Mortars and MGs

[Pvt.Tom]

Ok, I am fine with open ground not readily being open if that is what BTS says. So, a MG doesn't wipe out a charging squad because they are using cover, so shouldn't the same apply when a squad is charging another squad? I will have to test it but a could swear I have a lot more casualties when I charge a squad than a MG. I know the firepower is higher for the squad but geez, I will charge a MG any day over a squad, maybe the movies have made the MG out to be a super weapon that it readily is not.

Pvt.Tom

[Pvt.Tom]

Good point Head, can I call you Head? Hee Hee Hee. Anyway, that is very true, you grow up reading stories and seeing movies where 1 MG dominates a section of the line then you play CM and it is a big letdown, I guess it is another case of CM shattering old misconceptions about WWII.

PS I still think the mortar seems very inaccurate.

Pvt.Tom

[Pvt.Tom]

Good point Head, can I call you Head? Hee Hee Hee. Anyway, that is very true, you grow up reading stories and seeing movies where 1 MG dominates a section of the line then you play CM and it is a big letdown, I guess it is another case of CM shattering old misconceptions about WWII.

PS I still think the mortar seems very inaccurate.

Pvt.Tom

[StellarRat]

Mortars make up for inaccuracy with the high volume of rounds they put down. I think mortars are inaccurate because the base tends to move around on the ground when they fire, so each shell is fired at a slightly different angle than the last one.

Mortar shells are definately the most deadly for their size because they impact at almost a 90 degree angle with the ground and they have a thin casing that is stuffed with a lot of explosive. This gives them a perfectly circular burst pattern with lots uniformly distributed fragments. Also, they have a better chance of falling into uncovered fortifications because they fall nearly straight down.

[This message has been edited by StellarRat (edited 04-02-2001).]

[StellarRat]

Mortars make up for inaccuracy with the high volume of rounds they put down. I think mortars are inaccurate because the base tends to move around on the ground when they fire, so each shell is fired at a slightly different angle than the last one.

Mortar shells are definately the most deadly for their size because they impact at almost a 90 degree angle with the ground and they have a thin casing that is stuffed with a lot of explosive. This gives them a perfectly circular burst pattern with lots uniformly distributed fragments. Also, they have a better chance of falling into uncovered fortifications because they fall nearly straight down.

[This message has been edited by StellarRat (edited 04-02-2001).]

[Pak40]

Pvt Tom,

make a test scenario with a company of men vs an 81mm spotter. Play the scenario over and over with the FOW off (or play hotseat as both sides), that way you can tell how many men are truly getting hurt.

Experiment with the company: place them in foxholes, out of foxholes, moving or running across the kill zone etc....

You should be able to get a good idea how good 81mm rounds are. You can also experiment with 4 on board 81mm mortars.

[Pak40]

Pvt Tom,

make a test scenario with a company of men vs an 81mm spotter. Play the scenario over and over with the FOW off (or play hotseat as both sides), that way you can tell how many men are truly getting hurt.

Experiment with the company: place them in foxholes, out of foxholes, moving or running across the kill zone etc....

You should be able to get a good idea how good 81mm rounds are. You can also experiment with 4 on board 81mm mortars.

[pritzl]

As regards to mortars, don't forget that Combat Mission's battles represent fighting at its highest levels of intensity. Outside the scope of the game are daily mortar barrages meant as harrassing fire, etc of known enemy positions.

These regular barrages caused a lot of casualties but were nothing more than brief attacks with no intention by the enemy to follow up with any kind of infantry attack.

[pritzl]

As regards to mortars, don't forget that Combat Mission's battles represent fighting at its highest levels of intensity. Outside the scope of the game are daily mortar barrages meant as harrassing fire, etc of known enemy positions.

These regular barrages caused a lot of casualties but were nothing more than brief attacks with no intention by the enemy to follow up with any kind of infantry attack.

[Hilhil45]

I just thinks that is strange...I heard that shrapnel from any artillery killed the most

people....at first I didn't believe it but then I heard you'll talking.Some one should find out the ratios of artillery deaths to guns.

[Hilhil45]

I just thinks that is strange...I heard that shrapnel from any artillery killed the most

people....at first I didn't believe it but then I heard you'll talking.Some one should find out the ratios of artillery deaths to guns.

[SenorBeef]

Originally posted by Pvt.Tom:

I am no expert but I recall hearing that mortars and MGs caused most of the casualties in combat, yet in the majority of games I play tanks and infantry do most of the killing/wounding. Is it just me or have the mortars been made too inaccurate and MGs not powerful enough? Or maybe I am expecting unrealistic results (destroying the enemy rather than routing them?)

Pvt.Tom

Mortars were, I think, mostly employed behind the lines as batteries. Not generally as on-board direct fire weapons. And so the tactics were different. Most mortar casualties were probably caused by offboard barrages over running infantry, as well as harassing bombardment, rather than actual mortars sitting on the battlefield, firing directly at infantry.

[SenorBeef]

Originally posted by Pvt.Tom:

I am no expert but I recall hearing that mortars and MGs caused most of the casualties in combat, yet in the majority of games I play tanks and infantry do most of the killing/wounding. Is it just me or have the mortars been made too inaccurate and MGs not powerful enough? Or maybe I am expecting unrealistic results (destroying the enemy rather than routing them?)

Pvt.Tom

Mortars were, I think, mostly employed behind the lines as batteries. Not generally as on-board direct fire weapons. And so the tactics were different. Most mortar casualties were probably caused by offboard barrages over running infantry, as well as harassing bombardment, rather than actual mortars sitting on the battlefield, firing directly at infantry.

[Stix]

That brings me too another point.

Why can't Mortars give indirect fire!???

Why do they have to have a HQ with a line of sight to target?

Mortars are a in-direct fire weapon there shouldn't be any need for line of sight. Line of sight just purely increse accuracy thats all.

[Stix]

That brings me too another point.

Why can't Mortars give indirect fire!???

Why do they have to have a HQ with a line of sight to target?

Mortars are a in-direct fire weapon there shouldn't be any need for line of sight. Line of sight just purely increse accuracy thats all.

[jasoncawley@ameritech.net]

How do you think they are supposed to know where to shoot, without any FO? Do you think they are psychic? How do they know what the target is?

The on map mortars don't have radios, you know. Only the HQ does, if that. If they can't see it, either somebody that can calls out the target to them, or they might as well shoot a random spot somewhere on the globe.

Indirect mortar fire, you can use on map mortars and an HQ as their FO, or you can buy an 81mm mortar FO and use them as artillery. Mostly, the on map ones are for direct fire.

Incidentally, the accuracy of on map mortars is, in anything, still incredibly high in CM. It used to be worse. The Germans rated the circular error of their 81mm mortar at around 35 meters, meaning only half the rounds would fall that close or closer.

They are stabilized only by a tail fin (like on an airplane bomb), have long hang time, drift in wind, there is windage between barrel and shell size, etc etc.

Did they cause lots of casualties? Sure, mostly by the standard means you will see if you buy a 81mm FO and drop 150-200 rounds on a platoon or two, in woods especially, while not dug in. Now do that 40 times, and you've reached the average service life of a German mortar, in rounds per tube. That is sort of the whole idea - throw a bunch of rounds, then walk away whole to do it again tomorrow.

The Germans threw ~75 million 81mm mortar rounds at people in WW II. They didn't hit 75 million people, and they didn't need to, for it to be a very effective weapon. If dropping a full module of 81mm ammo caused 10 casualties, they would have hit 5 million people all told. Which they probably didn't, because many barrages probably hit empty areas or whatever. The point is, you aren't "groking" the sheer scale of their use, in numbers at once (in many places) and over time, that made them effective.

Artillery weapons work and causes so many casualties, because they throws lots and lots of stuff at the enemy, usually without effective reply, over extended periods of time. Not because every round is a homing whiz bang flash gordon do-witz that never misses. (In WW II anyway - LOL).

[jasoncawley@ameritech.net]

How do you think they are supposed to know where to shoot, without any FO? Do you think they are psychic? How do they know what the target is?

The on map mortars don't have radios, you know. Only the HQ does, if that. If they can't see it, either somebody that can calls out the target to them, or they might as well shoot a random spot somewhere on the globe.

Indirect mortar fire, you can use on map mortars and an HQ as their FO, or you can buy an 81mm mortar FO and use them as artillery. Mostly, the on map ones are for direct fire.

Incidentally, the accuracy of on map mortars is, in anything, still incredibly high in CM. It used to be worse. The Germans rated the circular error of their 81mm mortar at around 35 meters, meaning only half the rounds would fall that close or closer.

They are stabilized only by a tail fin (like on an airplane bomb), have long hang time, drift in wind, there is windage between barrel and shell size, etc etc.

Did they cause lots of casualties? Sure, mostly by the standard means you will see if you buy a 81mm FO and drop 150-200 rounds on a platoon or two, in woods especially, while not dug in. Now do that 40 times, and you've reached the average service life of a German mortar, in rounds per tube. That is sort of the whole idea - throw a bunch of rounds, then walk away whole to do it again tomorrow.

The Germans threw ~75 million 81mm mortar rounds at people in WW II. They didn't hit 75 million people, and they didn't need to, for it to be a very effective weapon. If dropping a full module of 81mm ammo caused 10 casualties, they would have hit 5 million people all told. Which they probably didn't, because many barrages probably hit empty areas or whatever. The point is, you aren't "groking" the sheer scale of their use, in numbers at once (in many places) and over time, that made them effective.

Artillery weapons work and causes so many casualties, because they throws lots and lots of stuff at the enemy, usually without effective reply, over extended periods of time. Not because every round is a homing whiz bang flash gordon do-witz that never misses. (In WW II anyway - LOL).

[Olle Petersson]

A couple of points:

- Arty fire being the largest killer; Yes, considering all kills in the war.

A considerable part of these arty kills were the effect of harassment fire. Tom mention combat, not the everyday shelling.

Mortars were big killers in combat, since they were battalion assets and was fast and accurate on target.

- Mortar accuracy; If you look at the target sheaf it's very accurate, centered on the target. Precision (lack of spread) is if anything too high. As Jason noted the 81mm mortar had a spread of 35m.

It's also noteworthy that early war German 12cm mortars were notorious for having too little spread to be practical. By the timeframe of CMBO this error had been corrected.

My father was the leader of a 12cm mortar squad, and he's told me that they adjusted fire until a round fell within 50m from the target. That was close enough to be considered on target, since the actual target point was within spread range. (Once they actually scored a direct hit on the target, a small shed, and that with the first spotting round...)

[Olle Petersson]

A couple of points:

- Arty fire being the largest killer; Yes, considering all kills in the war.

A considerable part of these arty kills were the effect of harassment fire. Tom mention combat, not the everyday shelling.

Mortars were big killers in combat, since they were battalion assets and was fast and accurate on target.

- Mortar accuracy; If you look at the target sheaf it's very accurate, centered on the target. Precision (lack of spread) is if anything too high. As Jason noted the 81mm mortar had a spread of 35m.

It's also noteworthy that early war German 12cm mortars were notorious for having too little spread to be practical. By the timeframe of CMBO this error had been corrected.

My father was the leader of a 12cm mortar squad, and he's told me that they adjusted fire until a round fell within 50m from the target. That was close enough to be considered on target, since the actual target point was within spread range. (Once they actually scored a direct hit on the target, a small shed, and that with the first spotting round...)