Artillery round v.s. Tank

Draschel:  Let us look at weapon intent before calling people whiners. With it changed, a lot of others things change too. Artillery can mean many different things, but colloquially what we in world of tanks or armored warfare know as artillery, is a self propelled gun lobbing explosives indirectly at targets with poor accuracy and high randomness. Throughout history, artillery means rather much and can be difficult to define. A regimental field gun, with a flat firing trajectory for long range, can neverthless lower and level the gun and fire onto targets directly. Pretty much horizontal. Most towed guns have a direct fire panoramic sight attached. British and USA 4.5in guns were a clear example of this, same with British 5.5in. Heavy barreled, higher operating pressure, higher velocity VS a howitzer.  What is the point of all this jargon? Well, the point is artillery didn't find that good cost/expenditure ratio of barraging a single target for fire-for-effect result. The idea was to barrage a sector, and if advancing armour units were hit, they were hit. The damage would generally be mobility kills and damaged suspension, damaged guns and observation, damaged hatches. That sort. But for artillery crew, to ACTUALLY SEE a tank, and level the gun onto the target, and fire onto the target.....the damage is greater. But we aren't talking about indirect artillery damage anymore. Get your intent right. And all you pro-arty crowd, get your intent right too.