Self-propelled artillery/gun

[neon bolt]

I'm surprised SP vehicles are not in the game. I could see them using the same system as artillery (with the range calculation gui). It seems natural for it to be in the game imo, something I would expect to have
Tbh, I would rather have mortars and self-propelled artillery/guns over useable artillery. Artillery should be a callin for the commander instead because realistically artillery was way way back behind friendly lines. Even Squad44 doesn't have a proper self-propelled artillery other than the Panzerwerfer which has the same role as one despite it being rocket artillery. But I mean a proper one like the Sd.Kfz. 124 Wespe, SU-122, Sexton, and M7 Priest would be really cool to have in HLL and think about how useful it'll be

The Panzerwerfer from Squad44 in action. See how he's far away and just raining rockets on the point
https://youtu.be/9TQOTml23QA?si=exXmWVnLLn8fctps

IL2 Sturmovik is probably the only game with a historically accurate and proper use of SP artillery. But of course don't make it so complicated as the one in IL2, give it the same system as the HLL artillery instead
https://youtu.be/SK0hLTkisj4?si=rg3sKNpSJNnPD4hD&t=74

[dire whale]

Yes please!!!!!

[foggy monolith]

100%

[arctic mica]

The maps aren’t even close to large enough for self-propelled artillery to make sense. They were’t deployed this close to the fight. Mortars would be an infinitely better addition and would actually make sense

[neon bolt]

The same logic applies to the artillery. But it works
I would argue the SPAs and SPGs would make more sense. The SU-122 for example could literally be used as an anti tank role or infantry support role. It's able to shoot targets at closer ranges than artillery. But it also has the capability to shoot targets across the map like artillery giving it a multi purpose role adding more diversity on the battlefield

[arctic mica]

The same logic applies to the artillery. But it works
Removing artillery and replacing them with mortars is literally one of the most common suggestions posted. The recon/arty gameplay loop is absolutely despised and it makes no sense that artillery is that close to the front when it has like 10 times the range of the map

[dire whale]

I like artillery though. A self-propelled artillery vehicle can fix the artillery problem maybe.
If you destroy the vehicle, not only will they have to wait for another one to respawn but it will cost a lot of resources to spawn it in. Also recon aren't forced to sit and spawn camp arty userrs

[cerulean zenith]

You’re aware the max range of mortars exceedes all maps in the game right? And the Howitzers in the game max range is 1800 meters and in real life they easily travel on average 15kilimotors. In the end, the game is about the suspension of disbelief.

[whole sand]

Oh hey, it's my video! 😄

And to the suggestion, would be cool to have them.

[dire whale]

That kill was impressive 👏

[sage quail]

I dont like it it could be very broken imagine launching artillery to hq or to move so recon cant hunt you also how many ammo will have and a lot of things i see that dosnet convice me

[weary anchor]

I would like a dedicated TD’s like M10 or something

[vocal sedge]

Mortars and mortar squads would be much better

[whole sand]

The same can be said about mortars too. I guess adding spawn protection would solve it?

[sage quail]

mortars for me are a good option bc they arent armored and also is easier to take them down also we could make the visibility is very high against those so when they moce is easier to watch them

[whole sand]

I beg to differ
I would argue that mortars are more difficult to take down because they're more mobile and can be placed almost anywhere with good cover. This is especially true near an enemy point where everyone is spawning and pushing from, giving you infantry cover.
In contrast, the SPG is loud and it'll reveal your position. You need to maintain some distance from your target to lob shells over trees or buildings. Additionally, it's open-top, so anyone can toss a grenade or hop onto the tank and shoot the crew. Not to mention, they'll most likely be alone, away from the fighting, so it won't have any infantry cover. If it goes into battle with the infantry, it's just a tank without a turret and MG at that point, making it less effective than a normal tank.

The mortar will be more effective too. Sure, the SPG will be dropping much larger shells, but the mortar will be dropping 15-25 rounds a minute, while it will take 20-30 seconds just to load a single round in an SPG.

[dire whale]

Mortars will actually be op, just ping where you wanna shoot and you get your range lmao. It's more balanced in Squad44 because you can only get an approx range by looking at your map and using the scale

[buoyant pulsar]

Game isn’t big enough for SPG. As everyone’s been saying forever - remove artillery, add mortars, add more infantry combat vehicles

[iron rapids]

I have made basically the same post before, I'm all for it

[dire whale]

Same with artillery and it works. It's fun too but does get annoying when you're the enemy recon team and are forced to deal with it. Just needs a few changes and bam, will be great

[weary badger]

To say "it works" while the arty is unrealistic and the gameplay mediocre is a bit silly.

[royal shell]

Models were made by cassagi ages ago. Never implemented.

[vital rock]

Idk maybe there could be a squad similar to tank and recon for portable mortars?

[weary badger]

Those are from BM and are very old. T17 never said anything about this. I highly doubt those models still exists.

[buoyant pulsar]

They look great, but it’s still not suitable for this game in my opinion. I think mortar squads would add a significant new dynamic to the game.

I don’t think the game can physically handle any new squads outside of the existing structure though, which is probably why this hasn’t ever and won’t ever be implemented.

[whole sand]

So what if it's unrealistic? There are many things in this game that are unrealistic

[dire whale]

It's not a new squad though, it's just another tank squad

[buoyant pulsar]

I was talking about mortar squads, as they can’t introduce any new squad variations to the engine.

[weary badger]

To have arty at the front and shooting it with a max. range of 1800m is pretty hard...
Its on the same level as having 3 people in a 2 man tank.
Both are impossible and kinda hilarious.

[dire whale]

HLL isn't a realistic game, so whatever.
The T-70 in HLL is is 3 man tank yet irl it was only a 2 man tank. The T-34 shouldn't have a separate commander and gunner, the commander was the gunner as well. The whole tank system is terrible in the game, extremely unrealistic. And whatever if the max range for the artillery is 1800m? It's mainly for balancing, I'm sure you don't want arty shells landing at your HQ spawn
Maybe have them fix the tanks first instead..

[whole sand]

Yeah, the tank system in HLL is terrible

[frank scroll]

Mortars since it encourages squads working together to get rid of mortar teams. Mortar teams in a defensive capacity, “counter battery” and mortar teams in an offensive capacity. “Softening, and deploying smoke.”

[dire whale]

Mortars will be too op imo because of the ping system. Literally gives me pinpoint accuracy

[obsidian pasture]

what are you talking about its exact same with artillery its a problem of ping not mortars

[dire whale]

You can literally place it anywhere, accurately fire 15 - 25 shells per minute, have someone place an ammo crate next to you and they're gonna be screwed
What am I talking about? You literally said what I said lol.. The ping system is the problem lmao. Mortars should be added once they remove the ping then it'll be fair. Same with the arty

[weary badger]

Mortar do have a smaller Projektile so they would have less Aoe, that balances out the fire rate. While they still would need to make the mortar range "unrealistic" I think a range of 300-400m would be okay. This would enable the reacon to stay closer to the Frontline and while still being able to destroy mortars if necessary. This isnt perfekt but sitting besides the enemy arty for 90 minutes straight is far worse.

Though i can fully agree to your statement about tanks.

[dire whale]

I want both mortars and SPAs
and make the artillery a commander call in

also they need to remove the distance when you ping, such a dumb feature

[lean flicker]

They need to add this it would make so much more since, and be really fun, every nation had a version of it

[forest rose]

Problem with that is that if we had to move artillery up the field we'd propably pin the last 200m of the other team and pound them to oblivion since HQs are in fixed positions

[stoic finch]

this can be fixed relatively easily by balancing:

• SPG get less range than a stationary howitzer and more shell scatter in the target area (so they hit less accurate)
• artillery gets a large muzzle effect so their position can more easily be discovered
• artillery can be destroyed by commander bombing runs
  And then there's the way their ammo supply works, I could imagine two ways:
• Option 1: SPG only carry limited ammunition just like regular tanks do. E.g. 20 shells, and then have to drive back to resupply, reloading takes a while
• Option 2: SPG shoot team ammo supplies but take longer to reload compared to the current howitzers

As for buildable howitzer nests - that would certainly be interesting, but only if Howitzers are expensive to be build (e.g. 450 supplies, reload less fast than in the current game and can be destroyed by AT weapons.

[lean flicker]

You could make it so that the last column does not allow any enemies to enter it, and give them the “return to combat area” message until the enemy is on the last objective, this would stop recon from camping spawns, then make it so that enemy shells would hit a invisible hitbox above the your spawns which disappears at the last objective

[forest rose]

[grim dust]

I definitely thing a change to artillery is a great idea. To add to the main post about adding self propelled guns, a change to the vehicle/armour spawning system could be good. Currently, all vehicles can only be spawned in by the commander, with occasional natural spawning vehicles available every so often. However, frequently a game will be won or lost due to the competency of the commander, due to the amount and type of vehicles being spawned or lack there off, as well as garrison's being removed, supplies dropped, and accuracy of straifs, bombing runs and recon planes. A bad team is a bad team and we've all seen things squandered by ineffective squads focusing on the wrong objective, or not working well with eachother. But a Bad commander means everything is just that much harder.

One solution I think could be to allow armour teams to use points they gain to request a vehicle instead of solely relying on a commander to bring one in. This would mean that effective and successful armour teams would have the ability to keep them selves in the fight more effectively as well as reward good armour squads. This would have a few positive effects on the game as a whole.
1: True armour squads (IE a full 3 person squad at maximum potential) would benefit and be rewarded for the effort they put in, as a good armour crew can make or break an attack or defence.
2: People who think it's ok to take a heavy tank as a solo whilst a 3 person crew get stuck with a light would be more tolerable, as a truly good armour crew can do some serious work even with a recon vehicle (Myself and two friends took out a tiger, panther, and panzer 4 with the greyhound a few days ago, just gotta hit them in the back, keep out the way of the gun, and have allot of luck).
3: Regardless of anything, a good tank crew are more effective than any bombing run. So keeping them in the fight is extremely important.

[forest rose]

Although I'd really appreciate having the ability of spawning them , I think it could harm the strategic / tactic ideas of the game. It's a pain having a commander that doesn't understand the good of armour squads can make, but I don't think allowing the crews to spawn vehicles themselves would foster cooperation and communication. Maybe adding the ability to remove innefective commands through vote would achieve same results, demanding a 65% or 70% yes could push for better efforts from commanders

[grim dust]

I understand what your saying, however even in a full game all too often the current vote of 20 won't be reached, due to things like the inability on console to vote unless your spawned in. A couple days ago, we encountered a commander that was removing garrisons, not spawning vehicles, and to top it off was openly racist when confronted. Multiple people attempted to vote him out of the game around 4 times, and he was only kicked because he was too dumb to realise my squad was trying to get him to kill us to get him kicked. Relying on a largely unspeaking team to remove someone who most people within the game don't even acknowledge whilst playing is often a loosing battle. Giving some control in the form of rewarding good players is nothing but positive. Plus, a good commander and team should mean that there is no need for any extras, but that's the minority of games unfortunately.

[forest rose]

I totally get your point, experienced the same things. But it would give room to doing this whenever players feel that people are not abiding by the designed mechanics. Open matches will always be more problematic in games like these, it's just what it is.

What me and other players have done is taking a look at who's playing as a commander and how the comms are working out to decide moving to armour or recon or not. Maybe when the browser kicks in this is going to be mitigated. Also, if we in consoles get the ability to set up servers as in PC we may enjoy the option of going to more competitive, closed matches and having fun on open ones.

[arctic mica]

False equivalence. It is infinitely more believable to see mortars that close to the front than any artillery piece.