Glubokii Boy Posted February 1, 2017 Share Posted February 1, 2017 A small artillery-UI suggestion.... Have the artillery function in a simular way as AI-groups do now. The artillery should have its own seperate kind of AI-groups...Called artillery groups, maybe...asigned by using shift-numberkeys The designer should be able to asign each (or multiple) artillery asset to an artillery group (1 - 16 (or 32)) The Artillerygroups would work in a simular way as AI-groups...That is have a number of orders (targets) that would be carried out in succesion. Like with AI-groups these orders (targets) could be 'set-off' and stopped by game clock or by a triggered event (using terrain objectives). If the artillery asset is not asigned to an artillery group then the AI will be free to use it at its own discretion. Instead of setting things like DASH, ADVANCE and CASIOUS, ACTIVE for example there could be options more sutable for artillery...like rate of fire, duration, fire pattern or something like that... A small example of a scenario...a reduced german battalion is ordered to assult a russian held village after first having to cross some open ground with the russians dug-in on a ridge infront of the village... art group 1 - 122 mm howitzer battery art group 2 - 122 mm howitzer battery art group 3 - 122 mm howitzer battery art group 4 - 122 mm howitzer battery art group 5 - 122 mm howitzer battery art group 6 - 122 mm howitzer battery art group 7 - 81 mm mortar section art group 8 - 81 mm mortar section art group 9 - 81 mm mortar section art groups 10 - 81 mm mortar section min 1 - 3 artillery groups 1 to 4 fire HE on 4 seperate target areas. min 2 - 4 artillery groups 5 and 6 fires smokerounds at specified areas to cover the intitial german advance across open ground. min 10 - 12 artillery group 7 and 8 targets likely player locations ahead of the AI advance (or could have a triggered artillery target each that will spring if player forces are spotted there) min 14 - 16 artillery group 9 and 10 targets further likely player possitions min 30 - 33 artillery groups 1 to 4 fires HE at the village in preparation for an assult min 31 - 33 artillery groups 9 and 10 fires smoke screens to cover german assulting troops as they advance into the village min 40 - 42 artillery group 9 and 10 fires HE on the primary objective in the village in preparation for a final assult on that objective. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sailor Malan2 Posted February 2, 2017 Author Share Posted February 2, 2017 18 hours ago, Bulletpoint said: Yes, that's what I personally would like to see. We already have this: the Target command. This would be the "Target Light" command. I did some casual testing and found that I needed two light machineguns (M8 scout cars) and one heavy machinegun (M1917) to suppress a building enough that my assault team could approach with total impunity. But of course these results vary with a lot of different factors. You know what I meant! There will always be a combination that isnt covered by any combination of orders if you go down the micro-control route. "Fire the SMG but hide the riflemen", or "throw half your grenades but keep the rest". How long do you think you should fire at a building to suppress it? That sounds like a lot of firepower, and I would guess does it in a minute? You shouldn't treat minutes as 'turns' in (e.g.) ASL in my experience. 2 or 3 mins fire is usually necessary with the type of firepower more normally available (depending on what you are suppressing and what sort of cover they have). 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bulletpoint Posted February 2, 2017 Share Posted February 2, 2017 2 minutes ago, Sailor Malan2 said: How long do you think you should fire at a building to suppress it? That sounds like a lot of firepower, and I would guess does it in a minute? You shouldn't treat minutes as 'turns' in (e.g.) ASL in my experience. 2 or 3 mins fire is usually necessary with the type of firepower more normally available (depending on what you are suppressing and what sort of cover they have). I don't know how long it should take. Just sharing my findings. My example was testing how much would be needed to suppress the building in 60 seconds. Good point about sustained fire. I think suppression is basically about the balance between how much suppression pours in, minus how much continually drains out (due to leadership etc). So in some cases, you might have just a small surplus of suppression, and it takes several minutes to build up. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sailor Malan2 Posted February 2, 2017 Author Share Posted February 2, 2017 Just now, Bulletpoint said: I don't know how long it should take. Just sharing my findings. My example was testing how much would be needed to suppress the building in 60 seconds. Good point about sustained fire. I think suppression is basically about the balance between how much suppression pours in, minus how much continually drains out (due to leadership etc). So in some cases, you might have just a small surplus of suppression, and it takes several minutes to build up. Agreed. My play improved immensely when I stopped thinking of minutes as 'Turns'... (i.e. one turn 'prep fire' then assault.. or more accurately die) 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Kettler Posted February 8, 2017 Share Posted February 8, 2017 Would love to have "ears" locked in place to where the men are, rather than being able to fly them about as some sort of unfettered acoustic detection system. Find it ridiculous that LOS has to be from where the observer is, but hearing is at will and anywhere. At the very least, I feel this should be implemented in Iron, but would favor its being in effect well before that. This would, I believe, be especially useful in infantry combat, where recon would become even more valuable. This could also permit implementing noise discipline as a game feature. I feel such measures would allow worthwhile patrol scenarios and such. Contrary to the ill-designed challenge on "Mythbusters: The Search," sound can be more than adequate to deliver a killing blow, especially if using grenades, which are pretty much sourceless to the recipient, start bursting! Regards, John Kettler 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jock Tamson Posted February 8, 2017 Share Posted February 8, 2017 6 hours ago, John Kettler said: Would love to have "ears" locked in place to where the men are, rather than being able to fly them about as some sort of unfettered acoustic detection system. Find it ridiculous that LOS has to be from where the observer is, but hearing is at will and anywhere. At the very least, I feel this should be implemented in Iron, but would favor its being in effect well before that. This would, I believe, be especially useful in infantry combat, where recon would become even more valuable. This could also permit implementing noise discipline as a game feature. I feel such measures would allow worthwhile patrol scenarios and such. Contrary to the ill-designed challenge on "Mythbusters: The Search," sound can be more than adequate to deliver a killing blow, especially if using grenades, which are pretty much sourceless to the recipient, start bursting! Regards, John Kettler Agree. In fact I would like Iron to limit map scrolling to within a couple of hundred metres of your troops, creating a frontline / fog of war effect. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted February 8, 2017 Share Posted February 8, 2017 9 hours ago, John Kettler said: Would love to have "ears" locked in place to where the men are, rather than being able to fly them about as some sort of unfettered acoustic detection system. I've noticed in recent months that moving the camera with its mike around the battlefield to find sources of sound doesn't seem to work as it used to. I can still hear fences and hedges being crunched if I don't have eyes on the area, but no longer can hear engine sounds or pinpoint muzzle blasts. I don't know if that is an intentional feature or a peculiarity of my setup. Michael 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warts 'n' all Posted February 9, 2017 Share Posted February 9, 2017 @ Jock Tamson.... Surely you could do that yourself. Just don't scroll all over the map during the replay phase. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jock Tamson Posted February 9, 2017 Share Posted February 9, 2017 3 hours ago, Warts 'n' all said: @ Jock Tamson.... Surely you could do that yourself. Just don't scroll all over the map during the replay phase. How would you know your opponent was doing the same? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warts 'n' all Posted February 9, 2017 Share Posted February 9, 2017 My apologies Jock, I didn't know that you were talking about H2H play. I only play against the AI. Obviously in your case you would have to reach a "Gentleman's agreement" in the same way that some players agree on whether to allow preliminary bombardments etc. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.