Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: Indirect artillery fire....

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> John Tiller's Campaign Series >> RE: Indirect artillery fire.... Page: <<   < prev  1 [2]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Indirect artillery fire.... - 4/29/2008 8:23:23 PM   
Arkady


Posts: 1262
Joined: 5/31/2002
From: 27th Penal Battalion
Status: offline
Yes, i remember one lucky shot by my opponent during online battle (Talonsoft version)
82mm mortar indirect fire



_____________________________


(in reply to Huib)
Post #: 31
RE: Indirect artillery fire.... - 4/30/2008 1:14:40 AM   
1925frank

 

Posts: 1039
Joined: 6/20/2006
Status: offline
How does disabled work?  Does it result in a loss of a SP?  Does it work the same as a disrupted unit?  Or is the unit simply unable to move but still able to fire (essentially like a fixed unit)?  Can the unit lose its disabled status?  I don't think I've ever encountered that, or if I did, I didn't make any note of it.

(in reply to Arkady)
Post #: 32
RE: Indirect artillery fire.... - 4/30/2008 1:52:35 AM   
Jason Petho


Posts: 15009
Joined: 6/22/2004
From: Terrace, BC, Canada
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: 1925frank

How does disabled work?  Does it result in a loss of a SP?  Does it work the same as a disrupted unit?  Or is the unit simply unable to move but still able to fire (essentially like a fixed unit)?  Can the unit lose its disabled status?  I don't think I've ever encountered that, or if I did, I didn't make any note of it.


A strength point is removed from the unit for the duration of the scenario, the remainder of the platoon functions as normal.

So in the example above, assuming it was a 4SP PzIVH platoon, it would now be a 3SP PzIVH platoon.

Jason Petho

_____________________________


(in reply to 1925frank)
Post #: 33
RE: Indirect artillery fire.... - 5/2/2008 5:53:08 AM   
dgk196

 

Posts: 248
Joined: 3/21/2006
Status: offline
Jason, et all.....

I'm really glad to see that 'artillery' is a priority on your list. As always, I'm grateful for the support you guys give to the game. I look forward to seeing what you have done in 1.03! Any chance of a thumbnail summary of 'artillery' related changes?

Dennis

(in reply to Jason Petho)
Post #: 34
RE: Indirect artillery fire.... - 7/17/2008 11:03:09 PM   
1925frank

 

Posts: 1039
Joined: 6/20/2006
Status: offline
I just finished "The Clay Pigeons of St. Lo" by Glover S. Johns, Jr.  It about an American battalion commander, and thanks to Campaign Series, I was able to put a lot of what he said into some kind of framework.

Regarding artillery, Johns describes it (at least for the Americans) in a way that the game seems to reflect well.  That is, any forward unit acted as a forward observer because of radio or telephone communications.  The radios were apparently very primitive, because most of the reliance was on telephones.  Radios were in short supply and apparently had very limited ranges.  The real trick was to have intact telephone lines and to persuade each rung up the ladder of the importance of the particular requested fire mission.  A lot depended on the person at the front too, because not everyone had the skills to communicate where they wanted the fire or how to adjust fire.  I have no military background, so I have no idea how anything worked, but I found this book to be a good read.

(in reply to Huib)
Post #: 35
RE: Indirect artillery fire.... - 7/18/2008 8:17:08 AM   
Mraah

 

Posts: 1085
Joined: 2/20/2008
Status: offline
dgk196,

To answer your question ... Does it work the way I expect it to? ... some parts yes ... some parts no .

Parts that need changing (optional feature as always) ...

OFF BOARD ARTILLERY - preplanned missions.
Instead of having all the artillery on-board we need to move some off board (DCG games too). During the setup phase you select "target" hexes and assign the batteries to these hexes and select a turn that you want the artillery to arrive on, and how many turns you want the barrage to last. These "off board" assets are like the Airstrike assets ... you only get a few preplanned missions to burn. Then when it arrives, assuming 2 salvo's/battery, it lands on the target hex or any adjancent hex (randomly determined). You can see that having 4 batteries preset to arrive on target can pretty much cover a good chunk of ground ... just don't be around when it lands. Also, you can "cancel" the fire mission at any time, however, the delay (in turns) would be applied to whatever the highest HQ is present on the battlefield ... such as ... Corps (0 delay), Division (1), Brigade (2), Regiment (3), Battalion (4) ... or whatever values you want to use to suit ones own taste.

ON BOARD ARTILLERY - add a delay based on chain-of-command from the spotting unit upwards.
Since the game knows whether a hex is in LOS then it must know which unit can see what hex ... right? When you use the artillery dialog (or even directly from the gun battery unit) and select a hex it will scan for friendly units that can see the hex ... and then use the chain-of-command to incure a delay. The delay can run from one turn (like we have now) up to several turns ... again, depending on the best chain-link it can determine. So, when we click a hex a dialog appears ... it will tell us an ETA ... this ETA can flex +/- 1 turn if we want to add some randomness to it. At this point we can cancell the mission and move along. If we agree with the delay and click "ok" then another dialog appears asking us to set a time on-target (in turns, say 1 or 2 turns). After the batteries start firing you cannot cancel them (hence 2 turns max on-target). Then ... yes there's more ... the battery that just fired immediately goes to a low-ammo state, no if's-and's-or but's about it ... then later it's subject to the normal ammo recovery rule.


Does it solve the uber-artillery vs armor? ... no, but it minimizes the point-and-click destruction we have now.

From the accounts I read in books (accurate accounts but not really technical stuff) it seems to me that artillery was mostly preplanned and all they had to do was turn it on or off. Any adjustments from the "battle-plan" resulted in delays that either slowed the advance or worse case arrived off target on friendly troops because human error will always be a factor.

Thanks for listening!

Rob


< Message edited by Mraah -- 7/18/2008 8:21:02 AM >

(in reply to dgk196)
Post #: 36
Page:   <<   < prev  1 [2]
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> John Tiller's Campaign Series >> RE: Indirect artillery fire.... Page: <<   < prev  1 [2]
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.672