Artillery commitment in hasty / deliberate attack v01.02.08 (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Gary Grigsby's War in the East 2



Message

KenchiSulla -> Artillery commitment in hasty / deliberate attack v01.02.08 (12/7/2021 11:12:55 AM)

I've observed that long range indirect fire artillery (both attacking and defending), even when committed to battle, in a hasty attack does not fire at all.

Battle prep points do not matter.

- Can someone confirm this?
- Is it intended?

When committed in a deliberate attack they play a decisive role in disrupting elements.



GibsonPete -> RE: Artillery commitment in hasty / deliberate attack v01.02.08 (12/7/2021 2:40:50 PM)

Rule 23.4.1 to get SU support during a hasty attack the HQ must not have moved, and the unit must be eligible (in command range). Rule 23.4.3 during a deliberate attack the HQ can have moved. Rule 23.6 Headquarters can only commit SU's that pass the required leader checks, are within 05 hexes and trace a friendly path of any length to the unit. If a river is involved 23.8.9 kicks in. Also check 23.6.1 for how vehicles play a part and HQ movement effects leader checks. Or just roll the dice screw the odds.



jubjub -> RE: Artillery commitment in hasty / deliberate attack v01.02.08 (12/7/2021 2:59:59 PM)

quote:

- Can someone confirm this?


can confirm.



KenchiSulla -> RE: Artillery commitment in hasty / deliberate attack v01.02.08 (12/7/2021 3:03:33 PM)

Hi Pete,

- the support units are committed to battle but do not fire in the battle (0 shots, 0 HPE).
- divisional artillery also does not fire, only the infantry howitzer units fire (direct, not indirect)



Joel Billings -> RE: Artillery commitment in hasty / deliberate attack v01.02.08 (12/7/2021 3:19:45 PM)

Yes, hasty attacks have no indirect fire phase.



KenchiSulla -> RE: Artillery commitment in hasty / deliberate attack v01.02.08 (12/7/2021 3:31:32 PM)

Hi Joel, so it is a design decision to not allow for indirect fire during hasty attacks (for both defender and attacker). This means that artillery does not play a role at all (exception are the specialized howitzer units part of regimental / divisions TOE as they are used in the direct fire role).

Why is the game adding artillery support to the fight then?



ShaggyHiK -> RE: Artillery commitment in hasty / deliberate attack v01.02.08 (12/7/2021 4:17:07 PM)

In my opinion, this is the worst decision in the combat system at the moment. Hasty attacks are too strong to defend against.
This rule must be reviewed for the defender.



Joel Billings -> RE: Artillery commitment in hasty / deliberate attack v01.02.08 (12/7/2021 6:24:47 PM)

Yes, this has been this way ever since Gary created the indirect fire phase. It's WAD. It does seem a waste of time to commit artillery support units to these battles, but that wasn't anything that was ever looked at. Hasty attacks should be used in very rare situations, mostly just against weak opposition in 41 or when hitting units that have already been in combat and have retreated during the current turn.



ShaggyHiK -> RE: Artillery commitment in hasty / deliberate attack v01.02.08 (12/7/2021 7:13:09 PM)

At the moment, these attacks are great for attacking even relatively strong units, as long as they are not on level 3 fortifications.
Support and terrain other than urban are not particularly useful for repelling hasty attacks or inflicting casualties on the attacking troops.



tonyhnz -> RE: Artillery commitment in hasty / deliberate attack v01.02.08 (12/7/2021 7:15:40 PM)

I didn't realize this was the case especially from the defender point of view.
I kind of agree with shaggy - if i am in a defensive posture wouldn't i have my artillery already set up and prepared to repel an attack.
If the attacker decides to do a hasty then they would not have time to get all their artillery into position to support the attack.



Yogol -> RE: Artillery commitment in hasty / deliberate attack v01.02.08 (12/8/2021 5:54:27 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Joel Billings

Yes, hasty attacks have no indirect fire phase.


For the attacker, I can understand this. But not for the defender: if you are dug in with and someone attacks -hasty or otherwise- the defending artillery would certainly fire, no?



loki100 -> RE: Artillery commitment in hasty / deliberate attack v01.02.08 (12/8/2021 6:56:32 AM)

you are rather over-estimating how responsive artillery was in this period?



ShaggyHiK -> RE: Artillery commitment in hasty / deliberate attack v01.02.08 (12/8/2021 7:18:24 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: loki100

you are rather over-estimating how responsive artillery was in this period?

Your opinion is absolutely correct, the Soviet artillery had a number of shortcomings, the first was the issue of mobility. In the event of an offensive, Soviet artillery lagged far behind the advancing troops, there were also cases due to poor command and control of troops, not knowing how to use or lack of radio stations, when the army command simply did not have information that 3 artillery regiments of the RVGK were on their side, due to for which they simply did not have the information to open fire.
However, if the difficulties were overcome, then the Soviet artillery was no worse than the German, and in a number of indicators even better than it.
In the context of the game, there is no reason for the defender not to use artillery if it has already entered the battle.
If the commander passed the checks and the artillery regiments were in action, why don't they fire? In any defensive situation, the division's art regiments have clearly designated firing sectors. This is the first thing that artillerymen do, this is their main task. And it is very strange to see when 3 regiments seem to step into battle, but no heavy weapon simply opens fire on the enemy.



Jango32 -> RE: Artillery commitment in hasty / deliberate attack v01.02.08 (12/8/2021 7:30:21 AM)

To expand on Soviet artillery shortcomings:

https://imgur.com/a/5WEwWhN



Jango32 -> RE: Artillery commitment in hasty / deliberate attack v01.02.08 (12/8/2021 7:31:15 AM)

EDIT: looks like the forums had a 500 error and double-posted.



DeletedUser44 -> RE: Artillery commitment in hasty / deliberate attack v01.02.08 (12/8/2021 9:30:23 AM)

All I can say is that during my service in artillery, we planned and trained for both "Hasty" and "Deliberate" operations.

https://www.marines.mil/Portals/1/Publications/MCRP%203-31.1%20Formerly%20MCRP%203-16C.pdf?ver=2017-10-02-131649-870

Scroll down to page 21. It even touches on "Hasty Attacks" and "Deliberate Attacks". (these terms were in use well before WiTE)

The idea of my artillery battalion sitting out during a "Hasty Attack" is completely foreign to me.

Following is training material on "Fire Support Planning" (Basic Officer Course).

https://www.trngcmd.marines.mil/Portals/207/Docs/TBS/B2C2797%20Fire%20Support%20Planning.pdf

Most important to emphasize, is that "Fire Support Planning" is ongoing, continuous, it never stops - and plans for all possible contingencies, to include:
- advancing to engage an enemy
- breakthrough and exploitation

It is integral in the US Field Artillery Mission Doctrine - which has its roots stemming from WWII.

So, whatever the reasons for excluding artillery fire in the game's hasty attacks... I cannot speak to it. It is not based on anything I know - other than just a game mechanic deemed needed?



DeletedUser44 -> RE: Artillery commitment in hasty / deliberate attack v01.02.08 (12/8/2021 9:31:05 AM)

EDIT

Double post, sorry....



ShaggyHiK -> RE: Artillery commitment in hasty / deliberate attack v01.02.08 (12/8/2021 10:43:37 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sauron_II
It is integral in the US Field Artillery Mission Doctrine - which has its roots stemming from WWII.

Moreover, this goes not only into the Second World War, but also into the First World War, but even deeper into the US Civil War and the Napoleonic Wars.



EddyBear81 -> RE: Artillery commitment in hasty / deliberate attack v01.02.08 (12/8/2021 2:58:42 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: tonyhnz

I didn't realize this was the case especially from the defender point of view.
I kind of agree with shaggy - if i am in a defensive posture wouldn't i have my artillery already set up and prepared to repel an attack.
If the attacker decides to do a hasty then they would not have time to get all their artillery into position to support the attack.


Totally on board : it leads to a "minor" exploit. If you have less powerful artillery than the defender, then it is better to launch a Hasty Attack compared to a Deliberate.

Deciding for a Hasty Attack should only penalize the attacker.



Iam5not8 -> RE: Artillery commitment in hasty / deliberate attack v01.02.08 (12/8/2021 3:15:56 PM)

in-game "hasty assault" is more a meeting engagement than a hasty assault as referred in NATO-western doctrines.
It is an engagement made directly from march columns (while on movement).
when I read the links from Sauron (thanks for those, very instructive) , IMHO it refers more to "movement to contact".

Therefore, on the assault side, it is not absurd to not have artillery involved in the engagement (could be challenged on the Self Propelled Arty).
On the defensive side, it is more difficult to assess. But on the Soviet side, the command&control structure was not very agile, and to have a commitment of non-organic arty in a meeting engagement would have been sporadic at least in the 1st years of the patriotic war.

When comparing to more modern doctrine, communications and availability of maps are a key point to consider (not even speaking of data exchange between front units and arty/support ones).




Joch1955 -> RE: Artillery commitment in hasty / deliberate attack v01.02.08 (12/8/2021 6:56:42 PM)

Interesting discussions. In all WitX games, I always viewed a "Hasty attack" as an attack "off the march", i.e. Armored units barrelling through opposition as it encounters them. So yes, makes sense the attacker would not have access to artillery support. re: the defender, that is a bit more tricky, yes a prepared position would generally have artillery support pre-registered against likely avenues of attack. However, a hasty attack is generally a surprise attack so the defender will not always be able to bring all its artillery into play so there should be limits, i.e. as already spelled out in 23.4.1 and 23.6.

Another point to bear in mind is that based on my years of playing Wite1, WitW and now Wite2, "Hasty Attacks" generally work as you would expect,i.e. fine against weak opposition, but you can easily get a bloody nose if you get too ambitious. I would be careful about making changes that would make them substantially weaker.



AlbertN -> RE: Artillery commitment in hasty / deliberate attack v01.02.08 (12/8/2021 7:24:09 PM)

If unit organic artillery fires normally - for both ends - I think it's fine.
SU from HQs should not be involved - artilleries or not, due to the nature of the 'hasty' attack. As per an attack on the go.



Stamb -> RE: Artillery commitment in hasty / deliberate attack v01.02.08 (12/8/2021 8:07:14 PM)

Now the question is if artillery is committed to a battle but does not fire - will it still lose CPP?



jubjub -> RE: Artillery commitment in hasty / deliberate attack v01.02.08 (12/8/2021 9:13:39 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Stamb

Now the question is if artillery is committed to a battle but does not fire - will it still lose CPP?


Yep, it’s a big pain, because then they’re less likely to commit defensively when your panzers are getting attacked.



GibsonPete -> RE: Artillery commitment in hasty / deliberate attack v01.02.08 (12/9/2021 3:11:45 AM)

With a turn being a weeklong the idea of a true meeting engagement does not occur. The attacker decides how many MPs he is going to use to attack a defender who may or may not be in a prepared position. The attacker may conduct one to five hasty attacks or conduct one or two deliberate attacks. in a modern battle restricting indirect fire use to only a deliberate attack makes little sense. To assume the defender or attacker could not bring non divisional mortars, howitzers, cannons or guns to bear is not logical. Most indirect fire tubes can be laid and prepared to fire within ten or fewer minutes. If communication is the concern, then that would be an issue whether the attack is designated a 'hasty or deliberate'.

1) Consider increasing the MP cost of Hasty by one and allow Indirect fire.
2) Consider an increased leader check cost to include indirect fire to Hasty attack.
3) Consider a single direct support indirect fire battalion per stack in a hasty attack and two for the defender.

Something to discuss and kick around. [sm=character0267.gif]



K62 -> RE: Artillery commitment in hasty / deliberate attack v01.02.08 (12/9/2021 3:30:09 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: GibsonPete

With a turn being a weeklong the idea of a true meeting engagement does not occur. The attacker decides how many MPs he is going to use to attack a defender who may or may not be in a prepared position. The attacker may conduct one to five hasty attacks or conduct one or two deliberate attacks. in a modern battle restricting indirect fire use to only a deliberate attack makes little sense. To assume the defender or attacker could not bring non divisional mortars, howitzers, cannons or guns to bear is not logical. Most indirect fire tubes can be laid and prepared to fire within ten or fewer minutes. If communication is the concern, then that would be an issue whether the attack is designated a 'hasty or deliberate'.

1) Consider increasing the MP cost of Hasty by one and allow Indirect fire.
2) Consider an increased leader check cost to include indirect fire to Hasty attack.
3) Consider a single direct support indirect fire battalion per stack in a hasty attack and two for the defender.

Something to discuss and kick around. [sm=character0267.gif]


In a week long turn a mobile unit can spend up to 50 MPs. A hasty attack is 3 MPs, corresponding to an interval as short as 10 hours. (Possibly shorter if the unit is inactive at night.) In these 10 hours they have to find, fight and drive off an enemy located over an area of 10x10 miles. The idea that heavy artillery could be deployed effectively into the attack plan under such conditions seems a bit challenging. By contrast, a deliberate attack at 16 MPs corresponds to a time interval of over two days.



ShaggyHiK -> RE: Artillery commitment in hasty / deliberate attack v01.02.08 (12/9/2021 6:17:59 AM)

German players are now abusing the mechanics of the game with Hasty attacks. The USSR may have strong divisions and good positions with the support of a large number of art regiments, but the Germans conduct a Hasty attack, which leads to the fact that the Soviet troops cannot use their advantage, not in territory, not in fortifications, not artillery.
Moreover, such an attack does not cost the German player anything in terms of losses, not in terms of action points, which does not even allow creating any delays in the German offensive.
I am sure that he is working in about the same way with Germany in defense for 44 years, but as a rule, German players do not sit in defense for a long time and late scenarios do not prefer the main scenario from 41 years old, so they do not face this fully.



ShaggyHiK -> RE: Artillery commitment in hasty / deliberate attack v01.02.08 (12/9/2021 6:23:04 AM)

error



Iam5not8 -> RE: Artillery commitment in hasty / deliberate attack v01.02.08 (12/9/2021 6:47:21 AM)

Hasty attacks should be limited to 1 unit, not a stack of 3 divisions. The coordination needed for an assault with different divisions can not be done in this kind of engagement.



ShaggyHiK -> RE: Artillery commitment in hasty / deliberate attack v01.02.08 (12/9/2021 7:00:11 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Iam5not8

Hasty attacks should be limited to 1 unit, not a stack of 3 divisions. The coordination needed for an assault with different divisions can not be done in this kind of engagement.

I'm not sure that such a solution can be considered adequate, because the problem is not that the Germans use 3 divisions in hasty attacks, but that the conditions in which the defender turns out to be in comparison with the attacker in combat, are wrong. The point is not how the artillery fires directly in battle, but because in hasty attacks, the attacker uses the TOE that he has much more efficiently, and the defender does not use his heavy weapons at all.



Page: [1] 2   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
1.826172