Modify Mortar -> Firebase Damage System

[Psyrus]

[Preamble]

The ease at which mortars can be established, and on all maps except 4km, their near omnipotent range means that when used effectively (or even moderately effectively), they can essentially invalidate defensive positions. I realize that this is their intended purpose, however it is merely the ease of use and potential for near unlimited barrages (with a decent supply line) that I take issue with. As of 0.973, the status quo is as follows. Squad A reports a firebase at grid H4-7, mortar team fires off 5-10 rounds [mortar team's SL can call their own firemission], firebase and all troops are no more, Squad A didn't have to lift a finger.

For this reason I propose the following change, specifically to
- Further promote teamwork
- Reward defensive positions a little bit more

[Proposal]

Everything remains exactly the same, with the single exception that mortars will no longer destroy firebases. They will instead disable the spawn point (overrun mechanic) if a mortar lands within the mortar's splash range. The mortars will still kill all infantry that are not in foxholes and destroy emplacements (although I advocate anything less than a direct hit doing much less damage).

The reasoning behind the proposal is as follows: Mortars are indeed a force to be reckoned with, and should not be neutered to damage people less, or not affect fobs. The issue is with the rather spammy nature of them, especially with dedicated mortars teams basically being able to invalidate all spotted fobs on 1-2km maps. The above proposal retains the destructive power of the mortars without significant gameplay changes, however the mortars will now only serve as a clearing tool, and it will require a squad/vehicle to go in there and actually remove the enemy's spawn point. The overrun mechanic will serve the purpose of reinforcements being cut off as the mortars wreck havok. It will also potentially give rise to more smoke round usage, as the mortars could fall, causing damage to the fob position but not killing the foxhole infantry (and maybe leaving a SL to drop a rally to reinforce the position), meaning that smoke will be useful in assisting the squad tasked with clearing the fob in its entirety.

[Pros]

• A potential increase in inter-squad teamwork (mortars->inf)
• Give spawnpoint/fob defenders more of a fighting chance, while still giving the mortars a significant kick.
• Essentially invalidate mortar spam on fobs, especially undefended fobs, as it'll just disable them for the duration of the spam and then the team can spawn there again.

[Cons]

• Could result in unscrupulous mortar teams sporadically [every 2-3 mins] mortaring known fob locations hoping for cheap kills, without really caring whether the fob goes down.
• Not as 'realistic', although I argue not a huge amount of the current situation is anyway.

[Short Summary]

• Replace FOB mortar damage with the overrun mechanic (2 minute spawn disable)
• Retain infantry killing power
• [Optional: Reduce splash damage to emplacements - not remove]
• Promotes teamplay by requiring an infantry squad to work with the mortars to take down fobs, rather than just mortaring & being done

[Arnoldio]

Nicely written.

To counter "Could result in unscrupulous mortar teams sporadically [every 2-3 mins] mortaring known fob locations hoping for cheap kills, without really caring whether the fob goes down." , you could do it a bit differently. Mix it with the "[Optional: Reduce splash damage to emplacements - not remove]" Keep fob spawnable, make it more resillient to mortar fire (direct fire or not), to make it destructible, but would require several acurate shots, also make foxholes really tough againsth splash, except direct fire ofcourse.

[Von_Gnome]

But how would this affect let's say a fob in the bunker on kashan?

[goguapsy]

Interesting.

I agree with Arnoldio about the foxhole damage, they should be resistant for gameplay reasons. But definitely not indestructible. I would decrease the emplacements damage slightly to still allow a figthing chance, but still being a much more reasonable idea to go to a foxhole.

The idea is generally very reasonable, and I see your point. I wonder how would that work to be implemented, but I think would be interesting to try...

I believe a lot of people will not see much use in this. TBH, since the mortars were introduced, I have seen a few times FOBs getting destroyed solely by them (but I have seen some). But I believe that if you put this into perspective, a lot of people might find this idea reasonable.

But give it a look at Arnoldio's and my emplacement damage suggestions, I think they would be interesting.

It will also potentially give rise to more smoke round usage, as the mortars could fall, causing damage to the fob position but not killing the foxhole infantry (and maybe leaving a SL to drop a rally to reinforce the position), meaning that smoke will be useful in assisting the squad tasked with clearing the fob in its entirety.

I don't quite understand what you are saying there.

[Mikemonster]

Once a FOB is known it is destroyed by a team effective with mortars, which I think is a little silly and defeats the point of a foxhole. I think MG's and foxholes should be immune to mortars, crates destroyeable, TOW/AA emplacements destroyable, and the actual FOB itself damageable (so as to not allow spawning) but not destroyable.

That way a squad could effectively defend a firebase without being able to feel invinceable.

[Arc_Shielder]

I definitely support this. The mortars are not overpowered, but its destructive nature should be decreased for the sake of gameplay flow.

[jerkzilla]

Nicely written.

To counter "Could result in unscrupulous mortar teams sporadically [every 2-3 mins] mortaring known fob locations hoping for cheap kills, without really caring whether the fob goes down." , you could do it a bit differently. Mix it with the "[Optional: Reduce splash damage to emplacements - not remove]" Keep fob spawnable, make it more resillient to mortar fire (direct fire or not), to make it destructible, but would require several acurate shots, also make foxholes really tough againsth splash, except direct fire ofcourse.

Correct me if I'm wrong but, don't FOBs "bleed" after they take some damage?
Makes several accurate shots one accurate shot and then it bleeds by itself. But otherwise agree.

[Arnoldio]

Probably bleeds, but that could be tweaked with slowing/removing bleed...

[dtacs]

I disagree that defensive strategies need more buffing, but I agree that a firebase shouldn't be made entirely redundant by a mortar team.

To be frank I find mortars to be a total gimmick. The amount of times my squad has actually been effected by them (both when calling them in and actually getting killed by them) is less than I can count on two hands.

[billysmall44]

I think mortars should be more used as a suppression technique more then demolition.
Another thing, Ive been in fox holes when being mortared and they don't seem to do anything special. any even if they did work, Air bursts would make them useless wouldn't they? Mortars are awesome, don't get me wrong, but they are totally replacing a few important game play aspects.
I haven't been in a squad were anyone used a combat engineer for a long time. Maybe it would be better if you had to use C4 to completely kill emplacements. Incendiary just disable them, but sooner or later to completely get rid of them it takes a combat engineer. In my mind that would make a lot more sense then calling in mortars to do that job.

[Mikemonster]

Dtacs, mortars are pretty useless but only if you have a building to wait them out in. They are great for FOB sniping and destroying squads out in the open. But nobody uses them [effectively], not that I see. I think it's the boredom factor.

[PFunk]

I disagree that defensive strategies need more buffing, but I agree that a firebase shouldn't be made entirely redundant by a mortar team.

To be frank I find mortars to be a total gimmick. The amount of times my squad has actually been effected by them (both when calling them in and actually getting killed by them) is less than I can count on two hands.

Thats only because when people build them they usually suck at either using them or at communicating with the people who need them.

I've worked with mortarmen who were godly with their aim, on time with their rounds, and seriously dedicated to making it into an art.

I'm not even kidding, they decimated any target in the open. They had created their own fire solution calculator they used external to PR and could coordinate two tubes to fire a single pattern of rounds that would land within a meter or two of where they were called in and all that within 40 seconds at the most usually.

They are obviously the exception but even one tube working well can be really effective if the enemy doesnt have any cover over their heads and remains static. If the SL can observe an enemy moving in a straight line and can guess where they'll be when the rounds come down he can get them on the move too.

Features don't suck cause people suck at using them. And there should be some kind of cover for entrenched infantry from mortars. There are flags out there that can easily be wiped clean by continuous mortar fire. Maybe we need a slit trench that can be dug up with a roof over it but it takes 4 guys 5 minutes to dig, implying that its only available at positions that are VERY much in friendly control. It would also still possibly cause a bleed after direct hits maybe to even it up a bit.

In really coordinated play I've seen mortars absolutely dominate a map. I mean they became the equivalent to air superiority on Kashan 64. It didn't take much either. It took a grid reference and 40 seconds of waiting for hell to land on bad guys.

The tools ain't broke just because nobody knows how to use them right.

[Redamare]

hmm . . . sure sounds good to me except i would bring the spawn time to 100 instead of 2 due to the fact people could just simply morter one shell every 2 minutes and keep a fob unspawnable.

[goguapsy]

hmm . . . sure sounds good to me except i would bring the spawn time to 100 instead of 2 due to the fact people could just simply morter one shell every 2 minutes and keep a fob unspawnable.

Well... they can do that already right? By destroying them?

[Rudd]

directional damage is currently more complicated than currently portrayed I agree, however the current foxhole damage is correct gameplay and semi-realism wise, so I would like it seen change in proportion please!! (Drunk message!)

[Stealthgato]

imo mortars can be complete gameplay killers. The situation which left me most disappointed was in a round in Barracuda, we set up an awesome defence at Supply Fortification, with the ZPU-4 still up and at it, the US were getting ready to charge up the hill, it would be awesome, then they just spammed all of the Supply Fort with mortars, destroyed everything, inf just walked in and capped. No fun for anyone. Ragequit.

[goguapsy]

they just spammed all of the Supply Fort with mortars, destroyed everything, inf just walked in and capped.

Well that's for what mortars were created for...

And TBH, many times it's more fun to win than to lose... I'm not saying the U.S. wouldn't have fun charging up the hill (and possibly getting steamrolled), but I don't think the portrayed situation normally provides bilateral fun.

[Mikemonster]

Provide diggeable [deployable] protection from mortars?

[DudeofDeath]

Provide diggeable [deployable] protection from mortars?

that sounds kinda cool, a partially underground foxhole/bunker, maybe the top's like a machine gunners nest with little windows and it takes a little longer to build, like 60-75 shovels or something because it affords more protection. (3-5 Direct hits might destroy it? maybe or invincible.)

I don't think the mortars themselves really need to be changed, they work fine now and noticed them take over games only occasionally, more often lately I've seen them somewhat unused.

If enemy mortars are affecting your team that much a major priority should be to seek and destroy them as many times as necessary. The End.

[rushn]

that sounds kinda cool, a partially underground foxhole/bunker, maybe the top's like a machine gunners nest with little windows and it takes a little longer to build, like 60-75 shovels or something because it affords more protection. (3-5 Direct hits might destroy it? maybe or invincible.)

I don't think the mortars themselves really need to be changed, they work fine now and noticed them take over games only occasionally, more often lately I've seen them somewhat unused.

If enemy mortars are affecting your team that much a major priority should be to seek and destroy them as many times as necessary. The End.

that underground foxhole will should not withstand a direct hit maybe 1-2 shots