Empire Specific Artillery! NS Artillery!

Hi, quick and easy ideas for Empire Specific Artillery and NS Artillery

Terran Republic:

MLRS, Basically. This Artillery would shoot a Rocket Barrage.

New Conglomerate:

Cruise Missle, Basically. This Artillery would fire a single Cruise Missle that could be guided by the player.

Vanu Sovereignty:

Laser Beam, Basically this Artillery would shoot a continuous laser beam that would start off with low damage, but increase in damage longer the trigger was held. For those who Play Starcraft 2: Think Void Ray.

Nanite Systems:


Basically, NS would shoot typical Artillery shells.

Light Artillery, Less Damage per shot(100 or whatever), More Rounds in a clip (3) Less Max Range (250m)

Medium Artillery, Middle Damage Per shot (200 or whatever), Rounds in a clip (2) Middle Max Range (500m)

Heavy Artillery, Heavy Damage Per shot (300 or whatever), Rounds in a clip (1) Long Max Range (750m)



Thanks for reading.

Okay. Why would the addition of artillery be a good idea for gameplay? MBT's already fill the role of long range barrage to a large extent, being able to damage any armored target up to render distance, access to zoom objectives, and in the case of TR, the deployed mode helps a ton for long range encounters. Even the Lightning can do artillery if you're good at aiming.

You're kidding, right?

He's not. The one and only purpose for artillery in PS2 would be to fulfill people's dreams of spawn camping easier and easier. MBTs and light tanks already stand off with spawn rooms and camp them. In the case of MBTs, it's practically their only role, which is an absolute and total failure in game design on the part of SoE. And until this changes, there is 100% no call and no need for a dedicated artillery platform.

Why do you say that? My question is perfectly valid. Any change or addition of game content needs to be justified in terms of what value it adds to gameplay. Surely you have some reasons for posting this thread?

At the risk of derailment I shall respond viva numbered responses.

1. I'm not gonna type a 10,000 word essay throwing out random statistics and whimsical thinking just so people can get on board. It's a waste of time for me and in many cases the developer. Because people are busy. Unless a person is willing to go full throttle and do said 10,000 word essay with: Photoshop pictures, 3D renders of concept art. 2D renders of concept art, actual conceptual statistics, Edited essay, etc etc. Basically, being an unpaid amateur video gaming consultant.. No thanks.

2. "Value" is in the eye of the beholder. I'm not sure how I or anyone can convince people of "Value" when it comes to gameplay . If you're looking for an easy explanation then here it goes. Adding Artillery would be adding more content. That easy. My personal "Value" when it comes to Artillery would be that Artillery would add "coolness" and thus "Value" to the game, but that's just me.

sorry but you're clearly confusing the current role of tanks with the concept of howitzers/artillery

tanks = direct fire / line-of-sight to target
artillery = indirect fire / no line-of-sight to target

only because tanks also lob shells over great distances doesnt really make them artillery, in the sense of modern-day artillery which includes self-propelled howitzers and field guns that are exclusively used to pound enemy forces far far away

in fact, i could see artillery being one of the more effective counters to something a lot of people despise in this game, namely tank zergs. artillery units could be deployed 600-1000 meters away from their targets and would ONLY be effective when an ally spots the enemies beforehand. these artillery units could then fire their barrage which would take quite some time to arrive at the enemy positions. enemies would then hear the projectile whistle long before the impact, giving them enough time to react and move away. if they cant (perhaps because the zerg's tanks/vehicles are all blocking each other), they deserve to die to artillery fire


just think of all the potential before saying artillery would not add anything to this game. in my view, the large distances and wide maps of planetside2 pretty much scream for some real extreme-longrange weaponry like artillery units. hell, even battlefield games have artillery units (MLRS) in their "small" maps, why should this not work for planetside2?

I didn't say tanks are the same thing as artillery, I said that in PS2 they fill the same role to a large extent, that role being long range bombing.

This sounds like a way to make spawn bombing even more effective. Let's not bother with the tanks and liberators at all when we can just bomb the spawn room endlessly from the safety of our ammo tower two regions away.

I didn't say they wouldn't add anything to the game, I just have my reservations, which is why I asked the OP who came up with the suggestion to provide his reasons for why he thinks it'd be a good idea. I don't have to come up with reasons to add artillery, the OP does.

Well just like "eldarfalcongravtank" said, Artillery is indirect. Versus Tanks which are Direct. Since Artillery is indirect, meaning. No Line of Sight, then that means you won't be able to see the spawn room unless you had help, like from a player, or device or a game mechanic that worked in conjunction with the mini-map or a 3D in-game rendering of the projected projectile arc. (Shows you where your shot will go) Don't think that would happen though..

So yeap..

Furthermore, Artillery would add content.

So if you have no LOS with artillery, how do you fire at anything with it?

You can see the spawn room on your minimap, all you have to know is which building it is. The minimap extends to about 1 km radius when expanded and fully zoomed out. If you can fire at any spot in the minimap, you can spawn bomb.

Obviously... Otherwise there would hardly be any point in asking why it would be a good idea.

I like the idea of artillery but this is infantry side. The devs would never put this (or any non-los weapon) in the game. Hell the proposed orbital strike takes 4 minutes to work.

The way they did it in Planetside 1 was infils *could* paint a target with a special weapon that would transmit a waypoint with a height marker that people on their own side could see(can't remember if you had to be squaded with them or not). So basically you would sit and deploy the artillery piece and *theoretically* wait for a designation to fire.....of course most didn't wait which usually resulted in alot of TK'ing.

I mean, I'm not gonna think of every contingency plan of "How Artillery can be abused" or how are the mechanics are going to work, that's unreasonable and that would be something the developer would come up with (Read my first post if you're interested in what kind of foundation idea I have for Artillery however), though I think (correct me if I'm wrong) is that your issue is being spawn camped.

Honestly, if the option is there and the Developer's through their own game design basically say "Go for it" then people will spawn camp or abuse the system, it's inevitable. All a person can really do is point out the issues as they arise. (Also P.S. Rumor-mill: Spawn rooms will be underground soon so they're at least aware.)

Also remember, Artillery would be available for everybody. Not just one Faction.

Okay... here's a list of roles:

1: Provides a use for the Infiltrator class (Spotting) Infiltrators could spot enemies to provide positions to artillery crews, which in turn, gives an AV capability to Infiltrators without the classic "SHOOT OFF ANTENNAS" or "AV BULLETS" or "GIVE INFILTRATORS C4" and the like.

2: Fire Suppression. I know theres a lot of big booms in this game, but this weapon could put strength in the hands of the lesser side.
a small force with a well positioned, well trained artillery crew can break defensive walls much better than a Tank.

3: Provides a new objective for Air Vehicles and Infiltrators, and adventurous harassers or lightnings: To counter Artillery with ATGMs and Rocket Pods.

4: Provides a supply and support line to the battlefield. One could consider the logistics of this game in comparison to capitalist economics. The free market of sunderer drivers will go as close to the front line without being in fire to be of most benefit. Artillery Pieces are a whole new layer. They would go behind the lines and create a larger field: a larger battle. Modern warfare most often takes place at a range larger than 1000 meters. the effective (It can be longer) range of even an MBT is a solid 21-2200 meters. Artillery, when placed in te picture here, would be back, secluded, but connected to the battle.

5: Gives advantages to a team with a larger (longer) front line. If your empire pushes in one crazed rampage in one straight dash to a point, they will be more easily flanked and their artillery will be exposed, or possibly even within the minimum range of their enemies. Thus, if your empire is holding on to one isolated territory, their lacking fire support will mean their logical, practical doom.

6. Let's be honest: the current tank barrage lineup looks.... stupid (?) Shells raining straight from the sky (of any caliber) look pretty freakin AWESOME.

7. Would you rather it be OSes? People said that Orb Strkes ruined PS1. Unlike OSes, Artillery does take skill. Take World of Tanks, for example. That game gives you a real view f your target, and the enemies are still hard to hit. Orbital strikes (Which I hate with the passion of a thousand burning Angelic TR's souls of impending death) would be.... essentially stupid, at least in the way they are suggested.

8. A Handheld Mortar would give Engineers a more engineering-oriented AI weapon.

9: Mine deploying artillery shells would counter impending tank zergs. and EVERYONE hates those things (Based upon forum titles)

10: Oh yeah i suppose it would help spawns, which are not meant to be exited once the base is effectively taken, anyway.

@Goldy, so why do you want artillery? Why do you think it'd be good for gameplay?

I think this weapon could come in the game if it was skill based. Everyone can shoot in a tank, but if you had to find the sweat spot where the enemy is it could be good.

There might be problems with spam though...

There was once AT Flail in PS1. Was good deployable slow fire hammerflat badass with 1.5km range.
In present non-skill zerg-rush gameplay that would be more screaming around nether some benefit.

What this game is need - nerf NC and TR empire MBT tank prime caliber zenith. Even Lightning have it ~20', why Prowler and Vanguard got ~55'?

I for one like the idea of artillery, but we will need to think about how it would be deployed and moved.
I will ponder about this and get back with you guys later.

Okay... here's a list of roles:

1: Provides a use for the Infiltrator class (Spotting) Infiltrators could spot enemies to provide positions to artillery crews, which in turn, gives an AV capability to Infiltrators without the classic "SHOOT OFF ANTENNAS" or "AV BULLETS" or "GIVE INFILTRATORS C4" and the like.

2: Fire Suppression. I know theres a lot of big booms in this game, but this weapon could put strength in the hands of the lesser side.
a small force with a well positioned, well trained artillery crew can break defensive walls much better than a Tank.

3: Provides a new objective for Air Vehicles and Infiltrators, and adventurous harassers or lightnings: To counter Artillery with ATGMs and Rocket Pods.

4: Provides a supply and support line to the battlefield. One could consider the logistics of this game in comparison to capitalist economics. The free market of sunderer drivers will go as close to the front line without being in fire to be of most benefit. Artillery Pieces are a whole new layer. They would go behind the lines and create a larger field: a larger battle. Modern warfare most often takes place at a range larger than 1000 meters. the effective (It can be longer) range of even an MBT is a solid 21-2200 meters. Artillery, when placed in te picture here, would be back, secluded, but connected to the battle.

5: Gives advantages to a team with a larger (longer) front line. If your empire pushes in one crazed rampage in one straight dash to a point, they will be more easily flanked and their artillery will be exposed, or possibly even within the minimum range of their enemies. Thus, if your empire is holding on to one isolated territory, their lacking fire support will mean their logical, practical doom.

6. Let's be honest: the current tank barrage lineup looks.... stupid (?) Shells raining straight from the sky (of any caliber) look pretty freakin AWESOME.

7. Would you rather it be OSes? People said that Orb Strkes ruined PS1. Unlike OSes, Artillery does take skill. Take World of Tanks, for example. That game gives you a real view f your target, and the enemies are still hard to hit. Orbital strikes (Which I hate with the passion of a thousand burning Angelic TR's souls of impending death) would be.... essentially stupid, at least in the way they are suggested.

8. A Handheld Mortar would give Engineers a more engineering-oriented AI weapon.

9: Mine deploying artillery shells would counter impending tank zergs. and EVERYONE hates those things (Based upon forum titles)

10: Oh yeah i suppose it would help spawns, which are not meant to be exited once the base is effectively taken, anyway.

Are you Goldy?

Why did you post the same thing again? I already read your list of reasons the first time around, Mr. Attention Seeker.