Another idea for the new engine...

[RSColonel_131st]

Wow, my first "request new feature" topic evar. /me rules now!!!

Hhmm, or something like that.

Anyway, I recently had a small QB against AI where I expected them to hide in a small patch of woods. I had an 105mm aim at the outskirt of it.

Now okay, so far it's realistic, because without LOS the FO couldn't bring the shots on target.

But, and here's the question...wouldn't it in reality be possiple, once the shells start falling, to request the aiming point to be layed back a few meters? In other words, aim at the outskirts of the wood, establish that the Arty is on target, then lay the fire 50 meters back and have it REALLY cook up the woods?

If I'm not mistaken, changing Arty target during bombardment so far is only possiple for area in LOS. I think a good gunner could make small corrections to either side without the FO needing to recheck.

[ParaBellum]

Hehe...one of the most discussed topics on this board is CM's modelling of arty support, especially the behaviour you describe in your example, Colonel.

Rest assured that we will see a much more refined and detailed model for the new engine.

The new engine will surely allow this and more. Better arty model, dynamic lighting, relative spotting, eternal life and joy and happiness for all.

Or sumfink like that...

[ March 19, 2003, 09:09 AM: Message edited by: ParaBellum ]

[Tero]

Originally posted by RSColonel_131st:

wouldn't it in reality be possiple, once the shells start falling, to request the aiming point to be layed back a few meters? In other words, aim at the outskirts of the wood, establish that the Arty is on target, then lay the fire 50 meters back and have it REALLY cook up the woods?

IRL you can request it be changed as far as you like, even if the target is beyond LOS.

If you know for example there is a depression 200m which you can not see behind a barn you can see nothing prevents you from firing a few ranging/registering shots and the ordering the fire mission proper 200m from the location of the shots.

If you have the barn already registered you can order the fire mission without the ranging/registering shots.

If I'm not mistaken, changing Arty target during bombardment so far is only possiple for area in LOS. I think a good gunner could make small corrections to either side without the FO needing to recheck.

Actually the gunner is not the key person. The key person is the guy doing the calculations.

[RSColonel_131st]

Semantics aside (Gunner/Calculator) thanks for confirming my point.

I'd assume that the more you put the fire away from the original location, the less precise it would become. But the wood example is small enough not to worry about that.

As it stands now, it's really a tad bit frustrating, because if I aim at the outskirt of the wood half of my shells will be spread in the open where I clearly know that no one is.

Parabellum, thanks also for your reply. I must slowly become a CMBB regular when I start realizing stuff others have found valid already...

[Hat Trick]

One potential problem with this new feature -- if implemented -- is that it exacerbates the "God's eye" advantage that a player has. In real life, the forward observer may not know exactly how far behind the barn, hill or other obstruction the target is, or even if there is anyone there at all. Because the player can see what all of his units can see, he could retarget his FO's fire far more precisely than the FO could in real life.

If this feature is implemented in the next engine, I would suggest that the retargting to areas out of the line of sight be limited to multiples of, say, 20 meters; e.g., 20 m behind the barn, 40 m behind the barn, 60 m behind the barn, and so on. This would prevent forward observers "zeroing in" on units that they cannot see.

Alternatively, maybe FOs could have their fire directed from headquaters units that do have line of sight to the target, much as on map artillery can now.

[RSColonel_131st]

Good point. But since this will only be for the next engine anyway, there should be no borg spotting anymore.

[Joques]

Originally posted by RSColonel_131st:

Good point. But since this will only be for the next engine anyway, there should be no borg spotting anymore.

Borg spotting is not the issue. The issue is what you, the player, know. So let's say you have an artillery spotter whose LOS is blocked by a building. You have another unit that can see an enemy squad cowering behind the building. In RL, the Spotter probably wouldn't know about that enemy unit. If your suggestion is implemented, then your spotter could merrily shell the heck out of someone he didn't know was there.

This has nothing to do with the issue of borg spotting. Even without borg spotting, the fact remains that you the player will know everything that all of your units know. You will still have a god's eye view of the battlefield.

I say that if the engine allows you to adjust artillery fire onto a target your spotter doesn't know is there, it will be way less realistic.

[mike_the_wino]

First off, this isn't "another idea for engine re-write" it is a recycled old idea. As noted above the "God's eye" view of the player makes arty unrealistic as it is and the penalties for re-targeting out of LOS is a nice way to provide some balance to this issue. I don't want arty more accurate, be able to adjust out of LOS (without time penalties), or any other any tweaks that would allow a platoon and a gaggle of FO to defeat a battalion supported by a company of tanks. Because that is precisely what would happen if your proposed "improvement" was put in place.

[ParaBellum]

Originally posted by RSColonel_131st:

Parabellum, thanks also for your reply. I must slowly become a CMBB regular when I start realizing stuff others have found valid already...

You're welcome, Colonel. Actually this discussion has already came up for CMBO years ago...

It comes down to what the others have already stated. The biggest problem is that you as the player see everything on the battlefield and with this knowledge could direct your arty fire with far too great accuracy on the battlefield.

Actually every single unit capable of spotting the enemy would become some kind of FO, since the information would be relied to you (the commander) without delay.

Without at least some kind of restrictions for FOs the play balance would be greatly affected by this.

[ March 20, 2003, 05:07 PM: Message edited by: ParaBellum ]

[Hans]

Out of LOS fire should be unobserved ie you might hear it and see dust but you couldn't observe where exactly it was hitting.

I've fired real artillery into just this situation and yes you can adjust up - but its really swag as to where it is hitting and oddly depends on the quality of the FO and FDC crews to factor in the heights of the trees too.

I fired a lot of artillery onto targets "just behind the hill(s)" I could see. This fire was map based and often done in requests from non-artillery observers. Where in those cases we had radar back up we found that in general FO swho adjusted into dead space tended to underestimate the distance.

As a general rule accuracy would go down-as you would base hits on smoke, dust and flash which is an art in it self.

accuracy of such fire would also be dependent on the skill level of both the FO and indirect system firing.