No it changes a lot. The 3 damage A-IV wouldn't be affected by the potential rule change true, but it would be doing 3 damage non-AP as opposed to 4 damage (against different targets true) AP damage. Armor could negate the grand majority of the damage and thus counter it. I am not crazy about making 3 damage artillery pieces that cost less than 80 points or so but I can live with one if it doesn't have AP.

I'm of the same opinion. What I meant is that suddenly the Liao Arrow IV would in fact be the only arty you'd see, since it would be the only one that could damage armoured units.

What about another spin on the situation? I've been reading the move-and-shoot thread, and it's made me realize how much of a downer for arty that rule would be. Maybe then artillery wouldn't NEED to be fixed quite so much.

1. so an increase of 3in would totally ruin a venue? cardboard is cheap an can be foun most anywhere. A simple cardboard backer to support the additional length and not require a change to the tables.
2. with multiple arty it takes too long to engage anyway. given a mirror force of arty duels its an incrediblely boring game decided on who goes first.
3. I don't worry about long toms. for a couple of reasons. they are expensive, they drift badly and they do a 2 max of damage. adding a long tom layer would cut into how many Arrow4s and DI AA Arty being played or would cut into their support.

1) Ok I didn't think of card board backers you have a point there

2) I totaly agree with that about arty right now. That is why people have a problem with it. However increasing the board size will increase time it takes to begin fighting for none arty units which is not a good thing.

3) I disagree with you here. In a longer board size 2 longtom would be very effective for their point cost. And you will still have enough point left to bring 3 ssw towed arty and enough points left to bring 5-6 moratal arty, and will still have around 100 points to mess with. On the other hand mechs will have to go through more distances to get to artillery ( more heat and damage), and infiltrators will become less efective in tying it up.


How about this sugestion. The units in deployment zones will not take damage from artillery attacks.

How will this effect the game?
First of all there will be no artillery duel. So to kill enemy arty you will have to send your own units to take them out.
Second player one has a huge advatage right now with infiltrating atv squads to tie up units and raining arty on them before you have a chance to react, this will no longer work.
Third arty will only threaten units which you will move out of DZ.
There will not be a nightmare of having 6 pogs on your DZ before you had a turn and having only 3 orders to trie to move out all your units out of the way.

Actually my other suggestion would be to do this.
current rule:
Preparing the Battlefield
"Each of his units must be placed with its center dot in the deployment zone"

suggested change:
"Each of his units must be placed with its base in the deployment zone"

it would eliminate the Player 1 pog you to death scenario, unless they are transported. 30in range + 2in blast radius + 1.5in for half a base = 33.5in just shy of hitting something that is against the backwall of your DZ. however, the arty pieces are still effective as once you move you are now vunerable, but at least your support will have a chance.

These uber range measuring discussions for arty ranges are nice and all... but do we really want a game where SS Tank ArrowIV execute anything that dares come out of its DZ? They threaten 33.5" if their base is entirely in the DZ, and 35" if the centerpoint is on the DZ edge.

Sure, it is a radius and we're measuring the farthest point... but you guys get the idea.

Howdo guys
I realise AP is a part of the game and should not be
removed from it,in my opinion,but i think it needs
to be re-defined as per SE description,after all
it is designed to destroy ARMORED Units not
soft skined vehicles or infantry,and the same is
true of anti personel SE.Why should it do damage
to ARMORED units,making the SE do what it was
desiged for would help.
Mechlube Man

DUDES arty is cheap
a soviet 120mm gun cost less than an american 2 1/2 ton truck. they are cheap in life and in the game. But people are not upset about arty per say but arty with AP. I am sorry that your 200 point plus mech with hardened armor and 23 defense can be hit by a 43 point gun, but it is not the end of the world.
I am sure you can adapt to the situation

Am I the lone warrior who doesn't think arty is overpowered?

I rejoice when my opponent fields arty, since my goal is to engage the enemy in their deployment zone. Pick a mech or two with decent speed and cram your infantry in Shuns and Saxon APCs. Then take off.

If you happen to go first, just move your mechs. Make your opponent make the first move. And finally, be sure to place blocking terrain in front of their deployment zone whenever possible.

Ok, now back to the discussion of nerfing arty....

AlienJake

>> I am sorry that your 200 point plus mech with hardened armor and 23 defense can be hit by a 43 point gun, but it is not the end of the world.
I am sure you can adapt to the situation<<

Absolutely...don't play with those pieces.

>>Pick a mech or two with decent speed and cram your infantry in Shuns and Saxon APCs. Then take off.

If you happen to go first, just move your mechs. Make your opponent make the first move. <<

Absolutely, only play with those pieces.

On the other hand, some folks would like to add a bit of variety to the game.

take care,

Rick

Artillery was not overpowered until the idiot designers broke it. Multipog artillery pieces were one of the worst mistakes ever made. The only good thing was there were very few effective long ranged multipog armor piercing ones. Fixing stacking of the pogs helped, but then they designed a new piece that broke the system again.
________
Bongs

This is right on the money. I'm getting tired of having to fix artillery after every expansion. We have reached a point that fixing the SS A4 with a general rule would simply kill artillery altogether.

WK should use its awesome FAQing power to eliminate the AP of this piece. It would still be a hell of a buy for 51 points. I feel sorry for anyone who paid $50 for it on ebay but uber artillery pieces are not in MWDA best interest.

Yea I'm with Doomboy on this, yes while its possible to beat it with a counter stratagy (but with things as they stand "counter" only works if they DON'T bring peseants otherwise you never stop the artilery and you get chewed to pieces by VTOLs) it also takes the fun out of it when the majority of the cool looking pieces WK loves to send out to people who remain devoute to battlemechs are rendered unless and a waste of resorces. Remeber One Eyed Jack? Ever since artilery came out he's gone into hiding, I can't even get people to admit to having him.

Really I'm the only guy who runs mechs anymore where I am and thats cause I don't have good VTOLs and artilery.

WK's loves to make bigger and badder mechs with each set, but really all they are, are collectables. No one serious in competition would even consider using Geo Kain alongside artilery, but only serious competition seems to exsist.

The first step in the right direction would be to disallow Armour Piercing on artillery attacks. Arty would be plenty useful even without AP - it's not like there's a lot of infantry that can deal with it. And the few "powerful" vehicles in the game aren't currently fielded because of arty, at least not without tank-drop.

Tell me how that would not make the game better.

AP on the Snipers and LongTom was not over powered. These pieces have a role in the overall scheme of things. They force players to engage.

The designers should have made AP artillery single use like they did with VTOLs. Barrages are hell on ammo stocks. But that is water over the dam now.

Nixing the AP on the SS A4 would do the trick and balance out the artillery costs.