Will there be artillery observer aircraft in future BattleFront titles ?

[Tempestzzzz]

I love using the RAVEN UAV in BF Black Sea and while I know an L2 Grasshopper or Feisler Storch are not the almost God Like eye-in the sky a modern UAV is I certainly can see their use on the BIG Maps in WWII scenarios. And of course the US and Germans have there quad-50's and 20's to act as counter measures. It's not like the new game engine can't support it. FWIW.

The observer aircraft spots anything it doesn't have to be an exact vehicle observed-just a n icon with a question mark sometimes.

Edited February 2, 2016 by Tempestzzzz

[gnarly]

 

And BF's comment

 

 

Edited February 2, 2016 by gnarly

[Tempestzzzz]

:^/

Thanks.

 

[purpheart23]

I'd kill to have an OV-10..... man those things looked awesome.

[Pak40]

LOL, I can see it now, a full battalion of Piper Cubs coming to squash  , er, gingerly float over the opposition. 

[MikeyD]

... and to be easily knocked down by 20mm AA. 

[Michael Emrys]

... and to be easily knocked down by 20mm AA. 

Right. Which is why, if I understand matters correctly, most of the time they tried to stay over their own lines and use their altitude to spot enemy artillery or vehicular movement, both of which have fairly large visual footprints.

Michael

[Bud Backer]

Right. Which is why, if I understand matters correctly, most of the time they tried to stay over their own lines and use their altitude to spot enemy artillery or vehicular movement, both of which have fairly large visual footprints.

Michael

Exactly. Which would also make their use be at a level far beyond the tactical which CM simulates.

 

[Michael Emrys]

Exactly. Which would also make their use be at a level far beyond the tactical which CM simulates.

 

Well, but not too far, I suspect. While those aircraft might have been held at a corps level, they could have been attached further down the food chain for a specific operation or period of time. The catch would be that the guys on the ground would have to have the right comms equipment and procedures, and that could take a few days of planning. And it would most likely be divisional artillery that they would be contacting. Don't expect them to be targeting fire for your mortars.

Michael

 

[Pak40]

Well, but not too far, I suspect. While those aircraft might have been held at a corps level, they could have been attached further down the food chain for a specific operation or period of time. The catch would be that the guys on the ground would have to have the right comms equipment and procedures, and that could take a few days of planning. And it would most likely be divisional artillery that they would be contacting. Don't expect them to be targeting fire for your mortars.

Michael

 

Digging around on the internet will yield some rare gems...

According to this book, (pg 308)the piper cubs were attached to the artillery battalions. Each battalion had two cubs. This seems to be the norm whether an organic Divisional battalion or Corps/Army Battalion.

[MikeyD]

Looking up Brazilian army in Italy recently I was surprised to find their single division included seven (I think) Grasshopper spotter aircraft flown by their own pilots, using their own officers as spotters, directing fire for their own 105 and 155 artillery assets - one supposes all in Portuguese! Before reading that I had paid no attention to the role of spotter aircraft. in WWII

The big-bad topic for the game would be one of control of spotter aircraft. This is WWII, nobody's directing spotter aircraft from the ground. They're pretty much free agents looking for targets of opportunity. Would an artillery spotter act like CMRT air support? You purchase the asset but have no control over them. Maybe they'll randomly spot and target the enemy on their own, maybe they'll be chased off by ground fire, or get shot down, or spot nothing, or target friendly units. Just like uncontrolled air assets.

Edited February 19, 2016 by MikeyD

[Heirloom_Tomato]

Looking up Brazilian army in Italy recently I was surprised to find their single division included seven (I think) Grasshopper spotter aircraft flown by their own pilots, using their own officers as spotters, directing fire for their own 105 and 155 artillery assets - one supposes all in Portuguese! Before reading that I had paid no attention to the role of spotter aircraft. in WWII

The big-bad topic for the game would be one of control of spotter aircraft. This is WWII, nobody's directing spotter aircraft from the ground. They're pretty much free agents looking for targets of opportunity. Would an artillery spotter act like CMRT air support? You purchase the asset but have no control over them. Maybe they'll randomly spot and target the enemy on their own, maybe they'll be chased off by ground fire, or get shot down, or spot nothing, or target friendly units. Just like uncontrolled air assets.

I think this is the only way to use them in game. They would add a very real element of tension to any game in which they are in play. The joy of seeing artillery, you didn't call, falling right on the enemy at a key time in a battle would be great. As well, the frustration of them not seeing anything or worse yet blasting your own men would be very annoying. The right balance then for use in game.

[Michael Emrys]

I think this is the only way to use them in game. They would add a very real element of tension to any game in which they are in play. The joy of seeing artillery, you didn't call, falling right on the enemy at a key time in a battle would be great. As well, the frustration of them not seeing anything or worse yet blasting your own men would be very annoying. The right balance then for use in game.

Does anyone have any reliable statistics on how many times there were friendly fire incidents attributable to flying observers? I expect it may have happened, but I have never come across mention of any in the articles on the subject that I have read so far.

Michael

[Sailor Malan2]

The idea of an aerial spotter in a CM scenario (even the biggest) is just not credible... You try telling the position of the front line on the ground whilst flying in one of those. There are there for spotting rear area artillery positions, road traffic, etc. They are not yet another variation on Gandalf's staff blasting fire and death in Elvish...

Battlefront are doing a good job of avoiding WW2 as seen in the movies. Let's keep it that way. 

[Michael Emrys]

Battlefront are doing a good job of avoiding WW2 as seen in the movies. Let's keep it that way. 

I agree with you, however a considerable number of posts by vocal advocates on these forums have made it clear to me that a sizable percentage of CM players desire to exactly reproduce the actions of their favorite war movies and don't give more than a vague flip about history at all. They vote with their money and that is a pressure that BFC cannot entirely ignore. What they have been good at so far is to produce a product that renders something pleasing to both camps. Players can create scenarios that are reasonable reproductions of actual historical events. Alternately, they can often reproduce scenes from the movies, however absurd those might be. So far, we have not had a platoon of raygun armed little green men emerge from a flying saucer to turn back the Nazi hordes, but no doubt demand for that cannot be too far over the horizon.

Michael

[panzersaurkrautwerfer]

I will right pissed if my mobility kill M4A3E8 cannot kill off like, and entire SS infantry battalion.  Also Tiger tanks must be shot from 90 degrees to their aft or it doesn't count.

(In all seriousness, I am irrationally excited for M4A3E8s.  I know they're not like a wundertank, but they're far and away my favorite Shermans.  Of course now that I'm getting them I will have to switch over entirely to whining about needing Pershings in the game)

As to on topic, they're an interesting piece of the battlefield, but from all my readings (pacific inclusive) they weren't linked to the CM level commanders, they were reporting at much higher or separate echelons.  

On the other hand:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Carpenter_(lieutenant_colonel)

Can we get Piper Cubs as air support options? 

[MikeyD]

I will right pissed if my mobility kill M4A3E8 cannot kill off like, and entire SS infantry battalion.  Also Tiger tanks must be shot from 90 degrees to their aft or it doesn't count.
 

A humorous anecdote. I was test playing a CMFB scenario when I found my Sherman's shells bouncing off a Tiger hull at uncomfortably close range. So I laid down smoke shells and tried to race around for a flank shot. Halfway through the turn the darned Tiger rolls forward through the smoke and now I'm trying to outrace his turret rotation as he tried to get a bead on me. I thought "AHHH! I'M RECREATING THAT SCENE FROM 'FURY' THAT EVERYBODY HATES!!!!"

[panzersaurkrautwerfer]

In literally every game that has somewhat realistic armor vs anti-armor performance and World War Two, I gleefully await the angry forum post demanding how it was possible that a Sherman/T-34 killed their Tiger and how it's impossible unfair a sign of hollywood blah blah MICHEAL WITTMAN IS A GOD blah blah blah goosestepping moron etc etc.

[AttorneyAtWar]

In literally every game that has somewhat realistic armor vs anti-armor performance and World War Two, I gleefully await the angry forum post demanding how it was possible that a Sherman/T-34 killed their Tiger and how it's impossible unfair a sign of hollywood blah blah MICHEAL WITTMAN IS A GOD blah blah blah goosestepping moron etc etc.

Hunting and destroying Wehraboos is also one of my favorite past times.

[panzersaurkrautwerfer]

Hunting and destroying Wehraboos is also one of my favorite past times.

Same here man.  It's the sport of kings and scoundrels alike.  Although sometimes you just have to realize you're well past reasoning with them, so you have to go for causing an aneurysm by claiming Saving Private Ryan shows the inferiority of ubermench vs plucky American smarts and thus you're right.  

Also pointing out who won the war is pretty much a sure fire nuclear option for causing some really amazing mental gymnastics.   

[AttorneyAtWar]

Same here man.  It's the sport of kings and scoundrels alike.  Although sometimes you just have to realize you're well past reasoning with them, so you have to go for causing an aneurysm by claiming Saving Private Ryan shows the inferiority of ubermench vs plucky American smarts and thus you're right.  
Also pointing out who won the war is pretty much a sure fire nuclear option for causing some really amazing mental gymnastics.   

Too be fair to some of them, when I was in my teenage years (which wasn't that long ago honestly) I also thought "TIGER TANK WAS BEST EVER", but as I delved into history more my perception changed.

World War 2 is actually becoming "main stream" at least in the gaming world, you have games like War Thunder and World Of Tanks making more people interested in the period than ever before probably. Unfortunately with this much popularity the myth's start to crop up everywhere about the invincible German tanks of yore that were only stopped by the "hordes of under equipped Russians" and how it wasn't a fair fight.

Edited February 29, 2016 by Raptorx7

[panzersaurkrautwerfer]

That too.  The other ones that are interesting to work around is the whole "T-34 is comrade super tank of massive goodness" school.  It's effectively the Sherman*, just with propaganda backing it up.  


*Which is not at all an insult, both of the tanks were war winning designs.  It's just they're both tanks that generally were VERY good at introduction, became long in the tooth circa 1943-44, saw some upgrades before becoming competetive and effective again after the later models received some upgrades.  T-34 might have been a bit better armored with better cross-terrain mobility, Sherman was way more reliable with better situational awareness.  But the perceptions of each of them, the Sherman remains a deathtrap in a lot of opinions with the T-34 pretty much saving the world singlehandedly and being a competitor with the best tanks of World War Two.  

[JonS]

I am irrationally excited for M4A3E8s

http://community.battlefront.com/topic/21966-i-hate-losing-tanks-on-turn-4/#comment-200762

 

 

Edited March 1, 2016 by JonS

[fivefivesix]

http://community.battlefront.com/topic/21966-i-hate-losing-tanks-on-turn-4/#comment-200762

This comment truly stands the test of time ... carried forward 16 years to provide amusement for a second time. I'll mark my calendar, see you in 2032, when CMFB finally releases! 

[panzersaurkrautwerfer]

Eh.  I think the rule of thumb is whatever your tanks are, they're easily penetrated and exploded readily, and the enemy's are surprisingly resilient to everything you throw at them.  If you're going for the historical norm though, the M4A3E8 beats the standard German lack of tanks.