On the other hand - for success you ALWAYS need some arty. Never underestimate it. You cannot win without artillery since massing doesnt work. It simply doesnt. And if it does it only means that your enemy is not very good player or doesnt cooperate much which would lead to fall anyway ... only with more time and probably less casualities on attacking side.
Not really true. I can see arty being required in almost all 3v3+ games, but there are higher ranked 1v1 players out there who play really hyper-agressively. With 80kph+ units flying at you from all directions fighting the whole width of a map things can get pretty hectic and arty really isn't much use. I've seen this in 2v2 ranked on Airfield as well. Investing anything >100 points in arty in these instances will hurt you bad as you are constantly under very mobile pressure.
The best time for arty in 1v1 is after the game has slowed down. Once you have a solid area of the battlefield where the enemy isn't and can't easily be. Some games never get like this, while some are like this after the first couple of minutes. At this point you need to invest some points in arty fairly soon to support any future advance if you're down, or to smash the enemy as he comes in if you're up. I've lost count of the number of people I've beaten because they've invested too early in arty and they've crumbled under a multiple pronged offensive from a no-arty force. Tends to be that arty without map control over the areas that should be yours is a bad move.
Well youre probably right. True is that I play only 2v2 3v3 and 4v4 games so 1v1 game will be definitely more agressive. Like in every RTS game