Onboard vs. offboard artillery (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Steel Panthers World At War & Mega Campaigns



Message

Scharfschütze -> Onboard vs. offboard artillery (9/18/2001 7:11:00 AM)

Which one do you prefer?
Certainly shorter delay and the ability to resupply ammo on spot are great assets, but how have you fared with onboard howitzers, mortars and rocket launchers against human opponents who have the capacity to go for them?
The other matter here is caliber: the big guns are restricted to offboard, do you agree that "anything counts in large amounts" or would you say that 20 rounds of 203mm (or 150/155mm for non soviets)equal all 75/76mm shells in the world?



Alby -> (9/18/2001 7:56:00 AM)

I like the faster response of onboard and the resupply capability, however, they never seem to fire enuff rounds to get the job done, if you know what I mean.
BTW, I always wondered why the onboard stuff fires so fewer rounds?
ProbaBLY been answered before, but i forgot heheh



Major Destruction -> (9/19/2001 10:24:00 AM)

Having played against a few opponents who have used the 75/76mm onboard artillery to kick the snot out of my infantry, my opinion has swayed to buying them over the offboard stuff. But it never hurts to buy a battery of 150's offboard for CB fire. Later in the battle those can throw a decisive punch. Defending your onboard arty costs points, as does supplying them. You'll need a platoon of engineers or riflemen and some MMG's (or MMG's and ATG's) plus some transport (gun teams are cheap) and buy sections not platoons. If you can get some SP artillery, those are often cheaper, since they are more mobile, are armoured and carry a bigger gun. For protection of SPA, a section of armoured cars should be sufficient- or SP AA. Some of my PBEM opponents sometimes insist on a limit of points spent on artillery. I find the 75 onboard gives good service at a low price.



Jasper -> (9/19/2001 11:53:00 AM)

quote:

Originally posted by Scharfschütze:
Which one do you prefer?
Certainly shorter delay and the ability to resupply ammo on spot are great assets, but how have you fared with onboard howitzers, mortars and rocket launchers against human opponents who have the capacity to go for them?
The other matter here is caliber: the big guns are restricted to offboard, do you agree that "anything counts in large amounts" or would you say that 20 rounds of 203mm (or 150/155mm for non soviets)equal all 75/76mm shells in the world?

That is why I am waiting for the SP3, at least the map is big enough for some of the Off Board to be on board.



Tomanbeg -> (9/19/2001 12:47:00 PM)

I don't know if it's real or not, but it seems to me that the On-Board has a tighter spread. Mortars especially. I think a mix works best. If there is a terrain feature that looks like I'm goin to have to fight over, then Off board does a better job. For going after point targets and suppressing my opponents On Board arty, the medium mortars work best. My favorite is the track mounted 60 and 82 mm mortars. The American 60 jeep is great for putting down smoke screens using direct fire. The mistake I see the most is shooting for 1 turn and then reassigning the tubes. If you can't shoot for at least 4 tuns with <150mm tubes I question shooting at all. After 2 or 3 turns your opponent will move his units out from under the fire. That is when you get your kills. If he doesn't after 4 turns the suppression should be mounting up to where it might be worth an assault. Soviet doctrine called for 200 tubes per kilometer in the assault. That is 10 per hex. With > then 150mm you might get away with 2 turns of fire, but that will most likly be spread out over 4 or 5 turns anyway, since you will have less of the more expensive guns and there won't be as many available per turn. Remember also that the .0 to .3 arrival time will give your opponent a chance to rally his troops. If you are planning on fallowing a barrage into a position, move the dime(spotting request) around until it ends in .4 or .5 That way you get your assault in before he can rally.
T.



Tomanbeg -> (9/19/2001 12:58:00 PM)

quote:

Originally posted by Alby:
I like the faster response of onboard and the resupply capability, however, they never seem to fire enuff rounds to get the job done, if you know what I mean.
BTW, I always wondered why the onboard stuff fires so fewer rounds?
ProbaBLY been answered before, but i forgot heheh

The onboard unit represents 1 tube. An off board Battery represents 4 to 6 tubes (some countries use 8 tube batteries which is where the WaW 4 tubes battery comes from). I think. So an Off board Batallion would have 3 or 4 batteries, or 12 to 18 tubes. I don't think there are any 32 tube battalions in WaW, although I've read that the japs had some. I don't play the Pacific.
So that one request to an off board battery can get 3 to 8 times as many shots. Compared on a point basis, you have to buy 3 or 4 pairs of 75mm guns to equal 1 off board 75 battery.
T.



skukko -> (9/19/2001 12:59:00 PM)

Hello From 50mm-mortar to 75mm howitzer(and bigger 81mm and 90mm mortars) onboard do deserve some protection and are worth of all points set into support and guard them. They can pin up enemy just when you need to so attack on enemy positions. From 105mm to 155mm...lets just say that they are easier Offboard. But ... In maps sized bigger than 100X100 guns/mortars under 105mm should be Onboard. Before howling and crying starts; -If you buy under 105mm Offboard arty, you have wasted points as they don't shoot a single shot during a game. It has something to do with their range and positioning at the side of the map. David Boutwell asked this half a year ago while we had 4.5game, but I can't remember now where is Offboard -arty positioned. This in mind you can have all under 105mm onboard. But protect them against human attacks. How much arty onboard ?? Fast refresh from Grasses TOE-sheet says that commonly one company of infantry had 0.2 - 1.0 pipe in their use. ( IE onboard, usually +75mm mortar) Bigger guns came from battalion/division and in request/need to support battle acts. In this game arty can stop all movement, and I think its not the purpose of the game that tries show us mobile war. Remember that this is not Division-level game, try WiR for that. Thats what I do mosh



Charles2222 -> (9/19/2001 7:58:00 PM)

I've often wondered why anyone would buy an aircraft that didn't have potent enough anti-tank capability, but this artillery talk gives me pause. Perhaps the AC won't do what you want it to do, assuming you're wanting to target something else other than tanks, and hit artillery, but I thought of an easy CHEAP use of AC with little or no AT ability. In playing the AI, two things come to mind regarding the use of AC: 1) The AI often stacks AA units in it's rear, so that if you forgot to re-direct your AC flight path you're going through all his stuff practically. 2) The AC tends to attack tanks before any other target selected, so that if you're selecting AC more specifically to attack onboard artillery and leave tanks alone, then you can't very well start the flight path on your side of the board. Idea? If you haven't figured it our already, I'm talking about selecting the lightest AC you can buy, just to harass and perhaps rout some artillery that's smoke has been spotted. Despite my natural inclination to path the AC from my side of the board, to start on the enemy side would be the only way to guarantee not hitting tanks, but even so, I haven't tested whether using light AC with hopefully the ability to attack with MGs more than once in a battle, will target artillery very successfully. Perhaps there is a problem since the artillery is technically still unspotted, so that if the artillery is very well hidden it will attack something really dumb instead. While on the subject of using light AC for anti-artillery role, isn't the amount of times the AC can fire the MGs in a given turn pretty low? Shouldn't it at least be able to fire a full six times like an MG on the ground, because I would imagine any AC that hasn't been harassed too bad will make one pass per sortie a minimum. Anyone ever tried targeting onboard artillery, seen or unseen with AC, both light and otherwise? Thanks.



CF_Medic -> (9/19/2001 8:30:00 PM)

For Scharfschütze and alby, Think of it this way. the OB artillery has the opertunity from fixed prepared positions to prepare and stock ammunition, where as the mobile, on the board units can only take their field load and need the logistics boys to back them up. as for the spread mentioned later, the farther it has to fly, the farther it will spread, or atleast with todays arty that is... I use almost exclusively onboard smaller calliber units, usually horse drawn as well. they may not kill much, but will certainly supress whatever it hits. besides, what large arty units have the ability to direct fire if needed, AND have an AP rating in the 80's to 90's?



Tomanbeg -> (9/19/2001 9:25:00 PM)

quote:

Originally posted by Charles_22:
I've often wondered why anyone would buy an aircraft that didn't have potent enough anti-tank capability, but this artillery talk gives me pause. Perhaps the AC won't do what you want it to do, assuming you're wanting to target something else other than tanks, and hit artillery, but I thought of an easy CHEAP use of AC with little or no AT ability. In playing the AI, two things come to mind regarding the use of AC: 1) The AI often stacks AA units in it's rear, so that if you forgot to re-direct your AC flight path you're going through all his stuff practically. 2) The AC tends to attack tanks before any other target selected, so that if you're selecting AC more specifically to attack onboard artillery and leave tanks alone, then you can't very well start the flight path on your side of the board. Idea? If you haven't figured it our already, I'm talking about selecting the lightest AC you can buy, just to harass and perhaps rout some artillery that's smoke has been spotted. Despite my natural inclination to path the AC from my side of the board, to start on the enemy side would be the only way to guarantee not hitting tanks, but even so, I haven't tested whether using light AC with hopefully the ability to attack with MGs more than once in a battle, will target artillery very successfully. Perhaps there is a problem since the artillery is technically still unspotted, so that if the artillery is very well hidden it will attack something really dumb instead. While on the subject of using light AC for anti-artillery role, isn't the amount of times the AC can fire the MGs in a given turn pretty low? Shouldn't it at least be able to fire a full six times like an MG on the ground, because I would imagine any AC that hasn't been harassed too bad will make one pass per sortie a minimum. Anyone ever tried targeting onboard artillery, seen or unseen with AC, both light and otherwise? Thanks.
Historically the main role of aircraft was and is recon. Tactical Ground Support is the last thing planes are used for. I target the On board arty all the time, seen or not. And I start 99% of my passes from the enemy's rear. I'm trying for recon on my way out. Blind firing passes are excellent for flak supression, although if you have less then 4 flights, I'm not sure if flak suppression is worth the Ammo. On Board arty is better for that. Remember, tactical combat is about information. If you know where he is, and he doesn't know where you are, that is a BIG advantage.
T. (Who will take any advantage he can get, big or little)



Charles2222 -> (9/19/2001 10:41:00 PM)

Tomanbeg: Perhaps I confused you, but I wasn't talking about attacking AA with light AC, I was talking about attacking onboard artillery with light AC. It would seem that based on what you said, that there may be no problem attacking AA units, from the enemy rear with light AC, so that therefore artillery could be just as easy. The only thing, though, is that AA 'should' be easier to spot since they are exposing themselves by firing up at the AC anyway, but with the artillery that is not the case. As well, if you did spot onboard artillery smoke correctly, and then sent in the light AC, would the AC not attack the artillery if any other unit (other than the obvious of the AC selecting a nearby tank over it), in this case a firing AA unit, was nearby? (edited at this point) Sorry, Tomanbeg, I do see you mentioned onboard artillery, and I think my conclusions are correct, though you might want to comment. On a side note, I'm often thinking of what's the use in attacking onboard artillery, or any unit, if you cannot destroy it or rout it. In the case of using light AC on artillery this may be quite the useless use of that light AC. On the other hand, I have to remember, that the batt;e is pretty much won or lost on the first ten turns. Sure, it's a bummer if the onboard artillery you attack with light AC pounds away at you after turn 10 because if wasn't eliminated, but even if a small amount of suppression keeps that gun from firing once or twice for much of the first 10 turns, the light AC has fulfilled a useful role. [ September 19, 2001: Message edited by: Charles_22 ]



Scharfschütze -> (9/21/2001 10:36:00 PM)

First, thank you for your opinions on this! Some remarks: - less distance to target should result in a tighter spread, following the laws of physics. I am, however, not sure whether this is worked intio the artillery routines! - more ammo loads for field artllery is pays especially when using rocket launchers like the Nebelwerfer, the Wurfrahmen 40 and the large rocket Katyushas (I do now there is also an onboard, big-bang US launcher but haven´t looked uop the name. - aircraft: Those bombs are so deadly... when you catch infantry on the move with those, the result is often disastrous. Since bombs are one-shot, you just have to wait for the right moment when you have some enemy squads bunched up unfortunately close... and hope they will still be when your planes strike! Attacking from behind is an nasty thought, I will try it out!
Bombarding artillery positions is a second priority, I would blast assault troops first!



Tomanbeg -> (9/21/2001 11:37:00 PM)

C22. howdy, I wasn't being clear. I target the little puffs of smoke and let the A/C find something to shoot at. What I am after is the Ammo trucks. Although any truck will do. That way I get suppression on the Guns themself. Plus if I get the truck(or wagon) the tube isn't going any where very fast. and the 'Flaming Datum'(to use a natucial term)gives me an aim point for the time I'm to slow or lasy to write down a hex number. As a rule of thumb(IMHO WaW has no firm rules, a big part of the fascination) ON-Board Counter battery is a waste of ammo, unless you A. Have the enemy spotted and can see the results of your fire. B. you are faced with Rocket batteries or heavy SPA's
Turn 10? That varies by style. I won't play a game of less then 20 turns. I don't get any enjoyment out of head butting. Some guys like it, Some don't know any better, some just don't have the attention span or patience. Of the 8 PBEM games I have going now(I'm cutting back) the shortest is 32 turns, the longest is 60, two others are 40+. So By turn ten in my average game the scouts have been worked into place and I'm trying to Identify centers of gravity and get inside my opponents Boyd Cycle, in preperation for setting up traps and ambushes. The General who makes the last mistake loses. I enjoy turn 42 of a 45 turn Soviet assault on the Finns where my Last T-26 can see the last set of flags in front of him. I am using my red cord left over from Squad Leader to see if the Flak gun I bypassed Has a LOS to that open hex I have to go thru to get the next flag. 12 turns? Not worth the time to select forces.
T.(Whose cord lied. The T-26 died and T lost)



Charles2222 -> (9/22/2001 12:47:00 AM)

Tomanbeg: I see you and I think a lot alike, only in different ways (always nice to start a post in confusion).
quote:

Turn 10? That varies by style. I won't play a game of less then 20 turns. I don't get any enjoyment out of head butting.
The difference, I suspect, is that I'm playing strictly against the AI, so often I can depend on a quicker advance, myself, and of course there's rarely a faster advancer than the AI when he's attacking. I'm also pretty strictly a campaigner, so that weighs in pretty heavily too. Most of the time with my advance being fairly speedy, but still cautious, the winner is evident by turn 10, but one just has to have a bit of patience to engage in the inevitable results pending, and the mopping up later. I too can't stand short battles, and though I could manage a 20 turn battle and enjoy it, it isn't fun, as I see all too many scenarios this way, where it's 20 turns and you have not only minefields but tons of aircraft to deal with. For someone who likes fighting to the relative death this doesn't even come close to enjoyable. Though almost all my campaign battles witness the winner in terms of ebb and flow by turn 10, I often find the few Russian-against-the-Finns battles to be perhaps all the way to turn 20 before the winner is in evidence, and even then the Russian can screw it up. I haven't tried the Finn perspective, since there isn't a WWII campaign for them. Yeah, as a campaigner, I certainly don't have to worry about ammo trucks, or at least I've never seen one, though I have offered counter-battery to smoke puffs. I try pretty regularly now to buy 2-4 field howitzers in core, and try to limit any resupply of them to maybe only 2 guns, with perhaps only 10 rounds given to each; I don't want to make resupply too ridiculous. I will then move the ammo trucks to help out with any units which came off pitifully in the random ammo department, or of course I may do it the other way around, where I resupply the low units first, hold off on artillery for a while, and then send the trucks to the artillery. One things that really GRIPES me though, is that for us poor campaigners, the limited supply option never works beyond the first battle. I figured since it won't work, I might as well make the first battle full supply as well. The ol' ammo trucks hardly figure in the game if you don't have a functioning limited supply, which is the case only with campaigns.



11Bravo -> (9/23/2001 10:00:00 PM)

What what its worth, I prefer on board forces. I enjoy the added complexity of defending them and moving them around. The also provide a good last ditch defense for HQ, and give those no good loafing ammo truck drivers some sorely needed work!



Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.609375