AI artillery fire rate

[BornGinger]

One thing I like about this game is the AI's ability to use its mortar teams to shoot on the player by itself when they spot something interesting and also the officers (with permission) and FOs ability to call in artillery on the player when they spot something interesting. What I wonder, though, is a bit about the fire rate with which the AI tries to trouble the player.

Does anyone on the forum know anything about the fire rate with which the AI calls in artillery? If the AI's officer with artillery permission or an FO spots the player's units, do they call in a maximum barrage no matter the amount of spotted enemy or do they call in artillery with a fire rate depending on how many they spot? It would probably be possible to make them call in a specified rate of artillery fire depending on the amount of observed enemy units.

If AI belongs to the Blue (US Army in CMFB) the code could maybe be something like:

if (Red) <5 = call in harass
if (Red) <5 and >10 (not >15) = call in medium
if (Red) <5 and >20 (not >25) = call in large
if (Red) >25 = call in maximum

I look forward to the answers from the so called "plugged in" know-it-all people on the forum.

[mjkerner]

2 hours ago, BornGinger said:

I look forward to the answers from the so called "plugged in" know-it-all people on the forum.

Not a big Dale Carnegie fan, huh?

[Michael Emrys]

14 minutes ago, mjkerner said:

Not a big Dale Carnegie fan, huh?

Michael

[BornGinger]

1 hour ago, mjkerner said:

Not a big Dale Carnegie fan, huh?

You mean the one who wrote the book "How to Win Friends and Influence People"? So if I use the correct method, flatter, I will hopfully influence people to show off their knowledge in the subject which will make them so greatful so they see me as a friend for letting them shine in the glory of their know-it-all.

That way I don't have to do a lot of tests myself.

[mjkerner]

What are you, 12? No one ever teach you simple manners?  No, I just meant that being civil to people you are asking to help you to find answers is usually a good starting point. No suck up necessary.  Too bad you're being such a tool, because those were good questions to which I'd like to know the answers as well. (Note: I don't want or need a damn thing from you, ever, so in this instance I don't feel the need to be civil, dickhead. See how that works?)

 

Elvis, feel free to ban me or whatever...I couldn't help myself. This guy's a twat.

 

PS: My apologies to 12 year olds everywhere!

 

Edited November 17, 2019 by mjkerner

[Warts 'n' all]

Although you may be biologically inaccurate in your terminology, I don't think that you should be banned. In the meantime perhaps my fellow redhead will learn how to be grateful.

[BornGinger]

It's interesting how a little joke can stir up so much emotions. It seems someone woke up on the wrong side today.

Back to the main subject: Does anyone know an answer to the question in the first post?

 

Edited November 18, 2019 by BornGinger

[Combatintman]

I don't think that there is such a relationship between numbers of enemy spotted and rounds on target as you suggest.  There are other variables which you don't mention are probably a factor such as:

How much offensive support is available.

Soft factors for the observer.

Soft factors for the offensive support asset.

From limited experience of something that I am working on - AI spotters will consistently call offensive support onto what are perceived as lucrative targets displaying the same movements and behaviours in the same timeframe and action spot, at the same rate.

You may now give me heaps of likes for knowing it all.

[BornGinger]

Thank you for the answer. I knew I could trust on one of the people who usually writes in the forum.

May your name be mentioned in the heavens.

 

[MOS:96B2P]

21 hours ago, Combatintman said:

You may now give me heaps of likes for knowing it all.

+ 1.  Well...............  there's one anyway.         

[BornGinger]

I'm back in this thread about AI and artillery. But it's not about the rate of fire and AI although that's what the subject for this thread is.

What I wonder concerning AI and artillery is whether the AI favours on-map artillery before off-map when requsting artillery support? Why I'm asking this is because I was checking the movements of the AI troops in a scenario I'm making and noticed that three officers were all requesting artillery support from on-map mortars although they could request support from larger off-map mortars which would cause more damage to the enemy.

I was thinking that the reason could be that on-map mortars reply to a request quicker than off-map mortars, but I don't know if the AI is coded to "think" that way.

Another question regarding AI and artillery support is whether the AI is keeping track on where the friendly forces are so it doesn't request artillery support on a position which is too close to where the friendly troops are?

I thank you for your knowledgable answers in advance.

Edited February 29, 2020 by BornGinger

[Bulletpoint]

I think the AI is much simpler than that. I've seen it call in quite large 150mm artillery barrages on two broken guys hiding in a shellhole in no-man's land. It seems to me it just sees a target, then chooses a short or medium fire mission with whatever asset is on hand.

[RockinHarry]

what I figured during my own scenario testing is that the AIP maintains a security distance to his own nearby troops when calling for Arty support. That would be variable for the big stuff (105, 155cm and up) of about 2-300m at least and considerably smaller for mortars. Still I´ve seen oftenly that the AIP plasters its own troops with mortars, quite particularly when the AIP also is somewhat enforced to apply to a given movement plan. Most secure method for an AIP is to have or get a FO to a vantange point with good view to a potential bombardment area. Having an AIP TRP in any such enemy area yet is another option to get the AIP react timely and responsively to any enemy units in LOS.

Whether the AIP prefers on- or offboard assets I think mainly relies on C2 (between spotter and Arty) and whether a sighted enemy is more mobile or rather static. Range to target and mentioned security range, plays a role as well, as is amount of available ammo and some soft factors maybe.

[rocketman]

2 hours ago, Bulletpoint said:

I think the AI is much simpler than that. I've seen it call in quite large 150mm artillery barrages on two broken guys hiding in a shellhole in no-man's land. It seems to me it just sees a target, then chooses a short or medium fire mission with whatever asset is on hand.

On the other hand, you knew that they were only two broken guys, maybe the AI suspected something else? But I tend to agree, it uses arty more as a reflex than careful planning and doesn't cancel barrages that obviously won't do much damage.

[BornGinger]

4 hours ago, RockinHarry said:

Having an AIP TRP in any such enemy area yet is another option to get the AIP react timely and responsively to any enemy units in LOS.

No, I don't want that. It would be too easy for the attacker that way as he's already having more infantry and armor than the defender. Requesting artillery support has to be done in the moment of the action to make the scenario a little bit more balanced. I guess it's fine the way it is. I just wanted to know as this behaviour from the AI was a bit surprising.

Thank you very much for the replies.

[Combatintman]

I've had AI artillery knock over friendly forces too - so no I don't think that the AI keeps too close of a track on friendly force locations.  That said, the last time I saw the behaviour I didn't have much of a handle on which unit had called the fire in or how many minutes had elapsed between the call for fire - the firing unit was an off map 105mm battery with either average or above average soft factors.  The rounds impacted about a hundred metres away from a concentration of enemy forces that was the likely observer's intended target.  Unfortunately my AI controlled assaulting infantry element was crossing that hundred metre gap at the time that Fire for Effect rounds were starting to drop.

I think the main takeaway on the whole topic really is that AI-controlled artillery is more of an art than a science without TRPs or using the trigger trick for on-map assets.  Good soft factors for both observer and firing unit help but at the end of the day it is difficult to produce consistent results for AI-controlled artillery.

[Ultradave]

I don't know what the AI logic does in the game, but for background, the FO calls a fire mission that includes a description of the target (inf co in the open, inf sqd entrenched in treeline, that sort of thing). The fire support unit, whatever it is, will decide what to fire, based on that description, their support role, ammo situation, and competing requests. The FO always has the option to call for a repeat if the initial fire mission was not effective enough.

This is based on my experience as a FIST chief back in the late 70s, in the 82d Airborne, where our artillery methods weren't much different than in WW2 or Korea - all manual, no computers, no GPS. The main difference is that the FIST organization puts an enlisted FO with each infantry platoon and the LT with the company commander constantly, instead of just the one FO per company when and if attached as it was in WW2.

[General Jack Ripper]

On 11/17/2019 at 8:47 AM, BornGinger said:

Does anyone on the forum know anything about the fire rate with which the AI calls in artillery?

I've been playing for years, and I don't have a clue.

The AI does seem to prefer short or quick barrages, but that could just be the fact I don't really present any large targets for them to shoot at.

[BornGinger]

A new question concerning AI artillery and about on-map mortar teams in particular. What is required for AI on-map mortars on the move to get ready for use? Is it to stop their movement plus the time required to set the mortar up, so they can be used for indirect fire, or is it to spot an enemy team/enemy squad plus the time required to set up the mortar? Or maybe it is both of the two requirements or a completely different requirement?

Edited April 26, 2020 by BornGinger