Your thoughs behind artillery response times (Full Version)

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



Message

vulkansanex -> Your thoughs behind artillery response times (8/9/2004 6:43:04 PM)

I am an avid fan of the game and I've always been curious about the mechanics behind SPWAW artillery...

I know from a previous post that SPWAW is a WARGAME and not a simulation. And I appreciate that a game must be a game first and a Simulation of reality second. So here's the question:

What's the game design rationel between the time it takes plotting artillery fire vs "game time". With a FO on the field i get some very short responsetimes 0,1 .- 0,5 perhaps - 1,1 or so with normal arty. If you measure the distance a tank can drive in this time - it seems to me the artillery is pretty damn quick.

Having only experienced calling in simulated artillery strikes during my National Service, my knowledge of the reality between spotting and actual impact is very limited. (After a few minutes from reading the coordinated on the radio, some resevist fired some crackling fireworks on top of us from an old sawn off mauser carbine and shouted "artillery is landing infront of your position..."



plloyd -> RE: Your thoughs behind artillery response times (8/9/2004 9:07:59 PM)

A few minutes in the game is 1 or 2 turns. That would suggest a longer response time, according to your experience note.

Anyway, I don't normally use artillery against AFVs. It just too hard to hit a moving point target. If there were more advanced munitions available, I might change my mind. Mostly defensive off-board artillery requires a bit of planning. Ususally I choose where I think the enemy will be, then shift the FFE hex until the delay is 1.0 or 1.1. Next turn, assuming he went in the direction I thought he would, I can zero in and hit him next turn. It is all planning and coordination.



Jim1954 -> RE: Your thoughs behind artillery response times (8/9/2004 9:19:04 PM)

Look to the Artillery Management (T.O.T.) thread in the training center for all things arty related.



vulkansanex -> RE: Your thoughs behind artillery response times (8/10/2004 12:03:34 AM)

I was wondering if there were historical facts behinde how far a ground unit can move vs. the time for called artillery strikes.

I must practice my short and clear inquiring. Sorry to be so fuzzy around the edges.

I have not read the Artillery related stuff in the training centre though. So Off I go.
And Thanks.



FNG -> RE: Your thoughs behind artillery response times (8/10/2004 3:34:19 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: vulkansanex

I was wondering if there were historical facts behinde how far a ground unit can move vs. the time for called artillery strikes.



British & Canadian artillery batteries in a particular sector were all aligned to the same grid and would have certain areas zeroed in. FOOs could call in targets of differing priority, from a troop of 25 pdrs to all the heavy stuff in the vicinity. This could arrive *very* quickly; there are examples in late '44 and early '45 of German counter-attacks being completely disrupted at the jump-off point by fast and concentrated artillery fire.

'The Guns of War' is a memoir by a Canadian FOO (can't remember the name offhand) who served in the ETO from July '44 until the end of the war. Very good read generally, but specifically for understanding how artillery was really used. Apparently many German prisoners asked to see the British "semi-automatic 25 pdr" because they could not believe that they had been hit by regular field guns.



plloyd -> RE: Your thoughs behind artillery response times (8/10/2004 6:02:18 PM)

I think the answer to your question is a soft "no". I put it that way because, while we know the vehicle speeds, the response times for artillery are more esoteric. The relative response times are pretty much in line with my own reading and what I have studied. I think relative to vehicle speed it may be shorter. I also think we tend to run vehicles at full speed more often than happened in reality. Perhaps that makes it even.

I think the concusion is that we have a fuzzy point (based on doctrine and technical ability), which at the moment, fits the game, reflects the real problem, but may not be real in itself.



Major Destruction -> RE: Your thoughs behind artillery response times (8/12/2004 5:30:09 AM)

Heinz Guderian mentions in his book Panzer Battles that he was fired on by a French artillery bombardment when moving from one location to another in May 1940. This would assume that his vehicle was under observation and the observer was able to order immediate fire on his (fast-moving) vehicle.

Why not?

Webster, in his Parachute Infantry recalls how in 1945 his observation point called for artillery and received incoming within minutes. The fact that the American guns fired on his position and not the enemy position [X(] is moot in this case. The response time was almost immediate.

What the game does not properly address is the ridgid artillery schedules of pre-planne bombardments. this is best modelled by the much-loathed level bomber bombardments where, by the time the bombardment occurs, your troops have already moved into that sector and the bombardiers aim is off...........[X(]

This happened too in every army. But we don't use it in our games because it is too random, right?



vulkansanex -> RE: Your thoughs behind artillery response times (8/12/2004 2:58:50 PM)

Doesn't the bombardment have a random scatter element.
I rarely have points to spare for the use of bombers - but I seem to remember they can be off to some degree.

Perhaps not as much as you would like though :)

(I myself is always more interested in historical accuracy than gamy-ness. I would not slag off people who likes it the other way around - but personally my greatest joy from the game is invisioning real "what if" scenarios. Phew - There, its out...



Voriax -> RE: Your thoughs behind artillery response times (8/12/2004 4:20:35 PM)

One problem with arty response times is that it is not determined how long a turn is. 'Few minutes' or 5 minutes are often quoted. However if you have created a scenario where a day long battle is compressed to 20 turns then you could say the turn length is 25 minutes?
Which would obviously play havoc with speeds and such. Also as the arty response times varied from few minutes (US, Finns, maybe some others) to something like 20-25 minutes (Soviets) this would mean in game the response times would be pretty much as they are or they could increase to 4-5 turns. I myself am more at ease with the present situation.

Voriax



Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.65625