jshandorf Posted January 22, 2001 Share Posted January 22, 2001 BTS, Was talking to a friend the other night about CM since I am trying to get him to play it. He is a avid war buff and a minor grognard. We got to talking about artillery in the game and he mentioned counter batteries. I told him that there were none and then he stated that the allies had the capability for counter batteries and that it was used quite often on the west front. I was wondering about your thoughts and opinions on this and why it isn't included in the game. Thanks, Jeff ------------------ First of all, David, you stupid sot, if names were meant to be descriptive, everyone would have the, culturally appropriate, name of, "Ugly little purple person that cries and wets itself." -Meeks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest wwb_99 Posted January 22, 2001 Share Posted January 22, 2001 I think it is beyond the scope of the game. A battery with a CBA mission is not availiable to a commander at the front, hence no spotter and no arty. And on the other hand, I just chalk up the loss of arty due to the loss of the FO team as effective CBA. WWB ------------------ Before battle, my digital soldiers turn to me and say, Ave, Caesar! Morituri te salutamus. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gregory Deych Posted January 22, 2001 Share Posted January 22, 2001 It was definitely available, though I can't say how much it was used. I've seen a Russian book, circa 1938 or so, on use of sound location to pinpoint the enemy batteries. Also, Russians used artillery recon teams - somewhat like FOs, but more to pinpoint static positions then to directo fire - quite heavily during the war. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slapdragon Posted January 22, 2001 Share Posted January 22, 2001 The question is, is it available in a 60 minute intense battle which is represented in CM. The answer may be that it was sort of, but CBA firemissions took hours to finish because they involved collating the reports of people at the front to narrow an attack into an acceptable CEP, then firing before the unit left the place, then seeing were the unit popped up next, then firing, and usually involved batteries not assigned to front line commanders (who just provided information) instead being tasked specifically with that mission (except in the US Army were the communication system was good enough to give any platoon leader control of any battery in the division, which is not simulated in CM). In other words, it was not up to a company or battalion commander to reassign his close support artillery fires to counterbattery. The only time they would become very active was when they were in logger and being bothered by harrassing fire, at which time they make be assigned a battery for CBA, outside the scope of the game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slapdragon Posted January 22, 2001 Share Posted January 22, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Gregory Deych: It was definitely available, though I can't say how much it was used. I've seen a Russian book, circa 1938 or so, on use of sound location to pinpoint the enemy batteries. Also, Russians used artillery recon teams - somewhat like FOs, but more to pinpoint static positions then to directo fire - quite heavily during the war.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> in the US Army, 1/3 of all fire missions were counterbattery in WW2 (per Dunnigan). They used spotting planes, collated reports of sound and flash from commanders at the front, and even reports from spies to fire the missions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IntelWeenie Posted January 23, 2001 Share Posted January 23, 2001 Including it would enhance the realism, but the question would be how to include it. Naturally, since the fron't line commanders had no control, it should not be something controlled by the user. Would it be purchaseable and funtion something like fighter-bombers? (buy them and HOPE they show up and bomb the right people) Could counterbattery fire be reflected in loss or hinderance of OBA?? Just some random thoughts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slapdragon Posted January 23, 2001 Share Posted January 23, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by IntelWeenie: Including it would enhance the realism, but the question would be how to include it. Naturally, since the fron't line commanders had no control, it should not be something controlled by the user. Would it be purchaseable and funtion something like fighter-bombers? (buy them and HOPE they show up and bomb the right people) Could counterbattery fire be reflected in loss or hinderance of OBA?? Just some random thoughts.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I think you may have the best solution if it is included. One big problem is that the US had it in spades compared to Axis and other allies. On the east front Russian artillery never did get the hang of it, but the Germans were quite good for the limitations of their artillery system. Any addition to the artillery realm will have to be thought out carefully to balance it while making it realistic. Still, I like the idea of it being like air power. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lordfluffers Posted January 23, 2001 Share Posted January 23, 2001 Even if counter artillery was available in CM, you never see enemy or friendly artillery. Unless the counter battery was directly behind you, you would probably not even hear the shells going over anyway and since CM models distant artillery (you can hear if you turn ambient sounds on) you may presume this also includes batteries firing at each other too. [This message has been edited by Lordfluffers (edited 01-22-2001).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Forever Babra Posted January 23, 2001 Share Posted January 23, 2001 The 1st Canadian Radar Battery and the 100th British Radar Battery were fielded specifically for the purpose of silencing German mortars and Nebelwerfers. These units were equipped with anti-aircraft gun-laying GL MkIII radar systems which proved remarkably successful at suppressing German mortar fire in the Rhineland. Mobile Radar control posts were also fielded to assist medium bombers in suppressing German batteries and supporting ground troops, and these also proved remarkably successful. 18 percent of 1st Army Group were cannon-cockers, and a goodly number of them had the sole job of hitting German batteries, so I'd like to see counterbattery work implemented in some form at least. ------------------ Massada Lo Tipol Shenit Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Germanboy Posted January 23, 2001 Share Posted January 23, 2001 AFAIK counter-battery fire (while clearly being outside the scope of CM - trust me, my grandfather directed it for the Germans around Leningrad) is modeled through the variable delays you get on your FOO response time. I am quite sure I read a statement to that effect. Ever noticed that sometimes you may have two 25pdr FOOs with the same experience, and one takes 3 min, while the other takes 4 min for the rounds to come in? That is supposed to model conflicting requests and counter-battery, IIRC. ------------------ Andreas Der Kessel Home of „Die Sturmgruppe“; Scenario Design Group for Combat Mission. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jasper Posted January 23, 2001 Share Posted January 23, 2001 If off-map artillery is "in the scope" then why is counter battery "out of scope"? Last I checked there where no 'out of bounds' penalties in war. I know there is some weirdness differences between on-map artillery and off-map artillery - but I've never had a mortar fire request denied because my battery just got toasted by the enemy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tanklover MD Posted January 23, 2001 Share Posted January 23, 2001 I am all for having counter battery in the game, but I wonder: how does it get played. I mean, something you cannot see shoots at something you cannot see. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PzKpfw 1 Posted January 23, 2001 Share Posted January 23, 2001 I wouldn't go as far to say the Soviet's never got the hang of Counter-battery fire, they chose to use a small allocation of specialised units that that were only used for CB & these units were very successful & had inherent spotter aircraft, & Arty Recon Bn's etc. The 4th Guards Heavy Cannon Artilery Division was one such CB specialist unit. Also the Soviet M1938 152mm cannon had over twice the range of German Div Arty. IIRC their were a few articles on Soviet CB practices & employment in JOSMS that went into more details. Regards, John Waters ------------------ "We've got the finest tanks in the world. We just love to see the German Royal Tiger come up on the field". Lt.Gen. George S. Patton, Jr. February 1945. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Dorosh Posted January 23, 2001 Share Posted January 23, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Forever Babra: The 1st Canadian Radar Battery and the 100th British Radar Battery were fielded specifically for the purpose of silencing German mortars and Nebelwerfers. These units were equipped with anti-aircraft gun-laying GL MkIII radar systems which proved remarkably successful at suppressing German mortar fire in the Rhineland. Mobile Radar control posts were also fielded to assist medium bombers in suppressing German batteries and supporting ground troops, and these also proved remarkably successful. 18 percent of 1st Army Group were cannon-cockers, and a goodly number of them had the sole job of hitting German batteries, so I'd like to see counterbattery work implemented in some form at least. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Not to mention the concepts of flash spotting, sound ranging, and as mentioned in another post, the collation of SHELREPS and MORREPS (shell and mortar reports which every unit did every single day). But Counter Battery fire has nothing to do with an infantry or armoured battalion in action and is way out of the scope of the game. What possible relevance could it have to an hour long battle as simulated by Combat Mission? The inclusion of a FOO in an order of battle assumes that his battery has not been incapacitated by counter-battery fire. To allow CB in the course of a single scenario would be rather damaging to play balance, and unrealistic. Infantry units could not count on counter-battery fire to provide them any help at the drop of a hat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Michael emrys Posted January 23, 2001 Share Posted January 23, 2001 As has been mentioned, counter-battery fire took a long time (at least hours and more likely days) to set up and was usually an integral part of the division or (more likely) corps fire plan. As was also mentioned, it was completely out of the hands of the forces a CM player commands. I think the most realistic way to protray it in the game would be at the outset, after the players have purchased their forces, the program would roll a die and declare that one or both players had lost some percentage of their purchased artillery. To me, this sounds like more programming hassle than it's worth, but anybody determined to squeeze the last drop of authenticity out of the game might try lobbying Charles to put it in. Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GriffinCheng+ Posted January 23, 2001 Share Posted January 23, 2001 Okay, I am not a pro but let me try: 1. As mentioned by others, scounting planes and radars can detect the incoming shells and rockets in flight. Based on their flight path, the launching source cand determined. 2. To inspect the imapct crater and one knows the angle of impact and thus the distance of the shell travelled. With the direction, one can pinpoint the location of the batteries. Griffin. Originally posted by Tanklover MD: I am all for having counter battery in the game, but I wonder: how does it get played. I mean, something you cannot see shoots at something you cannot see. ------------------ "When you find your PBEM opportents too hard to beat, there is always the AI." "Can't get enough Tank?" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Germanboy Posted January 23, 2001 Share Posted January 23, 2001 Originally posted by Jasper: If off-map artillery is "in the scope" then why is counter battery "out of scope"? Last I checked there where no 'out of bounds' penalties in war. Irrelevant comparison - off-map arty has its effects occur on map. Counter-battery has its effect occuring off-map. Simple as that - as I said, I think it is supposed to be simulated by delays, which seem to me to be more variable and generally longer with the Germans, indicating lower availability and maybe more effective CB fire by the Allies. Since there are no boundaries in war, can we look forward to you arguing for the on-map inclusion of strategic bombing, the submarine war in the Atlantic, dogfights and whetherAdolf had a good night's sleep the day before your QB? ------------------ Andreas Der Kessel Home of „Die Sturmgruppe“; Scenario Design Group for Combat Mission. [This message has been edited by Germanboy (edited 01-23-2001).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Col Deadmarsh Posted January 23, 2001 Share Posted January 23, 2001 Excuse my naivate(sp) but can someone give me an overview of counter battery and exactly what it is. I have an idea now by reading these posts but it's still unclear to me. ------------------ Youth is wasted on the young. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Forever Babra Posted January 23, 2001 Share Posted January 23, 2001 Col. Deadmarsh, An enemy mortar or artillery unit is "spotted", while it is firing, either by aircraft, radar, sound ranging or some other means. Really HEAVY friendly artillery zeros in on the offending unit. The enemy battery must either be stonked or move, thus ending their fire mission. ------------------ Massada Lo Tipol Shenit Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts