WriterJWA
-
Posts
217 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by WriterJWA
-
-
+1 for this! This is a great idea!
-
I've seen it go both ways. I've given Fire Briefly orders to sixty crews only to have them do nothing, and then the next time they blow through 45 seconds of ammunition. I hate assuming, but I wouldn't be surprised if it has something to do with whether or not the crew can get the spotting rounds on target withing the 15 seconds.
That said ... mortars in direct fire are WAAAAAY too quick to blow through their ammo at targets in LOS. I've had to have crews take down the tube to get them to stop firing.
(.... user-defined SOP's would solve this, Battlefront.)
-
Incidentally... this man should be dead. He was killed the previous scenario.
-
Here's a screenshot of what I'm basically seeing:
-
I see what your saying. And it's not a crushing deal, really. I just don't like seeing, and that's why I brought it up. I just want the game to be as realistic as possible. Plus, I figure a bug like that would be worth bringing to the attention of "the staff."
-
What if Tiger tanks could still operate just as efficiently with only the driver left alive?
-
Runners from higher hq? Pigeons? Signal flares? Lights? Hand gestures? Does it HAVE to be a radio?
Isn't this supposed to be a 1:1 game? There was no one else around. The officer was by himself, with over 500m distance between him and the nearest unit (which was out of LOS because of elevation differences and vegetation). How do you call in a fire mission with flares? Or with pigeons without their being an ungodly delay? How do you call in adjustments to the spotting rounds (which the lone officer was able to do)? Wired telephones are not listed in the game manual as a valid, or even included C2 method.
Yes, it would HAVE to be a radio.
-
If they don't have a radio, or access to a nearby one, they shouldn't be able to communicate at all.
-
The ability to call artillery is tied to the leader in the team. It has nothing to do with radios, just the continued functioning of (at least one of) the designated observer(s) in the team. Most teams only have one designated observer, and they're the "Leader" in the team. If they die, the unit will lose the ability to call fire; all assets will be "Denied". The only exception I've found is where a unit has an XO incorporated in it, such as a US infantry platoon HQ. Assuming the XO survives and takes over the leadership role, they will have access to the on-call assets as if their original looie was still alive. I can't recall whether an XO in a separate XO unit gets arty calling from the start, nor whether they inherit it if their Old Man carks it.
You're right in the fact that if the FO "leader" dies, then the indirect assets are no longer available for use (which is academically inaccurate. See below) ... but if they have no radio in the team, or are within proximity to another elements radio, how is the FO going to contact the battery? By ESP? Carrier pigeon? Whether or not he's capable of plotting the mission is irrelevant, he physically has no means of contacting that battery. I have seen leader/HQ, units lose their radio operator and lose the ability to call indirect fire. Why do those rules no apply to FO teams?
Indeed, but the 3 man FO teams in the game don't have 2 trained observers in 'em. Someone pointed out that the Priest Battery's FO section was 7 men, all of which were trained in calling strikes from their battery; I interpret the FO team in-game as one of those men having been detached to work with whatever formation your force is based on, and having been assigned a security man and a radio by the brass of that formation or its parent formation.Redundant training was (and is currently) key to battlefield success. Squad leaders, if they happen to have an SCR-536 or -300 in their squad, should be able to call in company 60mm mortars if available. Forward observer teams were and even today trained in the same way... if the lieutenant takes one in the running lights, the NCO and radioman should be able to, at a minimum, pick up the mission where the FO left off. That is reality.
But... that's a design decision on part of the developers ... I suspect as a means of establishing some game balance. The real issue as far as this thread goes is the FO calling in fire with access to a radio or other C2 link.
-
Wow ... totally just got thread-jacked there. Heheee...
-
Last night, playing through some of Conrath's Counterattack, I was able to call in indirect fire with an FO that did not have a radioman. The FO was completely on the other side of the map from the nearest radio or other C2 link. He was completely alone. The FO team radioman and the FO team NCO had been killed in a previous scenario.
Also ... something else I've noticed. I've had cases where the FO officer dies and afterward the NCO can't call in fire missions (I get 'denied' across the board). Seems a bit off ... there were NCO forward observers.
-
The White Tiger is an absurd premise, and the main attraction, the Tiger, has an incorrect hull, which i am sure will annoy a lot of CM players.
As for Saints & Soldiers, if those are some of the best action shots in the film i'll just watch BoB again.
Grace and Danger looks like a group of re-enactors with a reasonable budget and an amateur director.
This is why wargamers and armchair history buffs can't have nice things .... or accept them, at least. Between costuming, FX, pyrotechnics, props and set constructions, war films are some of the most expensive films to make, and here we have three, and the first thing out of a wargamers mouth is "!@#$in Tiger tank doesn't look exactly like it in '44 ... the whole thing's crap!"
Now ... if all three wind up like Windtalkers, then we might have a whole different discussion.
-
I don't know how it was handled in other armies, but leaving a gun without disabling it was equal to court martial and death penalty in the german Wehrmacht (but depended on the capabilities of the commanding general). My grandfather was a Panzerjäger in the 3.Gebirgsdivision and left his gun and the ammo behind, because of a sudden Russian breakthrough. There was no time to detonate the ammo and destroy the gun and he could only take the gun's lock with him.
It was investigated and since he could proove with independent witnesses what happened and that there was no other possibility, the case was not put to court. If he would have not been able to proove his claims, or if he would have left a functioning gun behind, the case definately would have gone to martial court. Leaving weapons behind was not a minor thing - not under a good general and not even under the extreme conditions of the Heeresgruppe Süd in 1944.
I wasn't really referring to the administrative penalty of leaving a crew-served weapon on the field. Regardless of what the off-map punitive actions are, crews do abandon guns, or are killed while manning them, making them inanimate objects the rest of the game as the engine exists today, which is unrealistic. It's not a game-breaker, re-crewing weapons is something that should happen.
-
I'm sorry, but you can't disagree with the facts. This issue has fallen the wrong side of the "improve this now or later" line and there are still many things that are more significant to both game play and presentation that would be more worthwhile use of development time. It is futile to bemoan possibly unfortunate design compromises to people who are simply telling you the way life is.
Oh sure! It's not a game breaker as it is now, but it would add an element of realism and complexity to the game. I'd rather have fire, flares, and amphibious movement before that. I should have been clearer. I wasn't arguing the timing point, but rather the technical issue of re-manning crew-served weapons.
-
Re-manning guns etc. so far has fallen on the wrong side of the line (at least enough to mean that there are a lot more things that ought to go in in preference to it).
I respectfully disagree, kind sir. Crew-served weapons and some vehicles should be treated as objects, not units. The crews are the units, the ATG/jeep/halftrack/MG is their assigned equipment, and technically usable by anyone on the field (with less aplomb depending on the type of equipment).
-
Mild arty question: Why can't we fire "grid missions" at suspected enemy areas out of LOS of the spotter? Say.... on the reverse-slope of a hill?
-
I'd KILL to see a CM: Vietnam! I'd love to fight Hue City, the A Shau Valley, and the rest of I Corps. Sadly, I suspect it will be a long way off, if ever. There would need to be some significant engine improvements. The helicopter aspect alone would be a monster, and virtually required in order to be authentic.
-
There's no help for it vs the AI, but PBEM, you could always agree with your opponent "no artillery".
I'm playing a couple of Small battles like that at the moment, to see how a small reconnaissance clash would pan out - our rules are : Nothing fully tracked ( HT are ok ) ; no gun 50mm or larger ; no artillery ; no more than 50% points on infantry.
Armoured cars engaging like Mad Max - It's been quite a blast
Yeah ... I like the infantry company vs. infantry company fight. There is indirect fire, but only organic mortars.
-
If we can get all the right equipment and TO&E in upcoming CMFI modules, I'd like to see Tobruk and El Alamein represented.
-
But then there is this god element, artillery. This seems to greatly minimize the play of the above elements as the plan so often seems to be: 1) find something important, e.g. an AT Gun; 2) blow the hell out of it with mortars or heavier artillery. Then rinse and repeat.
Gerry
Funny.... that's how I've been fighting battles in Sicily so far, to the point where I wonder if maybe I'm relying on indirect fire ahistorically. But at the same time, I'm emboldened by a quote made by Teddy Roosevelt Jr, 1st ID deputy commanding general, during the Troina operation. When told the division had spent a million dollars worth or artillery ammunition, ordered "Spend another million."
... and I've used a !@#%-ton of artillery in the Troina campaign.
-
Sometimes I do miss the structure of the bocage. It made fighting a matter of geometry at its basic. There is no better feeling than catching an enemy platoon with it's back to a hedgerow! I can't wait for CMBN v2!!
Sicily is definitely a reconnaissance war. Locate and eliminate hardened targets such as ATG's, bunkers and entrenched troops with direct artillery and mortar fire in lieu of an infantry/armor advance. It's hard to say which one I like better. I'm overall happy with both theaters and their distinct challenges. I just want to see engine improvements.
-
Interesting. Something similar seems to happen with ATGs.
I've seen (from both sides) ATG crews stick to their guns through serial minutes of suppression from DF HE and MG fire. Even though they're unable to get their heads up for long enough to operate the weapon, they don't run until they take a KIA/WIA, even though their ammo bearer team (under much less withering fire) vacates the area pronto, before having taken any casualties.
It's not inconceivable that ATG crews get a bonus for staying put because the consequences of them abandoning their gun are serious and permanent. Perhaps that has snuck through into other crew served weapons too.
I had something similar happen to me recently. I had a German 50mm gun under fire with a .50 cal mounted on a TMC at less than 100 meters. While under fire, the ATG unlimbered, turned, and fired at a 75mm TMC nearby and scored two hits. THAT seemed excessive....
-
In a game last night, I had a pair of German 81mm mortars direct fire on a rifle platoon at ~65 meters and kill all but four men in two turns, with most of it happening in the first turn (I couldn't get them out because they had broken and went to ground).
The platoon was on high slope behind a stone wall looking down on the German mortars. They had come under no small arms fire when the mortars began falling. The platoon was just beginning to open up.
I have personally hand-fired the M224 60mm mortar and it can be brought into about 70 meters effectively. The rate of fire is slower than when fired conventionally because it has to be manually triggered. Naturally the German 81mm can't be hand fired, so the ROF will be higher. I guess I have three issues with the event:
1. The German crews seemed to be able to adjust their tubes and puts an FFE on target a little TOO quick, especially considering the range of the small arms fire aimed at them. Friction seemed to have no impact.
2. The American platoon was waaay too slow in their rifle fire. There were no other targets but the mortar crew. That should have been their focus.
3. The morale system was a little too fickle toward the American platoon. Once the first round fell, American rifle fire dropped to zero the Germans were able to fire with impunity. Also, not one man got up and ran. Basically, it was like once the first mortar round hit, the game was over for that platoon... and that felt a little out of the box.
Overall.... I keep running into situations where the tighter the range between units, the more realism is stretched. Another such example is the AT fight from a few days ago.
-
I have a very recent anecdotes of this ... but I'd like to hear cases of this from others. Who here has seen mortars fire inside their minimum effective range, namely when the crew is firing at a target in their line of sight? Or seen mortars be able to turn and put rounds down the tube without the requisite adjustments (which would be required any time the bipods are moved) and then fire direct?
.... I have a sneaking suspicion mortars firing in direct fire mode (firing with the tube in direct LOS to the target) is ENTIRELY too fast.
Wouldn't it be cool if...
in Combat Mission Fortress Italy
Posted
+1 THIS.... ALL DAY, EVERYDAY!! Zooming down to a typical CM view, and zooming out to a CO view with a transition that wouldn't take you out of the environment could make it epic. It would, however, need a VERY strong TacAI to successfully represent unit leaders at a tactical level. The operational AI is already pretty good.