Does AI build artillery at all? Isn't it a bit weak?

[WiZz]

ORIGINAL: zgrssd
If artillery hit it oculd be absolutely devastating. Hitting was the issue, especially if the tank was close. Artillery was rarely designed for direct fire.

Accuracy already isn't an issue for modern artillery. Computer systems and recon drones greatly increases accuracy even for old artillery like bm-21 or 2s1. Donbass conflict proves this when numerous tank columns were destroyed by MLRS or high caliber artillery.

[Uemon]

ORIGINAL: solops

I remember reading about a Tiger tank in the Normandy area that was flipped over by a near miss from a BB shell. The crew apparently survived and they got the tank turned back over and continued on. But I have also read about arty wreaking havoc on tanks as well.

Soviets used artillery against tanks specifically to destroy them, in particular very heavy and slow tanks and tank destroyers. So yeah its definitely a thing.

Tanks tend to have very thin armor on top, meaning that even a low caliber direct hit can be devastating to a tank.

On the other hand, artillery and high caliber mortars are quite good at detracking tanks even if they dont hit them at all. Fragmentation shells in particular could be excellent vs light armored vehicles, as we have seen this in real life in last 10 years (Ukraine and Syria where entire lines of Soviet armored vehicles were pretty much proven useless for the battlefield they were fielded on as shrapnel could penetrate them sideways even from 150+ meters away).

[Cavgunner]

Some of you seem to be looking at artillery from a completely incorrect perspective.

1) Unless the enemy also has artillery, you are immune to retaliation.

2) Artillery reduces YOUR casualties. There is no better weapon for reducing an entrenched enemy unit's Readiness and thus paving the way for an effective assault.

3) Any actual casualties inflicted by the artillery itself are icing on the cake. However, casualties on mid-tech units can be quite devastating, especially if you have Cluster Bombs.

4) Aircraft can perform a similar function, but are even more resource-intensive.

[WiZz]

1. The only visible advantage of artillery. However, most of the time artillery kills nothing.
2. Not really. Build a few tank battalions and see better results.
3. Again - casualties from artillery are almost non-existent.
4. I don't build air forces coz AI doesn't build it. It's simply not fair.

[postfux]

I always have one motorized battalion of arty with the biggest tubes driving along any offensive force. I use them on strongpoints and troops in difficult terrain.

Ideally first comes an attack from a recon plane, then arty softens up the position with long range fire, only then the ground attack starts.

Reducing enemy readiness and entrechment can make the difference between a battle lost and a battle won. If the odds arent close it helps reduce casualities. Perhaps low readiness even increases enemy casualities?

[Cavgunner]

ORIGINAL: WiZz

1. The only visible advantage of artillery. However, most of the time artillery kills nothing.
2. Not really. Build a few tank battalions and see better results.
3. Again - casualties from artillery are almost non-existent.
4. I don't build air forces coz AI doesn't build it. It's simply not fair.

1. You mean viable advantage, not visible. That aside, do you think we talking about militia units here? If your artillery isn't killing anything, ever, then the problem is YOU.

2. And much higher casualties, especially if your opponent has a tech advantage.

3. That's just flat-out incorrect. Currently my motorized and mechanized arty units are pasting slightly higher-tech infantry regiments and divisions. PASTING. Each gun in a regiment is consistently getting 4-6 hits each, sometimes more, with typically around 25% of the guns getting at least one kill apiece. Sometimes they even manage to kill a couple of tanks. Morale and readiness crumbles under such an onslaught. In my current game my army was much smaller and somewhat less advanced than my nemesis. Massed arty don't care. It's the great equalizer. Expensive? Perhaps. But effective. And much preferable to replacing units that would have been lost during attacks on entrenched positions otherwise, especially expensive tanks.

4. Irrelevant. The point stands.

[WiZz]

1. Read my first posts. I was talking about max-caliber arty + rocket arty.
2. If your opponent has tech advantage your arty won't kill anything. Simple example: 300 vs arty can't scratch inf in battledresses. Arty has some ups like cluster mines.
3. That's really different from my experience.