jshandorf Posted August 23, 2000 Share Posted August 23, 2000 In all the games I have played I feel artillery is way too accurate. Sometimes all the atrillery aimed at me falls within a 30 meter diameter. I feel that even with a FO with LOS on a target getting all your arty to fall within about 30 meters is way too unrealistic. Given the wind and minor flucuations between shots because of gun displacement and shell imperfections and lets not forget most of these rounds are coming from miles away they should not have sucha close grouping. Anyone have any "real world" exp. with this? Thanks, Jeff Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
L.Tankersley Posted August 23, 2000 Share Posted August 23, 2000 Are you sure this is all "off-map" artillery? In my experience off-map artillery has a significantly larger impact area even when the target is in LOS of the observer. However, once on-map mortars find the range, they can consistently place shots in a very tight grouping. Could the more extreme cases you cite be 2 or 3 on-map 81mm mortars perhaps? ------------------ Leland J. Tankersley Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chupacabra Posted August 23, 2000 Share Posted August 23, 2000 I believe that properly spotted artillery is in fact quite acurate, although I'm neither an ex-artillery officer nor a proper grog, so I can't quote sources or provide data. In general, though, in all of the reading I've done, one of the things soldiers feared the most was artillery. ------------------ Soy super bien, soy super super bien, soy bien bien super bien bien bien super super. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Madmatt Posted August 23, 2000 Share Posted August 23, 2000 You 'feel' it is unrealistic or you have some real world data to back up your feelings? FYI, there are several active and retired military personel that have real world artilly experience. Now that being said tell us why you think its too accurate and we will be all ears. Back this up with some hard data and changes can (and have repeatedly in the past) be made to the gamne to better reflect reality. To be honest I thought it was a little accurate myself in the begining (although I have never seen an off-board 30 meter grouping) but was quickly overwhelmed by the knowledge of 'professionals' that do artillery work every day and they seem to like it just fine. Madmatt ------------------ If it's in Combat Mission, it's on Combat Mission HQ! CMHQ-Annex, The Alternative side of Combat Mission Combat Mission HQ CMHQ-Annex Proud members of the Combat Mission WebRing [This message has been edited by Madmatt (edited 08-23-2000).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jshandorf Posted August 23, 2000 Author Share Posted August 23, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Madmatt: You 'feel' it is unrealistic or you have some real world data to back up your feelings? FYI, there are several active and retired military personel that have real world artilly experience. Now that being said tell us why you think its too accurate and we will be all ears. Back this up with some hard data and changes can (and have repeatedly in the past) be made to the gamne to better reflect reality. To be honest I thought it was a little accurate myself in the begining (although I have never seen an off-board 30 meter grouping) but was quickly overwhelmed by the knowledge of 'professionals' that do artillery work every day and they seem to like it just fine. Madmatt <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Huh? That is why I asked for anyone with real world experience. I was atempting to see if my feeling was a "correct" feeling or and "incorrect" feeling. I am not talking motars I am talking off-map artillery. What is everyone elses experience with the groupings of thier off-map arty? Thanks, Jeff Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spook Posted August 23, 2000 Share Posted August 23, 2000 Jeff: As a point of clarification, many of us here will regard off-board mortars as "off-board artillery" too. Or rather, any artillery unit that requires a spotter is considered as OBA. To help you to discern better as to whether or not you still feel OBA to be too accurate, try the following: 1) In a game or "test scenario" (CM's editor is very easy to use in setting up the latter), let a bombardment go for at least two full turns or even three. After the bombardment, click the "Line of Sight" option on a nearby friendly unit. Use the drawn LOS line to help you measure the overall area where the shells have fallen, or how shells have scattered relative to each other. 2) Try this both for off-board howitzer & off-board mortar spotters. I find that 81mm mortar OBA (a battery of four tubes?) has a reasonable scatter to it, sometimes with an overall impact area of 50 X 50 meters, sometimes a bit more. When you do this enough times with different types of OBA, this process should help you consider whether or not you think that OBA is still too accurate. Of course, the opinions you may draw from your own tests may still be challenged by the artillery experts here. Good luck. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fionn Posted August 23, 2000 Share Posted August 23, 2000 I think Jeff feels arty is too accurate because I'm pounding him with VT shells . Poor platoons... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jshandorf Posted August 23, 2000 Author Share Posted August 23, 2000 Here is some idea on how complicated it is to correctly target artillery. http://www.evac.ou.edu/jmpbac/appl.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jshandorf Posted August 23, 2000 Author Share Posted August 23, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Fionn: I think Jeff feels arty is too accurate because I'm pounding him with VT shells . Poor platoons...<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> You are only one of many people I have played against where the artillery falls with uncanny accuracy. Check out the link I provided above. I think it will open your eyes on the complexity of FO spotting artillery. Jeff Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Von Fauster Posted August 23, 2000 Share Posted August 23, 2000 Along the same lines, but in a different direction: I'm wondering what happens when you wax an AI arty spotter. Say he has already called-in his fire mission: does it continue without him? Does it stop cold? If it continues, is accuracy reduced? And along the same lines: Say I'm doing an Area Fire (Indirect fire) with my mortar crew, who can't actually see the target, but is in communication with his HQ who can see. Then the HQ is KO'd. Will this effect my mortar fire? Thanks all. Love the board. Love the game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ben Galanti Posted August 23, 2000 Share Posted August 23, 2000 www.battlefront.com/discuss/Forum1/HTML/008115.html That thread has some good info on arty accuracy in CM. I've made a similar test scenario and came up with the same results. Ben Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Splinty Posted August 23, 2000 Share Posted August 23, 2000 Just as a point of interest, one of the thing Allied troops feared was their OWN artillery. ------------------ Nicht Schiessen!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Big Time Software Posted August 23, 2000 Share Posted August 23, 2000 Hi Jeff, Oddly enough, CM's artillery became MORE accurate because of real world artillery men complaining that things were too inaccurate The threads can be found and they backed up their positions with real world data. Note that we took into account WWII levels of technology and communication. The fixes (between Beta and Gold Demo) pleased the cannon cockers enough that they gave us the thumbs up Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jager 7 Posted August 23, 2000 Share Posted August 23, 2000 Ok....time to toss my hat in on this one. First, I for one have yet to see extremely accurate Off-Board arty in CM. Nothing near the 30 Meter sheaf referred to. Not calling anyone a liar, I have just never seen it. Secondly, that link to all the metro and ballistic data is great. It proves that there are indeed many variables that affect the fall of shot in artillery. Having said that let me add one more item.... ...That is why God made FO's. We identify the target, we locate the target, we call for fire on the target and last and most importantly....we ADJUST fire onto the target if there is time. In CM all arty missions I have seen are Adjust Fire missions. This adjustment and prior registration by the battery has eliminated or reduced the effects of most of the variables. It is very easy to adjust artillery fire onto a target and achieve a Fire For Effect that has a sheaf of 100 meters in radius. If we call for a Converged sheaf (all guns are dialed in to hit the same point) we can cut that radius in half or less. To summarize; if the fire is observed and adjusted by an FO, you had better hope the supporting battery runs out of ammo or find a new place to hide. Fionn, VT is nasty stuff, shame on you for using that against your opponent. And by the way...VT has a somewhat greater casualty radius per shell as it is an air burst with nothing but air to slow down the fragments. Can't say whether this has been factored into CM or not. Hope that helps explain away some of the thoughts that artillery is most often inaccurate. Out here... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jshandorf Posted August 23, 2000 Author Share Posted August 23, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Jager 7: Ok....time to toss my hat in on this one. First, I for one have yet to see extremely accurate Off-Board arty in CM. Nothing near the 30 Meter sheaf referred to. Not calling anyone a liar, I have just never seen it. Secondly, that link to all the metro and ballistic data is great. It proves that there are indeed many variables that affect the fall of shot in artillery. Having said that let me add one more item.... ...That is why God made FO's. We identify the target, we locate the target, we call for fire on the target and last and most importantly....we ADJUST fire onto the target if there is time. In CM all arty missions I have seen are Adjust Fire missions. This adjustment and prior registration by the battery has eliminated or reduced the effects of most of the variables. It is very easy to adjust artillery fire onto a target and achieve a Fire For Effect that has a sheaf of 100 meters in radius. If we call for a Converged sheaf (all guns are dialed in to hit the same point) we can cut that radius in half or less. To summarize; if the fire is observed and adjusted by an FO, you had better hope the supporting battery runs out of ammo or find a new place to hide. Fionn, VT is nasty stuff, shame on you for using that against your opponent. And by the way...VT has a somewhat greater casualty radius per shell as it is an air burst with nothing but air to slow down the fragments. Can't say whether this has been factored into CM or not. Hope that helps explain away some of the thoughts that artillery is most often inaccurate. Out here...<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Thinking about now it seems to me that when I observed ground impacting arty it was more spread out then then airburtsting artillery. (Insert Fionn gloat here) I wonder if someone could do a test between the two.... Hmmm... Jeff Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jager 7 Posted August 23, 2000 Share Posted August 23, 2000 Jeff, Interesting observation. There is no reason why VT (Variable Time) fused shell should be any more accurate than an shell fused with a point-detonating Quick fuse. The VT fuses cause air bursts and consequently have a potential to create more casualties on the ground. Out here.... ------------------ When the situation is obscure....attack! CGen. Heinz Guderian Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts