Panzer 2000

[aperson444]

A lot of OPFOR armies still use Arty. And yes, US still uses Arty, though I'm sure that air strikes are more popular.

[Thermis]

Arty is still very much used by the United States and all modern armies. It's very effective in a conventional conflict, but not so effective for the precision strikes we are currently using since we deal with heavily populated civilian areas.
Player controlled arty just takes some of our already limited amount of players from the actual combat not a good idea imo.

[AnRK]

[quote=""'[R-CON"]ReaperMAC;960844']Well if you know what they are, but don't know what the names are, pictures help [/quote]

He knew the names, just not sure about the German translations.

Anyway faust is indeed "fist" in German, and Panzerschreck is "Tank Fear" in German.

Panzerschreck - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[quote="aperson444""]My question is why can't we have arty? POE2 had an arty system that was controlled by players. It isn't hard to balance out, as long as we give every faction (and most armies have some kind of mortar/IED). All we need is a general aiming system, which can be created with something else (E.g, use marker, and line up distance).[/quote]

It's not a matter of getting them in game, just of their implementation, as had been said this particular tank has a range of 18km, which is more then 4 times the width or length of the biggest map in PR and just over 3 times the diagonal length of the biggest map in PR.

Like I said before you have to take down its range significantly for it to still be able to stay in the main base (thus making it's portability pointless), and then even if you took it down further, say gave it a range of 1km it'd have to be on a map where there was air support to balance it out and it would get hunted down in a second. If you left it for tanks to take down then your team would warn you very early on and you'd be able to get away before they got a chance to get you, either that or you'd just shell the £$%^ outta them before they even got close.

[fuzzhead]

POE2 had an arty system that was controlled by players.

If long range arty/mortar support was ever put in PR, it would have to be MUCH improved over the POE2 system, which is not high enough quality standard in realism and teamwork to be included in a PR release.

[Tirak]

If long range arty/mortar support was ever put in PR, it would have to be MUCH improved over the POE2 system, which is not high enough quality standard in realism and teamwork to be included in a PR release.

So just take out the overhead view

[AnRK]

Heheheh

I'd love to see it in aswell but I still can't see how it would work out to be honest.

[Glimmerman]

The model wont be a problem for us, its the aiming technique, if the DEV's sort that out...

[Sparatan117]

M109A6 Paladin is what we currently use in the united states along with the M270 MLRS. Both are great but cause way too much damage to be be fair in a bf match

[Maxfragg]

short question, how many maps do we have that could use the operating distance of such a heavy artillery?

[AnRK]

short question, how many maps do we have that could use the operating distance of such a heavy artillery?

The short question that's already been answered?

[Blade.3510]

M109A6 Paladin is what we currently use in the united states along with the M270 MLRS. Both are great but cause way too much damage to be be fair in a bf match

i like ur thinking

The model wont be a problem for us, its the aiming technique, if the DEV's sort that out...

cant you use a predictable ark of fire and leave it up to some sort of calcuulation on the players part by using the grids and team intel? with autority from comander only to shoot (squad leader if no commander)

[Thermis]

short question, how many maps do we have that could use the operating distance of such a heavy artillery?

A 155mm has a max range of 18km which is bigger than PR maps can be made. So, no PR map could use the operating distance of heavy artillery thats why we have off map arty.