If only teammates were that helpful.
2 Likes
The artillery mechanics are already in game! Sort of…
You see, since the recon drone was added, some especially crafty players have been using it for indirect artillery.
Vehicles like BMP-3 can fire 100mm low velocity HE shell, and has the required scout drone. Guns with higher velocity (like M109) can also work, provided you have a squadmate with recon drone, and if the map is large enough. Sadly most WT maps are too small.
You fly the drone over the target and place a squad marker. The drone tells you the distance back to your tank. You aim at the squad marker, set range, and fire. Observe fall of shot in drone view, make corrections, and fire until the target is destroyed.
This isn’t a viable strategy in most games, as people rarely sit still long enough for you to hit them. But it’s interesting regardless! With some refinement I could see it becoming an official part of the game.
4 Likes
Oh dear lord. This sounds like the WOT artillary. With fast firing mortars That would be true cancer.
I don’t know what it’s like in WOT, but I don’t like anything I saw there.
It is clear that the current firing system is not enough for these vehicles. But it shouldn’t be impossible to develop a new shooting mechanic. It is basically shooting blindly, taking the information generated by the same intelligence that the equipment provides. They could also have scout drones and scouting capabilities. Placing mines as I already said and would even be a good opportunity to add kamikaze drones.
I don’t think it’s impossible, by any means. In addition, it opens the door to many new vehicles, sweeping systems such as the urdan, loitering munitions. It really looks fun.
We could just take out the damn fantasy artillery we currently have and replace it with real vehicles with realistic mechanics.
2 Likes
Giving artillery drones would actually be very cool to see added.
One thing I’ve been thinking of as well is for drones to be used for TV guided missiles, or the drone mechanic can be used for the missile that gives you a few seconds of loitering to find a target.
1 Like
The player gets an option similar to the artillery call in WT, but unlike in WT, in WoT the player is the artillery.
So you can shoot from 3rd person view and overlooking the map. It has its limits though, iirc every SPG can only view a certain portion of the map, probably something to do with range.
1 Like
Yeah, the Cent. AVRE I know of, oh, and the M7XX CEV whatever the designation is. I meant something like, for a mid age, Cold War era Swedish one, the Bergespansar 81. As others have said, it has no major armament, that’s true, but that’s part of the play-style of it, being more strategic with vehicle placement and creating a more realistic tank “squad” or properly named Regiment to properly take part in battles. For a more modern Swedish one, I would say the Bergespanzer II, just a german built one, or, the CV90RV.
Hmm… They could be like top tier back ups.
Just what the site said, considering its capture from reports, afaik, from all records, it is. Also looking at that Tunnan, looks like it has bombs or some other ordinance on the wings, that aren’t given in game, but idk.
Yeah, I’ve heard from some others, who’s job used to be using the vehicles, said they would be happy to see these come to the game with an interesting new playstyle too, so it may be for just a few, it it will be interesting.
For me it would depend on how many "Game-ism"s that come with them.
On one hand it would be cool to have dedicated engineer vehicles that can place ammunition dumps, dig tank ditches, place mines and AT guns, etc. (Similar to how engineers work in Enlisted). Bridge layer tanks could be a seperate class, or maybe included in engineer vehicle category.
However, you could argue this isn’t exactly realistic, considering that a single engineer vehicle can’t carry so much special equipment, and that it would realistically take hours to build some of these structures. For now I think I side with the gameplay side, if it’s good for an interesting gameplay loop I’m on board!
Edit: There are already a lot of compromises in favor of gameplay in WT, for example how tank maintenance, reliability, crew morale/survivability, and production numbers aren’t a factor.
Yes, I’d love to see almost a “historical battle” although in the past, we’ve seen these be a complete failure because of the lack of balance. However, I propose a “all out war” where it’s similar to an air sim battle with lakes and rivers to have more of a reason to add and play these vehicles. Also more of a reason for game exterior communication and regiment formation for these battles, almost viewing them as tournaments would be a neat way to play it. It would give some tanks that are in real life “amphibious” (with preparation) like the 103 with its float skirts, and the IKV 91 with similar techniques And Russia, USSR, with their T-80/T-72 river Fjording technology, it would be really cool to see. Other than that, I highly agree with you, in something like a GRB, it wouldn’t be too useful, however, the “all out war perspective” would be an awesome game mode/mechanic use these vehicles realistically, as for the ammo dump, that would be probably the most useful thing in GRB for it to be played there, and then the fortification creation would be amazing too. Also, seeing an IDRF mode for artillery would be awesome for this mode, especially for the ARCHER MAS, and the Bandkanone 1C to (in a regiment size of a few pieces, roughly 4-5) with their clip reloading trucks would be awesome firing roughly 3-4 kg of HE every 3 seconds.
1 Like
Yes!
Sort of like Enduring Confrontation, but for ground?
Thinking of similar games my mind instantly goes to Foxhole, and how its persistent world suits teamwork, logistics and engineering.
I think that huge maps with changing objectives could to some degree solve spawn camping, because when your team is overrun and the objective lost, you can pull back to a rear-line defense and keep fighting from there.
Like you said, this would also put more emphasis on a tanks versatility. Amphibious vehicles in the current meta don’t have many opportunities to use their strengths, but with huge maps there would be meaningful obstacles to cross, like rivers.
This wouldn’t be easy to implement of course, but I think it’s OK to have dreams. This is one of mine.
2 Likes
Now that I think about it, this is what “World War” should’ve been
1 Like
I think with how the game is currently set up, I think that Gaijin is in a sense, preparing to shift or add this mode within a few years. Most combat games are beginning to shape into this, mainly thinking of DCS and OHD, as well as SQUAD. As for now, it will be a while, the reason I say 1-2 years, is because of the nations not yet added and the ones to come that currently can’t because of “political turmoil” as I will just put it. Altogether, it will eventually form to be a game like this, but most likely, it will be a while.
Now here’s a wild thought, hold on to your chair.
If the maps were large enough, a coastline could be integrated to them and ships would play in the same game. Easier said than done, but dear god it would be beautiful
1 Like
yeah I certainly hope so.
They have been quite passive in the game-mode department so far.
Absolutely, and seeing how the, I’ll just say “current eastern operations” to keep from being flagged, would see maybe more modern ships and subs to launch missiles to the battlefield, and as how WWII started, the destruction of shipyards of the enemy and their supply lines, it would truly be “all out war” and I think it will be the most amazing thing ever added. As for an actual current situation, it’s a waiting game, grind before it comes I guess? But it will be the peak (with removal of some bias and unrealistic aspects) be the best vehicular combat game ever, and, unlikely, but maybe a reason for IFV to be a thing (I.e. real infantry).
1 Like
Forgive me for derailing the discussion topic, but I found this footage of Norwegian M8 Greyhound during an exercise in 1952. I think it’d stand a good chance to be added to Sweden TT, maybe as part of a subtree.
Edit: I also feel sympathy for the US players who can’t have this in their own TT, except as a GJN coin vehicle. That was a bad move. But alas that decision is already made :/