Sten Posted November 2, 1999 Share Posted November 2, 1999 When retargeting artillery there is a new delay before the strike at the new location. Sometimes this delay is one minute or less, sometimes it is as much as three minutes. I have not been able to figure out how this delay is determined. Wouldn't it be a good idea to have a 'confirmation dialogue' when targeting artillery? Something like: "Time to strike at this location would be 2 min. Do you want to target? Yes/No?" This would enhance playability and I think it would be realistic since the FO would have that info. (Or a rough estimate.) Sten Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike D Posted November 2, 1999 Share Posted November 2, 1999 I think this is a great idea. Mike D aka Mikester Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fionn Posted November 2, 1999 Share Posted November 2, 1999 This data is available in-game. Look at the bottom middle of the screen in the unit data interface. it shows there. ------------------ ___________ Fionn Kelly Manager of Historical Research, The Gamers Net - Gaming for Gamers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sten Posted November 3, 1999 Author Share Posted November 3, 1999 Ahem. Fionn, I'm not THAT stupid. Reread my post and you'll see that the point was to have the confirmation box BEFORE I assign a new target. I know the info is there, but it's only there AFTER I have assigned a new target. I want the dialogue BEFORE I assign, since if it will take 1 min to impact I would want to retarget whereas if it would take 3 mins I might want to keep the original target or choose another one. I have been in situations where I hear myself say "Damn, had I known it'd take 3 mins I wouldn't have retargetted at all." And once you have given a new target, it's too late to go back. Sten Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kingtiger Posted November 3, 1999 Share Posted November 3, 1999 Which is more realistic? Issuing new target orders and having someone indicate how much time it will take to deliver at the new target. END OR checking around the battlefield and looking for the lowest retargeting times and then picking the area that likely will have the least time-wait for retargeting and greatest impact. Richard Kalajian Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sten Posted November 3, 1999 Author Share Posted November 3, 1999 Realistic? Realistic would be to be able to redirect an already ongoing barrage with a very small time delay. ("Forward Observer 1 to Battery Commander: Correct 200 meters west.") No need for new spotting rounds. What is unrealistic though, is to retarget, realize it'd take 3 mins for effect, and then be unable to withdraw the order and just continue with the ongoing barrage. Or, if there is a system to it all so that a new target within 100 m of the old one takes 1 min, outside of that it takes 2 min. It might just be a documentation thing. Sten [This message has been edited by Sten (edited 11-02-99).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moon Posted November 3, 1999 Share Posted November 3, 1999 Sten, there IS a system like that. The further you retarget from the initial target point, the longer it takes - if you go really far away, indeed, new spotting rounds are necessary and it will again take a few minutes. If you only move the target point a few meters (say 20), the time delay is only 20 seconds or so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sten Posted November 3, 1999 Author Share Posted November 3, 1999 Oh, ok. That's good. Can you be more specific? How far away = how much time? Sten Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JonS Posted November 3, 1999 Share Posted November 3, 1999 I don't know for sure, but I think it is this way (100m =1min etc). From teh fiddling with the game I've done a short shift = a short time delay (in some cases just a few seconds), and a long shift = a long delay. As a gunner I can assure you that this is entirely correct (well, not entirely ... the delays are a little on the short side overall ). I expect it's another of those BTS/gut-feeling things that you'll have to learn and add to your personal bag of tricks. JonS Later: whoops, too slow with a response - gee you guys are quick!! ------------------ Quo Fas et Vino du Femme [This message has been edited by JonS (edited 11-02-99).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kingtiger Posted November 3, 1999 Share Posted November 3, 1999 John S (Gunner), Would the order be issued to retarget or would they ask how long will it take to retarget first, then if that is reasonable, retarget. Maybe, retargeting time shouldn't be present till we view the battle. My impressions of how this takes place would only come from movies and games. I don't know. Richard Kalajian Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JonS Posted November 3, 1999 Share Posted November 3, 1999 Time isn't really factored into the decision making (oddly enough) - if it is a high value target, or if the infantry need the support, it's just done (no we aren't sponsored by Nike hahaha )and to hell with the time involved. However, once rounds are landing on an adjusted target the time to move onto a nearby target (I'm thinking within about 1km) is very narrow because, as Sten suggested, all you do is give a correction and order more rounds. The time to calculate a shift of 50m is the same as that for one of hundreds of metres, but once you start to move them too far away other random effects start to come into play. A shift of any sort now-adays takes about 90 seconds to implement (time between making the call for the shift and seeing the fresh rounds on the ground) with PCs doing the calculating. In WW2 I imagine the delays would have been longer. In game terms, I believe having an increasing delay at greater shifts is valid because it takes into account any adjustments needed to the MPI (Mean Point of Impact) at the new target location. Doctrine for us is to have registered and recorded targets all over the battle area, and when a target pops up to do a correction from a known point - it's faster and more accurate than starting fresh. I understand that pre-recorded target locations for quick response will be a feature of the released CM. Regards JonS ------------------ Quo Fas et Vino du Femme Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fionn Posted November 3, 1999 Share Posted November 3, 1999 When retargeting a GREEN LINE is an adjustment while a BLUE LINE is a NEW TARGETING order. Green line delays fire by a few seconds., BLUE LINE = delay by 2 to 3 minutes since its essentially a totally new fire call. GREEN LINE = the drop 200, left 50 type calls. Its a little abstracted but this isn't Forward Observer I after all ------------------ ___________ Fionn Kelly Manager of Historical Research, The Gamers Net - Gaming for Gamers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Rock Posted November 3, 1999 Share Posted November 3, 1999 I think Sten has a point, that it would be nice to know how long a delay will be incurred before making the change. Kingtiger's realism question is a valid one. In this case the player is taking on the role of FO, and it would be fair to say the FO would know how long it takes, so I don't see a concern in that regard. If the targetting cursor had the new time delay as well as range, etc, it would solve the problem. Once again I discuss solutions without knowing how much is involved in coding them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fionn Posted November 3, 1999 Share Posted November 3, 1999 Well, currently the game tells you if the delay will be SHORT (roughly about 30 seconds or less ... GREEN LINE) OR a complete retargetting ( 2 to 3 minutes depending upon FO (see bottom of screen) ... BLUE LINE. ------------------ ___________ Fionn Kelly Manager of Historical Research, The Gamers Net - Gaming for Gamers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
guachi Posted November 3, 1999 Share Posted November 3, 1999 Thanks, Fionn. I was also wondering about artiilery retargetting time delays. This is something that would obviously be in the manual, but it will certainly make replaying the demo a little easier. Jason Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fionn Posted November 4, 1999 Share Posted November 4, 1999 Funnily enough my assaults are going in so quickly that I don't have time for arty. On average when playing the Germans in last defence I breach the village defences and am inside the village with infantry by turn 7 or 8. I've ended up mostly using my arty just for smoke missions. ------------------ ___________ Fionn Kelly Manager of Historical Research, The Gamers Net - Gaming for Gamers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reverendo Posted November 4, 1999 Share Posted November 4, 1999 I think the current system is realistic enough, but there's a little flaw: you said a correction of 100 m takes about 1 min. Suits me, but whenever I tell my spotters to target (and I don't say 'target wide') they sweep an of, more or less, 90 meters radius. Do you think I can expect any effect if I tell them '10 more meters to the East'? Does anybody have the same problem? I don't correct arty fire because it is too unaccurate for me to make the difference. I usually asign two or three spotters to the same area and start bombing until I hit something (after tracing its outline with craters, though) 8( ------------------ Regards Reverendo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allen Edwards Posted November 4, 1999 Share Posted November 4, 1999 "Sweeping wide" as you say is completely accurate. (No pun intended ) Artillery is an area weapon, not a point weapon. Depending on the caliber of the on-call assets, the burst radius of a single HE round could be up to 50 meters. You are correct when you say adjusting fire by 10 meters would be pointless because the effect of the artillery would be the same. Actually, being "on target" would be any shell that impacts inside a 50 meter radius of the target. Adjustments are only made until you get that bracket on what you are shooting at. After that, "Steel Rain". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JonS Posted November 4, 1999 Share Posted November 4, 1999 If I can elaborate a bit here on what Allen has just said - when an eight gun battery fires say 40 rounds (5 per gun) the intended effect is NOT to get them all 40 to land on the same 1m x 1m square of ground. Rather, it is to plaster a square 150m x 150m, with rounds aprroximately evenly distributed throughout this area. Arty is indeed an area weapon - not because it is inherently inaccurate, but because that is desirable. You just have to get used to its characteristics. It like the difference between how you employ a StuG, a Tiger, and a M18 - each has it's strengths and weakness which must be learned. Fionn: LOL Forward Observer I. hehehe. Well, I'd buy it, but I think the overall market would be pretty small. Actually, I have trained on an Indirect Fire Support Trainer (WIFT), and while it's a good procedures trainer, it does get boring fairly quickly. Overall I'm impressed with the way BTS have handled Arty - far and away the best I've seen in a game, abstractions and all. JonS ------------------ Quo Fas et Vino du Femme Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob Deans Posted November 4, 1999 Share Posted November 4, 1999 I made a few points on my own observations about artillery in a separate post (...kick at the cat...). The observation I made was that the distribution of fire was too random as rounds were landing WAY off target (300m) away. Adjusted fire is simply not that inaccurate. The delays to FFE are way too short in my book. The fire should be more accurate and take longer. A point on technology, using simple radios, and manual equipment that is older in concept than you can imagine, a good FOO/FC and mortar line team can have an adjusting round on the ground in (working backwards, 30 sec ToF + 20 sec lay of the mortar + 50 sec calculation of fire data and issue of this to the line + 30 sec call for fire and read back) just over 2 minutes. For a mediocre FC add to this 4 or 5 adjusting rounds at a minute and a half a pop. Gives a grand total of about 10 min to FFE. This is a perfect scenario, of course, with no rain down you neck, water all over your plotter and ****ty comms. How can people remark about the interminable 3 min wait I don't know. What I havn't seen is the suppressive effect of the fire, I have seen sections stay upright with rounds exploding all around. The "killing" radius of a mortar bomb is say 40m (with a shell being somewhat more) so the supressive effect should be much greater. The issue of "adjustment distance for time" is a "gamey" issue. As stated above a 50 m correction takes no more than 15 seconds less than a 400m one. May be the confirmation of the limit of adjustment could be made? Thanks Rob Deans Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JonS Posted November 4, 1999 Share Posted November 4, 1999 Rob, maybe they're modelling rogue guns One delay that made me giggle a little was an increase of 15 or 20 seconds after one (short) correction I'd made. In most instances this would be shorter than the TOF, ie the rounds had been re-targeted while in flight ;P One possibility - think of it as adjusting with FFE (adjusting the MPI). Then the time delays are approx ok. Very good first round accuracy though... But, (why is there always a 'but'?), as I said before - I generally like the arty model as is. JonS ------------------ Quo Fas et Vino du Femme Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fionn Posted November 4, 1999 Share Posted November 4, 1999 Actually the spotters in this aren't all that great. Round scatter is tied in with spotter experience. Conscript spotters should be shot on sight since the WILL call artillery down on themselves Elite spotters can hold a line all by themselves. I had 2 Elite 210mm spotters destroy an entire US company all by themselves Something like 150 dead and 18 surrendered... Not a single one of my MGs or rifles opened fire ... It was beautiful. ------------------ ___________ Fionn Kelly Manager of Historical Research, The Gamers Net - Gaming for Gamers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob Deans Posted November 4, 1999 Share Posted November 4, 1999 "Round scatter is tied in with spotter experience" This is the point I'm trying to make. This is wrong. The ability of the FOO has no bearing on the dispertion of the rounds during FFE. His ability lies in ADJUSTING the rounds. If he's good, he won't go chasing rounds all over hells half acre during adjustment. Yeah sure if hes a thud he'll order the fire in the wrong place but ALL the fire will end up there not just a few rounds. I'll give you an example...When I took the army course on this stuff the standard was "on in six". The initial round (had to be within 400m), one for line (2), a 400 correction (3), a 200 correction (4), a 100 correction (5) and a 50 correction (6). This was the student standard. A minute and a half per correction. We all did our thing and then the instructor stands up,...........New Target,...........three rounds in adjustment.....Fire For Effect.........He was on. Half the time to FFE. Thats the difference between a new FC and an experienced one. We both used a "Circle-Radius 50" distribution of fire.....The effect ammo looked exactly the same on the ground. Rob Deans Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JonS Posted November 5, 1999 Share Posted November 5, 1999 Rob, hehehe, I once watched a Capt use 12 rounds in adjustment, and at the end he was no closer than his opening round. And he'd been in arty all his career. Eventually the CO (LtCol someone-or-other) gave EOM to wrap it up before he used up everyone else's training allocation. I take your point about the difference between accuracy (rounds on the target) and precision (all rounds landing together in a good pattern. The FO affects accuracy totally, and because of that the time it takes to get target rounds, while the firing battery has NO influence on this. The battery affects precision totally, while the FO has no influence at all here. JonS Ubique Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob Deans Posted November 5, 1999 Share Posted November 5, 1999 I just don't think that it would be that hard to have a simple and realistic model for indirect fire given the existing system now. The only games that I have seen where it comes even close to it are TACOPS and Brigade Combat Team. Every other game I have seen pays it lip service. Minute angle differences and trajectories are taken into consideration when dealing with armoured combat (well done) but the indirect fire system does not replicate the attention to detail of the rest of the game. Rob Deans Rob Deans Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts