Shore Based Guns

[Sampsonite]

I tried to find it in the forum search and came up with nothing. Are there going to be shore based guns? During the Battle of Morocco, the Battleship Massachusetts while firing on Jean Bart was harassed by the shore guns overlooking Morocco harbor. The reason battleships didn't just steam into a harbor and shoot up the place was because of coastal guns. Recent talk in the forums of islands made me think of it.

[mr3awsome]

Why would someone sacrifice their mobility for a more vulnerable, weaker emplacement?

[International_Barfighter]

Yeah, this would be similar to making the gun emplacements in Siegfried Line operational.  It would add static annoyances without really bringing any bonus to gameplay.  Everyone would simply target them first, take them out, then carry on smartly.  Another example of realism vs gameplay.

[sgtpepper500]

mr3awsome, on 02 January 2013 - 03:55 PM, said:

Why would someone sacrifice their mobility for a more vulnerable, weaker emplacement?

I think what he is trying to say is what about coastal guns in maps. This would most likely depend on the game mode. For example it would work well with my Island assault mode.Of course it wouldn't make sense to have random coastal guns shooting each other in a normal mode.

[JeeWeeJ]

While i like the idea, i don't think they'll be ingame. As they are to be AI controlled...and KGB was quite clear that there will be no AI controlled assets ingame.

 

Still, i'd like to see them in an island assault mode!

[sgtpepper500]

International_Barfighter, on 02 January 2013 - 04:09 PM, said:

Yeah, this would be similar to making the gun emplacements in Siegfried Line operational.  It would add static annoyances without really bringing any bonus to gameplay.  Everyone would simply target them first, take them out, then carry on smartly.  Another example of realism vs gameplay.

I am not sure if that would be the same in WoWs. Considering we haven't even had a chance to play it yet. Plus as I said they wouldn't need to be in every mode and map. Considering most of the guns would most likely not be right next to the enemy spawn. So unless the carriers are able to get their planes through the air defenses and focus on the turrets I don't see how then the enemy can simply target them first.

by focusing on them first they would leave themselves vulnerable to the enemy ships because the coastal guns would most likely not be all alone. It is viable to have coastal guns in defensive areas since they are a defensive weapon.

[sgtpepper500]

JeeWeeJ, on 02 January 2013 - 04:14 PM, said:

While i like the idea, i don't think they'll be ingame. As they are to be AI controlled...and KGB was quite clear that there will be no AI controlled assets ingame.

Still, i'd like to see them in an island assault mode!

I thought that was regarding AI controlled ships? Hmm well that would be a real bummer if no AI controlled anything. I guess it would still make the Island Assault mode viable sort of.... :Smile_amazed:.

[Ariecho]

Sampsonite, on 02 January 2013 - 03:53 PM, said:

I tried to find it in the forum search and came up with nothing. Are there going to be shore based guns? During the Battle of Morocco, the Battleship Massachusetts while firing on Jean Bart was harassed by the shore guns overlooking Morocco harbor. The reason battleships didn't just steam into a harbor and shoot up the place was because of coastal guns. Recent talk in the forums of islands made me think of it.

There is more than one problem with coastal batteries:

• They couldn't be used in regular battles.  What side would they pick?
  
• Depending on the guns used, they couldn't be available for every tier.
  
• As previously mentioned, they'd have to be AI-operated.

I'm sure I'm missing other "problems".

[Wunderwaffen1945]

Idea is not so bad at all.....worth of taking in concern

[Agent_JackRyan]

I would think this would be no different that AA for WoWP.  set up a few static around the bases (make them destructable like AA) and it adds to the defense of a capture point.

[Sampsonite]

I wouldn't think that they would be mannable. I'd say just automatic once a ship came within range. I didn't even think of the different battle modes. I was thinking along the lines of a deterrent to people rushing into a harbor. I could see them used in "Assault" mode as being a viable asset. Too small to be anything dangerous to a battleship but a real threat to smaller ships.

[sgtpepper500]

Ariecho, on 02 January 2013 - 04:21 PM, said:

There is more than one problem with coastal batteries:

• They couldn't be used in regular battles.  What side would they pick?
  
• Depending on the guns used, they couldn't be available for every tier.
  
• As previously mentioned, they'd have to be AI-operated.

I'm sure I'm missing other "problems".

1. They would be used only in certain modes.
2. Who is to say you couldn't have tiered guns too? I think this problem could be addressed. Nobody said the guns had to be able to one shot everyone. Could have a coastal gun for each spread of three tiers or so?
3. I thought that answer was for AI controlled ships. Perhaps I missed another question.

[Lt_Andrev]

Sampsonite, on 02 January 2013 - 03:53 PM, said:

I tried to find it in the forum search and came up with nothing. Are there going to be shore based guns?

Yeah, like base defence guns in WoT.
  :lol:

[anonym_auUiRfWCi1jI]

This would be a viable inclusion if shore batteries were either AI or player controlled, neither of which I believe WG is considering.

 

Sampsonite, on 02 January 2013 - 03:53 PM, said:

I tried to find it in the forum search and came up with nothing. Are there going to be shore based guns? During the Battle of Morocco, the Battleship Massachusetts while firing on Jean Bart was harassed by the shore guns overlooking Morocco harbor. The reason battleships didn't just steam into a harbor and shoot up the place was because of coastal guns. Recent talk in the forums of islands made me think of it.

[International_Barfighter]

Once again, what is the advantage?  You're taking the pure-PVP aspect of the games and adding AI to it.  Or you're forcing someone to be the shore-gunner.  Either way, it would be something contrary to the spirit of their games so far.

[anonym_auUiRfWCi1jI]

If enemy AI shore batteries provided a measure of capture through a process of suppresive fire, that would be something I would welcome.  If it had no value to suppress, let alone rack up cap points, then no, I would be opposed to it.

[International_Barfighter]

I'm sorry, I don't really understand what you mean.  A measure of capture?

[anonym_auUiRfWCi1jI]

Like capping in WoT, where by destroying shore batteries, among other fixed targets, earns your team capture points.  If your team sees little to no action ship-to-ship or otherwise, capping can still win the game.

[sgtpepper500]

t42592, on 02 January 2013 - 06:54 PM, said:

If enemy AI shore batteries provided a measure of capture through a process of suppresive fire, that would be something I would welcome.  If it had no value to suppress, let alone rack up cap points, then no, I would be opposed to it.

You mean like killing a defense gun would some how affecting the cap process? Such as destroying a gun would either increase your capping rate or decrease the enemy's cap rate?

[RRR3]

If they put them in they would become like artillery, but it probably won't happen

[Crag_r]

RRR3, on 02 January 2013 - 11:39 PM, said:

If they put them in they would become like artillery, but it probably won't happen

According to people here, EVERYTHING wold become like arty.  :Smile_sceptic: kinda over the arty analogy for the time been

[cmcpaulinc]

I think of costal defence as something in Shogun 2 Fall of the samuri. they can be a form of base, such as a main base where players could destroy or capture to use as protection. they get a low range so enemy players could easily menuver around there range. these could be kind of who owns the water like WoWP has air supremecy. only all the costal guns need to be under a single team control. if they are destroyed, they make an easy capture, so you dont own the waters based on a single costal gun outpost.

[Super_Dreadnought]

Crag_r, on 03 January 2013 - 12:02 AM, said:

According to people here, EVERYTHING wold become like arty.  :Smile_sceptic: kinda over the arty analogy for the time been

All that we need now is for arty to become submarines, then the circle of life will be complete. :Smile_teethhappy:

[anonym_auUiRfWCi1jI]

Sortof.  Let's consider each side has a potential to earn 100% capping, either through sitting on the enemy flag location, or through eliminating enemy strategic assets, coastal defenses, or the like.  In the following example, this is more readily understood.

 

20:00 Minutes clock starts!

• Both teams steam across the map with air squadrons dispatched to the four winds.

19:00 ~

• Both teams' air units engage over open water, with near devastating results.  Remaining flights return to surface bases.

16:00 ~

• Forward surface ships on both sides are coming up short on detection, and aerial patrols are just now returning to designated patrol sectors.

13:00 ~

• Surface patrols are redeployed on both sides to scout other locations.

10:00 ~

• Mid point through the game, no major engagments have occurred.  Both teams make for nearest known enemy coastal waters.

08:00 ~

• Aerial patrols spot military land structures, and commence bombing.

• Battleships train main guns and begin shelling the same.

• Escort screens setup picket lines flanking the battle group.

07:00 ~

• Enemy fighters and bombers enter the picket line, screening for the battlegroup.

• AA fire commences, and a wall of bullets insues.

• Defensive fighters engage the attacking forces.

05:00 ~

• Enemy battle groups begin ranging the picket lines, and shells start dropping short.

• Enemy escort group is steaming towards the picket line.

03:00 ~

• The capping meter is nearing 90%, as the shore targets are nearly destroyed, with aerial enemy fighters are destroyed.

• All the while, the enemy capping meter is now growing at 10% with several direct hits on the picket line.

01:00 ~

• With all the shore targets destroyed, and the picket line nearly gone, carriers are now dispatching airplanes on enemy battle groups and fast approaching escorts

• The capping meter grows to 98% as both fighters and bombers make short work of escorts engaging the picket line.

• The battleships are sinking the approaching ships until the combined damage between shore targets and enemy shipping reaches 100%

Victory!

 

Yes, this is a one-sided example of a unknown battle match.  But I hope it helps you understand how fixed land assets can swing the scale in your teams favor, if your enemy is illusive.  The problem with engaging shore assets is it gives away the enemies position, or strategic interest.

 

 

sgtpepper500, on 02 January 2013 - 07:48 PM, said:

You mean like killing a defense gun would some how affecting the cap process? Such as destroying a gun would either increase your capping rate or decrease the enemy's cap rate?

[T3nno]

i can see this happening, WoWp has A.I. controlled AA guns