Does Artillery need to be revamped?

[Colt Ward]

Anything that makes artillery MORE useful is bad for BTech, IMHO.  I've played in games with 10, 15+ Arrow IV launchers on the field (BN+ games, I was fielding over a regiment of just infantry, for example) and it's just BRUTAL.  companies wiped out, lances failing multiple PSRs- when you gots a dozen LTs/A4s, you can fill the probably movements of mechs/vees pretty easy and simply luck o the irish will make SOMETHIN' hit.  against slow vees and infnatry- brother man, don't even bring them.

bottom line- in ones and twos, yah, maybe they seem lousy.  sink some BV into them, and it swings a game, and makes it unplayable, which is no fun for anyone.  :-\

just my thoughts, o' course.

With your example I do have to question if you were using double blind rules with all that artillery.  Of course its powerful in numbers with effectively invincible spotters, since you can see all the enemy units without being misled by feints.  As someone else sort of pointed out . . . before you get into short delays (2 or 3 turns) you sort of need to deal with the artillery- counterbattery fire, airstrikes or air assault troops will work . . . so will flankers IF you are using DB.  The other side of that is you disperse your forces so area saturation does not cause as much damage . . . but that must be considered with running into the enemy when they are concentrated.

We need to summon Charlie 6 and then this can really get into a redleg discussion.

[Charlie Tango]

Yes, but you can fire indirect still even at close ranges. And that covers Homing, I believe.

Only if there is no LOS to the target.  Per Tactical Operations p. 185.

[Charlie Tango]

I would suggest also checking this rules question thread:

http://bg.battletech.com/forums/index.php/topic,21537.0.html


It clarifies the issue.

[Charlie 6]

We need to summon Charlie 6 and then this can really get into a redleg artillery discussion.

So not in the Army.

Funny story about aircraft...they don’t fly low at helpful close air support levels during sandstorms or other remarkably crappy weather.  Not a fun experience but achieving first round effects on a tank as the only fire support game in town in that sandstorm was fun.  Seeing a division of AH-1Ws snaking up the road after the sandstorm left was akin to feeling my spine uncoil.  Good times.

Firing and scattering by unit would represent basic battery level operations.  They are simple fixes that would speed the game up.  Accurate predictive fires is about good target location, good data determination, knowing the firing location, knowing your weapons and ammo, and knowing the meteorological effects.  Accounting for those with increasing skill should cost a player.  Getting really fancy (using multiple simultaneous round impact, transferring data, massing multiple battalions) are difficult levels of training to achieve so make units capable of them very expensive in terms of BV and C-Bills.

As in all things Battletech, the ranges stink.  A Long Tom’s range of 30 map sheets is only 15Km and still at probable errors in range of +/-25m or less than a hex.  Reaching twice that range (or on scale with 20th century capabilities) would need rocket assisted or base-bleed rounds to be introduced.   But for a big stompy robot game making those changes trends towards a wargame simulation and not desired.  It’s annual discussion on these boards.

S/F

Matt

[MoneyLovinOgre4Hire]

The biggest mistake I've seen players make with using artillery is going for one or two big guns instead of a lot of little guns- a bunch of Thumpers seems to be far more effective than a couple of Long Toms.

Artillery is a form of brute force.  And as my sig says, if brute force isn't solving the problem, you aren't using enough.

[Colt Ward]

Lol, I know you are a jarhead- but IIRC . . . you all spend time at Fort Silly, and the redleg thing refers to artillery in general.

And as you say, this is a topic that comes up and the suggestions really have not changed much.  Though the cruise missiles now offer something like ATACMS ability for ground forces.

[Mohammed As`Zaman Bey]

  If the game made artillery realistic 'Mechs would take a secondary role to artillery duels. In campaign play I've seen 'Mech companies slaughtered by air strikes, which made Aero the most effective weapon in the campaign.

 

[Akalabeth]

  If the game made artillery realistic 'Mechs would take a secondary role to artillery duels. In campaign play I've seen 'Mech companies slaughtered by air strikes, which made Aero the most effective weapon in the campaign.

It all depends on the points. If the points don't reflect the capabilities of the aircraft then the points are wrong.
Personally I've never liked how they diverged Aerotech into what is basically its own separate system. Why try to bridge the RPG to Battletech but keep Aerotech different. And I mean in terms of weapon ranges primarily.

Battlemechs are more resilient to damage however. I've seen heavy aerofighters lose their entire compliment of weapons in a single round or so and aerofighters missing their piloting roll and crashing into the ground in what is close to a mint aircraft. Mind you our group uses house rules that enable aircraft to be on the main map instead of needing some separate aero map, not sure how much the regular rules differ in terms of piloting rolls and so forth.

Same should be with artillery. If artillery is too effective, then raise the points or lower the effectiveness or add things like requiring a spotter, etcetera. I think my biggest issue with artillery is the fact it does such high damage (20 pts homing) out of sequence. Other games like Babylon 5 Wars had missiles for example hit before other weapons, and in small portions it wasn't bad but when they started to introduce massed amounts of missiles (like a missile heavy race) it became problematic. Battletech is a game that's built around simultaneous combat, is not IgoUgo so, to have a situation where your units can not retaliate is a bit problematic. And having artillery do huge single point hits rather than spreading the damage about will increase the chances of a unit getting killed or knocked out.

Remember that the universe says that combined arms formations like RCTs are effective. So there should be an in-game reason for using those sorts of formations.

I'm not a huge fan of lrm-deployed minefields either. Never understood why lrms could do more damage as a minefield than as direct-fire missiles. They are I believe another weapon which when used in large quantities can become problematic.

[Charlie 6]

Combined arms and complimentary weapons are, inherently, problematic for an opponent.  That's why we go to great lengths to employ everything in a combined arms fight.  In Marine parlance, we want the enemy on the horns of a dilemma:  move or get down...either way you're dying.  Artillery and high speed aviation should happen first, with appropriate but ready counter-effects, because generating those effects are the culmination of rapid planning ahead of time.  Massed surprised fires should be devastating but expensive.

But to paraphrase Mohammed As 'Zaman Bey:  warfare simulation is bad.

Colt, I do not want to go back to Sill...ever.

[Colt Ward]

Lol . . . I have managed to be out of Lawton for about two years, and all I miss is the Korean food.

One of the things that can make large formations of artillery too powerful is the god's eye view you get without paying for it in any way.   As Charlie 6 can back me up, a key component of the five rules for effective fire (or is it six, I have not looked at 6-60 in a while) is having someone able to report.  Keeping recon, spotters and FISTers out of LOS, aerial observation and sat recon from giving a accurate position on your forces is one of the weaknesses of artillery- but unless you are using double-blind rules it is not possible.  Which means you can get a lot of mileage out of less fire units, where as if you did not have accurate position you will need to lob more rounds which means dedicating more fire units at a given target.

[MOrab46019]

Rules on Arty are clear. Now add the RPG rules you can use in BT and they can help a lot. Arty gunner can use Weapon Spec. That gives your gunner a +2 sorry -2 to your hit roll. Not sure if I have this right a Copperhead round from a Long Tom dose 15 points of damage not 20. Has this changed? With the ATOW Companion Tac rules your spotter can get better FO skill just like in the old Rule books that said for each 4 levels in FO. A -1 was added to hit roll. I hope this helps.