Treebursts

[Palle]

Treebursts were generally reckoned more lethal in WWI and II, which is but logical; a grenade exploding above you leaves you little places to search for cover. And as the Americans started using Close Proximity Fuses in the Battle of the Bulge, these too, were meatchoppers.

Now, searching the forum did not provide an answer, so I am sorry if this has been adressed before; but are treebursts more lethal than normal arty in this game?

Thanks

[Suhiir]

Originally Posted by Palle

Treebursts were generally reckoned more lethal in WWI and II, which is but logical; a grenade exploding above you leaves you little places to search for cover. And as the Americans started using Close Proximity Fuses in the Battle of the Bulge, these too, were meatchoppers.

Now, searching the forum did not provide an answer, so I am sorry if this has been adressed before; but are treebursts more lethal than normal arty in this game?

Thanks

Tree busts aren't directly represented in the game.
Tho there is VT ammo (in at least the US OOB) that represents air bursts. As does the lethality of cluster type munitions.
Also I just started a thread in the TO&E section concerning the air-burst fuses the USA (and perhaps others) now use on almost all mortar ammunition. Feel free to add your 2 cents (or whatever currency they use in your country).

[Marcello]

There are some artillery pieces equipped with proxy fuzes in the game. They are labelled as VT and have greater HE kill values.
Aside from that they do not differ from normal artillery, they create craters at the same rate etc. As for treebursts, there aren't any, nor probably there could be. I would expect that the germans were getting this effect by regulating their fuzes on "superquick",so to speak. This probably won't be done in many others cases.

[Palle]

We use Kr and Øre, as we have chosen not to be part of the Euro. Thanks Sulhir.

I do not know much about it really, I am just running a campaign in French Indochina, so the thought occured that there should be treebursts.

Treebursts are more lethal because:
- Your foxhole or trench does not give much protection against something exploding overhead and shattering hot, razor-sharp shrapnell everywhere.
-Additionally the tree(s) will also shatter and throw long, pointy and extremely nasty splinters everywhere. Again from above, so still not much cover to be had. The Americans felt the effect of this in the hard battles for Hürtgen Forest.

Airbursts just above ground would be the same except for the splinters. But I believe that they should still, by logic, be more damaging to ground troops as they cannot take cover except under vehicles or inside bunkers. Though I am unaware whether such an effect can be included in SPMBT/SPWW2. I just know what happened historically, nothing on game mechanics.

[Suhiir]

Originally Posted by Palle

Airbursts just above ground would be the same except for the splinters. But I believe that they should still, by logic, be more damaging to ground troops as they cannot take cover except under vehicles or inside bunkers.

This is one reason US doctrine (and I'm sure everyone else's) has long emphasized the importance of overhead cover on fighting positions. And even more so when facing an opponent that regularly uses VT type fusing.

So while such bursts ARE more lethal troops aren't dumb so they'll seek cover (when possible). So it sort of "comes out in the wash". In-game you'll notice mortar/artillery fire is a LOT less effective VS dug-in troops to represent this.

[scJazz]

AFAIK it is not modeled. However, the trees will nicely catch fire and suppress anything in the hex. Which is why I have rule #42 when playing SPMBT... Thou shalt not put crewed unmovable equipment like artillery and AA guns in woods.

[Mobhack]

A tree-burst might be dangerous in the small area nearby but the overall presence of trees will still soak up the blast and splinters in terms of the general area.

A mortar bomb going off in your particular room of a building is rather unpleasant for you, but the walls make it far less so for your section mate next door, too.

Your open-topped slit trench is an unhappy place to be if a round lands right inside it by chance too. That's for you, but not the rest of the platoon. But being in trenches means that rounds which do not land inside are overall less lethal.

Thus woods and buildings are both treated as reasonable cover and occupying a trench is also good. Statistically, less casualties are received from being in them overall. A few guys will be "lottery winners" but overall most will not.

Andy

[Palle]

True, as is the overhead cover point. When checking it seems airbursts are most unpleasant when on the attack and thus out of cover. But that probably cannot be modelled.

[runequester]

Originally Posted by Palle

True, as is the overhead cover point. When checking it seems airbursts are most unpleasant when on the attack and thus out of cover. But that probably cannot be modelled.

To an extent it already is, i think. Troops moving in the open tends to take much heavier casualties from artillery.

[DRG]

Originally Posted by runequester

To an extent it already is, i think. Troops moving in the open tends to take much heavier casualties from artillery.

That is correct.

Don