T2 artillery discussion

[yeager]

there's been a lot of discussion about t2 lately so I figured it's only fair we get this all out:
Does t2 arty need a buff?
Reasons it does: it doesn't have the rang, damage,accuracy of tml; the fire rate and aoe make them bad against everything (minus fat boys)
Reasons they don't: they can be left to there own devices and be slightly effective, they counter other long range units fairly well etc.
all things considered none of them seem worth building except cybran (personally the fire rate/aoe makes it my favorite by far) so do they need a buff?

[pza]

there's been a lot of discussion about t2 lately so I figured it's only fair we get this all out:
Does t2 arty need a buff?
Reasons it does: it doesn't have the rang, damage,accuracy of tml; the fire rate and aoe make them bad against everything (minus fat boys)
Reasons they don't: they can be left to there own devices and be slightly effective, they counter other long range units fairly well etc.
all things considered none of them seem worth building except cybran (personally the fire rate/aoe makes it my favorite by far) so do they need a buff?

Not the worst of ideas. I could imagine it be a cheap version t3 arty, having half a t3 range. it sure would have to be way more expensive then. I keep on seeing new players building them as stationary defense, which is, well, not what it is supposed to be. A range buff would destinct them more from beeing a defensive tool.

Of course, i didn't think this through yet, so it could be possible that it'd have massive impact on naval warfare, outranging most ships. Depending on what we would set the cost to, it'd be a good counter of naval shore siege. (but maybe that's good?!)

Shields then again would be easier to overcome. They'd be sieged by a more or less safe location. Although a bit later in the game, since the cost went up, but i think this would buff and nerf turtling at the same time. Arty needs an agressive counter (=pushing), but building arty's needs massive defenses to protect from attacks or make them more costly.

And last but most importantly, in a direct comparison to TML, they'd be a way more expensive, similar ranged weapon, not counterable by shields. considering this, we'd need a downside of the arty, like the cost, to be so high, that TML could still be a cheap alternative. A very high cost of a t2 arty would be fitting the theme of the t3 arty cost, which can be considered a t4 unit costwise (it's only not a t4, because every faction has access to it, isnt it?).

it remains to be seen where the cost of such an artillery would need to be to be balanced. My first estimate is halfway between t3 and a cheap t4 unit.

[Iszh]

Isnt it exactly the same game like on t3. You get the rocket first since it is times more harmful and nearly without range. Whene enemy is shielding with tmd and nuke def then you can get t2/t3 arti to kill the tmd/ nuke defense in range of your gun to be able to sent rockets again? There is no need to buff those arti. I ve had in a wonder game 8 of them together with a t3 army, something like this is no fun to attack anymore already. i was able to scare away easily a fatboy. Those arti have more range.

The only buff i would advise to all stationary arti in game is to increase accuracy bit.

[Ithilis_Quo]

This is something that i acctual try to fix. And its problem...

Main issue:
- game orginal was made for big map 20x20+
- most of game are 10x10-

that mean, on small map is good T2 artilery wrong, becasue will lead on PD(Arty) creep what is bad for gameplay, it denny all action, make game stationar and boring.
bad T2 arty, is ussles and basicly good only against big and slow units (perci/fatty/mega/tempest)

In equilibrium i make them better and more fair,

Spoiler: show

T2 Static Artillery 140range (from 128)
Cybran 1500m 15000e 150s bt 2fr 1750dmg (1680m 12K e 117,36s 2,5fr)
UEF 1600m 16000e 160s bt 1,75fr 2000dmg (1890m 13,5K e 128,64s 2fr)
Sera 1700m 17000e 170s bt 1,5fr 2250dmg (1995m 14,25K e 134,16s 1,5fr)
Aeon 1800m 18000e 180s bt 1,25fr 2500dmg 3000hp (2079m 14850 e 172,16s 1,5fr 2200hp)

but seemt that they are too good now, and game have big chance to change for T2 arty creep. First thought was get range back, but it will not change main issue, 10% more range mean that acu need move 4 more second and start build on that place. Basicly its same. I spend time in theorycrafting, what to do with it. And solution that i found will be make them T3 units. (and more accurate of corse)

Why?
- Its no units against is T2 arty suppost to fight, on T2 phase it can be only aginst destroers -> where cruiser will outrange it. And against enemy base - what can make gameplay booring and worse. Most of units that is T2 arty against is on T3 phase.
- because it will come later will not lead on arty creep, because would be more powerfull units online, that an smash some pd creep more easily.

danger:
- players that will not accept T2 artilery (miasma, gunther, klink hammer, zthuuthaam) on T3 for nostalgic reason
- potential problem against T2 navy, where this option will missing.

[KD7BCH]

I would make no changes to T2 ARTY.

[yeager]

I don't like the idea that it could have insane cost/range and best up shields, that sounds to much like a t3 unit. Also for ppl who think they are used to kill tmd and smd for missles it doesn't work, it takes at least 2 arty to break a shields and destroy what's under it. I think this begs the question: what should arty be good for? Anti unit? Anti tml? Anti mobile arty? Anti shield?
Buffing accuracy would be nice, but extra rof would make them able to kill shields, and that ain't fair. More range also means more tutting (although tml has tons of range and it doesn't really provoke a lot of turtleing) a bigger blast would be nice, terrorizing bases that don't have shields and keeping expansions down, but that's all I can think of

[zeroAPM]

I don't like the idea that it could have insane cost/range and best up shields, that sounds to much like a t3 unit. Also for ppl who think they are used to kill tmd and smd for missles it doesn't work, it takes at least 2 arty to break a shields and destroy what's under it. I think this begs the question: what should arty be good for? Anti unit? Anti tml? Anti mobile arty? Anti shield?
Buffing accuracy would be nice, but extra rof would make them able to kill shields, and that ain't fair. More range also means more tutting (although tml has tons of range and it doesn't really provoke a lot of turtleing) a bigger blast would be nice, terrorizing bases that don't have shields and keeping expansions down, but that's all I can think of

Aeon: anti structure (high damage, high precision, low AoE)
Cybran: anti blob (good rof, big splash, low precisio, medium damage)
Sera: balanced
UEF: anti EXP/big unit (very high direct hit damage, very little splash, splash deal low damage, medium precision, lower fire rate) (the weapon is called APDS artillery so it shooting a Armor Piercing Discarding Sabot-like projectile would be nice)

[yeager]

I don't like the idea that it could have insane cost/range and best up shields, that sounds to much like a t3 unit. Also for ppl who think they are used to kill tmd and smd for missles it doesn't work, it takes at least 2 arty to break a shields and destroy what's under it. I think this begs the question: what should arty be good for? Anti unit? Anti tml? Anti mobile arty? Anti shield?
Buffing accuracy would be nice, but extra rof would make them able to kill shields, and that ain't fair. More range also means more tutting (although tml has tons of range and it doesn't really provoke a lot of turtleing) a bigger blast would be nice, terrorizing bases that don't have shields and keeping expansions down, but that's all I can think of

Aeon: anti structure (high damage, high precision, low AoE)
Cybran: anti blob (good rof, big splash, low precisio, medium damage)
Sera: balanced
UEF: anti EXP/big unit (very high direct hit damage, very little splash, splash deal low damage, medium precision, lower fire rate) (the weapon is called APDS artillery so it shooting a Armor Piercing Discarding Sabot-like projectile would be nice)

Sera: balanced
Why does no one give a shizle about sera? Also you should make them work with the faction diversity and uef really doest need more late game units
Id say:
Aeon: anti t3/exp unit, high muzzle velocity, excelant damage, almost no splash, less rang than the others
Cybran: anti shield, it has a rate of fire and big blast, has a shell that has a small emp
Uef: higher rang but lower damage than the rest, with a small aoe and decent fire rate
Seraphim: combined properties it has an insane damage out put and splash but an awful rate of fire (kinda like aeon mobile artillery) making it the worst against shields but awesome at devastating t2-t3 armies (if they are slow) and unprotected points. Slightly more range than regular but not as much as uef, most costly

[zeroAPM]

I don't like the idea that it could have insane cost/range and best up shields, that sounds to much like a t3 unit. Also for ppl who think they are used to kill tmd and smd for missles it doesn't work, it takes at least 2 arty to break a shields and destroy what's under it. I think this begs the question: what should arty be good for? Anti unit? Anti tml? Anti mobile arty? Anti shield?
Buffing accuracy would be nice, but extra rof would make them able to kill shields, and that ain't fair. More range also means more tutting (although tml has tons of range and it doesn't really provoke a lot of turtleing) a bigger blast would be nice, terrorizing bases that don't have shields and keeping expansions down, but that's all I can think of

Aeon: anti structure (high damage, high precision, low AoE)
Cybran: anti blob (good rof, big splash, low precisio, medium damage)
Sera: balanced
UEF: anti EXP/big unit (very high direct hit damage, very little splash, splash deal low damage, medium precision, lower fire rate) (the weapon is called APDS artillery so it shooting a Armor Piercing Discarding Sabot-like projectile would be nice)

Sera: balanced
Why does no one give a shizle about sera? Also you should make them work with the faction diversity and uef really doest need more late game units
Id say:
Aeon: anti t3/exp unit, high muzzle velocity, excelant damage, almost no splash, less rang than the others
Cybran: anti shield, it has a rate of fire and big blast, has a shell that has a small emp
Uef: higher rang but lower damage than the rest, with a small aoe and decent fire rate
Seraphim: combined properties it has an insane damage out put and splash but an awful rate of fire (kinda like aeon mobile artillery) making it the worst against shields but awesome at devastating t2-t3 armies (if they are slow) and unprotected points. Slightly more range than regular but not as much as uef, most costly

Looks good to me.
Damn UEF frontloadedness clouding my judgement

[Col_Walter_Kurtz]

For the mass cost of more than 9 MML, you get a unit that can't move unlike the MML, is ineffective at breaking turtles, and isn't more than a nuisance to unshielded targets. Every unit needs at least one niche where it excels. For T2 arty there is none, or maybe only in emergency to push back navy.

I would really be against placing them in T3 class. Aside from the obvious reason that it's been a T2 units for ages, it simply needs an accuracy buff. A unit that fires so slow should always hit dead on target. Either that or keep it as is and increase rate of fire.