Update:

I made a mod to test this countermeasure against Grad/RM-70 spam, and it turns out to be generally feasible. Please check out my new post: I made a mod to test countermeasure against Grad/RM-70 spam in 10v10 WITHOUT direct nerfs.

TL;DR:

The real issue with PACT arty spam in 10v10 is that too many divisions rely on Grad/RM-70. If balancing 10v10 gameplay without over-affecting 1v1 or small lobbies is tricky, providing NATO with effective countermeasures in 10v10 might be a better solution. Slightly boosting NATO’s large-caliber MLRS relative advantage while keeping PACT’s small-caliber MLRS strength (Grad/RM-70 spam) could preserve spam as a viable playstyle in 10v10 while preventing Grad/RM-70 from becoming useless in 1v1 ranked.

Analysis:

The reason there are always more complaints about PACT's arty spam than other forms of spam on Reddit is that there’s nearly no effective counterplay against Grad/RM-70 (small-caliber MLRS) spam in 10v10. I've spent over 1250 hours in this game (you may have met that cow on grass under the assyrian winged disk lol), testing every strategy against it, especially in detecting their FOBs: the 82nd's LAV early rush, the 9th's FAV sniper early rush, the 101st's transport helicopter rush, sneaking in recon units like helis mid-game, and, of course, the "classic" M270 CLU and AuF1 anti-arty fire. Yet, I can confidently say that no method even comes close to having half the success rate of AA and ASF intercepting CAS planes. From my observation, even if NATO destroys all of PACT's FOBs, PACT can still maintain high-intensity arty output for 25–30 minutes. Against skilled players, the only real way to stop it is to hope they make a mistake and forget to move their arty after firing—before that, you’re just wasting your time and ammo.

As a result, unlike deploying CAS planes, which are high-risk and high-reward and rarely survive more than two sorties due to the dense AA nets and ASF spam in 10v10, the risk/reward ratio of Grads remains absurdly high throughout a 60-minute game. It is clear that PACT becomes relatively dominant in forests and urban areas—if you've ever played VALLEY 10v10, you know exactly what I mean.

Let me clarify: I don’t think spam—or Grad/RM-70 themselves—is an issue that needs fixing unless it’s completely uncounterable. Spam is just a playstyle—like how Hippie loves spam—and 10v10 is exactly where you can bring out all your favorite toys that are heavily restricted in 1v1 or smaller lobbies. For example, who would ever buy a 350-point TOS in a 1v1 ranked match? If no one uses such high-value equipment, what’s the point of designing it and including it in the battlegroup? It’s paradoxical.

It is also tricky to find a balanced way to reduce Grad/RM-70 spam in 10v10 without completely nerfing it to the point of being useless in 1v1 and small lobby game. So, would it be better to slightly buff the large-caliber MLRS aiming time and ensure that, at the moment the Grad/RM-70 begins to relocate after firing, the MLRS cluster rounds are about to land?

We could simply fix all large-caliber (200mm+) MLRS units at "trained" veterancy to avoid major changes. If the aiming time bonuses for "trained" and "veteran" (with a CV) are too high (-15%/-30%), we could adjust them to -10% and -25% (only works on large-caliber MLRS), respectively, while increasing the cost by 5-15 points as a balancing trade-off.

The core of my strategy lies in slight adjustments, as outlined above, and relative balance. Let’s compare: PACT has 12 divisions using standard Grad/RM-70 HE (not counting 2 divisions with Grad-V) and 3 divisions with large-caliber MLRS, which would also benefit from the same buff as NATO; meanwhile, NATO has 6 divisions with M270/MARS (4 CLU + 2 HE). This means PACT would still maintain a relative arty advantage while countering NATO with KDA, 39-ya, and 6-ya. Although PACT’s options are more limited—especially since most of these six NATO divisions are top-tier and more frequently picked—everything comes at a price.

Even if this balance change turns out to be too much, we could simply buff large-caliber MLRS HE—it's rarely used trash anyway. However, that would leave 3 PACT divisions against 2 NATO divisions, effectively making it a relative buff to PACT.

To conclude, if directly nerfing the Grad/RM-70 is too tricky, the solution could be to optimize NATO’s counterplay in 10v10 while minimizing the impact on other game modes. Slightly reducing the aiming time bonus for trained/veteran units could help prevent large-caliber MLRS from becoming too OP in 1v1 ranked matches. Similarly, slightly reducing the dispersion bonus for large-caliber MLRS could also work, forcing players to use both two MLRS and a CV for guaranteed kills—a strategy common in 10v10 but rare in 1v1: as the meta evolves, skilled players would likely spread out their arty batteries more, increasing micro requirements slightly. However, my proposal has a clear flaw: it may unintentionally affect howitzers, mortars, and the balance between different map scales in various game modes. So, what’s your take on this?