Artillery question

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

Artillery question

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

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> The War Room >> Artillery question

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

Artillery question - 2/1/2014 5:38:14 PM

BigBadWolf

Posts: 584
Joined: 8/8/2007
From: Serbia
Status: offline

I know artillery was tweaked a while back to stop nuclear bombardment of Chinese troops, so my question is is it worth assembling large artillery groups for those early games sieges? Should I bother spending PP on large caliber IJN guns from Manchuria and transport them to PI, if I can find a port to unload them, that is? How much improvement would I see compared to divisional artillery one usually has in Clark and Bataan?

_____________________________

Post #: 1

RE: Artillery question - 2/1/2014 5:58:42 PM

castor troy

Posts: 14330
Joined: 8/23/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: BigBadWolf

I know artillery was tweaked a while back to stop nuclear bombardment of Chinese troops, so my question is is it worth assembling large artillery groups for those early games sieges? Should I bother spending PP on large caliber IJN guns from Manchuria and transport them to PI, if I can find a port to unload them, that is? How much improvement would I see compared to divisional artillery one usually has in Clark and Bataan?

considering how much an artillery unit costs you will be far better off releasing Divisions

_____________________________

(in reply to BigBadWolf)

Post #: 2

RE: Artillery question - 2/1/2014 6:13:42 PM

BigBadWolf

Posts: 584
Joined: 8/8/2007
From: Serbia
Status: offline

Yeah, there's that, too.

_____________________________

(in reply to castor troy)

Post #: 3

RE: Artillery question - 2/7/2014 9:46:45 PM

Jorge_Stanbury

Posts: 4320
Joined: 2/29/2012
From: Toronto and Lima
Status: offline

Just starve Bataan/ Clark

You are not Homma, thus you don't need to worry about being labeled as "not aggressive enough" due to a long delay in conquering the PI

_____________________________

(in reply to BigBadWolf)

Post #: 4

RE: Artillery question - 2/7/2014 10:18:12 PM

BigBadWolf

Posts: 584
Joined: 8/8/2007
From: Serbia
Status: offline

If you can afford to tie down few divisions for several months.

Siege artillery isn't as expensive in PP terms. Still, I'm not sure what effect would they have in battle and if it is worth while dragging them from Korea to Philippines.

Would they be effective in shelling invasion TFs?

_____________________________

(in reply to Jorge_Stanbury)

Post #: 5

RE: Artillery question - 2/7/2014 10:30:05 PM

Jorge_Stanbury

Posts: 4320
Joined: 2/29/2012
From: Toronto and Lima
Status: offline

You can do a full invasion of the PI, get Manila, etc. and once Bataan/ Clark is isolated, remove all the best units, leaving just enough to troops to repeal any counter attack. Lack of provision/ reinforcement means that any offensive attempt will benefit you.

That said, ART is your best bet against fortified positions. And it is common knowledge that it is deceptive to look just at the AV numbers when calculating the odds vs fortified positions.

I don't think they are very effective against TFs, they will fire, but miss a lot

(in reply to BigBadWolf)

Post #: 6

RE: Artillery question - 2/7/2014 11:23:34 PM

Gaspote

Posts: 303
Joined: 6/30/2013
From: France
Status: offline

In my opinion, engineer squad are more usefull than artillery. Artillery is usefull only if fortification level is at 0 or 1. If you attack a fortified position (lvl 3 more), even with more artillery you will loose more units. If you have more engineer squad, you will reduce his fortification so even if you get 100 guns less, on unfortified units, you will be more effective than with more guns on well fortified position.
For PI, you get enough of artillery and you still get some unit from China if it's not enough. The only point using artillery is to use ennemy supplies everyday with bombardment because you can't shock or deliberate attack everyday. I still don't think it make a difference if it's one brigade shooting or 5 except you will perhaps get 1 more squad disabled against a fortress.

(in reply to Jorge_Stanbury)

Post #: 7

RE: Artillery question - 2/7/2014 11:44:45 PM

mind_messing

Posts: 3393
Joined: 10/28/2013
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: BigBadWolf

I know artillery was tweaked a while back to stop nuclear bombardment of Chinese troops, so my question is is it worth assembling large artillery groups for those early games sieges?

Ground combat at Sian (83,41)

Japanese Bombardment attack

Attacking force 6630 troops, 444 guns, 438 vehicles, Assault Value = 2799

Defending force 66510 troops, 338 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 1251

Allied ground losses:
1274 casualties reported
Squads: 34 destroyed, 49 disabled
Non Combat: 1 destroyed, 4 disabled
Engineers: 1 destroyed, 9 disabled
Guns lost 10 (4 destroyed, 6 disabled)

Assaulting units:
35th Division
15th Tank Regiment
3rd Ind.Mixed Brigade
32nd Division
36th Division
27th Division
1st Ind.Mixed Brigade
110th Division
116th Division
12th Tank Regiment
13th Tank Regiment
16th Ind.Mixed Brigade
12th Division
14th Medium Field Artillery Regiment
15th Ind.Medium Field Artillery Regiment
6th Ind.Hvy.Art. Battalion
4th RF Gun Battalion
Tonei Hvy Gun Regiment
2nd Ind. Mountain Gun Regiment
North China Area Army
7th Ind.Hvy.Art. Battalion
1st Ind.Hvy.Art. Battalion
2nd Hvy.Artillery Regiment
22nd Medium Field Artillery Regiment
4th Ind. Mountain Gun Regiment
9th Medium Field Artillery Regiment
12th Army
12th Ind.Art.Mortar Battalion
1st Mortar Battalion
4th Medium Field Artillery Regiment
51st Ind.Mtn.Gun Battalion
8th Ind. Engineer Regiment
3rd Hvy.Artillery Regiment
5th Medium Field Artillery Regiment
13th Ind.Art.Mortar Battalion
4th Ind.Hvy.Art. Battalion
2nd Ind. Engineer Regiment
11th Ind.Art.Mortar Battalion
7th Medium Field Artillery Regiment

Defending units:
38th Chinese Corps
36th Chinese Corps
57th Chinese Corps
16th Chinese Corps
92nd Chinese Corps
76th Chinese Corps
1st Chinese Corps
3rd Chinese Corps
96th Chinese Corps
9th Chinese Corps
41st Chinese Corps
15th Chinese Base Force
5th War Area
34th Group Army
Red Chinese Army
47th Chinese Corps
4th Group Army
22nd Group Army
4th Construction Regiment

Yes.

(in reply to BigBadWolf)

Post #: 8

RE: Artillery question - 2/8/2014 7:33:14 AM

obvert

Posts: 14050
Joined: 1/17/2011
From: PDX (and now) London, UK
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: castor troy

quote:

ORIGINAL: BigBadWolf

I know artillery was tweaked a while back to stop nuclear bombardment of Chinese troops, so my question is is it worth assembling large artillery groups for those early games sieges? Should I bother spending PP on large caliber IJN guns from Manchuria and transport them to PI, if I can find a port to unload them, that is? How much improvement would I see compared to divisional artillery one usually has in Clark and Bataan?

considering how much an artillery unit costs you will be far better off releasing Divisions

have a look at the small arty units in Manchuria. Some of those have the 24-32cm guns, and they are very cheap, strangely. These are VERY effective when dug in and well supported. Well worth the PPs, especially for a long siege or in a set defensive position. Here is a recent example against late war Marine arty units. There are a number of 24cm guns there, and a few 32cm.

Ground combat at Masan (102,54)

Allied Bombardment attack

Attacking force 81113 troops, 1678 guns, 1418 vehicles, Assault Value = 3108

Defending force 154922 troops, 1930 guns, 413 vehicles, Assault Value = 5341

Japanese ground losses:
118 casualties reported
Squads: 0 destroyed, 10 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 2 disabled
Engineers: 1 destroyed, 0 disabled

Allied ground losses:
870 casualties reported
Squads: 25 destroyed, 77 disabled
Non Combat: 3 destroyed, 9 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 13 disabled
Guns lost 33 (8 destroyed, 25 disabled)
Vehicles lost 10 (2 destroyed, 8 disabled)

Assaulting units:
34th Combat Engineer Regiment
33rd Infantry Division
Americal Infantry Division
2nd Marine Division
81st Infantry Division
6th Marine Division
5th Marine Division
3rd Marine Division
3rd USMC Field Artillery Battalion
I Corps Artillery
1st USMC Field Artillery Battalion
8th USMC Field Artillery Battalion
I US Corps
10th USMC Field Artillery Battalion
X Corps Artillery
Tenth US Army
XXIV US Corps
251st Field Artillery Battalion
12th USMC Field Artillery Battalion
V US Amphib Corps
147th Field Artillery Regiment
4th USMC Field Artillery Battalion
XIV Corps Artillery
X US Corps
XXIV CorpsArtillery
148th Field Artillery Battalion

Defending units:
Yosu Fortress
78th Infantry Regiment
87th Infantry Regiment
94th Division
109th Div /2
123rd Division
111th Division
160th Division
109th Division
57th Division
30th Infantry Regiment
140th Infantry Regiment
11th Division
4th Manchukuo Distr Division
127th Division
77th Infantry Regiment
112th Division
96th Division
19th Division
150th Division
14th Division
120th Division
16th Garrison Unit /9
15th Medium Field Artillery Regiment
2nd Mortar Regiment
14th Area Army
30th RF Gun Battalion
121st Division
10th Mortar Battalion
7th Ind.Hvy.Art. Battalion
71st Mountain Gun Regiment
17th Mortar Battalion
31st RF Gun Battalion
13th Ind.Art.Mortar Battalion
28th Mountain Gun Regiment
Tonei Hvy Gun Regiment
29th RF Gun Battalion
26th Field Artillery Regiment
11th Ind.Art.Mortar Battalion
2nd Medium Field Artillery Regiment
12th Ind.Art.Mortar Battalion
6th Ind.Hvy.Art. Battalion
76th JAAF AF Bn

< Message edited by obvert -- 2/8/2014 8:35:48 AM >

_____________________________

"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm." - Winston Churchill

(in reply to castor troy)

Post #: 9

RE: Artillery question - 2/8/2014 8:19:43 AM

LoBaron

Posts: 4776
Joined: 1/26/2003
From: Vienna, Austria
Status: offline

Arty effectiveness is highly dependent on how and where it is used.

In general, fort levels diminish the effect of artillery very fast in terms of casualties achieved. This usually means that when attacking against a well dug in defender the primary effect if arty is not destroying devices. But that does not mean it is useless. Bombarding arty forces counterbattery fire, and this costs supply. So it is possible to starve out sieged units faster by constantly running bombardement attacks, even if there are no devices damaged ot destroyed.

Arty also supports attacks by ground units. This is often underestimated as a units� condition can only be viewed after the repair phase, which usually means that much of the damage initially caused by combat can already be repaired again, and disruption/fatigue reduced. When a ground assault begins after the bombardement phase, this has not been the case yet. So it may well be that a defending unit is in a bad condition when the dices start to roll for the ground assault, because arty caused enough havoc by the bombardement phase before, and so significantly influenced the battle outcome.
My general observation is that ground attacks supported by significant ammounts of arty often have a much higher rate of success than without.

As a defender, arty initiates counterbattery fire when attacked. In most cases is more destructive than the bombardement attack itself, partly because the attackers� fort levels a lower on average, partly because how counterbattery fire is implemented in game.

And finally, depending on the terrain, arty is a very important unit type to stop tanks, more so if not much AT weaponry is available. This only works in consert with serious AV provided by other units though.

And finally, in case you use stacking limit map, the use of arty has an advantage to a regular inf unit, as can significantly enhance the available firepower in a hex (and sometimes AV although that is not the primary goal) without increasing the stacking costs.

_____________________________