Adding in Arty

[OatsAndHall]

My regular group has tinkered around with arty a few times, with mixed responses. Some of our players really want to play with it more often as it discourages heavy/assault "campers" raising hell. On the flip side of the coin, there's folks who like playing with these types of sniper/over watch units. I tend to fall in the latter group as I feel like it speeds up our games a bit, especially as our group has developed a proclivity towards light and medium jumpers. I like having the ability to stop a big boy in elevated cover and make those bouncy mediums and lights a little wary.

I've made the argument that we don't necessarily need straight arty as IDF provides the similar results but that doesn't seem to be a big selling point. I love using it and do so regularly but I'm the only player in the group that ties it into a force on a regular basis.

What are some other ways one can counter "campers" without just dropping arty shells on their heads?

[dgorsman]

The optional no-movement rule - if the target doesn't move/spend MP, it's a modest bonus to the to-hit number similar to immobile target but not as harsh.

[Charistoph]

If they are against anything that will make them move, then there's nothing that they would accept.

IDF works great, but is best with VTOL TAGs that are a pain to hit.

However, there are things like Aerospace Attacks which accomplish the same goal.

If those are too complicated to implement, there are the Battlefield Support options as found in a few books, including The Battlemech Manual.  Be warned, though, these actually are easier to hit with then the normal Artillery and Aerospace and can't be countered by units on the field, just more limited in use (most of the time).

[OatsAndHall]

If they are against anything that will make them move, then there's nothing that they would accept.

IDF works great, but is best with VTOL TAGs that are a pain to hit.

However, there are things like Aerospace Attacks which accomplish the same goal.

If those are too complicated to implement, there are the Battlefield Support options as found in a few books, including The Battlemech Manual.  Be warned, though, these actually are easier to hit with then the normal Artillery and Aerospace and can't be countered by units on the field, just more limited in use (most of the time).

What are the Battlefield Support options? I'm not familiar with them.

Thanks.

[Charistoph]

What are the Battlefield Support options? I'm not familiar with them.

Thanks.

They're in a few places, like the new Tukayyid book, but they are also in The Battlemech Manual.  There is also a deck of Battlefield Support Cards that carries the rules on how to use them.

Basically it's a way to incorporate Artillery, Aerospace, and Mines without all the difficulty of figuring out how far out they are, flying the ASF, and such.  There's even a card to counter Aerospace, if I remember right.

[DevianID]

Yeah I came here to say this.  The BSP rules found in the Battlemech Manual are great in limited quantity to add some support.

The problem with the full artillery rules is how overpowered it is.  The side with artillery has a massive advantage against a side without artillery.  So then both sides want more and more artillery.  To add insult to injury, artillery units are irresponsibly cheap, like many are less then 200 BV.  Resolving artillery adds multiple new phases to the game, the targeting phase and artillery attack phase, so it also slows down the game.  When I play with artillery for campaign stuff, its usually a 'enemy base' boss battle type thing to force the players to move each turn, and I put the targeting hexes down (not hidden) to make the fight more like a MMO raid 'danger circle' so the players can move to play around it.

Instead of full artillery for non-campaign matched play, I really like 5 points of BSP for a 4v4ish game with objectives.  It gives enough for a single sniper or thumper blast, or some light/heavy bombs, as a 1 time use.  It helps deal with battle armor and light units like dashers which otherwise can hold/steal objectives for very little battlevalue--the threat of predesignated artillery on an objective means the enemy cant just put a 400 BV unit on an objective and call it a day, but the fact you only get 1 shot means there is some interaction.

As a side note, playing with objectives and not just 'kill each other' also really helps reign in 'turret tech' better then adding in artillery.  If there is something in the middle of the board that needs to be held, and the snipers are in the back in their heavy woods, well they arnt gonna win the objective from back there.

[Apocal]

Yeah I came here to say this.  The BSP rules found in the Battlemech Manual are great in limited quantity to add some support.

They are godsend for that, yeah. Critical support to whoever came up with the concept and got it into the BMM.

As a side note, playing with objectives and not just 'kill each other' also really helps reign in 'turret tech' better then adding in artillery.  If there is something in the middle of the board that needs to be held, and the snipers are in the back in their heavy woods, well they arnt gonna win the objective from back there.

I've had something of the opposite experience, but that was with clear attacking/defending sides of an objective.

[OatsAndHall]

They're in a few places, like the new Tukayyid book, but they are also in The Battlemech Manual.  There is also a deck of Battlefield Support Cards that carries the rules on how to use them.

Basically it's a way to incorporate Artillery, Aerospace, and Mines without all the difficulty of figuring out how far out they are, flying the ASF, and such.  There's even a card to counter Aerospace, if I remember right.

This is good stuff, thank you. I'll talk to our GM about incorporating it and possibly buy the cards.

[CarcosanDawn]

I like artillery in Alpha Strike at least. It is a good, useful weapon that can do things like FASCAM and smoke.

Would encourage people to play Combined Arms more, personally.

[OatsAndHall]

I like artillery in Alpha Strike at least. It is a good, useful weapon that can do things like FASCAM and smoke.

Would encourage people to play Combined Arms more, personally.

I don't know what the AS arty rules look like. But, they're a little crunchy in Classic and do tend to drag things out. It can be fun to play with in Classic, depending on the situation and the players at the table.

Combined arms can be tough in Classic as long as it's controlled. It's way too easy to swarm with cheap BV vehicles in Classic which is seriously irritating. And, it's also easy to tie in dirt-cheap C3 networks which, if not worked out ahead of time, will seriously piss off a group of players.

[Cannonshop]

Yeah I came here to say this.  The BSP rules found in the Battlemech Manual are great in limited quantity to add some support.

The problem with the full artillery rules is how overpowered it is.  The side with artillery has a massive advantage against a side without artillery.  So then both sides want more and more artillery.  To add insult to injury, artillery units are irresponsibly cheap, like many are less then 200 BV.  Resolving artillery adds multiple new phases to the game, the targeting phase and artillery attack phase, so it also slows down the game.  When I play with artillery for campaign stuff, its usually a 'enemy base' boss battle type thing to force the players to move each turn, and I put the targeting hexes down (not hidden) to make the fight more like a MMO raid 'danger circle' so the players can move to play around it.

Instead of full artillery for non-campaign matched play, I really like 5 points of BSP for a 4v4ish game with objectives.  It gives enough for a single sniper or thumper blast, or some light/heavy bombs, as a 1 time use.  It helps deal with battle armor and light units like dashers which otherwise can hold/steal objectives for very little battlevalue--the threat of predesignated artillery on an objective means the enemy cant just put a 400 BV unit on an objective and call it a day, but the fact you only get 1 shot means there is some interaction.

As a side note, playing with objectives and not just 'kill each other' also really helps reign in 'turret tech' better then adding in artillery.  If there is something in the middle of the board that needs to be held, and the snipers are in the back in their heavy woods, well they arnt gonna win the objective from back there.

Funny, I never found one gun to be of any use.  Artillery has this weird 'curve'.  One tube, you might as well leave it in the dropship with the spare parts, because you're running higher risk of friendly fire, than harming the enemy (Guided rounds cancel this, I'm talkin' dumbfire shots only)

The minimum USEFUL kitting out for artillery on two mapsheet map, is four tubes.  with four tubes you can establish something of a useful pattern for terrain denial or camper harassament.  This scales up to 2x3 maps before you start needing more, or bigger, guns.

the MAJOR problem, is that artillery rules themselves, are very clunky, with flight times and the rampant inaccuracy of dumbfire artillery, coupled with the sandwich-plate blast radii (out to dinner plate on the bigger stuff), though they at least got rid of the open-ended scatter they tried to incorporate in TacOps.

The blast radii and damages? are very OP, especially with the stats given in Tac Ops, where 200 KG of arrow IV or Long Tom does more damage to a larger area than a full ton of air-dropped bombs. (this is because the air-dropped bombs were balanced against BMR(r) artillery, while Tac Ops went hawg wild porting over Munchtek's or Unbound's enhanced blast radii.)


To the OP:

if your group's having issues, go with the light guns.  Thumpers, the blast radius isn't insane, they're still effective enough, the scatter hazard's not too bad {You' won't be greasing your own units on a bad role quite as hard) and the assault campers can look at the damage rates, and either grit their teeth or go watch Football.

if you do, work them in in pairs.  as I said, single tubes you might as well leave on the dropship if it's not homing rounds with a tagger, because artillery is one thing above all else: dreadfully inaccurate and prone to scatter.

when coupled with the bigger blast radius, this means you might completely annihilate the chicken coop behind the enemy, or bounce a shell right on your own guys, but whatever it is, if it wasn't pre-registered before play began, it's not going to be particularly useful or valuable if you only have one tube.

IOW instead of a force multiplier, a single tube firing non-guided artillery munitions is a force divisor that costs you BV and maybe c-bills, and can actually lose you the engagement on a bad roll at the worst time.

Some things to keep in mind?

1. It gets less useful the closer you are to the other guys.  This has to do with scattering back.  Keep in mind the maximum range of the scatter in the rules you're using, when planning to use it.

2. have a plan of when NOT to fire.  For example, when your BA or INfantry is in close contact with the enemy, or when the other side has closed to AC/20 or Melee range. 

3. When using a useful amount of artillery (3 to 4 guns), plan your drop ahead of time, decide what terrain you're trying to deny or what avenues you're trying to keep open, and place your shot accordingly (at least, in theory-the odds are against your shots actually landing where you want them to!) I call this 'pattern' because It's spaced to deny an AREA-to make it hazardous for the other side to come through that area-and if they do, to give them pre-existing damage before they reach MY guys.

4. if you're using pre-registration? look at the map, and know where the best 'camping spots' are (woods hexes on elevations, lee side of a hill with partial cover, etc.)  THOSE are where you want your artillery pre-registered before play.

5. go over the spotting rules and make sure you understand spotting, and scatter, maybe pre-game it to make sure you're not skipping over something that is going to demand opening books and arguments.

[Charistoph]

Scatter can be bad, but it's no where near as bad as it used to be, thankfully.  Direction is the same as Falling, interestingly enough, which actually helped me memorize Falling direction!

The biggest cause of Scatter is simply the extremely high modifier you have to add on to it (assuming you're not using TAG with homing ammo, of course).  Highly skilled Spotters (2 and 0 Gunnery) help, but that can be expensive enough as it is, unless you're using Infantry (preferably Hidden ones).  If you can pull in Special Pilot Abilities, Oblique Artilleryman is pretty much a requirement.

In Alpha Strike, having a Spotter with PRB helps out a lot.

All this assumes that you're firing Indirect.  Direct fire is a bit easier, just focus on hitting the Hex.  Don't bother shooting the unit.

[Paul]

What are some other ways one can counter "campers" without just dropping arty shells on their heads?

Other items to consider:
Frag/Flechette ammo, which is more effective at clearing woods, thus ruining the camping spots and suddenly exposing the slow assaults on difficult terrain with 0 cover.
"Suddenly" still requires several turns unless you do something like bringing a dedicated LRM boats.

Another idea is using smoke rounds in LRMs or SRMs to block long range shots. Adding smoke to woods can rapidly cause LOS to be broken with even a single hex.

[PuppyLikesLaserPointers]

Artillery rules on TO is very complicated and I expect this would be only workable on MegaMek. I wonder that it does helps this situation, though it does have some chance to hit the target does not want to move for several rounds. And against normal targets those are barely hits anything, because you have to premeasure at least two rounds of the unit movement your opponent will made to hit those unless you employ homing round, and with this it's the game about hit the TAG or not, rather than drive the campers out.

Well, I do think that those campers have their own reason. For example many units of clanners are barely had the worthy rate of toll against spheroids unless they are sit down at the tip of no man's land with good cover and keep shooting, for it would be the best way to make use of their better range and they had paid enough BV for this already thus they have the right to enjoy some fun with their better range. Yes they does have many good mobile platforms, but they are all the same with the better range.

So, how much covers your map usually have? If the opposing force can have some covers enough to avoid the bullets while closing the gap with them then they would have the chance. Using smoke round does have similar result too. You don't have to make the map as if it is an underground maze with full of narrow corridor, but if there would be good site to camp then it would be better to make the possible ways to get around their firing arc and able to get their back without get exposed by long ranged fire.

Also, you are not required to eliminate their advantage entirely, although you are not required to use the rules that only benefit for the campers either. They will do that because it's suited for them, after all, and only making the camping entirely impossible just makes them frown but nothing else.

What I have in mind to make the gap other than something above is, to put multiple objectives that have some distant with each other. Then camping would be enough to keep an objective but they do need more units to capture the others.

[DevianID]

Funny, I never found one gun to be of any use. 

Depends on the support you give it.  A single gun at skill 4, 3 turns away, with no spotters is only good for static area denial.

However, I like using skilled spotters (skill 0 vtols calling in grid numbers from 30 hexes away for example) and I also up the gunnery of the arty tube instead of using base 4, for +20% BV per skill increase.  So that turns 11s with 4 gunners into 7s, and less if adjusting fire.  I also like tougher, closer ranged guns to reduce the time in flight to 1 or 0 turns.  Further, something as simply as a Catapult can always direct fire their artillery, for very low numbers, by ignoring target terrain and movement, and only having the +4 long range direct fire.  A vet gunnery 3 catapult plopping 7s to hit with direct fire, on something fast like a Viper in heavy woods, is crazy effective considering you ignore +6 in TMM and terrain.

Finally, you can 'double up' homing rounds with a single tube, buy firing at the mapsheet breakpoints, to land 2 TAG arrows in one time on target attack.  It lets you only have to expose your TAG units for the one turn, and 40 damage is nothing to sneeze at before the weapon phase.

I've had something of the opposite experience, but that was with clear attacking/defending sides of an objective.

  Apocal I also have had issues with assymetric attacker defender objectives.  I tend to dislike those.  Like, if the attacker has to 'destroy 3 building' and the defender has to try and stop the attacker, its often just a miserable mission for the defender.  Instead, if both have to destroy buildings, meaning there is no attacker/defender, its way more fair.
Ironically when I ran my megamek Tukayyid campaign on MRC, it was all attacker/defender missions (despite me not liking them normally) cause I was sticking to the Campaign book as well as I could.  And the Clans had a ROUGH time of it.  The 17 clan players only won a couple of those asymmetric missions, cause they were all forced into the Attacking side, and Comstar had defensive bonuses for mission objectives in the Campaign missions.

[Cannonshop]

Depends on the support you give it.  A single gun at skill 4, 3 turns away, with no spotters is only good for static area denial.

However, I like using skilled spotters (skill 0 vtols calling in grid numbers from 30 hexes away for example) and I also up the gunnery of the arty tube instead of using base 4, for +20% BV per skill increase.  So that turns 11s with 4 gunners into 7s, and less if adjusting fire.  I also like tougher, closer ranged guns to reduce the time in flight to 1 or 0 turns.  Further, something as simply as a Catapult can always direct fire their artillery, for very low numbers, by ignoring target terrain and movement, and only having the +4 long range direct fire.  A vet gunnery 3 catapult plopping 7s to hit with direct fire, on something fast like a Viper in heavy woods, is crazy effective considering you ignore +6 in TMM and terrain.

Finally, you can 'double up' homing rounds with a single tube, buy firing at the mapsheet breakpoints, to land 2 TAG arrows in one time on target attack.  It lets you only have to expose your TAG units for the one turn, and 40 damage is nothing to sneeze at before the weapon phase.
  Apocal I also have had issues with assymetric attacker defender objectives.  I tend to dislike those.  Like, if the attacker has to 'destroy 3 building' and the defender has to try and stop the attacker, its often just a miserable mission for the defender.  Instead, if both have to destroy buildings, meaning there is no attacker/defender, its way more fair.
Ironically when I ran my megamek Tukayyid campaign on MRC, it was all attacker/defender missions (despite me not liking them normally) cause I was sticking to the Campaign book as well as I could.  And the Clans had a ROUGH time of it.  The 17 clan players only won a couple of those asymmetric missions, cause they were all forced into the Attacking side, and Comstar had defensive bonuses for mission objectives in the Campaign missions.

I'd argue that one gun is absolutely worthless for area denial, DevianID.    The fall of shot is too random and the area's too large-you'd need to be playing in a phone-booth (with all the penalties for on-map shots)...and it's still too random.  At one point years ago I pointed out that having a single artillery piece doesn't create no-go-zones for anyone but the owner who's using it.

Two or three can do the static defense-if they have spotters.

Four is what you want on two by two maps-that's enough fire volume that, with averaging, you can actually make a zone that's dangerous for the attacker to cross,   (at least, dangerous enough to make someone risk-averse hesitate to cross it for a round or two).

That, in my mind, is 'static area denial'.

Homing rounds, on the other hand, can make a single gun useful, provided there's a tagger to guide the shot in-but that's better on the attack, than as a defense.

But it's all relative, and individual player experience varies significantly.

[Daryk]

It's almost like the RL six-tube battery has a raison d'etre... ;D

[Hellraiser]

 like many are less then 200 BV. 

Unless you define 2 Infantry Platoons as "Many" then this is false.

[Daryk]

Or if those "platoons" have "squads" of only 2 troopers... ;D

[PuppyLikesLaserPointers]

I'd argue that one gun is absolutely worthless for area denial, DevianID.    The fall of shot is too random and the area's too large-you'd need to be playing in a phone-booth (with all the penalties for on-map shots)...and it's still too random.  At one point years ago I pointed out that having a single artillery piece doesn't create no-go-zones for anyone but the owner who's using it.

Two or three can do the static defense-if they have spotters.

Four is what you want on two by two maps-that's enough fire volume that, with averaging, you can actually make a zone that's dangerous for the attacker to cross,   (at least, dangerous enough to make someone risk-averse hesitate to cross it for a round or two).

That, in my mind, is 'static area denial'.

Homing rounds, on the other hand, can make a single gun useful, provided there's a tagger to guide the shot in-but that's better on the attack, than as a defense.

But it's all relative, and individual player experience varies significantly.

You don't get the point - the point is 'without any further investment only a gun is only able to be used for area denial at best', not 'only a gun is fantastic for area denial and it should be enough.'

That said, I do think that it is not so realistic to deal with something by non-homing artillery round, unless it's building, infantry or anything immobile, else the game is very big enough to have several batteries(I said battery, not just the gun) backed on your other stuffs. But only for deal with the infantry as the surprised blast on the objective, it could works even on the small sized game.

[Cannonshop]

You don't get the point - the point is 'without any further investment only a gun is only able to be used for area denial at best', not 'only a gun is fantastic for area denial and it should be enough.'

That said, I do think that it is not so realistic to deal with something by non-homing artillery round, unless it's building, infantry or anything immobile, else the game is very big enough to have several batteries(I said battery, not just the gun) backed on your other stuffs. But only for deal with the infantry as the surprised blast on the objective, it could works even on the small sized game.

The problem is, it's NOT good for area denial, PPLP.    Not 'at best', it's 'at all'.   Area denial is exactly that-you're inflicting damage and a psychological effect on the enemy.  One tube, firing indirectly, with non-homing rounds, is not going to deny ANY area...except to your own forces, because the odds of a miss are so much significantly better than a near-miss, never mind direct hit, as to be betting on random lightning strikes, a conveniently timed earthquake, or the arrival of a random asteroid nobody on either side was tracking that happens to hit the right spot in the enemy's formation.

It's adding a dice roll that does nothing, followed by a scatter roll that also does nothing in the majority of cases, and your opponent has no reason NOT to advance there, because he knows your chances of hitting anything with that random shot are infinitesimal.

Two guns, and you can pull that cluster over, it's still too loose to be truly dangerous, but it's closer than you can pray to get with one.  Three guns? now we're starting to see some actual area denial-that is, the blasts hitting in enough of a pattern that it's actually risky to an advancing enemy, and predictable for your own movement- (Just stay out of the scatter zone and you're good to go.)

Four, and the risk is high enough even with Thumpers that most players will divert around what they think the scatter zone is going to be-because they don't want to take damage before they reach weapons range, and the odds with four guns on a single quarter of a 2x2, or middle third of 2x3 is that one or more of his units WILL take damage.

Thus, 'Denying the terrain' or 'Terrain Denial'-you're 'encouraging' the other side to avoid an area, channeling him (hopefully) into your kill box instead of letting him choose where to advance.

and if he doesn't? then you're getting enemy forces that have pre-existing damage arriving against your fresh defenders.

That's how that works, and that's why one tube isn't going to do it.

It's a mind-game, playing the player.  That's what Area Denial and Terrain Denial is actually for.

But...your mileage may vary.

IOW, I put myself in a theoretical here; you've got one Arrow IV launcher, no homing rounds.  I don't.

Two by Two mapsheets, company sized engagement.

I'm going to roll right through where you don't want me to go, because your one arrow four, while it does dinner plates of significant damage, is unlikely to hit my armored column without you having homing rounds and a tagger.

Why? because the odds are against your single artillery gun landing a shot anywhere I care about, that's why.

Now, you go in with four Thumpers? I'm going to rethink-because the odds are a lot better that you WILL hit something I want intact when my guys hit yours.

Law of averages, right??  The Thumper does less organic damage, but it's got twenty rounds per ton of ammo and can keep up that bombardment through most of the game, the Arrow platform carries FIVE rounds per ton, and you've only got one of them.

Do you see how that works out?  The single tube denies me NOTHING...otoh, you can't afford to have that scatter onto your own troops, so I know about where you're going to stop trying.

[PuppyLikesLaserPointers]

The problem is, it's NOT good for area denial, PPLP.    Not 'at best', it's 'at all'.   Area denial is exactly that-you're inflicting damage and a psychological effect on the enemy.  One tube, firing indirectly, with non-homing rounds, is not going to deny ANY area...except to your own forces, because the odds of a miss are so much significantly better than a near-miss, never mind direct hit, as to be betting on random lightning strikes, a conveniently timed earthquake, or the arrival of a random asteroid nobody on either side was tracking that happens to hit the right spot in the enemy's formation.

It's adding a dice roll that does nothing, followed by a scatter roll that also does nothing in the majority of cases, and your opponent has no reason NOT to advance there, because he knows your chances of hitting anything with that random shot are infinitesimal.

Two guns, and you can pull that cluster over, it's still too loose to be truly dangerous, but it's closer than you can pray to get with one.  Three guns? now we're starting to see some actual area denial-that is, the blasts hitting in enough of a pattern that it's actually risky to an advancing enemy, and predictable for your own movement- (Just stay out of the scatter zone and you're good to go.)

Four, and the risk is high enough even with Thumpers that most players will divert around what they think the scatter zone is going to be-because they don't want to take damage before they reach weapons range, and the odds with four guns on a single quarter of a 2x2, or middle third of 2x3 is that one or more of his units WILL take damage.

Thus, 'Denying the terrain' or 'Terrain Denial'-you're 'encouraging' the other side to avoid an area, channeling him (hopefully) into your kill box instead of letting him choose where to advance.

and if he doesn't? then you're getting enemy forces that have pre-existing damage arriving against your fresh defenders.

That's how that works, and that's why one tube isn't going to do it.

It's a mind-game, playing the player.  That's what Area Denial and Terrain Denial is actually for.

But...your mileage may vary.

IOW, I put myself in a theoretical here; you've got one Arrow IV launcher, no homing rounds.  I don't.

Two by Two mapsheets, company sized engagement.

I'm going to roll right through where you don't want me to go, because your one arrow four, while it does dinner plates of significant damage, is unlikely to hit my armored column without you having homing rounds and a tagger.

Why? because the odds are against your single artillery gun landing a shot anywhere I care about, that's why.

Now, you go in with four Thumpers? I'm going to rethink-because the odds are a lot better that you WILL hit something I want intact when my guys hit yours.

Law of averages, right??  The Thumper does less organic damage, but it's got twenty rounds per ton of ammo and can keep up that bombardment through most of the game, the Arrow platform carries FIVE rounds per ton, and you've only got one of them.

Do you see how that works out?  The single tube denies me NOTHING...otoh, you can't afford to have that scatter onto your own troops, so I know about where you're going to stop trying.

I think that 'at best' is usually a negative term, is not? That is already not a positive expression, else was my common sense somewhat flawed - although personally I do concur that I do, but that's not the topic.

You better think about the meaning of the others, seriously.

[Cannonshop]

I think that 'at best' is usually a negative term, is not? That is already not a positive expression, else was my common sense somewhat flawed - although personally I do concur that I do, but that's not the topic.

You better think about the meaning of the others, seriously.

"at best' still presumes something CAN work in that role.  I'm outright saying that  a single tube, doesn't work for defense, or with defense (unless you're firing 100% homing rounds).

it doesn't even work in theory.

'At Best' presumes it CAN work, that it's not ideal, but it CAN work.  I don't know if we share  a native language here, but there's a nuance there to colloquial terms like "At Best"-that is, it's an indicator of an absolute limitation that can be inferior, but still work.  IN the case of tactical roles, 'At best' is working better than 'not at all'...which is the more likely outcome if you try it against a player like, for example, me or anyone who regularly used to beat me.

Shelling your own guys only works as a tactic, if you planned to do it, intentionally.  When it happens randomly...not so much.

I speak as a player who has won games by doing just that, mostly because the other player misunderstood that I wasn't taking Thumpers due to BV limits, but because they're still the best choice for lobbing too-close-to-comfort shots since they're unlikely to singly do enough damage to sideline most medium weight combat units..by themselves.

I took them because I could:

1. keep the pattern going and  either damage or influence the movements of my opponent, since I knew where the shots were planned to land and he didn't.

2. I could keep firing throughout the match.  20 rounds/ton meant I could make a beaten zone that was high-risk for the other side, and manage that risk for my own.

3. If one or two of mine were caught in the scatter? light damage at most.  Not so with the heavier guns or Arrows, both of which are far better for using homing rounds or focusing on siege fire against a bunker (though I prefer airstrikes for bunker scenarios, even with the gimping of the bomb loads.)

4. on the defense, multiple Thumpers gave me the ability to inflict tactical risk and tactical dilemma on the other side-I had plenty of volume and duration for a pretty low cost in weight and bv.  A single tube  of Arrow can't do that, not even with Homing rounds. It's ONLY useful for specific, aimed shots with TAG-every other application makes it too dangerous to my own side (Wihle not being dangerous to the other guy) to use.

5. Multiple guns also deals better with counter-battery (f you're using those rules) and artillery duels, see you spread them out, and instead of one god-shot arrow or bombing raid taking them all out, they at best get one, but they're still close enough together to share Targeting numbers and flight times, or do the 'map edge trick' one of the other posters pointed out, while keeping a steady bombardment going.

Do you understand my logic here?  I'm not looking at this purely on a gunnery number plus damage, I'm looking at it from a purpose and tactics point of view.  The purpose of field artillery is to create tactical dilemmas and risk in the mind of your opponent.  The damage it does is secondary to that purpose.

This is the basis of terrain denial, you can't do it with only one tube.

[PuppyLikesLaserPointers]

"at best' still presumes something CAN work in that role.  I'm outright saying that  a single tube, doesn't work for defense, or with defense (unless you're firing 100% homing rounds).

it doesn't even work in theory.

'At Best' presumes it CAN work, that it's not ideal, but it CAN work.  I don't know if we share  a native language here, but there's a nuance there to colloquial terms like "At Best"-that is, it's an indicator of an absolute limitation that can be inferior, but still work.  IN the case of tactical roles, 'At best' is working better than 'not at all'...which is the more likely outcome if you try it against a player like, for example, me or anyone who regularly used to beat me.

Shelling your own guys only works as a tactic, if you planned to do it, intentionally.  When it happens randomly...not so much.

I speak as a player who has won games by doing just that, mostly because the other player misunderstood that I wasn't taking Thumpers due to BV limits, but because they're still the best choice for lobbing too-close-to-comfort shots since they're unlikely to singly do enough damage to sideline most medium weight combat units..by themselves.

I took them because I could:

1. keep the pattern going and  either damage or influence the movements of my opponent, since I knew where the shots were planned to land and he didn't.

2. I could keep firing throughout the match.  20 rounds/ton meant I could make a beaten zone that was high-risk for the other side, and manage that risk for my own.

3. If one or two of mine were caught in the scatter? light damage at most.  Not so with the heavier guns or Arrows, both of which are far better for using homing rounds or focusing on siege fire against a bunker (though I prefer airstrikes for bunker scenarios, even with the gimping of the bomb loads.)

4. on the defense, multiple Thumpers gave me the ability to inflict tactical risk and tactical dilemma on the other side-I had plenty of volume and duration for a pretty low cost in weight and bv.  A single tube  of Arrow can't do that, not even with Homing rounds. It's ONLY useful for specific, aimed shots with TAG-every other application makes it too dangerous to my own side (Wihle not being dangerous to the other guy) to use.

5. Multiple guns also deals better with counter-battery (f you're using those rules) and artillery duels, see you spread them out, and instead of one god-shot arrow or bombing raid taking them all out, they at best get one, but they're still close enough together to share Targeting numbers and flight times, or do the 'map edge trick' one of the other posters pointed out, while keeping a steady bombardment going.

Do you understand my logic here?  I'm not looking at this purely on a gunnery number plus damage, I'm looking at it from a purpose and tactics point of view.  The purpose of field artillery is to create tactical dilemmas and risk in the mind of your opponent.  The damage it does is secondary to that purpose.

This is the basis of terrain denial, you can't do it with only one tube.

That's pathetic level, indeed, but can - or at least insist that they do so. Nonetheless most units can laugh off this and it is not a secret, but it would be a meaninful threat for someone. So technically it does but unlikely to be effective, except for some specific type of enemy units.

But what you did not remember is, DevianID does says that it's there for check the enemy infantry and weak enemy to grab an objective. It won't be a perfect ways to do so, and it is not likely to stop a ground armor, but for the intended role it does works at least. Nothing required to be an absolute solution to be effective, unlike what you think. It does needs to be what it paid for, and what it expected.

You should remember that it is a battle. It is not as facing a sandback and punch it to spilt the sand. You cannot bring everything what you want on the exact place what you want them to be, as if you are either a magician or cheater. You cannot bring countless of resource and units from nothing. That's why we are strived for squeeze every possible exploits from what we have, unlike act like we got the ideal imaginary invincible armed force with infine number of troops and resource to spent.

Also DevianID does mentioned for the direct fire as well. I do think that those are far from efficient ways, but nonetheless, it works.

[idea weenie]

2. I could keep firing throughout the match.  20 rounds/ton meant I could make a beaten zone that was high-risk for the other side, and manage that risk for my own.

You can also do a 'stutter fire' where you make sure no shells will land on turn 12, and position your medium movers on turn 11 so they can dart into the target zone on turn 12, then out of the target zone on turn 13.  You have just moved a small force to take the enemy's flank or at least distract them.  On turns 13+ your shells are once again landing behind your medium movers, so your enemy can't use the same path safely.

You can then do the same thing in reverse, though making sure the enemy can't use the same path will take a little bit of work.  Perhaps pairing the artillery with a minefield, or a bunch of SRM infantry that are just in range to shoot anyone trying to cross the target zone?

[Daryk]

I think this artillery discussion has reached critical mass...

Have the Lighthorsemen charging Beersheba: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EsWQRI6VuzQ

"They're under the guns!"... ;)

Which is only matched by: "TALBOT!  STOP THAT GUN!" ;D

[OatsAndHall]

Some of us in my regular gaming group have reservations with including arty for a couple of reasons. Firstly and as I've talked about before, the group has a bad habit of spamming new tech/weapons to the point where games are ruined. And, a few of the players will bring in the new tech/weapons without truly understanding the rules and/or paying the proper BV. Our first couple of C3 games were a chit-show because half of the guys didn't calculate their BV correctly, even when the pages number for the rules was posted on the FB page. And, there were thorough explanations on the page as well.

Don't get me wrong, I'm good friends with (almost) everyone I play BT with. But, we'd all like to keep those friendships and have fun playing the game.

[PuppyLikesLaserPointers]

Anyway I doubt that artillery does a thing for the situation. Only a long tom does little to dispatch such a target, even if you made a clear shot. And you do need a lots more to actually made a clear shot for non-homing artillery, and even for this the chance is barely more than 50% unless you have the battery with exceptional skill. Not to mention that those artillery does costs your BV as well.

Yes hammered by the artillery for several rounds won't be fun and bearable either. But for this you do need a battery of guns(4~8) at least.

Else, it is also possible to use inferno Arrow IV missile to set ablaze the ground near of it(note that it causes the fire to the hex it hits and all adjacent hexes). You need some luck but it is even possible to harrass them by only a single launcher of Arrow IV with this.

[Cannonshop]

Some of us in my regular gaming group have reservations with including arty for a couple of reasons. Firstly and as I've talked about before, the group has a bad habit of spamming new tech/weapons to the point where games are ruined. And, a few of the players will bring in the new tech/weapons without truly understanding the rules and/or paying the proper BV. Our first couple of C3 games were a chit-show because half of the guys didn't calculate their BV correctly, even when the pages number for the rules was posted on the FB page. And, there were thorough explanations on the page as well.

Don't get me wrong, I'm good friends with (almost) everyone I play BT with. But, we'd all like to keep those friendships and have fun playing the game.

Having friends is good.  Keeping them IS better.  and rules arguments are NOT fun on game day, especially with players who've had to wade through poorly organized rulebooks and tend to rules lawyer from near ignorance.

[OatsAndHall]

Having friends is good.  Keeping them IS better.  and rules arguments are NOT fun on game day, especially with players who've had to wade through poorly organized rulebooks and tend to rules lawyer from near ignorance.

We've only had to send one player packing and it was because he argued over rules continually. I've talked about him in another thread and, as a group, we decided it was best if he wasn't playing with us anymore.

But, you're correct, the rule books can be tough to navigate. We do our best to post up specific pages within the books and to lay out stuff in detail, on the FB page and via a group chat.