First Turn Artillery

[LiveNoMore]

I have a question/issue/comment on the first turn artillery and it's use by the defender. If there have been prior posts or threads on this I apologize for missing them.

In all but a Meeting Engagement, most scenarios begin with one side in defense and the other either launching a probing attack or a full scale assault. In these cases the attackers would have a general idea where the defenders are located and where there might be fortifications. So he will start his assault with a barrage aimed at harassing or neutralizing these spots. So far so good. Now we deal with the defender. He is dug in and waiting for the coming attack. He has laid is defenses with over-lapping lanes of fire and pre-determined artillery targets. The only thing he is lacking is the timing of the assault. So he hunkers down and waits for the first sign of the enemy so he can launch the appropriate response.

Sound about right? So why does the defender get first turn artillery that is deadly accurate? Shouldn't he be allowed to plot his response to the attack, but not have the barrage arrive until it normally would?

Most of the games I play are PBEM and I think about this at the beginning of each game. Currently my friend and I are play testing a scenario I designed which takes place in Sicily. The Canadian 1st division has to push through a series of heavily defended hills to take the town of Agira, just east of Mt Etna. I tried to restrict the defenders first turn artillery by reducing his platoon/company level mortars at start up and having most of his stuff arrive as the first (5min) reinforcement. This pushes his first real artillery barrage out to about 10-15 minutes. I would like to set it up so that the Germans could plot their return fire during the first turn. It would arrive about 2-8 minutes later. Plenty of time for the attacker to get past the staging area yet not too much time to allow them to "grab the defenders by the belt" to avoid the barrage.

Does anyone else have any thought? Does anyone know how I can accomplish this as I continue to create scenarios?

[Freyberg]

You could make the attacker's setup zone nice and deep to allow the attacker to remain spread out.

I think an attacker might expect harassing fire as he approached - defenders wouldn't be without intelligence. If the attacker's setup zone is big enough, defender artillery fire would be less lethal and more realistic.

[womble]

As Freyberg says, a good chunk of the problem with "defensive preplanned fire" is down to the artificial constraint of the setup zone. Often, especially in QBs where there's no way to organise follow on waves by bringing them as reinforcements later, you have your entire force jammed into a setup zone that's too small; sometimes that's because the map's setup zone is too constrained, sometimes it's because the setup zone is largely exposed to enemy fire, so the defender can probably guess where the attacker is hiding.

It is a commonly held opinion on this forum that "defender preplanned arty" is "gamey" and many here would be reluctant to play against an opponent who wasn't willing to house-rule such action as unacceptable. Many scenarios are designed with artillery arriving as reinforcements, due to just the concerns you have identified.

One "technical" solution to the problem might be to extend the map by enough so that first 5min before the reinforcement arrives, the attacker is actually moving towards where the "start line" currently is. Or you could give the defender TRPs to place so that the reinforcement fires, once called for, arrive quicker and can arrive out of LOS of the defenders (which is another advantage pre-planned gives). Or both.

[LiveNoMore]

@Womble, I agree with the comment on "house rules", and that isn't an issue we have. I was looking for solutions and it seems we have all thought of the same ones. Too bad there isn't a way to restrict certain artillery units, on or off board, for the first turn only. That would solve the issue.

[Apocal]

I think an attacker might expect harassing fire as he approached - defenders wouldn't be without intelligence. If the attacker's setup zone is big enough, defender artillery fire would be less lethal and more realistic.

I agree that its less of an issue with large setup zones (or underpointed maps) but defenders having some indications and warnings of an impending attack isn't the same as being able to dump artillery on the assembly area or jumping-off point for an assault. If defenders were consistently able to catch attackers that way, I imagine the tactical narratives of WW2 would be much different.

@Womble, I agree with the comment on "house rules", and that isn't an issue we have. I was looking for solutions and it seems we have all thought of the same ones. Too bad there isn't a way to restrict certain artillery units, on or off board, for the first turn only. That would solve the issue.

Place them as early reinforcements.

[Michael Emrys]

+1 for larger setup zones. A lot of the ones on QB maps are ridiculously shallow and cramped. Even excepting the first turn defender's arty, which I don't have any real problem with anyway, it can be unreasonably difficult to set up an attack in any kind of realistic—let alone convenient—manner.

One positive thing I have noted however and wish to mention is that in most of the QB maps I have been using, the setup zones are usually located behind some kind of vision blocking terrain so that the defender cannot spot the attacker's forces at the outset.

Michael