ARTY SUCKS!!!!!

[Juardis]

Sheesh, go away for a day and your thread gets hijacked

Anyway, went back and watched the PBEM turns. Here is what happened with my 120mm smoke. I targetted a spot for smoke at the begginning of turn 2. Estimated time was 4 minutes for the shells to land. Well, smaller caliber smoke obscured the target point during turns 2-5, but the target point was clear again by the time the rounds started to land. Unfortunately, the smoke barrage landed >150m to the right of where it was supposed to, indicating to me that:

1) since the target was obscured for a period of time the game decided that the target should be considered out of LOS and consequently dropped smoke on the other side of the map

2) a spotting round may have fallen, but since it was a smoke round and there was still smoke on the battlefield, it could have been "lost" or, if the target was considered out of LOS, then no spotting round would have fallen.

So I retargetted the original spot (in LOS again) and the smoke landed >50m to the right of the target. Now I'm down to 14 shells and still have not hit the target.

QUESTIONS:

1) after the initial target is given, why would it becoming hidden change anything? The order is already given, what happens after that shouldn't matter. So if a building blows up and the dust cloud obscures the target, you're screwed. If a tank brews up and obstructs the target, you're screwed. There are too many things that can happen that would break LOS that this is both frustrating and unrealistic IMO.

2) why DO I HAVE TO RETARGET? My FO should do that automatically!!!!

3) and finally, even after I retarget, why is it still off?

[Andreas]

Regarding your last point, I would not really consider 50m to be 'off'. Seems okay to me. Certainly less accurate than CMBO, but not unrealistically so, IMO. Especially considering the footprint of a mortar shooting smoke.

[RSColonel_131st]

What a coincidence.

My german 81mm FO (Veteran) has a target for 50 smoke rounds without LOS. It took him three minutes to get the shells falling...and they are now 350! Meters off, to the back, and into an empty wood near the map edge. Actually he's almost dropping them on his own position.

WTF?

I can understand some problems with targets out of LOS, but 350 meter for a smoke barage? That is very, very useless.

[Redwolf]

Bahl. No LOS -> off target. Not problem there.

The question is: the new CMBB feature where a barrage with LOS may arrive off-target and needs adjusting, does the adjustment work? I have seen several reports that it doesn't - that the adjustment doesn't change the impact point.

Intermedeate loss of LOS due to smoke or movement may or may not have somethign to do with it, but people do report the adjust does nothing, which is probably not right.

[RSColonel_131st]

Sorry, No Los -> Off target yes, maybe 50 to hundred meters. But 350?, almost on the starting zone of the map when it should be in the middle? Why bother using arty then?

[demoss]

Just a quick point with regards artillery accuracy. I've not had problems with most calibres of artillery, the exception being 120mm soviet mortars. This has led me to suspect that this module doesn't have spotting rounds.

Interesting observation. I've only had an artillery accuracy issue once, and that, too, was with a (green) Soviet 120mm mortar battery. I had chalked it up to experience, but perhaps there's something wrong with the 120 battery (I suspect not, because I've seen them in action quite a bit, but it's probably an uncommon problem)?

[demoss]

Sorry, No Los -> Off target yes, maybe 50 to hundred meters. But 350?, almost on the starting zone of the map when it should be in the middle? Why bother using arty then?

If you're going to use it without LOS and without pre-planning, don't. Artillery fire should be observed or should be preplanned map fire. Period. Letting you get use out of artillery without either would be grossly gamey due to abuse of the god-like view you have.

[RSColonel_131st]

Hhmm, that makes non-radio FO's almost useless then because you can not get them into good LOS quick enough when you need them...

I didn't understand this tactic as gamey. I just figured in real life they would have had a map, and if someone told them to target the road crossing, they could do so based on map coordinates.

This also begs the question for me...if artillery is useless in indirect fire (aka, without LOS) then what's the advantage of arty against a standard on map gun?

BTW, someone made a point above about seeing the explosion, even though you can't see the ground. I think that's an interesting thought. In my example, im' firing smoke shells. The FO should be very able to see them above the small threes.

[Michael Dorosh]

Originally posted by Andreas:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Michael Dorosh:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Andreas:

BTW here is one ... and senior poster (I am not at all in favour of the number of posts being shown!)

Senior compared to whom? </font>

[Andreas]

Originally posted by Michael Dorosh:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Andreas:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Michael Dorosh:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Andreas:

BTW here is one ... and senior poster (I am not at all in favour of the number of posts being shown!)

Senior compared to whom? </font>

[Juardis]

Originally posted by Andreas:

Regarding your last point, I would not really consider 50m to be 'off'. Seems okay to me. Certainly less accurate than CMBO, but not unrealistically so, IMO. Especially considering the footprint of a mortar shooting smoke.

Excuse me? Is it not the job of the FO to make sure smoke falls where he wants it? If its off by 50m, that means the units that are depending on that smoke will not benefit. That means the attack will fail. I find it hard to believe that a FO will allow this to happen. He would not have allowed the first barrage to be >150m off target and he would not have allowed the second barrage to >50m off target. He might take longer to get it on target, but certainly not waste 75% of the rounds available to him. If you want to argue realism, then the current system models incompetent FO's just fine in which case my original assertion stands - ARTY SUCKS!!

[CombinedArms]

I have no problem with LOS arty being 50m off target. But I have had an experience where veteran German 105mm FO (division level) with 60 rounds was off by about 250-350m with direct LOS and no amount of retargeting (I tried it four or five times, at first with the green line, and then completely from scratch) allowed me to improve the accuracy at all. The arty fire consistently landed in a swamp and lake behind the main VL, disturbing the tranquility of many ducks, frogs and fish, but doing no harm to the enemy. This failure to deliver the rounds somewhere near the target probably cost me this particular battle.

I guess my question to BTS is this--is this kind of performanc intentional? Is this sort of failure --with no improvement after persistent retargeting--representative of the kind of bad stuff that sometimes happens? (Though I have to wonder why a vet FO would miss a target in plain sight over such a long period of time.) Or does it represent a bug in the system? Is it something you'd like to correct if you can? If it does represent a bug in the system, then I hope you'll be able to address it in one of your future upgrades. It sounds like I may not be the only one.

BTW, I didn't save the files, but it's possible my opponent (a B & T member) did, so if you want copies of the files I can try to get them.

[Andreas]

Juardis, my point was that I believe that in the WW2 context, 50m 'off target' was actually quite precise, and not 'incompetent'.

I would be interested to get some input into that from others. Jon?

The question of wasted rounds when adjusting is a different one. I guess you can justify one volley coming down after the 'cease-fire' has been hollered down the line. That is a limitation of the engine though, and the 60sec turns, I guess.

[White Phosphorus]

This is exactly why I was one of the crazy ones who argued against making the infantry more resilient to panic. Back in the day even 105s falling onto dug in troops would rout them out of their positions within a few turns.

[Agua]

Originally posted by Neutral Party:

I have previously sent game turns to Steve where this kind of problem occured and can only hope some attention is paid to it in the patch.

Joe

Bless you. Bullethead prepared a really nice arty range test setup which allowed a huge number of FOs to be utilized. He couldn't get a single instance of this problem to occur, nor could I, after what had to be at least 400 trials, but I have experienced it in game. It is exceedingly rare and I'm thankful that you were able to save a file and pass it on.

[Juardis]

Andreas, if I understand you correctly, I should be happy to get arty to fall 50m from where I want it because that's about all I can expect? I don't understand this. Again, it is the job of the FO to get rounds on target.

If he's happy that it's off by 50m, then he's incompetent.

If 50m is as accurate as you can expect, then buying arty is a waste of points.

But I suspect that an FO CAN get arty to fall on a point. It may take longer and more spotting rounds to make that happen depending on (in game terms) the experience of the FO, the size of the ordnance, and maybe the country firing it, but it will land on target. And he will not waste 75% of his loadout before getting that to happen.

And I say again, if he has LOS when he gives the order, then a spotting round should land regardless of whether he loses LOS or not. Now, whether the spotting round lands in LOS or not is another question, but a spotting round will land. If he does not see a spotting round is the FO going to say "well, I didn't see it so it must be ok, go ahead and fire 50% of your loadout"? I don't think so. He asks for another spotting round.

[manchildstein (ii)]

perhaps another issue to consider is the use of HE as spotting rounds in cmbo/cmbb...

in squad leader the spotting rounds were considered to be ('blue') smoke. was that wrong?

that's something i've always wondered about, ever since cmbo...

so a number of questions seem to arise here:

1) in 'real life' was HE used as spotting rounds, or was it smoke?

2) in cmbb, can the FO see only the ground where the artillery round is hitting, and not the explosion itself? and if so, does that even matter?

3) should cmbb use less rounds when correcting fire?

4) are the artillery modules too expensive in cmbb?

5) in cmbb, should there be 'battalion-level' spotters available, meaning that they have say - 8 or 12 or even 16 tubes?

[Andreas]

Juardis, at 150m off target I would agree with you. But at 50m my suspicion is that endless firing of spotting rounds is just not realistic, and would not have occured IRL. Once you are 50m near the target the FOO would just ask for FFE, and that's it. The footprint of the rounds coming down should cover your target now. Again, that is how I believe it was done. The reasons for that would be that the firing battery really has better things to do, and that this 'walking' your barrage to the target would alert the target that something was coming. Which is not what you want. But as I said, maybe it was done the way you say?

Now there is an issue with CMBB (and CMBO artillery for that matter) now that I am not happy with, and that is sheaf form and orientation. Couldn't be changed though between the games.

So in terms of realism, I am not unhappy (unless someone tells me that my idea of 'precision' is mistaken) with 50m. In terms of realism I am unhappy with the sheaf though.

[demoss]

I didn't understand this tactic as gamey. I just figured in real life they would have had a map, and if someone told them to target the road crossing, they could do so based on map coordinates.

You can - ahead of time. But if he can't see the crossing, how does he know that fire needs to be called down upon it NOW?

Doug

[JasonC]

50m is certainly close enough in real world artillery terms. You would just fire for effect. Arty sheafs were not all fired in tight patterns meant for point targets, as you see from single batteries in CM unless you specifically order "target wide". It would be much more common to see the "target wide" sheaf width, or to see 3 batteries firing side by side with aim points about 100m apart.

Either way you get a pattern 200m by 200m, about. If the center of that pattern is off by 50m, it still hits the intended point of aim and everything within about 100m of that point of aim. Then enough shells are fired to get the desired level of effect within that wide area.

You don't see people using arty this way in CM because the are trying to "game" the level of control they have over the fall of each shell, to compensate for the in incredibly tight shell budget they are operating under. Each shell must give a very high impact or the mission is considered a waste.

To get a high impact from each shell, you need a high caliber or exposed target or both, a massed target in terms of number of men in the beaten zone, a tight sheaf to overlap the fall of shells with the enemy formation nearly exactly, perfect timing, and perfect targeting. None of which were remotely required for real artillery use, nor possible to achieve.

They just dealt with accuracy by shooting at a larger area, and dealt with still having an impact by firing enough shells at that wider area. CM players don't because they can't afford the shells. Shells are scarcer in CM than in the real deal, while the potential accuracy if everything is perfect (TRP, etc) is higher than real artillery could expect. (From better intel, better coordination with the actions of other arms, etc).

As for one fellow's comment about phone FOs being useless, they either need a good overwatch position that can see most of the potential targets from the start or not far from the start (a hill e.g.), or they need to plan the fire ahead of time. Defenders can do that "reactively" with TRPs, registered concentrations to fire when someone gives the word. Attackers can do it by fire plans - call the fire on turn 1 but delay the time it comes down. Neither strays from the intended target, observed or not. The pre-planned type comes down even if the FO is dead or leaves the map.

"But I don't know where to fire, when, until I see the enemy there". If so, then you need LOS, and therefore either a good observation post, or a radio you can bring to a forward one. That is all quite correct. There is a reason radios are better than phones for FO work. Particularly for attackers, who more often have to move to get LOS to defender locations.

Remember, though, you only need LOS to the target -area-, not to the enemy men. A two story building nearby, or a hilltop, or the front of a treeline, can provide a point of aim even when the enemy himself is lower down or back in woods and so out of sight. This is especially true for large targets, with wide sheafs.

The reason I keep advocating battalion shoot FOs with more ammo but less flexibility, is that I see over and over CM players ares striving for god-like control over the fall of each shell, precisely because those shells are so scarce they regard every other use of them as wasteful. Players should be throwing more shells,or paying less for the ones they do fire, but not nearly so tightly targeted.

In WW II the combatants fired off many hundreds of millions of heavy artillery shells (105mm and up) at each other. There were far more shells used than combatants - more than all the militaries combined, let alone than front line combat troops. Each one did not have to hit 5 people, or even 1 person, for artillery to be effective in the long run.

In CM, a prep fire by 2 rocket FOs firing 128 rockets that hits 13 people would be considered a complete waste. Because it spent 450 points to take out a squad's worth of men. But if you fire 100 million rounds that efficiently, the other guy takes 10 million casualties, which he really can't afford. In one CM battle, driven by point budgeting based on expected effectiveness in one fight, the 13 men are not scarce. But the whole war, it was the 128 rockets that were not scarce.

A prep barrage that fell where nobody was - that would be wasteful. Not one that hit 1/10th of a man per shell fired. At CM prices, you need more like 1 man hit per shell fired - or perhaps half of that with medium calibers - to count a fire mission a success. It is the drive to make each shell 4-9 times as effective, to stretch the limited shell budgets, that makes people try to use tiny sheafs and perfect timing.

[Juardis]

just a point of clarification. If you want smoke, you have no choice of concentrated or wide area fire. You have smoke and that's all. And remember, I said >50m away. It appears the center of the spread is about 90m away from the retargetted point, so I improved the accuracy from 180m to 90m by retargetting, or about half the distance. The closest smoke puff to my retargetted point is 30m away.

[Makes The Jelly Judder]

Could the AI be made to use pre-planned first turn barrages even when it can't see any of your units? Say just select an area of your set up zone at random and fire!

As it stands if the AI is playing the Russians and has bought itself medium to large arty then the combination of AI stoopidness, long delays and inaccuracy makes the AI even more of a pushover than it would have been in CMBO. I don't think I have seen the AI successfully call in arty against any of my anti-tank/IF guns in CMBB either. The arty turns up like 15mins too late and 150m off target, which the AI then retargets but the battle is over before it begins firing again; this is a real handy cap for the AI which used to be quite good at this in CMBO.

The alternative would be to just stop the AI from buying arty for itself as its just a waste of points in the current system.

[WineCape]

Originally posted by Juardis:

just a point of clarification. If you want smoke, you have no choice of concentrated or wide area fire. You have smoke and that's all. And remember, I said >50m away. It appears the center of the spread is about 90m away from the retargetted point, so I improved the accuracy from 180m to 90m by retargetting, or about half the distance. The closest smoke puff to my retargetted point is 30m away.

Exactly! Far from sounding like a yes-man every time Juardis touches on a point that I agree with, this is the difference:

(a) We talking about smoke barrage, not HE FFE

( FO has LOS at smoke fire order

© If the LOS smoke order spotting round is off target initially, the FO should adjust automatically without player input.

I'm happy if HE FFE (with LOS) is about 50m-90m+ off from intended point of impact. No argument there.

Smoke falling 50m-90m+ from intended target with FO having LOS is a complete waste, considering the fast rate that the rounds fall before you have time to adjust, i.e. wasting a high % of your precious load-out.

Trying crossing a river/fjord/bridge with your footies when your FO's LOS smoke order is off by 50m+ is not on. A CO will not order his men to move out if he needs a narrow strip to be accurately smoked for his men to cross succesfully. 50m-90m+ off-target with smoke, even after re-adjustments... Incompetence with a capital I, and NOT realistic IMO.

Nailing the enemy with HE FFE where the LOS fire order is 50m+ off is OK, given the inaccuracy/wide foot-print of HE arty in general.

Or am i missing the point with lower division (battalion downwards) FO's?

Regards,

Charl Theron

[ January 25, 2003, 04:51 AM: Message edited by: WineCape ]

[JasonC]

Winecap - I think the problem you are actually having with your smoke mission is that the sheaf is narrow rather than wide. A long thin oval of smoke oriented along the axis of advance is often not what you want (unless masking one flank I suppose, already far forward). So, the solution would be a "smoke - wide" order.

[PiggDogg]

Juardis & Jason & Guys,

You have seen the "Arty Sucks In BB" threads at BoB. We just have to face it. In BB, arty sucks.

In BO, I was a lover and massive user of arty. However, in BB, to put it succinctly and without much explanation, arty sucks (I keep repeating myself, don't I ).

I doubt that I will purchase much of it unless it is big and probably German. Instead, I'll probably buy good direct fire HE AFVs (T34-85s (seems OK), StH-105s (should be OK), SU152s (I don't know with its sloooow rate of fire and small ammo load), etc.)

Anyone has comments on arty alternatives in BB?

Cheers, Richard :cool:

[ January 25, 2003, 01:13 PM: Message edited by: PiggDogg ]