CB against mobile units...

Ideas and suggestions for how to improve the Warzone 2100 base game only. Ideas for mods go in Mapping/Modding instead. Read sticky posts first!
Post Reply
icyflames
Trained
Trained
Posts: 46
Joined: 28 Aug 2009, 13:22

CB against mobile units...

Post by icyflames » 27 Dec 2010, 03:21

So I was playing against AI and tried to take out its artillery with my ripple rockets on hover. My plan was to assign them when they needed to shoot and then move as soon as they've fired so that enemy CB artillery misses. To my dismay, their artillery fire just homed in on my hovers whereever I went (within their range) and they got killed. This not only seems unrealistic, it's also annoying. :p

So my suggestion:
1. CB towers etc. should only detect where fire comes from, and not be able to follow the units for very far after they stop firing. (should be able to follow a tiny bit for balancing etc.)

2. Missiles (seraph -never used these ever- and archangel) should be the exception in that they CAN home in on units, at least to a certain extent.

User avatar
LZ compromised
Trained
Trained
Posts: 53
Joined: 24 Nov 2010, 16:14

Re: CB against mobile units...

Post by LZ compromised » 27 Dec 2010, 10:07

What you're suggesting is basically to not allow CB towers to pinpoint mobile artillery.

Imagine that happens and CBs can't follow artillery units anymore. Now you don't need stationary batteries/emplacements at all, ever: you can just make some mobile ripples on your base, have them fire, move them a few tiles to any side so that retaliation barrages miss, and continue bombarding the enemy artillery. And what's worse, the opposing side can exploit it the same, and the next time you move a CB sensor to a base, you won't be able to take out those ripples because they constantly move. Wouldn't that be annoying?

Long story short: it'd be broken.If you don't want to lose artillery units, use stationary batteries. That's the lesson I've learnt. If you don't want to lose buildings either, well, you could always build it, let it have a go at the enemy, and demolish it before it gets devastated by enemy fire.
"I don't know the key to success, but the key to failure is trying to please everybody."
—Bill Cosby

JakeGrey
Trained
Trained
Posts: 50
Joined: 11 Dec 2010, 22:17
Contact:

Re: CB against mobile units...

Post by JakeGrey » 27 Dec 2010, 17:23

Possible compromise: Have CB towers designate an enemy battery for a limited period -slightly longer than it takes to reload an Archangel, perhaps- after the incoming fire registers. After that, they have to wait for the next shot.

User avatar
KenAlcock
Trained
Trained
Posts: 192
Joined: 25 Nov 2009, 03:50
Location: Detroit, Michigan, USA

Re: CB against mobile units...

Post by KenAlcock » 27 Dec 2010, 21:34

LZ compromised wrote:What you're suggesting is basically to not allow CB towers to pinpoint mobile artillery.
Not at all. What he is proposing is a little bit of realism. Mobile artillery is supposed to have the advantage of shoot-and-scoot over stationary artillery. However, there are real-life trade offs. Whether or not they can be coded into Warzone is another question though.
LZ compromised wrote:Imagine that happens and CBs can't follow artillery units anymore.
This would not necessarily be the case if all things are considered fairly. The original poster did suggest (correctly IMHO) that The Seraph and Archangel Missiles should still be allowed to track targets. This makes sense, since these are guided missile systems with on-board tracking in the projectiles. Also, if you study the Tech Tree, you'll find Target Prediction Rounds for the Howitzer weapons line. These upgrades should also allow tracking moving artillery when assigned in a CB role. That leaves only the Ripple Rockets off the list of long range artillery that should not be able to track mobile artillery. And IMHO that is just fine, since Ripples can be researched so early in the Tech Tree. Ripples are rockets, not guided missiles, so it makes sense they should come early in the Tech Tree, and have limitations (other than just a shorter range from Archangels).

LZ compromised wrote:Now you don't need stationary batteries/emplacements at all, ever: you can just make some mobile ripples on your base, have them fire, move them a few tiles to any side so that retaliation barrages miss, and continue bombarding the enemy artillery. And what's worse, the opposing side can exploit it the same, and the next time you move a CB sensor to a base, you won't be able to take out those ripples because they constantly move. Wouldn't that be annoying?
Warfare is annoying, especially with all those pesky casualties. The fact that either side could employ the same tactics, makes the tactic in question fair and balanced. But you must also consider the ultimate balance in Warzone--the 150 unit limitation. Each side may only produce 150 total units (power permitting of course). So if someone produces 150 artillery, then you need only produce 150 VTOLs and assign them to CB VTOL Sensors; problem solved. If the VTOLs can't find the Mobile artillery where they originally shot their last salvo from, just micromanage them to patrol the surrounding area. Mobile artillery do not move very fast, since they are quite heavy. They are even move slower than Heavy Cannon-Heavy Body-Tracked vehicles. They are not that hard to hunt down. Now the original poster had his on hover propulsion, which IMO should not even be allowed; but whatever. VTOLs move faster than hovers.

LZ compromised wrote:Long story short: it'd be broken.
Not at all, it would be more realistic. The question is really: "Could this be coded or not?"
LZ compromised wrote:If you don't want to lose artillery units, use stationary batteries.
This is true. And you can build a lot more stationary emplacements than you can produce mobile units.
I'm on the forums on a limited basis. I play MP late Saturday night or Sunday afternoon/evening; my game handle is Cosmic Raven.

User avatar
KenAlcock
Trained
Trained
Posts: 192
Joined: 25 Nov 2009, 03:50
Location: Detroit, Michigan, USA

Re: CB against mobile units...

Post by KenAlcock » 27 Dec 2010, 21:45

JakeGrey wrote:Possible compromise: Have CB towers designate an enemy battery for a limited period -slightly longer than it takes to reload an Archangel, perhaps- after the incoming fire registers. After that, they have to wait for the next shot.

Another balance idea (much of which I believe is already implemented anyway). Mobile artillery must remain stationary when firing. That is mobile artillery, currently on-the-move, must: stop, rotate to face the direction of the target, and then fire. They must also stay facing the target until that target is destroyed. After the target is destroyed, they must rotate back to the direction of travel, and continue toward their destination. If several successive targets that reside in the same sector have been assigned, then the mobile artillery will naturally remain stationary longer, and will present themselves as a CB target proportionally longer.
I'm on the forums on a limited basis. I play MP late Saturday night or Sunday afternoon/evening; my game handle is Cosmic Raven.

User avatar
LZ compromised
Trained
Trained
Posts: 53
Joined: 24 Nov 2010, 16:14

Re: CB against mobile units...

Post by LZ compromised » 28 Dec 2010, 02:57

KenAlcock wrote:The original poster did suggest (correctly IMHO) that The Seraph and Archangel Missiles should still be allowed to track targets. This makes sense, since these are guided missile systems with on-board tracking in the projectiles. Also, if you study the Tech Tree, you'll find Target Prediction Rounds for the Howitzer weapons line. These upgrades should also allow tracking moving artillery when assigned in a CB role. That leaves only the Ripple Rockets off the list of long range artillery that should not be able to track mobile artillery. And IMHO that is just fine, since Ripples can be researched so early in the Tech Tree. Ripples are rockets, not guided missiles, so it makes sense they should come early in the Tech Tree, and have limitations (other than just a shorter range from Archangels).
Well that makes sense in fact. I don't know if changing ripples only would change the gameplay much for icyflames, but removing their tracking ability (which I didn't quite notice, I must say) feels right from a logical perspective.
KenAlcock wrote:Warfare is annoying, especially with all those pesky casualties. The fact that either side could employ the same tactics, makes the tactic in question fair and balanced.
It is, but I wasn't referring to warfare in general, I just mirrored OP's words. However, your point is very debatable. Multiplayer is not my cup of tea, but even someone as uninvolved as me heard the numerous complaints about MG rushes. Was it fair and balanced? Yes, since both sides could use it. Was it fun? Hardly, judging by the comments, as it went further than just a prevalent strategy.
KenAlcock wrote:Mobile artillery do not move very fast, since they are quite heavy. They are even move slower than Heavy Cannon-Heavy Body-Tracked vehicles. They are not that hard to hunt down. Now the original poster had his on hover propulsion, which IMO should not even be allowed; but whatever. VTOLs move faster than hovers.
I think this is why this thread appeared: if icyflames wasn't using hover units, there would be no issue. Tracked artillery indeed is slow and simply doesn't stand a chance against enemy fire, homing or not.
I use hover artillery myself and enjoy it, but I also feel the current system of artillery/sensors works really nice and is interesting to play with. Naturally, I'm inclined to keep it as it is.
KenAlcock wrote:
JakeGrey wrote:Possible compromise: Have CB towers designate an enemy battery for a limited period -slightly longer than it takes to reload an Archangel, perhaps- after the incoming fire registers. After that, they have to wait for the next shot.
Another balance idea (much of which I believe is already implemented anyway). Mobile artillery must remain stationary when firing. That is mobile artillery, currently on-the-move, must: stop, rotate to face the direction of the target, and then fire. They must also stay facing the target until that target is destroyed. After the target is destroyed, they must rotate back to the direction of travel, and continue toward their destination. If several successive targets that reside in the same sector have been assigned, then the mobile artillery will naturally remain stationary longer, and will present themselves as a CB target proportionally longer.
This could work, but we must be cautious. If your tank, say, a cannon, fires at something and gets damaged, you expect it to return for repairs (or order it manually). You don't want to it to ignore you just because the target isn't dead yet. Same here: what if a "locked" mobile ripple gets damaged to yellow/red health? Is it supposed to fall back?
If the restrictions are too harsh, people would just be better off building emplacements/batteries and not wasting time and oil on mobile units.
"I don't know the key to success, but the key to failure is trying to please everybody."
—Bill Cosby

icyflames
Trained
Trained
Posts: 46
Joined: 28 Aug 2009, 13:22

Re: CB against mobile units...

Post by icyflames » 28 Dec 2010, 03:37

This was really just an idea off the cuff to be honest. I do realise the balance issues etc. but I do believe they can be worked around just to add a bit more realism. Which is why I posted the idea up for debate. I'm not particularly mourning my hover ripples, because I could have just moved them out of range of the enemy hellstorms. And on retrospect, I could even hide them behind a mountain after firing!

Also has CB changed recently? I seem to notice that it now also works with direct fire???? And in the past, mobile CB turrets could only direct mobile artillery units, not stationary ones. I liked that I think because it gave another advantage to mobile artillery. And frankly, I think mobile artillery SHOULD have quite a few advantages because they are DISADVANTAGED in terms of number like some of you have pointed out.

Anyway the issue I was having was... if say my enemy has an archangel (i.e. huge range), and I have say groundshaker on dragon tracks (virtually indestructible) with a load of repairing chaperones. Does the current system mean that if I fired but one shot against their CB tower, their archangel will keep firing at my unit until it dies, even if I move back to the other side of the map for an hour (because I'm repairing it and the single archangel is too weak). If not, then ignore the rest of this post.

If true, I find it unrealistic. KenAlcock, you mentioned target prediction, but I believe that only works for stuff going in a straight line. I have actually in the past dodged artillery by quickly changing hover direction. :p HOWEVER, the 'thermal imaging' upgrade (or something similar) may be more relevant to my idea. After firing, any artillery unit will be hot. The CB can detect these artilleries by detecting their heat signatures after firing. That means that it will lose contact after an extended period of time following fire, because the unit cools down. This sounds like a fair idea? Not that it would affect gameplay a huge amount, but I think the extra realistic quirk would totally be worth it if it is possible.

As for hovers vs track artillery...... I only used hover on that occasion because the map featured loads of water. Otherwise I'd have used wheels for economy. ANYWAY, I also often use tracked artillery because they're more durable. And I'd debate that stationary artillery would outperform mobile, because artillery characteristically works better against structures than tanks. Which is why I think my idea is more relevant to tracked artillery than hovers (because hovers die very quickly, while tracks take much longer time to kill, during which time the CB may realistically be expected to lose its lock-on). Again, I'm not saying CB should lose contact as SOON as you move, but after a certain period after firing...
Last edited by icyflames on 28 Dec 2010, 03:48, edited 1 time in total.

JakeGrey
Trained
Trained
Posts: 50
Joined: 11 Dec 2010, 22:17
Contact:

Re: CB against mobile units...

Post by JakeGrey » 28 Dec 2010, 03:47

LZ compromised wrote: If your tank, say, a cannon, fires at something and gets damaged, you expect it to return for repairs (or order it manually). You don't want to it to ignore you just because the target isn't dead yet. Same here: what if a "locked" mobile ripple gets damaged to yellow/red health? Is it supposed to fall back?
I don't think anyone's suggesting that artillery units have to behave like trebuchets in Age of Empires II, merely that they can't shoot whilst in on the move. Something the code already allows for, and which I thought applied to all indirect-fire weapons already.

3drts
Trained
Trained
Posts: 379
Joined: 01 Aug 2007, 03:50

Re: CB against mobile units...

Post by 3drts » 30 Dec 2010, 01:36

Artillery can't fire when on the move, except for the mini rocket array and Seraph, which aren't really artillery (just indirect).

The tank stops, rotates, fires, then moves again.

You never see a ripple or howitzer turret rotate left or right, only up or down.

You can still micromanage your mobile artillery, constantly have them change direction, the enemy artillery will fire based on a prediction made of their speed and heading at the time of firing, make your hover artillery "dance", and the enemy artillery fire will scatter all over the place, but not actually at your tanks (if you micro them right)

TVR
Trained
Trained
Posts: 216
Joined: 22 Nov 2008, 22:59

Re: CB against mobile units...

Post by TVR » 04 Jan 2011, 07:11

This cb-tracking-mobile-units bug has already been marked for fix in a later version.

Should you want to see the reasons (which are very reasonable), use the search function to find the previous topic on CB radar.

Post Reply