Lets do something about artillery

Damn it

Discussion about the game and its default mods.

Should arty be changed?

Yes
22
58%
No
16
42%
 
Total votes: 38

Murto the Ray
Posts: 486
Joined: Mon Nov 10, 2014 4:34 pm

Lets do something about artillery

Post by Murto the Ray » Sun May 01, 2016 11:39 pm

First off, i dont mind artillery as it is at the moment. It is trickier to deal with than most other units but it is doable. Its not really OP relative to other strategies on the game.

But what i am really getting tired of is people complaining that arty is OP and ruins the game. So how about we decide here in this thread what is going to change about arty. The poll attached should give at least an idea of whether arty should be changed and we can discuss how here. Enough sitting around, we either deal with this problem now or stop identifying it as one.

NLynch77
Posts: 1
Joined: Mon May 02, 2016 1:34 am

Post by NLynch77 » Mon May 02, 2016 1:51 am

I signed up just to put my opinion here.

Back in CnC Red Alert: Retaliation, artillery and V2's had the same range as each other, except V2's hod one less square for range, so arty's could occasionally take out a V2 without getting hit. They did the same damage, artillery could travel faster but couldn't turn fast, V2's were slower but more mobile. Pretty close to being perfectly balanced, with some small differences for character. Both of their ranges were short enough that a tesla coil could shoot both V2's and arty, making it actually able to accomplish it's goal of base defense instead of being a last-ditch fallback when unit defense has failed. V2/arty were pretty close-support. A V2 and an artillery could take out a tesla coil with two or three hits, leading to a race between the tesla coil and an arty/V2 for which would win.

The most irritating part about artillery is that combined with the Allied sattelite perk, they could shoot first and automatically shoot targets far beyond any other unit's visibility. This could easily be fixed by having at least a few Soviet units be able to see reasonably far, it feels like Soviets are always crippled and playing in the dark, and you need constant micro in order to replace the scouts lost through trying to keep visibility on the battlefield.

Playing the game with the shroud disabled is much more balanced and entertaining - you can plan early and flanking/other tactics become easier, and each Soviet unit can work to it's best capacity without constantly being surrounded by shroud. Maybe Soviet radar domes can have a very large range, making the control provided by bases more significant, and increase the need to defend them, but still having them be slightly underpowered far away from the base.

The way i see it, the game can go two directions - 1: allies and soviets can have essentially equal power, each unit has an equivalent partner on the other team's side, and victory boils down to who controls their army better/who can build more. Or 2: allies and soviets become very widely different teams with hugely separate tactics (like allies being good because of the sattelite, but Soviets having better radar domes), providing a more interesting experience and shifting the likelyhood of victory towards the better tactician.

User avatar
hamb
Posts: 104
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2010 4:57 pm

Post by hamb » Mon May 02, 2016 4:30 am

I'm convinced artillery should change, the amount of discussion about the unit probably outnumbers all other unit balance discussions combined.

Could lower its range from 14 cells to 12, even then the range remains longer than V2. We could close the gap easier against artillery, and (if it happens) force crawling bases into more vulnerable situations. I mean, it feels badly designed now with how the game is currently played. I don't think lowering the range invalidates any strategies at all, artillery *can* be devastating regardless of its range.

klaas
Posts: 208
Joined: Wed Feb 06, 2013 9:38 am

Post by klaas » Mon May 02, 2016 6:58 am

Nerfing the range from 14 to 12 in the next release seems like a good idea. For the rest, arties are fine I think.

Maybe increasing the sight radius of tanks to something similar to the hind could work, also to make them more useful countering arties. I feel tanks are a bit underpowered right now, since they miss the speed to run over infantry, and also lack the firepower to really make a difference on the battlefield. Using their armor to get a superior vision over the battlefield would be a nice bonus and make it worthwhile to at least have 1 or 2 tanks in your army, without making them overpowered right away.

Murto the Ray
Posts: 486
Joined: Mon Nov 10, 2014 4:34 pm

Post by Murto the Ray » Mon May 02, 2016 9:29 am

I think the range would be a good start, if it is still a bit overpowering then it can be reduced to V2 range or another solution could be considered.
klaas wrote: -Snip-
I've been playing around with an army composition of about 2 APCs to each heavy and it can work quite well when you use the APCs to crush and allow your army to get into position then use the heavy tanks to tank damage from then on. I dont know how well this would work with allies though. Giving tanks more vision is interesting and definitely something to consider.

Kencka_Plus
Posts: 5
Joined: Sun Mar 29, 2015 6:19 am

Post by Kencka_Plus » Mon May 02, 2016 1:20 pm

I like it when things make realistic sense, so I think no matter how far artillery is able to fire, V2s should have bigger range than artillery in my opinion. Being honest though, as much as I find artillery annoying, I think it provides for interesting game dynamics that I didn't realize were possible in a C&C series, until I experienced them in OpenRA. It's a pretty awesome unit the way it is, so let's not put all the blame on it. The main problem for me is the gap of popularity between V2s and artillery and the fact that soviets can't compete very well with the powerful allies artillery/GPS combo. What I would propose is the buffing of V2s and/or the nerfing of Artillery, and also maybe a way for soviets to have spy planes more often.

noobmapmaker
Posts: 1086
Joined: Wed Dec 10, 2014 11:59 am

Post by noobmapmaker » Mon May 02, 2016 2:08 pm

I'd say make range 14 to range 12 and see how it does. Perhaps a little buff for the medium tank to compensate?
Playlist with ALL games of the Dark Tournament Youtube.com/CorrodeCasts
Consider supporting OpenRA by setting a bounty or by donating for a server

Murto the Ray
Posts: 486
Joined: Mon Nov 10, 2014 4:34 pm

Post by Murto the Ray » Mon May 02, 2016 2:31 pm

Can someone explain why the medium tank would be buffed? it seems like it's stats are already pretty good. The increased number you can get means you get to crush more, they are faster than most other tanks and since you can get more you can split them more and do more damage that way. I dont see a reason why medium tanks need a buff. I dont think an arty nerf will really make allies underpowered. There are plenty of good players (fiveaces and frame limiter for example) who hardly ever use arty as a main component in their armies and they do pretty well.

barf
Posts: 11
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2015 8:00 pm

Post by barf » Mon May 02, 2016 6:45 pm

I am in agreement with Murto that artillery are not a huge issue. The recent meta shift has led high level players away from an arty-dependent build in favor of more mobile armies.

The main complaints I hear about artillery come from new-to-intermediate level players as the arty play-style is relatively easy to manage and can be very effective against other new-to-intermediate players who have not yet developed effective counter strategies.

My confusion on this topic is why almost all consideration is given to the range of the artillery and making it shorter. A shorter range would make artillery no less devastating against attacking infantry blobs. Since allies are dependent on base creep to provide anti-air cover for artilleries i don't see a range nerf reducing arty effectiveness against enemy bases either.

My suggestion, IF arties were to be nerfed, would be to make them (slightly) less accurate. For example, allied Cruisers have incredibly long range and high damage but their inaccuracy keeps them from being OP. A reduction in arty accuracy would result in the following:

-Less effective counters to infantry blobs (reducing turtling by allied players).
-Less effective against base structures (giving opponent more time to develop a counter to arty fire)
-More artillery required to result in the same level of effectiveness they currently have, which is a bigger commitment financially to the player using them, making it a riskier strategy

Reducing the accuracy of artilleries would mitigate several issues of why they are currently considered OP by many yet would not change the way they are used in a significant manner. This also avoids having to change other units in response which adds to the risk of breaking the balance as it stands.

AmericanBlunt_
Posts: 52
Joined: Wed Apr 02, 2014 8:42 pm
Location: Mars

Post by AmericanBlunt_ » Mon May 02, 2016 6:51 pm

"Allies are for newbies, Soviets are for experienced players." I don't think artillery should change at all

noobmapmaker
Posts: 1086
Joined: Wed Dec 10, 2014 11:59 am

Post by noobmapmaker » Mon May 02, 2016 8:53 pm

On medium tanks:
Well imo allies are allready somewhat weaker and making arties less strong would weaken them more. I don't see many medium tanks so giving them a small buff could be an option. But I admit: my opinion is not very strong on the medium tank. I do think we should watch out to not strip allies from to many perks without giving something in return.

Decreasing range for arties doesn't make them a whole lot worse and still makes them keep their shelling roll. They're just a tad less effective at it, and a tad more vulnerable because they must be closer to their target.
Playlist with ALL games of the Dark Tournament Youtube.com/CorrodeCasts
Consider supporting OpenRA by setting a bounty or by donating for a server

klaas
Posts: 208
Joined: Wed Feb 06, 2013 9:38 am

Post by klaas » Tue May 03, 2016 8:13 am

barf wrote: My confusion on this topic is why almost all consideration is given to the range of the artillery and making it shorter. A shorter range would make artillery no less devastating against attacking infantry blobs. Since allies are dependent on base creep to provide anti-air cover for artilleries i don't see a range nerf reducing arty effectiveness against enemy bases either.
I think your confusion stems from the idea that the effectiveness of artillery against infantry is a problem at all. IMHO, it is not.

The only problem I see, is that the range of the artillery makes it easy to protect with a lot of base defenses, while still able to shell the opponent. This favors a very static and slow play style, which is frustratingly hard to counter and makes for boring games.

Nerfing the range a tiny bit would make it easier to counter exactly this play style, while still keeping the unit very useful.

scorp
Posts: 96
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 9:35 pm

Post by scorp » Tue May 03, 2016 8:33 am

Some posters earlier i.t.t. made it clear that why some people perceive Arty gameplay as OP is not just the range. It is also:

Arty+GpS or Arty+Hinds, Shroud logic, firing/reload speed, high damage against all types of units, lack of Soviet counters, vet logic.


All of these elements play a role. Allies outspot and outrange Soviet units. Soviets need to IC or otherwise constantly micro their units to hold ground. Allies can sometimes maintain their Arties which, in turn, vet up and become more accurate and deadly.

The fact that some top Allies Players don't even need Arties to beat Soviet Players doesn't imply that Arties are balanced.


Then there's another issue: Arty behaviour in general and especially vs. V2 should somehow make sense. There, i'd question Arty reload speed as well as range.

To sum it up: there's many possible ways to deal with what people perceive is a Problem. Just reducing Arty range by 2 probably won't change much. As pointed out by others, Allies often see while Soviets are in the dark, which is often a result of air unit balancing (and shroud/vision concepts). Then, Allies then have that one unit that makes effectively use of the vision advantage while Soviets lack "easy" Counters.

zinc
Posts: 657
Joined: Sun Feb 09, 2014 3:46 pm

Re: Lets do something about artillery

Post by zinc » Tue May 03, 2016 11:06 am

Here is what I think we should do:

Write a short playing guide for new players. Include mention of the issue and point out that many more experienced players don't think it's overpowered and you need to learn the game before having an opinion.

Don't change artillery at all imo.

zinc
Posts: 657
Joined: Sun Feb 09, 2014 3:46 pm

Post by zinc » Tue May 03, 2016 11:14 am

AmericanBlunt_ wrote: "Allies are for newbies, Soviets are for experienced players." I don't think artillery should change at all
Yep. Thing is, is that people remember the original and they want to play soviet. Allies are better for learning the game. And artillary isn't "all powerful" anyway. There are map types I believe where building up a tank army is the best way to go.

Post Reply