Jump to content

why cant morters fire without line of sight?

Recommended Posts

Originally posted by Germanboy:

That notion is wrong.

Then I stand corrected.

In which case it is right that the unit should suffer the penalty for being out of command.

Hmmmmm..... I'd say there are degrees of being out of command control depending if it is just a squad or an entire platoon. As things stand there is no such thing as a platoon out of CC.

If a unit has been out of contact with its parent HQ for, say, 20 minutes in a highly volatile situation (which is the case in the great majority of CM games smile.gif) and it has completed all missions assigned by its own parent HQ the unit leader would latch on to the nearest friendly HQ or in some cases even a FO as they were known to be more readily in contact with the CHQ and be aware of the situation and how it is developing.

The dilemma here is the fact that the unit responce time to player orders deteriorates "only" when a squad falls out of platoon HQ CC (because of whatever reason). AFAIK no penalty is received for losing a Company HQ if one is present on the map. (On a related note: the player is not thought to be represented by the most senior commander on the map but is he just the puppeteer pulling the strings. Any changes forthcoming to that in later remakes ? A designated player HQ would bring more flavour into campaign games at least.)

IRL the squad leader (or a platoon leader for that matter) would use his own initiative but that would mean either cutting the unit from the players control all together (no CC) or dropping the responce time to 0 (own initiative).

IRL such expedients as runners were used to reley orders but what if there is no company level HQ on the map (due to point limitations or what not) to actually simulate this ? Also, would a company commander send men to try and reach cut off single squads across hostile territory ? He would perhaps try and reach the platoon commander but what if the HQ unit is killed ? In case of a platoon size battle the HQ unit would soon run out of men if squads started dropping off the air and the leader had to dispatch men left and right.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 78
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by tero:

I wonder what the veterans of the 82nd and 101st Airborne for example would say about the premise that leading or being led by HQ's other than from your parent formation under combat conditions is ahistorical and unrealistic. smile.gif<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well, I don't think the problem is that platoons could be reorganized and coallesced. Certainly they were, and that accounts for the stories you have read. The question is how commonly that was done in the 30 minute time limit typical for a CM battle. Was it common enough that it can be included in the game without leading to ahistorical gamey play?


Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by Michael emrys:

The question is how commonly that was done in the 30 minute time limit typical for a CM battle.

When we think about this from the large scale KG/BG organization then I agree the timeframe is relevant. When we think about this from the local, squad/platoon level organization I'd say the timeframe is irrelevant. I think that instead of large scale we ought to look at this from a small scale localiced POV. While no specific quotes spring to mind off hand I am sure there are plenty of accounts describing junior officers rallying leaderless individual troops and squads and leading them in local operations (for example counter attacks), which fall into the timeframe. I'm sure relevant accounts can be found pertaining the actual landings and break out of the beaches at Normandy in addition to the airborne troops.

Was it common enough that it can be included in the game without leading to ahistorical gamey play?

I'd say it was common. In that respect it would not be ahistorical as such.

Gamey "suicide by enemy" disposing of weaker HQ's is indeed a valid concern.

I'm just wondering if TacAI is already excersising it when it seems to be unrealistically leading the attacks with the HQ units..... smile.gif

[ 09-23-2001: Message edited by: tero ]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Disco Diva:

Hello Hanz and Fritz

I think your point on mortars firing without line of sight is quite a valid one considering you just blew the crap out of me with your artillery in the last game we played . Personally I think the more restrictions on it the better being the double crossers you two are I don't think you should command an army at all ;)<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Mr Diva.Thank-you for your kind thoughts.I would just like to point out a couple of facts.I do remember your G.I.'s having quite a party in that field.The wind up gramophone was pumping out its 5 watts(shame it was the Andrew sisters,I prefer Big Band).You quite put me off my frankfurters. Then I saw All those happy French girls that you were entertaining,it was quite sickening. I just had to intervene when I saw you take those two mademoiselles off into the hedgerows.I thought the only chance of those girls getting a good bang and seeing fireworks was if I sent over my artillery.I'm sorry if my barrage spoilt your party,but you should thank me,you dont know what you might have caught(French girls are not very clean). Hope to see you on a battlefield soon,I'm beeing sent a new side-car by the way.Auf wiedersehen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Create New...