Fixing arty fests in 4v4s

I personally think the latest patch fixed most of the gameplay issues and that faction balance is now the best the game has ever seen. However one glaring problem that is still there is arty spam. I'd like to start a discussion about it since it hasn't really been brought up lately.

I'm going to assume I'm not the only one who gets frustrated by indirect fire spam in team games. I play this game to enjoy the awesome infantry and vehicle engagements and not to get bombarded by a shower of random artillery shells on the way to the front or even in the base.

The problem is that in 4v4 it is relatively easy to hold the line with few units while building 2-3 arty pieces in the back. Once one or more arty pieces are up it usually starts a snowball effect, especially on maps like Lienne Forest or Essen Steelworks where retreat/advance paths are predictable. Not to mention arty on these maps can usually fire into the enemy's base. Random hits wipe retreating squads, wipe repairing engineers/pio's, hit units on their way to the front forcing to retreat or just cause a massive MP bleed or wipes when targeting the base sector. The RNG dispersion at bigger ranges actually makes arty very deadly because it's impossible to predict where the shells will land. Not to mention 2+ arty pieces will usually kill OKW HQ trucks in one volley.

When playing with random teams, and especially with a lot of OKW factions, hard counters (offmap arty) can be scarce or even non-existant.


IMO it's incredibly annoying to play against and it completely ruins the gameplay experience. Personally I would really like to see this adressed in a future patch.

I think the best way to fix it is to limit heavy arty pieces to a max of 1. This will be plenty to dislodge enemy static positions (the true role of arty) but wouldn't be as influential to the entire match.
Alternatively I would suggest to actually make arty much more accurate so it can only be used on specific targets and not for area denial. That would also make it much more easy to avoid it by walking around the impact area.

I've said this on multiple threads but as brits I have found myself playing royal artillery nearly every game recently in order to counter LefHs that seem to plague every game. If you cannot counter them, you will lose, end of.

In my opinion the only useable 4v4 doctrines right now for allies if I'm solo queuing are:

Brits: Royal artillery and royal engineers, perhaps special weapons if you have a friend with recon. Only royal artillery has recon and can destroy the gun, the recon is bad though.

Soviets: Only doctrines with ML-20, B-4 or IL-2 bombing strike if you have recon.

U.S.-Infantry company because time on target with major recon is a win button against LeFHs.

From my experience if you don't have at least one of them on your team, decent players with LefHs will ruin you every time. And Munitions points are nearly always more valuable than fuel points.

I'm not sure limiting to one arty piece would cut it as although it would make them much less annoying and might prevent one person from carrying a team, you could still easily end up facing 4 of them if people choose the right doctrines. I think the issue is mainly they take immense cooperation to take out as few commanders have enough kit alone to deal with them i.e.-both recon and a reliable way of destroying the gun. (probably only Infantry company and the soviet doctrine that has B-4 and arty flares.)
This cooperation can be difficult to do with people you don't know or can't speak to (language barrier).

Perhaps greatly reducing accuracy of guns through fog of war (more than was done recently) and thus requiring scouts or recon in order to function properly. By requiring recon as well it means you will need to spend munitions to use your artillery properly which means you will be able to fire less often. Also allowing counter play by pushing enemy munitions points or building Anti-air.

P.S.- Balance on most factions is good yes, Pick rate of Brits in competitions will still be low though I imagine as none of their glaring issues have been fixed..

The worst in 4s it playing against multiple fortifications OKW... It gets really campy and you know that you will also be facing heavy tanks from them as well. I would really like arty to lose some of its pop cap and have a munitions cost to the barrage. Every choice a player makes should impact elsewhere. In the case of that particular doctrine it would be less MG bunkers and volks STGs and mines. But this would extend to the Soviet as well (less mines, guards are less likely to be up armed, or less penal ptrs/satchels ect) and we all know how the wehr do with munitions...

There is no fixing it unless you do something draconian like hard-limit arty pieces, which should not happen. The game is fine, just leave it be.

play less static /thread

play less static /thread

Unless relic give us capture points that move, this is a flawed strategy. XD

Artillery counter emplacements and stationary fortifications as they should, they also however can prevent you from capping points or attacking enemy stationary positions by shelling you when you push up, you don't have to be stationary for them to hit you punishingly, you just have to be in the area that they point it at. Which, when you need to cap, is quite easy to predict. And that doesn't just mean if you blob either.

This is like the most realistic game mode of coh. Casualties or deaths (not sure which one) were inflicted by indirect fire the majority of the time. Not sure if it's closer to fifty percent or up to eighty percent, but it's more than half.

Artillery sucks but, i dunno, you've just got to learn to counter it. At the highest levels of the leaderboard, there is a certain meta that people have to play in to. When I had 4s team, we all had one commander we would always go with variation between one other commander for at most two players. It was boring as hell but if you want to win the most games against the best players that's what has to be done.

This is like the most realistic game mode of coh. Casualties or deaths (not sure which one) were inflicted by indirect fire the majority of the time. Not sure if it's closer to fifty percent or up to eighty percent, but it's more than half.

Artillery sucks but, i dunno, you've just got to learn to counter it. At the highest levels of the leaderboard, there is a certain meta that people have to play in to. When I had 4s team, we all had one commander we would always go with variation between one other commander for at most two players. It was boring as hell but if you want to win the most games against the best players that's what has to be done.

It's not an issue of learning to counter it, I pointed out the counters earlier, the issue is at the moment it's making the game tedious and repetitive, I am tied to 1 doctrine every game as a result because everyone and their nan's are using artillery right now.

I am kind of in favour of just nerfing it into the floor to make the game mobile and fun like it used to be. Stationary arty will pretty much always be effective against emplacements and buildings, which is it's intended use, regardless of how much you nerf it because they can't move to avoid you. Perhaps making all stationary arty the same as the 25 pdrs used to be where only direct hits deal damage, everyone who has stationary artillery has rocket artillery for anti infantry too so make the rocket artillery anti infantry and the stationary anti emplacement.

play less static /thread

Did you even read my post? Arty on static position is not the problem.

This is like the most realistic game mode of coh. Casualties or deaths (not sure which one) were inflicted by indirect fire the majority of the time. Not sure if it's closer to fifty percent or up to eighty percent, but it's more than half.

Artillery sucks but, i dunno, you've just got to learn to counter it. At the highest levels of the leaderboard, there is a certain meta that people have to play in to. When I had 4s team, we all had one commander we would always go with variation between one other commander for at most two players. It was boring as hell but if you want to win the most games against the best players that's what has to be done.

I'm well aware of the role that artillery played the real conflict but this is a matter of gameplay over realism. Playing against arty spam is a terrible experience. And countering it with a random 4p team can be very hard due to various stated reasons. If something 'sucks' and is 'boring as hell' to play against that would be clear indications for me that something needs to be changed about it.

I've said this on multiple threads but as brits I have found myself playing royal artillery nearly every game recently in order to counter LefHs that seem to plague every game. If you cannot counter them, you will lose, end of.

In my opinion the only useable 4v4 doctrines right now for allies if I'm solo queuing are:

Brits: Royal artillery and royal engineers, perhaps special weapons if you have a friend with recon. Only royal artillery has recon and can destroy the gun, the recon is bad though.

Soviets: Only doctrines with ML-20, B-4 or IL-2 bombing strike if you have recon.

U.S.-Infantry company because time on target with major recon is a win button against LeFHs.

From my experience if you don't have at least one of them on your team, decent players with LefHs will ruin you every time. And Munitions points are nearly always more valuable than fuel points.

I'm not sure limiting to one arty piece would cut it as although it would make them much less annoying and might prevent one person from carrying a team, you could still easily end up facing 4 of them if people choose the right doctrines. I think the issue is mainly they take immense cooperation to take out as few commanders have enough kit alone to deal with them i.e.-both recon and a reliable way of destroying the gun. (probably only Infantry company and the soviet doctrine that has B-4 and arty flares.)
This cooperation can be difficult to do with people you don't know or can't speak to (language barrier).

Perhaps greatly reducing accuracy of guns through fog of war (more than was done recently) and thus requiring scouts or recon in order to function properly. By requiring recon as well it means you will need to spend munitions to use your artillery properly which means you will be able to fire less often. Also allowing counter play by pushing enemy munitions points or building Anti-air.

P.S.- Balance on most factions is good yes, Pick rate of Brits in competitions will still be low though I imagine as none of their glaring issues have been fixed..

you dont play this commander to counter the arty...you play this commander to have easy peasy arty fest and troll the enemy.

not german abuse artillery....the allie faction abuse callins and arty hard.

german faction dont have mobile arty like sexton and priest. they dont have huge rocket attack like LM, katj and caliopes. The have accurate rockets...but you must have vision, the right moment and luck bomb the enemy.

as allie you can easy bomb into the fog of war. you will hit something...

my new abuse troll gun: b4...wtf this thing awefull OP and take out so many tank the last games i play with sov. its unbelievable how easy you get your enemy to destroy his keyboard....

okw build lefhs beacause of arty spam from allies. not more.

Personally, I also dislike arty spam fests in 2v2 or 4v4.
IMO katy, mattress, stuka, pwerfer and calli shots should cost MUNI, maybe 35 or 45.

Most of 4v4 problems (arty fest problem included) are coming from maps.

They are too small or too narrow and have not enough points for 8 players.

Most of 4v4 problems (arty fest problem included) are coming from maps.

They are too small or too narrow and have not enough points for 8 players.

Very true, as I mentioned in the OP it's mostly the corridor maps that cause the arty spam problems because of predictable attack/retreat paths and narrow concentrations of troops. The bigger/wider 4v4 maps like Hill 400, Steppes or General Mud are much less prone to the problem.

However from what I gather here at the forums there won't be any new maps or significant changes to the current ones, so I guess the only way to fix the problem is by adressing the units that cause them.

Very true, as I mentioned in the OP it's mostly the corridor maps that cause the arty spam problems because of predictable attack/retreat paths and narrow concentrations of troops. The bigger/wider 4v4 maps like Hill 400, Steppes or General Mud are much less prone to the problem.

However from what I gather here at the forums there won't be any new maps or significant changes to the current ones, so I guess the only way to fix the problem is by adressing the units that cause them.

Mapmakers say that creating new maps for 4v4 mode is exponentially harder than 1v1 maps. Things get worse when you try to gather people to playtest freshly created map, only few paricipate and provide only little feedback, then map goes live, everyone shits on it and it get removed.

I wouldn't say that there is absolutely no chance that we will get new 4v4 maps, but it heavily depends on mapmakers' and players' coordinated effort and public's willingness to participate in map creation process is quite a factor here.

having trouble with arty? This video will help you a lot.

https://youtu.be/kvS6zMThiZU

having trouble with arty? This video will help you a lot.

https://youtu.be/kvS6zMThiZU

Yes, exactly.





Arty is strong, but counter-able. If you don't like getting shit on with randoms, find a team and play together. If you don't like losing because you want to pick a "fun" commander, well, then you're going to have to play the meta.

I found a different way to kill lefhs.

usf airborne commander

since most dont defend their lefhs.
Drop airborne soldiers + anti gun near their lefhs, maybe scout with pathfinders.
Take out 2-3 lefs before they notice with airbornes demo charges and the anti tank gun.


500 manpower for 1500.

If you're playing 4v4s and you're relying on other players to provide recon and ways to wipe arty, then you only have yourself to blame.

As Ostheer, I will always have Close Air Support commander ready to go, as 90% of the time the rest of your team are not not interested in using commanders to cover capability gaps and instead just want big tanks and powerful infantry. Same with Soviets; the majority of the time in 4s I will use Anti-Infantry Tactics commander so as to have the ability to quickly cover for team-mates who can't handle basic blobbing, as well as to completely invalidate fixed arty play.

How it's possible that the vast majority of 4v4 players (i.e mostly nubs) never learn the utility of abilities like recon, as opposed to just supplementing the strong tanks they have with more tanks, I just don't know.

Arty is strong, but counter-able. If you don't like getting shit on with randoms, find a team and play together. If you don't like losing because you want to pick a "fun" commander, well, then you're going to have to play the meta.

Uhm in my opinion the need for a dedicated team with dedicated roles just to counter basic game elements sounds like bad balance to me. Team synergy should improve and substitute basic performance, but it should not dictate it.

If you're playing 4v4s and you're relying on other players to provide recon and ways to wipe arty, then you only have yourself to blame.

As Ostheer, I will always have Close Air Support commander ready to go, as 90% of the time the rest of your team are not not interested in using commanders to cover capability gaps and instead just want big tanks and powerful infantry.

That might be a stopgap solution for Ostheer and Soviets, but neither the USF, OKW nor the UKF have any commanders that have both doctrinal recon and off-map artillery.

Mapmakers say that creating new maps for 4v4 mode is exponentially harder than 1v1 maps. Things get worse when you try to gather people to playtest freshly created map, only few paricipate and provide only little feedback, then map goes live, everyone shits on it and it get removed.

I wouldn't say that there is absolutely no chance that we will get new 4v4 maps, but it heavily depends on mapmakers' and players' coordinated effort and public's willingness to participate in map creation process is quite a factor here.

^This. I do not think it is harder, if anything a 4v4 map is easier to make design wise. However the maps are much larger so take a long time to make look pretty. But all major engagements take place at a few points: Fuels, VPs, and cutoffs if any. You just have to balance the middle of the map. Simple. But yes, getting 8 high level players together is very hard.

I would like to see a map making contest for 4v4s.
PHASE 1: Maps could be put together quickly and tested. Cover, buildings, etc all placed for balanced game play. Maps are judged by a panel and thinned down to say 4-8 maps.
PHASE 2: Put together a small tourney or some other method to play on the 4-8 maps.
PHASE 3: Maps are cleaned up visually and any small problems found in the tourney are fixed.
PHASE 4: Another small tourney or offline play. Replays uploaded and reviewed.
PHASE 5: Final judging.

Ideally, PHASE 3 should be repeated a 2nd or 3rd time with look overs from panel judges.

I constantly bug Tric to do one but without Relic support there is no point. If the map is not going into the game, balancing the map ruins it for its only purpose Comp Stomps. All Comp Stomp maps should be horribly imbalanced to one side adding an extra layer of difficulty. Play from the west, if you are not that good, and you get a ton of fuel and munis. Once you get good enough to smash bots in expert mode, play from the east and you are starved for fuel and munis etc.

Very true, as I mentioned in the OP it's mostly the corridor maps that cause the arty spam problems because of predictable attack/retreat paths and narrow concentrations of troops. The bigger/wider 4v4 maps like Hill 400, Steppes or General Mud are much less prone to the problem.

However from what I gather here at the forums there won't be any new maps or significant changes to the current ones, so I guess the only way to fix the problem is by adressing the units that cause them.

The problem with bigger maps is the high probability that you get double teamed and wiped out. Once that happens it is very hard to recover. Play against allies on Steppes and watch them lawn mower your team down with 3 team member blob waves.

As much as I disagree with it, I think that is why there are so many 4v4 maps used as 3v3s. If you do not like the arty and compressed play style of 4v4, then the 3v3 game mode is for you. I love the head to head brick wall clashing of team weapons so I prefer smaller maps, and thus, the 4v4 game mode

So if you like big wide maps with lots of flanks play 1v1 or 3v3 where arty is not as effective. 2v2 and 4v4 are for tighter team engagements where mortar and artillery monkey crap fights are the norm.