ALLIED : Gustav Line BETA AAR Round Two - Eye of the Elefant

[GreenAsJade]

Wow, it looks like Bil did get a contact on my snipers at Right Tit! I guess the MG fire was coming from the Brummbar, which unleashed a shell aimed right where they were sitting. I think it must have been fired last turn, actually - it arrived in the first second of the turn, and no-more followed. Those are a couple of happy chappies rushing away comparatively unscathed!

It looks like light armour arrived at Left Tit this turn. Did Bil bring small tanks as well, that I didn't spot, or is this one of the HT's I wonder?

Right now Bil must be finding out there's no-one at home. I wonder if he really thought I was defending those death traps, or just being appropriately careful? Anyhow, I suspect the honeymoon with this game will be over soon

It looks like Bil's main attack is going to be based from the centre, rather than a flank attack from either side. I think that the recon on the flanks is purely to figure out what threats are facing his centre force, rather than signalling a possible alternative line of attack. I'm tweaking with the midfield positioning to anticipate this a little: I need less cover on my left flank for example, if combined arms aren't coming around there.

I really hope I can disuade the right flank recon. The handful of guns positioned on the right flank are all that's stopping Bil from rushing up the right hand side of the centre ridge, out of view of my left midfield forces. Frustratingly, although I have at least 5 pairs of eyes, including 3 binoculars, facing that way, the KW driver-scout on my right hand side has completely disappeared.

GaJ

[John Kettler]

GreenAsJade,

If you look here, you'll find a tombstone magazine, which is what your M51 uses. 200 hundred rounds per drum. Appears to use crank to load belt, followed by normal belt feed to empty it by firing.

http://www.com-central.net/index.php?name=Forums&file=viewtopic&t=15872

The ammo loader's going to be sore after the engagement. Two hundred rounds plus the container comes in at 70-80 lbs.

Regards,

John Kettler

[Baneman]

I see we're gonna have to harass poor old Marco Bergmann for some new silhouettes...

[Marco Bergman]

After I finish texture work, hopefully by the end of the week, I'll be working on the silhouette mod.

[GreenAsJade]

Well, as I predicted, the honeymoon is over.

Regrettably, the JgPz spotted my ATG on the spur.

I guess the grass is concealing inf well, but the bushes not concealing guns so much...

Damn, eh? I doubt whether they will rally to return fire before getting blown up. Bil gets the jump on me.

He's also continuing to elude and mystefy me. I can't believe for a moment that he's not on Left Tit now, yet I still can't see anything from my Right Flank viewpoint, and I can't hear anything from the nearby sniper team.

What it looks like to me:

Those are almost certainly the HTs that I have sound contacts on, which must surely mean his troops are going in the directions of the arrows.

Yet, my MMG and mortar off on the right flank see nothing:

I'm starting to think that the grass may be working in Bil's favour in this instance ... surely he is there, and if he is, surely he is going around the wire. So - I'm going to send a welcome from the Mortars

Maybe it will take return fire to flush out who's up there. The MMGs will keep watching, waiting.

[GreenAsJade]

Other mysteries include artillery shells in strange places - a big explosion landed far from anything on the right flank, and a smaller smoke bomb landed right next to a startled mortar team...

GaJ

[bisu]

Other mysteries include artillery shells in strange places - a big explosion landed far from anything on the right flank, and a smaller smoke bomb landed right next to a startled mortar team...

GaJ

Must be spotting rounds

[Rokko]

I'm pretty sure a 76mm could have killed a JpzIV frontally at that range, should have given it a try I'd say.

[GreenAsJade]

As I said ... easy to say in hindsight If I'd known I'd get spotted so easily, I certainly would have taken the shot instead of waiting for a better chance. C'est la guerre.

[bisu]

So that concealment bonus for not having moved the gun after setup does not seem to be worth much..

[womble]

So that concealment bonus for not having moved the gun after setup does not seem to be worth much..

The bonus depends on what concealment you're trying to hide in. If it wouldn't hide a given ATG in the first place, no, the bonus won't mean much. If the gun was "adequately" concealed, it'll end up "real hard to see", and if it was behind really good concealment anyway, it'll be "mostly invisible". I suspect the 76 is too large a beast to be receiving much "base" concealment from tall grass.

[Michael Emrys]

I suspect the 76 is too large a beast to be receiving much "base" concealment from tall grass.

I'd say that is a lead pipe cinch. Although not as big as the 17 pdr, the 76 would need a fair amount of work to conceal. Digging it into a weapons pit behind some bushes might work. Anything less would be problematical.

Michael

[ASL Veteran]

The only way you can have an ATG remain concealed for any length of time when in the LOS of enemy units is to place them directly in a light or heavy forest tile and even then it's risky not to fire depending on the circumstances. Putting them out in the grass will never keep them hidden. I've had a 57mm in a light forest tile remain concealed even after several shots were fired.

[Hister]

Aww, I do hope your gun returns fire first GaJ or that second Bil's projectile misses! ... but looking at the teams shaken status that is probably not realisable. Good thing is that you had them hugging the ground otherwise some would be hit by shrapnel. Thus you gave them a couple more seconds of life.

Edit: Wait, can that dislodged sniper shoot on the TC now on not just yet? if yes now would be the time I say.

[womble]

The only way you can have an ATG remain concealed for any length of time when in the LOS of enemy units is to place them directly in a light or heavy forest tile and even then it's risky not to fire depending on the circumstances. Putting them out in the grass will never keep them hidden. I've had a 57mm in a light forest tile remain concealed even after several shots were fired.

I'd say "in" a forest tile generally won't be enough unless there are some bushes too. behind a forest tile (preferably in another forest tile) will give a better chance of remaining concealed. Push them back into the forest til they can't see out, then one AS nearer the edge...

[Vark]

From the angle of the Jgpz IV its commander could not spot the AT gun, the gunner has a narrow field of view so seems a bit odd, given it has cover behind it. Numerous combat references to AT suggest they only became visible after they fired, due to size and ability to conceal.

Surely a half-way competent crew, could have cut some branches from the nearby bushes and bound grass into bundles, to attach to the gun shield, to break up its sharp angles? If they had been in position for some hours the AT gun commander could have checked visibility from a potential enemies POV.

I think it raises another question about just how much topographical info the attacker should have. Surely there should be a forward edge that the attacker cannot be allowed across, like deployment zones, to check out LOS, in the deployment phase? If the defender has been there sometime there should be no such limitations, as it represents a thorough survey, before defensive positions are considered. At the moment the attacker can be alerted to every fold in the ground, dead zone etc, when he would really only be looking at general directions, via sometimes very basic maps. Professional analysts, like Bill, can meticulously pick apart any defence, often knowing exact areas of full and partial defilade by being able to unrealistically view a defenders field of view.

[womble]

I think it raises another question about just how much topographical info the attacker should have. Surely there should be a forward edge that the attacker cannot be allowed across, like deployment zones, to check out LOS, in the deployment phase? If the defender has been there sometime there should be no such limitations, as it represents a thorough survey, before defensive positions are considered. At the moment the attacker can be alerted to every fold in the ground, dead zone etc, when he would really only be looking at general directions, via sometimes very basic maps. Professional analysts, like Bill, can meticulously pick apart any defence, often knowing exact areas of full and partial defilade by being able to unrealistically view a defenders field of view.

You have to trade off the reduced fidelity of the image you're looking at against the lack of real world knowledge. There are things you can see from distance in RL that are really difficult to tell when peering at the "same" view through a flat, low resolution (compared to RL) screen. So the line wouldn't be "the edge of the deployment zone", but some other line, and where would you draw that?

[Seedorf81]

From the angle of the Jgpz IV its commander could not spot the AT gun, the gunner has a narrow field of view so seems a bit odd, given it has cover behind it. Numerous combat references to AT suggest they only became visible after they fired, due to size and ability to conceal.

Surely a half-way competent crew, could have cut some branches from the nearby bushes and bound grass into bundles, to attach to the gun shield, to break up its sharp angles? If they had been in position for some hours the AT gun commander could have checked visibility from a potential enemies POV.

I think it raises another question about just how much topographical info the attacker should have. Surely there should be a forward edge that the attacker cannot be allowed across, like deployment zones, to check out LOS, in the deployment phase? If the defender has been there sometime there should be no such limitations, as it represents a thorough survey, before defensive positions are considered. At the moment the attacker can be alerted to every fold in the ground, dead zone etc, when he would really only be looking at general directions, via sometimes very basic maps. Professional analysts, like Bill, can meticulously pick apart any defence, often knowing exact areas of full and partial defilade by being able to unrealistically view a defenders field of view.

Nicely put. Despite the fact that BF might have compensated the attacker in the game for not having "real life eyesight on the battlefield", I too believe that AT-guns are to easy to spot in the game.

[Vark]

You can use the magnification function, but yes, the still quite crude terrain (compared to RL) does limit the intuitive understanding of the lie of the land. I still balk at the ability of an attacker to be able to view behind ridges, to see what the defender can see, totally unrealistic.

"Remember, Gunter, 22m past the crest there is a nice piece of defilade which allows you to keyhole to hill 122 and cover the first 50m of the road."

"But, Sir. Our patrols only went out at dawn and did not get over the ridge, how do you know what is exactly over there?"

"Ah, Gunter... magic. Now as I was saying, when you want to move from the defilade, stay 20m to the left of the undergrowth, if you move any closer, a defender in the first farmhouse might see you."

Gunter, eyes wide, shakes his head in amazement, once again his commander has earned his nickname, 'The all-seeing one'.

[Baneman]

...I too believe that AT-guns are to easy to spot in the game.

Especially considering how sometimes Tanks can be "invisible" for more than a turn !

[Frankster65]

Frankster65, read a post above yours...

Oh for Pete's sake...I must be going blind in my aging...

[John Kettler]

GreenAsJade,

The 3-inch ATG is a moose, and I say this having stood next to it, a Pak 40, a 57mm and other goodies. It's much taller than a Pak 40, too. Camouflage should certainly be used, for that's doctrinal, but you really need a terrain fold, gully or a gunpit to hide and protect the thing. Gabel, in his Tank Destroyer monograph, had pointed things to say about effectiveness and survivability of towed TDs.

womble,

He should be allowed to plot simple LOS masking from a flat topo map, but not to freely roam around GreenAsJade's zone. Commanders at his level would rarely know, to any real accuracy, where they were, never mind the nitty gritty details of the enemy's terrain. Topo contours and hachure marks are one thing, grim ground truth another. Also, as late as the early 1980s, even Army FOs were running an average 300m own position location error!

Regards,

John Kettler

[womble]

The 3-inch ATG is a moose...

Nice image, John Moose: only slightly less conspicuous than a camel...

He should be allowed to plot simple LOS masking from a flat topo map, but not to freely roam around GreenAsJade's zone. Commanders at his level would rarely know, to any real accuracy, where they were, never mind the nitty gritty details of the enemy's terrain. Topo contours and hachure marks are one thing, grim ground truth another. Also, as late as the early 1980s, even Army FOs were running an average 300m own position location error!

But they could tell what they were actually looking at actually looked like, with a greater degree of accuracy than you can tell on a CM screen. Disallowing reverse POV is as wrong-headed as forcing only level 1 viewpoints from the location of your units.

[ASL Veteran]

You guys are acting as though every map was generated from scratch for every engagement for everyone who plays. A player could play the same map in a QB multiple times and many players will play a scenario multiple times and from both sides. Having a bunch of nonsensical restrictions on how a player can view the game map is asking a bit much of the game, especially considering how many times a map may have been played on by the same player. In this case, Bil made the map himself so how would a restriction on what he can view make any difference whatsoever? :confused:

[Michael Emrys]

Quite apart from ASL's observations, which I mostly agree with, in asking for limitations on what part of a map a player can see, it is worth keeping in mind that writing the code to do so would be a distinctly non-trivial task. Even supposing BFC were willing to undertake it, the final result would be likely to produce as much angry frustration as the present situation. LOS determination has always been problematical in tactical wargames as far back as I can remember, and we have always had to live with compromises, sometimes arbitrary ones.

Michael