Currently, we get the "I'll set this LeFH all the way in the back and camp around it with my pak-wall"-flavour type of Howitzers. These can only, realistically, be countered by commander offmap abilities. We don't want to overbuff these.

But problem is - even if you put LeFH now on back, even if you cover it with everything, it's still not effective.

I don't want to turn howtizers into "offensive" tools, it's ridiculous idea from very start. I want to make them better as support to mainforces tools. Infantry stun or supression + direct hit criticals would really work as support for you main troops or troops of your allie. Right now, it provides no support, it just bombards area, randomly hitting targets and causing not such huge damage.

Let it be vunerable, let it be overpriced, but let it also be effectve! That's what I ask! You suggest otherwise "let it be less vunerable, let it not be overpriced, but let it still be useless". I don't need cheap and useless howtizers, I need expensive and effective, please.

BreakingBrad has given one of the best suggestions to fix howitzer-play to date:
- Reduce their range drastically
- Also reduce their cost drastically
(something like 50%)

That way, you will only, realistically, use howitzers offensively when you want to besiege something in particular (e.g,. Brit sim-city, OKW-truck blob, etc).

This will lead to more interesting situations where:
- The howitzer is actually vulnerable to direct assault, since it is closer to the front.
- Countering the howitzer with one-click abilities will no longer be profitable.

Currently, we get the "I'll set this LeFH all the way in the back and camp around it with my pak-wall"-flavour type of Howitzers. These can only, realistically, be countered by commander offmap abilities. We don't want to overbuff these.

Wow! I like it!
I think 400 MP is a good spot (just like old 120mm mortar) - isn't spammable, much more realistic to build without shooting yourself in the leg. Could also increase popcap a bit to reduce spammability(like +2?).

But problem is - even if you put LeFH now on back, even if you cover it with everything, it's still not effective.

I don't want to turn howtizers into "offensive" tools, it's ridiculous idea from very start. I want to make them better as support to mainforces tools. Infantry stun or supression + direct hit criticals would really work as support for you main troops or troops of your allie. Right now, it provides no support, it just bombards area, randomly hitting targets and causing not such huge damage.

Let it be vunerable, let it be overpriced, but let it also be effectve! That's what I ask! You suggest otherwise "let it be less vunerable, let it not be overpriced, but let it still be useless". I don't need cheap and useless howtizers, I need expensive and effective, please.

The problem with stationary pieces of equipment is that it's an all-or-nothing investment. This is a more general problem, which you can also witness in Brit Sim city:
- You invest a lot resources to gain access to (stationary) indirect fire
- Now you need to invest the remaining resources to protect that indirect fire unit
- Camp!

If we make Howitzers even more expensive, there is no way somebody could, realistically, also field an offensive force to take advantage of covering fire from the Howitzer. Thus, the remainder of the resources will go towards HMG/Pak-walling, which are more efficient for that role. Then, the howie-player is going to remain stationary, while taking potshots at the other guy, who will now be forced to attack.

Now, if we also make Howitzers deadlier against something (e.g., tanks), we have all the ingredients there for C____r!

I understand the point that howitzers should be good at something. They can't match rocket artillery when countering pak-turtling or infantry. However they are very good at smashing defensive structures:
- OKW trucks
- Punishing forward retreat points
- (occasionally) punishing mortar/ISG blobbing

The LeFH is exceptionally effective at punishing forward retreat-points/campy-play. It is also particularly deadly if you manage to create a death-grip around the opponent and force them to concentrate their forces (e.g., HMG-wall/Pak-wall; in team-games mostly). While the howitzers barrage, they are excellent area-denial tools (each shot can really wipe an entire squad). I know this, because I have been at both ends of the LeFH.

We already have off-map artillery that is quite good at smashing immobile things. That costs munitions, and usually a lot of them. Howitzers are more economical in doing that, provided that they survive long enough to pay off. The problem is that they are already too expensive.

A Brit forward retreat point costs 450 MP. If you need to pay 600MP for a howitzer just to smash that, that's not going to pay off (since there is also the risk of the howitzer dying). What if the howitzer cost 400MP instead?

A price/range readjustment will help in the following vector:
- If you want to be offensive, you can always afford one howitzer to break up the enemy FRP.
- The lower range will make it risky to create a howitzer-farm. One miss-step and it's gone.

Now that won't always make howitzers, worthy, but they will be even better vs:
- OST that spams bunkers/pak-walls
- Brits that like their Sim-city
- OKW that gets greedy with their truck placement

Howis are hardly used from soviets or ostheer. They're expensive and cost a lot of pop cap, which is really dumb compared to rocket arty, which is so much more reliable, less pop and easier to spam. Not only that, but the doctrines they're in are rather lack luster to begin with.

The problem with stationary pieces of equipment is that it's an all-or-nothing investment. This is a more general problem, which you can also witness in Brit Sim city:
- You invest a lot resources to gain access to (stationary) indirect fire
- Now you need to invest the remaining resources to protect that indirect fire unit
- Camp!

If we make Howitzers even more expensive, there is no way somebody could, realistically, also field an offensive force to take advantage of covering fire from the Howitzer. Thus, the remainder of the resources will go towards HMG/Pak-walling, which are more efficient for that role. Then, the howie-player is going to remain stationary, while taking potshots at the other guy, who will now be forced to attack.

Now, if we also make Howitzers deadlier against something (e.g., tanks), we have all the ingredients there for C____r!

I understand the point that howitzers should be good at something. They can't match rocket artillery when countering pak-turtling or infantry. However they are very good at smashing defensive structures:
- OKW trucks
- Punishing forward retreat points
- (occasionally) punishing mortar/ISG blobbing

The LeFH is exceptionally effective at punishing forward retreat-points/campy-play. It is also particularly deadly if you manage to create a death-grip around the opponent and force them to concentrate their forces (e.g., HMG-wall/Pak-wall; in team-games mostly). While the howitzers barrage, they are excellent area-denial tools (each shot can really wipe an entire squad). I know this, because I have been at both ends of the LeFH.

We already have off-map artillery that is quite good at smashing immobile things. That costs munitions, and usually a lot of them. Howitzers are more economical in doing that, provided that they survive long enough to pay off. The problem is that they are already too expensive.

A Brit forward retreat point costs 450 MP. If you need to pay 600MP for a howitzer just to smash that, that's not going to pay off (since there is also the risk of the howitzer dying). What if the howitzer cost 400MP instead?

A price/range readjustment will help in the following vector:
- If you want to be offensive, you can always afford one howitzer to break up the enemy FRP.
- The lower range will make it risky to create a howitzer-farm. One miss-step and it's gone.

Now that won't always make howitzers, worthy, but they will be even better vs:
- OST that spams bunkers/pak-walls
- Brits that like their Sim-city
- OKW that gets greedy with their truck placement

I don't understand, why you so scary of "campings". Simcities are bad, but they are bad because of pretty wrong design of emplacements in general, not because "camping is bad". Camping is just another tactic and strategy, you just can't call it "bad" and say "only offensive tactics are good", it's biased position. It will make CoH 2 tactialy and stategicaly poor.

Howitzers can cause campy gameplay, but they are also anti-camp tools themself. Buffing them you don't make it worse at all - it equilizes itself. Somebody starting to camp with howitzers? Get your own and punish that bastard! Or... call some bombs on his head, works nicely too. CoH 2 is actually full of "anti-camp tools", even Simcities can be easily countered with them.

And howitzers are much more different, than Simcities or PaKs or whatever else - they don't autofire and they don't work directly on targets. Howitzers, as long range support gun (and that's how I see them) can do right now only 1 thing - deal random coming damage in big area on targets. That's all. And that's not that big damage, because again - it's pretty random, and it's way easier to escape from Howitzer bombardment, than from Rocket Barrage.

Plus, keep in mind, that Howitzers are out of use mostly in 1v1 (which is main mode of CoH 2) and little less often but in 2v2 they are also unpopular. And all 3v3 and 4v4 maps are pretty big, so if you want to catch with you howitzers your enemy, you just have to build them long away from your base, sometimes nearly close to frontline. Range of fire of Howitzers is not that big, as you think, actually... Placed near to base howtizer won't be useful for long, obviously.

And again - your idea of "make it cheaper and less ranged" is retarded from very start. We have "close range cheap howitzers" - Sextons. You can judge yourself about their effectivness... Turning all other howitzers, specially static in "Sextons" will only ruin howitzers at all and won't make them better.

And those "good for howitzers" targets, that you mentioned, are not worse targets for rocket platforms. Katyushas, Calliopes and Matresses deal perfectly with Trucks, Bunkers, Retreating to point infantry... But even they do that way more effective, than howitzers, because they instantly cover large area with deadly damage, instead of slow shooting at area with such low accuracy... At least 1/3 of general damage goes missing because of that, so how it that better than rockets? And some of rocket platforms aren't even doctrinal, it makes them even more attractive for people, than Howitzers, which doing same job, but asking from you refusing from heavy tanks or something like that.

Adding supression and direct-hit crits won't make howitzers such more powerful. They only will become more useful as support guns, which require from you really big investments, such as 600 MP per gun, choosing special doctrine, which is not always good and high risks of loss of your investments by off-map strike or tank raid or whatever else. So - let it worth those investments, instead of making that cheaper.

Again - people don't need cheap and useless howitzers, we have full UKF of those. Nobody is happy about them. Better let's make howitzers worth their expensive investments, by making them more valuable as support guns, which can help your frontline forces deal with infantry by stunning/supressing them for short time and deal with tanks, causing small damages to them.

I don't see at all, how it will make game more "campy", howitzers OP and it won't change anything in general at all! Howitzers just will become normal, that's it. Maybe few more people will start to use them - that's just fine! It will make more diversity in game, because right now howitzers are pretty rare guests in games, cos heavy tanks are more preferable option.

The main reason that Sexton/25pdr barrage suck so much is that they have no AoE. Compared to an ML-20:
- The damage of Sexton/25pdr is 25% smaller (this affects 1-hit probability and ability to kill structures)
- More crucially: the radius of Sexton/25pdr is 33% smaller

Since the radius affects an area, we could say that the damage output of a sexton/25pdr shot is about only 33% that of the ML-20 (against small structures) and 44% against infantry (which the ML-20 is not that good to begin with). It's -that- bad.

The other reason that 25pdr suck is the obvious artillery flare, with a 20-meter throw range.

If Sexton/25pdr AoE was a copy-paste of the ML-20, they would be pretty damn good for their role. Even despite the seemingly-short range (Sexton) or the visible flare (25 pdr)

Now. The main reason I am scared of camping is because I have been through the arty-parties of overpotent howitzers in the past, when:
- OKW had no counter to howitzer play (since they have no offmaps to speak of, and no long-range artillery to begin with).
- The game was all about camping behind an HMG wall and wondering whether the OST guy picked a doctrine with stuka bombs or not.
- CAS was meta

I can tell you that LeFH is very-much in-meta currently in team games. This is mostly due to:
- Brit-city
- The unholy synergy with OKW trucks
- The absence of Recon-and-stuka-bomb equivalent doctrines on the opposition.

Yes. It would be cool to start seeing howitzers used in 1v1, howver. However, would it be worth throwing 3v3+ under the bus again, just for that, though?

Now. The main reason I am scared of camping is because I have been through the arty-parties of overpotent howitzers in the past, when:
- OKW had no counter to howitzer play (since they have no offmaps to speak of, and no long-range artillery to begin with).
- The game was all about camping behind an HMG wall and wondering whether the OST guy picked a doctrine with stuka bombs or not.
- CAS was meta

I can tell you that LeFH is very-much in-meta currently in team games. This is mostly due to:
- Brit-city
- The unholy synergy with OKW trucks
- The absence of Recon-and-stuka-bomb equivalent doctrines on the opposition.

Yes. It would be cool to start seeing howitzers used in 1v1, howver. However, would it be worth throwing 3v3+ under the bus again, just for that, though?

About your scares:

1. I said long time ago - OKW should already get some kind of howitzer. Either Hummel S-P or at least it's static version sFH 18. Putted on "Feuersturm" doctrine, instead of useless flamenhetzer, it can make both OKW gameplay better against campers, and Feuersturm doctrine more popular, cos right now - it's same unpopular, as Recon Doctrine of USF.

2. As I said - camping is not that bad. It's not uncounterable, it doesn't give you so much benefits. It's just another playstyle with it's own pluses and minuses (and there are huge minuses). As you said yourself - campers can be divided on zero by Stuka bombs, by Fragbombs, by whatever else. Game is full of anti-static position abilites. Only OKW is bad here, but... Hummel could be solution. And as I said - such improvements, that I suggested won't cause massive "howtizer" abuse, Im sure. People still would prefer solid tanks or infantry, instead of random-working support gun. Only artillery and support-players will start to use it more often, but that's only better! It will be "equial" choise for players. Right now it works so "take good doctrine with good offensive units, like Tigers or take bad with howitzers, becuase howitzers are so bad themself, and their doctrines are also usually poor". After that it will be fair choise for those, who like offensive gameplay, and for those, who like supportive.

3. Well... if Howitzers will somehow become SO popular, than yes - CAS will come back. But it's not wrong at all. First time there will be mass of howitzer-players, then there will come CAS counter-players. After that howitzer players just will stop abuse howitzers and CAS after that won't be so needed. Game balance in that case is just like "Shadow hand of economy" - balancing and equilizes itself, cos it has all needed tools and counter-tools for that. I wouldn't worry about that so much...

Again, LeFH is obviously good against SimCities and such targets, but... You can deal with all those targets and without it! And for to get LeFH you should again: invest a lot, take LeFH doctrine (all of them are pretty mediocre). I don't think, that unit, which is effective against such small number of targets worth it right now. Make it also effective not as direct killer, but as supporter against other targets - it will worth those investments.