Quote:
Originally Posted by cosmicfish
I think I am missing something here - how do you guys see the Project using or needing artillery? Arty is normally something that is deployed as part of a substantial combined arms force, it requires it's own set of perishable skills as well as a substantial investment in equipment (plus supplies, spares, and storage space!), and requires a large target area and/or forward observers. None of this sounds like the Project to me.
If artillery pieces are wide spread in TMP, then it means a lot of teams having to learn them and maintain them and practice with them and drag them around with them. And that seems like a lot of time and money and space that could be best used for other things in an organization that is supposed to be more about rebuilding than waging war.
If artillery pieces are rare, then they are almost never going to be where they are needed when they are needed* and they are almost never going to be in the kinds of concentrations that make artillery really useful on the battlefield. By the time you move artillery into place, you have other options to remove the enemy threat.
So where is the balance point where artillery is worth having?
*: This is also my argument against other rare beasts like the MARS-1 vehicles, unicorns that excite players but don't seem to serve a real purpose. The Project has few men and few aircraft a lot of territory, assets outside a hundred mile radius of a given problem are likely out of play.
|
Artillery has one huge advantage it allows you to hit your opponent from a convenient range. Anything else means your valuabl, irreplacable having to get within getting clobbered range of the enemy.
Probably the aim of most MORROW engagements would be distance and ambush. No safer way of doing that than from miles away with a couple of hills in the way.
The problem would be doing this with equipment light enough to get dragged around by a big jeep.