Split the rocket into the new rocket and rocket artillery

    This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our Cookie Policy.

    • Split the rocket into the new rocket and rocket artillery

      Hello fellow players and developers,

      I would like to elaborate on a a post I made a long while back. I suggested replacing the rocket at level 2 as it is now by two units. One being a rocket that loses its unit destroying capabillities while maintaining its effect against buildings and morale. The other would be rocket artillery that can do damage to units and also damage buildings but is a lot easier to counter than the rocket is now. Reason I would like to elaborate on this is because I think a lot of problems that cause imbalance in the game now could possibly be fixed this way. The rocket on the first level would remain somewhat as it is now, the split would occur from the rocket at level 2.
      Rockets are the only buildable unit in the game that give a strategical advantage, a tactical advantage as well as a game mechanic advantage to whoever is using them. Rockets are a triple edged sword and your enemy suffers all three of them.

      Damage and cost
      On level 1 rockets do 15 damage to both infantry and armor and 50 to buildings. For comparison:
      A tactical bomber at level 6 does 11 to infantry, 6.1 to armor and 1.8 against buildings.
      The airplane is more expensive in manpower, oil, goods and money while metal is cost is 2/3.

      A medium tank at level 5 does 8 to infantry, 8.5 to armor and 1.5 to buildings.
      The tank costs more, well, everything.

      A strategic bomber at level 6 does 4.9 to infantry, 3.1 to armor and 17 to buildings.
      Costs the same in metal as a rocket, but is more expensive in every other resource.

      Rockets are simply to strong, to cheap and to multi purspose use.

      Mechanics
      Rockets can do a ridiculous amount of things in the game, unmatched by any other unit.
      Rockets:
      - can destroy buildings/units at the same time.
      - are hard to kill when not yet used because they can be hard to find and far away in enemy territory while still usable.
      - impossible to kill once launched.
      - ignore fortifications at level 4.
      - cost less in resources than they destroy, because they can destroy units so well that are usually more expensive than they are (this is especially true for manpower!).
      - can be outrun but can also be made inescapable (locking divisions into frontline battles, then launching).
      - can gain intel (they spot units as they fly through the air).
      - Checkmate enemy divisions in forts. Shoot rockets at units in a fort, if they don’t move, they suffer damage and the fortifications get weaker. If they move, shoot at them with artillery when they are outside of their fort (works good with level 4 rockets).
      - have a huge range.
      - can defend islands on their own starting at level 3 when combined with active play.
      - can to easily be mass produced (rockets level 1 need a level 1 airfield, after upgrading to level 2 all your level 1 rockets become level 2, this trait can be exploited once every game).
      - because they hardly cost manpower you can attack without spending much needed manpower while costing your enemy a lot of manpower. You save a lot of manpower while you can still destroy that of your enemy.
      - give you their flight time, if you see an enemy with your planes and you see they will be in a certain town 30 minutes from now you can fire a rocket, see that it takes the rocket 23 minutes to get there and then wait 7 minutes to fire a full volley from that same location.

      Reasons for splitting up the rocket as it is now
      - Historically speaking, the long range missiles of the second world war were not effective in using them against units. They were a terror weapon, trying to lower morale.
      - Rockets are hard to counter and balance into the game since they are not a unit, but ammunition. They just function in a way that makes them hard to counter (see list above). In short I see a lot of inbalance because of the way rockets are in the game now. Additional reasons are given throughout this article.
      - Rocket artillery as a unit would be much easier to defend against.
      - Rocket artillery would be a cool new unit with its own niche position in the game (but likely still be used a lot more than strategic bombers).
      - Historically, all sides in the game had these units. Pictures are added as an attachment.

      The new rocket
      - cheap. It would be cheaper than the current rocket
      - do damage to buildings and morale
      - hardly damage units
      - not in the same reaserch line as level 1 rockets. What is now a level 1 rocket would become the ‘flying bomb’. The current level 2 rocket would be a separate researchable unit with the flying bomb as a requirement.

      Rocket artillery
      - damages buildings
      - damages units (more damage to infantry type than armored or ships)
      - has bigger range than conventional artillery, smaller than the railroadgun / Or smaller range than conventional artillery and relatively more speed (see comments and response below from and to @Kanaris).
      - has a minimum range. They should not be able to hit enemies that are to close.
      - slow reload. Instead of the usual hourly damage, I’m thinking they could fire every 8 – 12 hours.

      I think splitting up the rocket is a much needed change for the game. It would stop late game experience from being an ''Owh I was not online and now my army is gone'' kind of experience. The game is a strategic very interesting and entertaining game. Though, the rocket kind of destroys this gaming experience up to a certain degree.

      Hope I can get some support going for this.

      Kind regards,

      Edepedable
      Images
      • American caliope in service in 1944.png

        70.38 kB, 287×219, viewed 18 times
      • German panzerwerfer in service in 1943.png

        76.83 kB, 287×197, viewed 9 times
      • Japanese type 4 20cm in service in 1943.png

        148 kB, 294×220, viewed 12 times
      • Russian BM-13 in service in 1941.png

        73.1 kB, 301×197, viewed 8 times

      The post was edited 8 times, last by Edepedable ().

    • The idea is very good as currently the way rockets are implemented is down right broken.

      But if self-propelled rocket artillery is to be introduced then range cannot be longer then conventional artillery. While its true rocket artillery packed a hell of a punch its range was between 5-12 km depending on the varient of rocket used which is about half that of conventional artillery.
    • Thanks for the response! :thumbsup:

      Kanaris wrote:

      The idea is very good as currently the way rockets are implemented is down right broken.

      But if self-propelled rocket artillery is to be introduced then range cannot be longer then conventional artillery. While its true rocket artillery packed a hell of a punch its range was between 5-12 km depending on the varient of rocket used which is about half that of conventional artillery.
      True! If you do it the other way around and make the range shorter, then it would not take away from what the rocket does now. So as far as a gaming mechanic I thought the larger range combined with the long reload time would be more interesting. This way it could somewhat do what rockets do now without having to run right up to enemies and get shot all the time.

      The counter to rocket artillery would mainly exist in planes and the railroad gun at range. And of course any unit that can rush it.

      Their main use would be to shoot at fortifications or airports and create a hassle for players that rely on them. Not necessarily take out huge amount of troops in the way rockets do now. Though, I do think their damage to infantry should be quite high. So that they could be used for the occasional fire support.

      If they are to have a short range like you describe, they would need to be really fast. Which could also be interesting. Had not really though about that option much. Seems to me that they would just die a lot that way because most forts have artillery in them.

      Would you prefer a faster short ranged version?
    • It would be more historically accurate as rocket batteries had to be relocated immediately after shooting due to how easily they would be spotted and countered by enemy barrage fire. Experienced crews were packed up and on the move the moment the last rocket left the rails.

      Also as you stated the increased reload time would have to be demonstrated but your proposed 8-12 hour is excessive I believe 4h would be sufficient for reloading.

      Historically thats how rocket artillery was used get close saturate the designated area with rocket fire and bug out quickly, reload and do it all over again. These units were the epitomy of shoot and scoot tactics

      The post was edited 3 times, last by Kanaris ().

    • Kanaris wrote:

      It would be more historically accurate as rocket batteries had to be relocated immediately after shooting due to how easily they would be spotted and countered by enemy barrage fire. Experienced crews were packed up and on the move the moment the last rocket left the rails.

      Also as you stated the increased reload time would have to be demonstrated but your proposed 8-12 hour is excessive I believe 4h would be sufficient for reloading.

      Historically thats how rocket artillery was used get close saturate the designated area with rocket fire and bug out quickly, reload and do it all over again. These units were the epitomy of shoot and scoot tactics
      I know how rocket artillery was historically used and I am all for historical accuracy as long as it does not ruin the game.

      Now that I have gotten some time to get used to the idea I think it is actually pretty cool to have rocket artillery be a fast shoot and scoot type unit with a shorter range. The reload time would indeed then not need be as as long. Though I do still think, like you also said, that it should be longer than most other units. Especially if they were to do heavy damage.

      I supose for game play purposes you can do one or the other. Longer range with longer reload with quite some damage and decent speed or shorter range with shorter reload with heavy damage and fast speed. I would be okay with either.

      The additional option to destroy buildings with a land dwelling unit would be really cool in my opinion. Not a lot of units can destroy buildings effectively now. As long as the rocket gets nerfed an we get rocket artillery in return in a way that brings new play into the game, I would be a happy customer

      The post was edited 1 time, last by Edepedable ().

    • In tandem I would like to see the shoot and scoot ability removed from conventional artillery units which realistically is complete BS. This can be done easily, simply put a 4 hour cooldown timer that gets activated everytime conventional artillery is moved preventing them from firing for 4h after issuing a move order.

      This way self-propelled arty/rocket become a niche item as the only unit that can shoot and scoot.
    • Kanaris wrote:

      In tandem I would like to see the shoot and scoot ability removed from conventional artillery units which realistically is complete BS. This can be done easily, simply put a 4 hour cooldown timer that gets activated everytime conventional artillery is moved preventing them from firing for 4h after issuing a move order.

      This way self-propelled arty/rocket become a niche item as the only unit that can shoot and scoot.
      Hmm 4 hours seems a little heavy, since its not that much of a strong unit early on. But I see your point, I think a 2 hour prep requirement before firing would be fair.
    • Rockets are already dirt cheap, though I like the SP Rocket Idea. Maybe 150km, same range as railroad guns, might be appropriate.
      I think nerfing the rocket would be a poor choice; the dangers involved in transports and moving them to the front are very real. In practice, rockets rarely do as much damage as they claim. Never have I killed an infantry unit with 1 or even 2 rockets. Making them destroy only buildings would have only a very limited use.
      "War is fought in three ways. Helping your enemy to lose, helping your allies to victory or helping yourself to win. Any way you take it, you are always helping someone."
    • My hope is that nerfing the rockets effectiveness against units and making it cheaper will make it usable as a tool to destroy morale and buildings. It is how they were historically used (destroy morale) and it would open up new strategies. Say that you are fighting a country of which you can not easily fight through their defensive line and they can not easily fight through yours. Since defenders have an advantage in the game, stand ofs happen a lot. If you can hurt this players buildings with strategic bombers and rockets you can gain an advantage and perhaps win somewhere in the future because you weakened the enemies unit production and economy. Though this seems optional already, there is no way in which this is a profitable strategy right now because of cost and efficiency.

      The post was edited 1 time, last by Edepedable ().

    • Good job Edepedable and Kanaris - so much truth in here.

      If I may sum up (partly my version):
      1. (easiest and most important one): Make rockets a strategic weapon by
      * reducing their damage against units by about 75%,
      * increasing the effect they have on the morale of the targeted province,
      * slightly reducing their costs,
      * slightly reducing their research costs.

      2.: Introduce new unit self propelled rocket artillery with these features:
      * Slightly shorter range than regular artillery.
      * Unarmored target with 5 HP.
      * 2 hours reload time. One remark about this: This would mean that stacks with rocket artillery as well as regular arty / SPAA would also fire only every second hour. So nobody would use this combination - as I think that's not a problem.
      * Rocket level 1 as prerequisite.
      * Very low defense values.
      * Ideally also a minimal range of 20km.
      * Damage against unarmored targets twice as high as regular artillery; against armored targets slightly lower compared to regular artillery.
      * All other features similar to SPAA, but production costs only 750 goods (SPAA: 1000), 250 steel (SPAA: 1250) and 1250 money (SPAA: 2000).

      3.: Let regular artillery have a cooldown phase after moving, so they can no longer shoot and scoot. I see as ideal: They have to halt for 15 minutes before being able to fire. Railway guns should have the same cooldown phase, but SPAA shouldn't. Slighty increase SPAA steel costs in return.

      By the way all three proposals are independent of each other - they don't have to be done together.