@cortana said in T2 arty's are a bit broken:
So due to the in game gravity mechanics, and the muzzle velocity of t2 artillery pieces, an arty fire base on a hill will have an advantage over an arty base down the hill. Or on a hilltop vs in a valley etc..
I mean it stands to reason. Having the high ground in battle tends to serve as an advantage generally speaking. It's just pretty hard to deal with in a game such as this. If the arty fire base is well protected, there's not a right lot you can do about it, except take the loss of everything within range of it.
I totally get where you're coming from, but in the long run I think I'd prefer an environment where building artillery on high ground gets an advantage over those built on lower ground.
If the map provides low-ground spawn locations, I guess we can see it as an incentive - or even an imperative, to secure some higher ground.
Losing a game because of an inability to fire back at artillery must suck; but in the long-run, it's a reason to value high ground more going forward, and I think this is probably going to feel like a 'good thing', in a strategy game that tries to emulate real physics, more often than not.
(Personally I'm very glad that T2 artillery has a low enough max muzzle velocity to be susceptible to elevation. I've seen enough games where aggressive firebases lose horribly to 'defender's advantage', and welcome seeing the opposite, given how much positioning influences strategic depth in RTS games.)