.com.unity Forums

.com.unity Forums (http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/index.php)
-   WinSPWW2 (http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/forumdisplay.php?f=139)
-   -   Realistic Artillery Management by a FOO (http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/showthread.php?t=41322)

Weasel November 21st, 2008 02:46 PM

Re: Realistic Artillery Management by a FOO
 
Gun tubes are always laid on a target when not shooting; so if the FOO called in a whiskey strike on plot A and the guns were already sited on plot A the time on target would be minimal. The way to simulate this in the game is to plot the guns but turn off the tubes.

As for walking the barrage, this was still standard practice in WW2 - the creeping barrage. While there were FOOs with the infantry, the guns were adjusting not on corrections but on time and thus were firing blind so to speak.

Brummbar November 21st, 2008 08:41 PM

Re: Realistic Artillery Management by a FOO
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Weasel (Post 654488)
We are discussing this at THE BLITZ currently too. The FOO restriction rule (attached) was created by Vesku, Walrus and myself, and play tested with about 10 players to try and come up with a system that does away with the single purchased FOO calling in single arty tubes onto 50 different hexes at the same time.

Give it a gander.

That sound's simple enough. I think I will suggest using that rule when I start playing PBEM games. :up:

iCaMpWiThAWP November 21st, 2008 09:16 PM

Re: Realistic Artillery Management by a FOO
 
One Great Thing would be an "adjusting round"-"FFE"(Fire for effect), option, as it would let you get accurate shots with no waste of ammo

RERomine November 21st, 2008 11:42 PM

Re: Realistic Artillery Management by a FOO
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by iCaMpWiThAWP (Post 654820)
One Great Thing would be an "adjusting round"-"FFE"(Fire for effect), option, as it would let you get accurate shots with no waste of ammo

IF your observer has LOS of the target, it's not much of an issue. Rounds tend to be pretty much on target the first time they come in. The observer having LOS tends to be a big IF, however.

On the other hand, if your "observer" doesn't have LOS (hard to call them an observer if they can't see the target :)), the first series of rounds can be expected to be off target. If you are using off-artillery, turn off all but one tube and adjust that. When the second series of rounds come in, all will be on target. That way, you only waste ammo from one gun instead of two, three or four.

This doesn't work with on-board artillery because it's not bundled into batteries. In this case, they may be purchased as a battery, but all are independent of each other. The lone exceptions would be the mortar paired units.

PanzerBob November 22nd, 2008 09:13 PM

Re: Realistic Artillery Management by a FOO
 
Just read this thread though and have discovered that my handling of arty has been more like the suggested methods. Especially in regards to LOC's and such.

While by game rules there is different units who can call fire, I've over the years have relied largely on the "experts" with other "able" units as back up if my "experts" got taken out. Granted these guys don't always have the LOS desired I have found as they gain experience this doesn't matter as much at least not for my purposes. Interesting thread.:up:

Bob out :cool:

Weasel November 24th, 2008 02:34 PM

Re: Realistic Artillery Management by a FOO
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Weasel (Post 654488)
We are discussing this at THE BLITZ currently too. The FOO restriction rule (attached) was created by Vesku, Walrus and myself, and play tested with about 10 players to try and come up with a system that does away with the single purchased FOO calling in single arty tubes onto 50 different hexes at the same time.

Give it a gander.

I have modified the FOO rule to include a basic version and the more advanced version.

chuckfourth November 28th, 2008 08:50 AM

Re: Realistic Artillery Management by a FOO
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Cross (Post 654611)
What's wrong with a 'floating artillery strike'? I've used this practice and have assumed it was realistic.

Hi Cross
I have no beef with delaying the timing of the strike what's unrealistic is moving it around, Ill call it 'floating'.

You can just stretch a "Silent Barrage" to cover it, but with the important proviso that you are assuming that the infantry squad you blundered into just happens to be exactly where you pre-planned artillery strike is. Or looking at it another way, every single hex for the entire width of your line of advance has been nominated as a target in the fire plan, otherwise your registering a new target and a delay is appropriate.

Interestingly a google search on 'Silent barrages' and 'artillery' returns nothing. So even if it did explain "floating" artillery strikes a 'silent barrage' appears to be a case of the exception being modeled rather than the general rule.

Also dont forget that 'floating'(ie zero wait time) para drops, medium bomber strikes and fighter bomber strikes are also unrealistic.
Best Regards Chuck.

chuckfourth November 28th, 2008 09:06 AM

Re: Realistic Artillery Management by a FOO
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Marek_Tucan (Post 654607)
But I would not like to be denied the option to shift fire with the advance of my infantry.

Hi Marek
OK I can do better, how about this,

The game knows if your artillery is targeting a hex in LOS or not, It should also know if the on-map bombardment marker is there or not. What you could do for each artillery peice is make the blue arrowed 'shift button' conditional(visible) depending on wether the target is in LOS or not and wether the bombardment marker is there or not.
So if the hex you want to target isnt in LOS then,
You have the blue arrowed 'shift fire' buttons visible -only- while the Artillery target hex marker -hasnt- appeared on the map. So as soon as you plot the strike into the same hex it fell in before, because its out of LOS you lose your shift fire button, until the next turn.
(You also need to change the delay for targeting the same hex from 0.1 to 0.0 so no rounds "carry over" into the next turn.)
This means you can still keep firing turn after turn without any delay in hexes out of LOS but you cant walk the bombardment marker onto the exact hex you want. So unobserved fire becomes what it should be inaccurate, but in the ball park.
LOS firing remains unchanged.
(alternately just remove enemy artilleries smoke signatures)
Best Regards Chuck.

DRG November 28th, 2008 02:50 PM

Re: Realistic Artillery Management by a FOO
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by chuckfourth (Post 656085)

What you could do for each artillery peice is make the blue arrowed 'shift button' conditional(visible) depending on wether the target is in LOS or not and wether the bombardment marker is there or not.


It's always easy to dream up things the game should and shouldn't do when you have no clue whatsoever how the code is put together and note I used the word "game" because it is a "game" and therefore will always have "gamey" aspects not found in real life. The basic concept of a top down God view game is "gamey" and it's one reason thousands of people like the "game" in the first place.

We have already mentioned a few times that the next upgrade has changes to the shift fire code that make shifting arty from one place to the other that is out of LOS a much more time consuming activity than it is now. Having an observer with eyes on the target hex WILL be more of an advantage than firing blind is.

However....

You're not going to get the shift fire buttons removed from out of LOS targets because *I* suggested this to Andy long before you thought it up and after a good look at the code it was decided this wasn't going to happen for a number of reasons directly related to the code but also because without the ability to shift fire like that with out of LOS targets you could not do a proper walking barrage because as soon as you start to kick up smoke you loose LOS and would loose the ability to shift fire without a much bigger delay than that manoeuvre requires.

Quote:

Originally Posted by chuckfourth (Post 656085)

(alternately just remove enemy artilleries smoke signatures)

Do that and it calls into question why smoke from a bombardments is shown to both sides if it is out of LOS and how the AI or a human player could counter battery on map arty. Smoke signatures is already a topic you have brought up on a few occasions. If we thought the idea was valid we would have said so the first time.

Perhaps it's time to either accept there will always be "gamey" aspect of this game ( we have.....) or find something else to occupy your time.

End of discussion Chuck

Don

Marek_Tucan November 28th, 2008 05:37 PM

Re: Realistic Artillery Management by a FOO
 
Re smoke, is it so hard to imagine that those puffs of smoke above enemy artillery are just an abstraction to cover: flash spotting, CB aerial recon, noise detection, or, in more modern days, CB radars (used already in 1944) and other technical means? Those are available to artillerymen in real life and would be extremely hard to model in-game.


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:06 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©1999 - 2020, Shrapnel Games, Inc. - All Rights Reserved.