Integrating indirect fires

[Redleg Bob]

In CMXX I have two strategies for the integration of indirect fires:

1. Take an FO and sit him on key terrain overwatching what I anticipate to be the decisive point in the engagement.

2. Plan a schedule of fires and hope that my manuever remains synchronized with my fires for the duration of the operation.

Both of these techniques require a degree of foresight that I don't necessarily possess with as much consistency as I'd like. Is there a better way?

At a broader level, why is it that only FOs can call for fire? Why can't the maneuver commander drop down to the fires net? Why can't an FO call any asset available? It seems like my "81 FO" should be able to drop to the 105 FDC and put bigger rounds on target? Finally, why can't my FO set the shell/fuze combo? Did WWII cannon batteries not carry time fuzes and PD? Is all this done for historical accuracy or for playability purposes?

I guess someone has to be an FA geek, and I it seems that that someone is me ...

[Tigrii]

I don't know about your second half, but if you are having trouble getting your FOs to be able to effectively enage enemy troops, this might help. Don't try timed preplanned barrages, they take way too much foresight to make them work. Just put a FO on a hill with optimum LOS. If it's a radio FO then you can load it into a vehicle and move it to a different LOS point if it becomes necessary.

[RSColonel_131st]

I think restricing Arty to FOs (and only a certain type for each FO) is a game modeling thing, that allows to put a certain price on every arty module.

Since in CMBB most battles are balanced by equal points on both sides, arty must have a certain value. If every 81mm FO could call 105mm and every company commander could call 81mm, then that would screw up the balancing game.

As for employing them...on the attack you'll usually find the enemy close to the flags, so you'll need an arty guy with LOS to your flags. On the defense place them so that they can cover most of the open ground further out.

For a large attack scenario, motorizing FOs (buying Radio FOs) certainly is a very good idea. While the AI may sit directly on flags, pre-planned against human opponents tends to be soooo useless - unless the map clearly has only very limited cover for the defender.

[Joachim]

Originally posted by Adam_L:

Take the risk and include the FO with your maneuver elements. Just be cautious enough with him -- let your squads have a safe boundary ahead of him and don't move him in the open if fire will likely be taken. Works best with radios. Also keep calling fire on the next bit of possibly occupied terrain, so that it will start to fall just as you engage. You can always cancel it before much falls if the enemy isn't there.

If you move him, make sure he is not the only unit moving in the area. Pack him with the second wave or the main body if you use many scouts.

Guess who's that loner moving onto that hill...

Gruß

Joachim

[Shosties]

JasonC's take on how to emulate what the Russians actually did in the context of CMBB...

http://www.battlefront.com/cgi-bin/bbs/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=23;t=007977#000019

In essence, buy as many conscript wire FOs as you can (most 76 mm, some 120 mm mortar) and build a barrage fire plan. LOS for the FOs will then cease to be an issue.

Naturally this isn't something that will likely work for you right out of the box, but will require learning through experience.

[tar]

I think restricing Arty to FOs (and only a certain type for each FO) is a game modeling thing, that allows to put a certain price on every arty module.

Since in CMBB most battles are balanced by equal points on both sides, arty must have a certain value. If every 81mm FO could call 105mm and every company commander could call 81mm, then that would screw up the balancing game.

Actually pricing isn't the issue. With generic FOs and other authorized observers, you could still charge for the amount and type of artillery that is actually made available to the player. You would still buy a limited amount of artillery.

I believe that the real reason for the restriction is to reduce the flexibility in the use of artillery. The great command and control, coupled with the amazing integrated overview of the battlefield already gives the players close to godlike control of the engagement. Also, it has been observed that players are much more precise and surgical in their use of artillery vis-a-vis real life. Barrages tend to be much shorter and adjusted more often.

To offset this precision use of artillery assets, one method is to make the control more centralized than it was in (at least certain) armies. There may have been other possible ways to do this, but the current game engine chose restricting the number and flexibility of potential forward observers. I personally wish that there were, for example, time delays not only in the giving of orders, but also in their cancelation.