When players control artillery in PR

[Redamare]

When players control artillery in PR how do you think it should be played?....

Should it stay as a Animated game controled asset? ( like it is now )
Or should it be Player controled like how the new morter system is at the moment?

Should the artillery guns be single double or trippled manned assets? suchas ..

One man Aims .. One man rearms and the 3rd man Shoots

OR One aims the one other man shoots and reloads.. Making it more realistic to modern fire teams. OR would this be exploited ? .. the same man keeps switching between reload and fire position. ( IF such a thing is even possible with the god forsaken engine )

and lastly do you thinnk that the Morter system in place now should be changed? given more time between allowable fire missions?? limited range?? ( only allowing between two specific barrel angles )

give your insight.

Howitzer Fire Team videos
M198 155MM TOWED HOWITZER

( NOTE . Differnt video loads each time you enter the Site Random order)
Use the Red Text menu below video to switch between videos

[dtacs]

What he said. It isn't in game for a reason, plus it would be pretty retarded on such small maps. Mortars are enough.

[calstifer]

In PR2 perhaps if the maps and players are eneough. In PRBF2, no.

[mezlay2]

i think actually its a good idea what if you put away the mortars from some 4km maps and change it into arty but is it possible to let someone else reload the gun? anaways i think the player controlled artillery is a good idea on big maps

[Doc.Pock]

naaah maps like arma 225km are big enough only i think
and in a 32 man team 3 man for one gun would me to much

[Deer]

I think mortar system should be like it was in battlefield 1942. Shooter sees same view as his spotter saw when he called the mortars. That way shooter gets some eye candy too =)

[Spec]

No artillery for players, thanks. More guns at the front, please.

[Bringerof_D]

no simply because thats another squad off the field. however in PR2 if we can get more than 6 people in a squad and more than 32 players per team, sure. but still only one man asset like mortars.

having 6 man mortar squads are not stupid. you need the squad leader to command the guns, 2 or 3 men firing the guns and reloading between fire missions. and 2 or 3 sitting on TOW or machine gun placements to guard against enemy FOB/mortar hunters. hell in PR2 if we can have a full 8-12 man section instead of a 6 man squad, i'd be having the remainder of guys on patrol to prevent enemy scouts from finding it or infantry/vehicles accidentally coming across our site. If the patrols get bumped all fire missions stop and no one will engage directly from the FOB site until we clear the area all hands will abandon their asset and group to prep an ambush for the enemy.

[Cassius]

I think both would be okay. Big boom on a timer, liker artillery strikes and jdam and player controlled mortars. Sure, some people complain that the insurgents cant place all of their people on the cache and cost the blueforce 100 tickets to take it out and have to make choices, like sending a squad out after the mortars or supplies, but I dont think it should be removed because of it.

[Spartan0189]

I can see why you want player controlled Arty, I would think it would have the most effect on maps like Kashan or Silent Eagle, only because the maps are so large (4km).
But I don't see it in the foreseeable future.