[Suggestion] Sunderer-based Artillery

Discussion in 'PlanetSide 2 Gameplay Discussion' started by ColonelChingles, Jun 23, 2014.

  1. Dutchoper72

    These artillery sundys cant carry people though, just to make it balanced. Oh also you have to deploy it with some of the heavier ones.
  2. ColonelChingles

    That's true for the Anga, but the Anteater, Arigato, and Avenger all use a modified Sunderer chassis that is essentially a half-track.

    There just really wasn't a reason to make the Anga into a half-track, as the rocket recoil was low enough so the modifications weren't needed. Most of these rocket-type vehicles don't really need those tracks, like the more modern BRDMs:

    [IMG]

    If the name bothers you, the "Sd.Aty 2/1" designation simply means: "Sunderer Artillery Model 2, Variant 1". This is because the Anga uses a slightly modified Sunderer chassis (the rear passenger compartment has been removed) so it is the Model 2 of the Sunderer line, and it is the first variant of the Model 2 line. :)
  3. ColonelChingles

    Well... to be fair I was also considering making the actual rocket take aerospace resources. Maybe 100 per rocket. So that's 400 mechanized resources for the Sunderer plus 100 aerospace resources for the first rocket and an additional 100 aerospace resource cost for every rocket after that.

    That's because I didn't envision the rocket to be something to be spammed, but rather a devastating attack that is timed with an assault. Say for instance a friendly infantry force is stuck outside an Amp Station because the defenders are occupying the towers. Calling in a guided rocket strike on those two towers would temporarily wipe out or disorient the attackers, long enough for the friendly infantry to capitalize on the assault. The intelligence of the missiles would work well with coordinated, pinpoint attacks.

    On the other hand the rocket itself is pretty vulnerable in flight... can you imagine something the size of a Sunderer with the vulnerability of an ESF and the maneuverability of a Galaxy? It would be a pretty big target that's vulnerable to everything down to the dinkiest pistol. If the missile comes in high, then it risks interception by ESFs and AA. If the missile tries to hug the ground, then it is vulnerable to infantry small arms.

    So against a semi-organized group of defenders (who worst comes to worst can just duck indoors), 1-2 missiles wouldn't be too difficult to deal with. Just order everyone in your squad to unload on it with everything they have, and that missile will be gone in fairly short order!

    IRL V-2s could be intercepted by all sorts of aircraft, from British Spitfires to B-24 bombers.
  4. ColonelChingles

    This brings up a good point, about how artillery should work if implemented.

    Battlefield 3/4 worked out a system which is precisely what you (and I) don't like... a simple minimap clicking system. For those of you who haven't had the displeasure of BF3/4, it looked like this:

    [IMG]

    Was ridiculously easy to do, and meant there weren't mortar teams and spotters but just lone guys spamming mortar fire (there was essentially unlimited ammunition as well). On the plus side it did make counterbattery fire very easy, but overall such a simplistic system wasn't fun for anyone involved, and meant that mortars were never really a serious danger (except to other mortar users).

    Now the funny thing was that BF1942 (which came out waaaay back in 2002) had a much more interesting system for implementing artillery. It relied on spotters whipping out their binoculars and calling for an artillery strike. What would then happen is that the artillery operator would gain a line of sight from the position of the spotter, essentially seeing what the spotter saw. From there the artillery operator would fire, see where their shot landed, and adjust based on that.

    [IMG]

    This was a better system because 1) it had a counter (if you killed the spotter then the artillery operator would no longer have LoS) and 2) it still required skill on the part of the artillery operator to figure out where their shots were going and how to correct for them (versus a simply point-and-click).

    PS1 had the Flail and a spotter system that I'm not familiar with, but I think what it did was give a virtual target for the Flail to aim at, which would result in a target hit. In my opinion that's still a little on the easy side for accurate shots.

    The last option I'm throwing out there is the "all manual" option, where the spotter and artillery operator have to verbally communicate everything. Naturally this takes the most skill, because the artillery operator can't see anything at all and must completely rely on the spotter's communication skills.

    Now I'm personally leaning towards the BF1942 model, which I think has the right amount of teamwork. Not too little, but not too much. But of course there may be other models out there that I've never even heard of, so of course other solutions for implementing artillery might exist!
    • Up x 1
  5. Tcsisek

    • Up x 1
  6. ColonelChingles

    The rather old Ground Control series of games had this mechanic, where you could convert your AT light vehicles to an anti-artillery vehicle:

    [IMG]

    Also the Supreme Commander series had tactical and strategic missile defenses, which could neutralize a certain number of incoming missiles (though it didn't do anything to cannon artillery):

    [IMG]

    In all these cases though you could "overrun" any of the anti-artillery units with enough concentrated artillery, though most often the easier approach was to blow up these units first by some other means.

    So yea, something like this would totally work I think.
  7. Tcsisek

    there should be a cluster bomb artillery that fires a missile and when it reaches its target drops 10-15 low damage bomb lets, as well as a napalm/fire missile that makes the area temporarily uninhabitable by infantry and light vehicles.
    • Up x 1
  8. Atuday

    Ok now let's see you fit a flail on the back side of that sundy. Lets bring back the ps1 artillery of doom along with the artillery spotter mechanic.
  9. Blippy

    Looks cool, but I'd rather it be a separate vehicle instead of making the sunderer a fully modular "do everything" bus.
  10. ColonelChingles

    You find me a 3D model of a Flail that I can throw into Blender, and I can make that happen. :)


    I think that would also be ideal (though it should be noted that many WWII artillery vehicles were simply repurposed transports), just that I tend to use models that already exist in the game to avoid having to make ones myself. :p I'm not actually much of a modeler... I just slice and splice assets that are already in the game!
  11. Enguzrad

    Apart from destroying the artillery, you've got some quite powerfull shields there. Anti-Artillery shield bubbles deployable by infantry or mounted on some vehicles could also be an answer to how to defend from constant shell spam.
  12. ColonelChingles

    To be fair shields in SupCom were anti-everything, from artillery to "small arms" (or the SupCom equivalent) fire. You also couldn't really rely on shields to stop artillery... eventually the artillery was going to break through. What it did buy though was a few seconds of protection and a chance to destroy their artillery with your own counterbattery fire or an airstrike.

    In PS2 such shields would simply be like a large personal shield that covered an area. Might protect from one or two shells, but would fall to a volley.
  13. HenryTD

    u don't call a vehicle with big *** gun that can only shot max range at 200~300m an artillery :v, why not make the range max around 2-3 hex but wildly inaccurate, and and can only shot point blank with no indicate how far the bullet will go, and the team use the artillery have to have a forward scout to guide the gunner, just like in reall life
    • Up x 1
  14. Thornefear

    I dunno, a lot of artillery is really hefty

    sidenote, I love the ideas adding depth to the game for everyone, keep them coming
    • Up x 1
  15. Enguzrad

    Well yes, they stopped almost everything (exept units moving inside), but in dependence on strength and regeneration rate of the shield one artillery couldn't destroy it. Usually it just downed the shield and before it fired again, the shield was back up. Then it was just about numbers, whoever got more artillery or more shields with more engineers assisting.

    Here it would be the same, if you could stack up more shields on one place, or they could be made to just be indestructible by artillery. Instead they would have to rely on infantry with this.
  16. SapioiT

    I think the AVENGER model should be literally a nuke, one time use, require 750 nanites for spawning the vehicle and another 750 for the shell. AoE 100m, flash everything as far as up to 300m (also I think the flash should also hide the doritos-targeting with the rest of the HUD) and the EMP grenades should make the guns unusable for 10-15 seconds. Maybe with the pistols having an upgrade allowing them to resist against EMP (so you could use the pistol if you're EMPed in the enemy base).
  17. Nintyuk

    Don't Necro threads over 6 months old.
  18. SapioiT

    I never look at the last post's date when I answer... why is that not allowed?
  19. Nintyuk

    Because It means your bringing back up discussions that have long since finished or are now outdated due to events happening since there discussion. Generally bad form and quite often a offence against most forum rules.
  20. AxiomInsanity87

    Make it so the sunderer has to deploy to be able to pivot the guns, fixed if not.