Artillery Test Fire

[laze and blaze]

I did a test with German arty last night. I set up one company of Russian infantry, dug-in along with some ATGs. I used various calibers of arty/mortars to see the results. Then I got to the rocket artillery and fired the 300mm rockets. There isn't even a comparison to the devistating effects of rockets vs. arty. The rocket arty wiped them out!

I didn't used to use prep fire, but the rockets would definately be worth it. Does anyone use heavy arty for prep fires? Or do you just stick with rockets?

[JasonC]

Bigger is certainly better with arty. The on map 150s are so effective some players ban them. Their effect is magnified even further against the AI, because it does not know enough to avoid bunching up, it uses predictable routes that can be "plugged" by one, it doesn't use assymmetric weapons to take them out and wait for that to be accomplished before proceeding with infantry, etc. Small bits of wire and AP mines can also create "stupid AI tricks" like this.

Do I always use big rockets for prep fire? No. Not because they aren't accurate enough - that is only a problem with small rockets. Big ones hurt what you point them at. The issue is, is there anything there, where you are aiming? If there is you hurt it. If there isn't, or only a few teams or half of one spread out platoon, you blow a huge arty module and get little in return.

It is the "clean misses" that kill you. All prep has this issue because you don't get to do any recon before you pick where to fire it. On a small map, terrain analysis can get you good targets. When the cover is fairly sparse, likewise, though then you have the problem that only limited forces set up in each scrap of it. (And good players use trenches to avoid being in the most predictable spots etc). On a big map, there are many more places the defenders could just not use at all, even though they are plausible areas to make use of.

You can get a clean miss with tube arty. It is easier, even, because the pattern is smaller. But you don't have to pay as much for each area you "test". And that means you can hit a lot more places, which combined are much less likely to be empty. For example, as the Russians I use prep fire a lot.

My favorite module for it is the 122mm gun (not howitzer) module, taken as conscripts. With rariety off, this costs 77 points, and gives 30 shells each respectable blast. If I put one of those on a wood area that does contain enemy, they get messed up. Not wiped out typically, but seriously messed up. And for the cost of big stuff, I can have a whole battalion of these, firing at 3-4 areas. I can easily get wrong one spot where the enemy might be. But I'm not going to be wrong about all 3.

[laze and blaze]

How many FOs would that be in 122mm? And how many rounds would be dropped?

Won't the squads you hit with 122mm prep fire recover by the time you get up there to attack them?

The rocket artillery was killing the squads outright in my test. While the lower calibers (120mm and below) were creating casualties and breaking a few squads in the impact area, but they would still be able to fight later I think. How bad is a squad with the "rattled" dot on the defense vs. on the offense? Do most players consider a rattled squad a right-off in the offense? How about the defense?

[securityguard]

Also don't be fooled into thinking the 300mm rockets and 300mm incendiary are the same when you purchase rockets because they are not! Incendiary is much less powerful with the trade off of possibly causing fire. Personally incendiary is very disapointing, the fire effect is wholely undermodeled (or possibly isn't - I haven't found any information on these rockets in real life).

300mm rockets are good against trenches but any other type of artillery, including weaker rockets, have trouble. I played an operation not too long ago where the axis force, advancing, had 50% more forces than the defending force with tons of reinforcements. The trade off was the terrain - very flat fields of wheat or brush with sparse tree lines.

Anyways, sometimes he would dump lesser rockets (150mm?) along with normal artillery on one trench line. There was some effect but not nearly enough for me to lose the line. I had a platoon and a half of men holding out several battles versus infantry, MG fire and the occasional tank round (most got hit by AT guns before they could do serious damage - direct HE vs trench is very deadly). It really broils down to luck with other types of off-board artillery, even the semi-big stuff!

[JasonC]

With rarity off, a Russian 122mm gun FO costs 70 points as conscripts and gets 30 rounds, each 188 blast. That is considerably more powerful than German 105s or either side's 120mm mortars. They typically half squad and break the units they hit, but do not eliminate them. The worst hit squad e.g. a near tree burst, can be reduced to a rifleman or two left, effectively eliminated.

I generally delay these shoots with QQQ, to occur between turns 5 and 10 typically, around the time my infantry is approaching. More toward the 5 end if the idea is to suppress their ranged fire, more toward the 10 end if the idea is to immediately precede an infantry attack.

The 152mm gun FO costs only 64, gets much more powerful shells (334 blast), but only 20 of them. They do as much damage, a few more wipe outs, but somewhat spotty coverage (i.e. sometimes half land outside the desired cover, the least hit unit within is just pinned, etc).

When rariety is off, the Russian 300mm rockets are a reasonable alternative. They cost about twice as much - 132 points for 36 rounds, each 459 blast. It is like putting 2 of the tube FOs on a target. For a large enough target you are sure will have serious forces present, that is a better deal, because you will kill them more thoroughly. But you are betting twice as much that there are serious enemy forces at that location.

The Germans big rockets are another kettle of fish. They have 633 to 708 blast, 50% higher than even the Russian 300mms (which are about the power of a German 170mm round, each). And they have much larger ammo loads as well - 72 to 90 rounds per module.

I consider those far too expensive to be practically useful, and deep into overkill on what they are aimed at. These modules cost 525 to 600 points even taken as greens, as much as 8-9 of the cheap Russian tube arty prep modules. Attackers get 3:2 odds. One of these needs to destroy an entire company to break even. If there is an entire company under their footprint, they will destroy it. But you can't count on knowing exactly where a whole company will be, at set up, on it being deployed tightly enough, etc.

That's with rariety off. When instead it is "variable", typically some one type has decent rariety and caliber combined, but most of the truly big stuff is seriously overpriced by paying +100% premiums etc. As the Russians, what I do is look for anything 122mm or higher with cheap rariety, take it as low quality and use it for prep. Sometimes with a 120mm mortar module added for "reactive" fire at spotted targets, rather than a fire plan.

A decent German prep fire module they can actually afford is a green 170mm, with 20 rounds of 452 blast. It still costs 164 points, more than the Russian 300mm rockets with only half as many shells. But with attacker odds, you can afford to destroy a platoon with them.

The real strength of German arty is reasonable rariety, reasonable reactiveness, from their powerful 150mm divisional FOs. Those cost around 250 points for 35 shells, each 299 blast. Which is a lot of points for not much ammo, and would certainly be wasted if fired as prep.

The way to use them is instead to "walk" their aim point around, dribbling in 4-8 shells at a time over the course of 10 turns or so. A single "flight" of them often breaks a platoon, half squads the worst hit, etc. Not annihilation, but they make it very hard to concentrate for infantry fighting. They hang over the other guy's head, forcing him to dodge spotting rounds, give ground, etc. In the case of defenders, a few of them arrive at a TRP at the end of any turn they are ordered, and you get a lot of those blasts in sequence.

Americans use their 155mm modules in much the same way. When CMAK battle sizes allow them, anyway. (Reactive CMAK arty is seriously overpriced). The Germans can afford things like 120mm mortars in CMAK. As for the Brits, I find their 5.5 inch useful though somewhat spotty shell coverage from not enough shells (like the Russian 152mm gun FO in that respect, but reactive and twice as expensive).

[laze and blaze]

It would be interesting to get several people to set up battle positions for a German defense, then have each participant prep fire against their opponents with Russian 3x122mm prep fires as you suggested in your post. Sort of a self-taught artillery prep fire clinic. If you get good at predicting platoon BP locations, then prep fires could really get dangerous.

[JasonC]

Part of it is getting good at prediction of positions used, part of it is simply making the maneuver plan correspond to what the fire plan does for you. If 1 out of 3 misses completely, but only because a wood you needed at turn 12 was clear of the enemy, your booby prize is those woods without fighting for them. Of course, the main thing is to hurt the enemy with your available shells. But the overall role of prep fire is to reduce infantry defenders along a definite series of positions, because you intend to send your main body through that series of positions - or through areas that only defenders on those positions could hurt you, along.

[Nemesis Lead]

Guys,

Very interesting thread that got me thinking....

I save the final results of my 100+ QBs. I took at look at the results and noticed is that 80%+ of the time, human opponents are dug into cover (trees, heavy buildings, etc.) near flags. Further, units are often packed fairly close together in order to take advantage of leadership bonuses. This goes for newbies AND vets (much as vets would like to deny it).

Arty in the 150mm+ category will break units that it hits. For timing, you have two choices. If you are armor heavy, you might want to fire immediately to kill AT guns that might threaten your tanks. If you are infantry heavy, you might (as Jason C suggests) delay your fire to coordinate with your infantry assault in order to give as little time as possible for your opponent to recover/shift reserves.

One item I do disagree with--the artillery does not actually have to "pay" for itself by destroying/breaking 150% of its value in enemy units in a QB attack. If the arty does break a section (even a platoon) of your opponent's line and you concentrate your attack on that part of his line, you can often overrun flags easily (here is where you get the points back) and force him to deploy his reserve and otherwise come out of static defenses. Hence, you can turn a static battle into a mobile fight that almost always favors the attacker.

One other thing...prep fires can be used on the defensive. If you look at the map, you can often (but not always) determine the enemy's most likely route of attack (look at flags and covered approaches to those flags). You also know roughly where the enemy start line is (forward edge is about half the depth of your defensive zone) and you can target your arty accordingly. My best result was vs. Meteorite, a pretty good player. Arty fired on turn 1 caused 83 casualties and broke the reinforced infantry company that was to attack me. The arty is especially lethal because your enemy is not dug in and thus extremely vulnerable. Again, both newbies and vets tend to concentrate forces and bunch up on the "start line."

Defensive fire with TRPs and conscript FOs are also great and less of a gamble, but you often will not get the concentrated effect that you get with "start line" fires.

The thing that puts a damper on all of this... You can only take advantage of all of this with rarity off or (in some cases) with variable rarity. With standard rarity, such tactics are far too expensive and since most people play QBs with standard rarity, it is not often that you can deploy such tactics.

Hope this helps,

Nemesis

[JasonC]

"artillery does not actually have to "pay" for itself by destroying/breaking 150% of its value in enemy units"

You managed to misrepresent me there, then disagree. The second I can argue with and will. The first I just have to correct. Because the attack has odds, he can afford a less than 100 to 100 exchange. He can afford a 150 (his) to 100 (the defender) exchange.

That does not put the bar way up at 150% of the cost of the module. It puts it down at 1/1.5 = 67% of the cost of the module. Which is still over a company for the big German rocket FOs, since those cost 525-600 points even with rariety off.

Next, does it really have to pay that much? You say no, because it can weaken a key point etc. Marginally possible, not practical in my experience. Say it is a 1000 point size battle and you are attacking, and therefore have 1500 points, with up to 375 available for arty. Say you spend 300 there. I put the bar at 200, but suppose all you do is deal with some supposedly useful portion of the line without clearing my level - you disrupt 100 points of guys, one platoon about.

Well, what are the remaining odds? Your wholeforce besides the prep is 1200. His whole force besides the allegedly key bit you hurt is 900. Odds 4:3, down from 3:2. Is he really weaker for his lack of that platoon, than you would be stronger with another infantry company, or medium tank platoon? Very unlikely. But you attack through it and get key terrain and make him do xyz. Um, wildly implausible as results of losing a mere platoon out of a 1000 point force.

You don't have to annihilate the point totals described - breaking them can be enough, if you follow up so he can't rally etc. But most of the suppression effects of arty are gone in 2 minutes, and nearly all are gone in 5. What you don't kill break or rout is not going to be hurt much, in the long run. Fights just aren't that short, and defenses aren't taut ropes that come apart when one platoon gets messed up. Defenses get platoons messed up all the time as a matter of course.

I described the effect of getting cleared terrain as a booby prize when you miss. That is what it is, a booby prize. The main idea has to be to hurt the enemy seriously. The effect you want is, you bring more than enough infantry, he has only enough, you then cut that infantry down by a third to a half with big HE both prep fire and on map, and his remaining infantry can't stand up to the resulting 2, 3, 4 to 1 odds.

You won't get that effect dropping a full company from your infantry force to buy prep fire, if that prep fire only musses the hair of a single platoon. No matter where that platoon is.

[Nemesis Lead]

Hi Jason C,

Have a lot of respect for your opinions and knowledge of WW2. Agree that I messed up your exchange rate.

Having conceded that, your attrition theories (dealt with in far more detail in other posts, so please forgive me for digressing and discussing them here) need to account more for OBJECTIVES/FLAGS, which are worth significant points and POSITIONING FOR FUTURE SUCCESS.

I will deal with each in turn.

OBJECTIVES/FLAGS

A large flag (300 points) is worth more than a Panther tank, a good sized arty strike or a couple platoons of veteran infantry. You can be downright wasteful (heavy losses and expenditure of ammo) crushing a portion of your opponent's line and then reclaim all of the "wastage" by grabbing valuable objectives and (even more importantly) by positioning yourself for future success.

POSITIONING YOURSELF FOR FUTURE SUCCESS

By this I mean....a rupture and penetration of an enemy MLR usually puts you in a position to roll up your opponent's line (especially in 1000-1500 point QBs where most opponents do not refuse their flank, do not defend in depth and do not keep signficant reserves) by pitting many of your units vs. just a few of his at any given time.

A long way of saying...one should not slavishly adhere to the "attritional exchange rate" stuff when it comes to penetrating the MLR. You will get all the points back (and much more) via the points for objectives and by destroying your enemy in detail when you roll his flank up/rape his vulnerable rear area units.

Look at the Soviets in WW2. The took absolutely horrible losses rupturing German MLRs. However, onces those MLRs where ruptured, the often mauled the Germans via encirclement, rolling up lines, pursuit, breaking down the combined arms team, forcing the Germans to abandon fortified positions and then killing them as they moved, etc.. The Germans did this to the Soviets. The Allies did this to the Germans in Normandy (the exchange rate was equal until the German MLR collapsed and then the exchange rate favored the Allies in a big way).

On a much smaller scale, this is how the best CM players win.

To use your own example against you. To spend 300 points (actually this is way too much since rarity is off and people are using Soviet/German arty in all the examples cited above) on arty to render ineffective one infantry platoon (worth 100-150 ponits) AND (you left this out) penetrate an enemy MLR/grab a flag IS WELL WORTH IT.

It also seems you think it unrealistic that the effective loss of one platoon is a catastrophe in a QB. Well, it is when a company sized force surges into that gap in the MLR. Granted flanking fire may cause some casualties. Maybe even moderate casualties. But when my company grabs a flag, pivots and start to roll up your line...

Be careful not reduce CM to a grinding affair where your only objective is to achieve a positive exchange rate AT ALL TIMES. Ultimately, you have to have a positive exchange rate, but THAT IS AT THE END OF THE GAME. IT IS PERFECTLY OK TO BE "WASTEFUL" IF IT POSITIONS YOU FOR LONG TERM SUCCESS AND/OR ALLOWS YOU TO ACHIEVE VALUABLE OBJECTIVES.

I am happy to provide a demonstration if you like.

Nemesis, out.

[JasonC]

Sorry, I understand your thesis I just disagree with it. I consider it an ideological maneuver theory drawn from four echelon levels higher, not a CM tactical reality.

MLRs aren't "penetrated" because there is one less platoon in them. An MLR is a firepower integrated position or it isn't an MLR. Every subformation's fire assignment is the ground in front of others, not just itself.

And you don't keep anything flag-wise if the enemy defeats your force, and you do get everything if the defenders are all destroyed. It doesn't matter when.

And 300 points on arty (which needn't be one module, it might be four) is exactly what we are talking about, that only get one platoon. If a single 100 point module takes out a platoon, of course it is working, because it is succeeding in pure attrition terms.

I think it is merely bad advice. I don't see how you'd "demonstrate" it. You'd have to deliberately blow 300 points of prep fire arty and hit only one platoon with it - e.g. a full German 150mm module QQQ fired at one wood. But you might hit more than a platoon, you might hit absolutely nothing. Arranging before you hit "go" for the net outcome to be good exploitation of a bad prep fire shoot, strikes me as something you'd need the defender's active cooperation to arrange. It is something that does happen in real fights, but not something anybody plans on, as the attacker.

If instead you recon and locate the supposedly key spot beforehand, it isn't prep fire is it? And usually, you wouldn't blow a whole 150mm module on it. Maybe a whole 100 point module, or half of a 105mm or 150mm one. But reactive fire tends not to be conducted by whole modules until dry. Also, they take 4 minutes to land after the delay, etc. So it would be 10 minutes from initial aim to exploitation.

More normal for a reactive fire mission is the aim point is walking around anyway, so it only takes 2-3 minutes there, and then only a 1.5 to 2 minutes of shells are used. Net time, 4-5 minutes, with the enemy not knowing it is coming for the first 1-2. But that means spending only 60, 75, 90 points worth of shells, typically. (Half a 120mm module, half a 105mm module, a third of a 150mm module).

That few shells only need to break half a platoon to work in pure attrition terms. A big prep fire is much more demanding, it needs to hit serious defenders or it weakens the whole attack. You can easily throw away half of your attacker's numerical edge with essentially nothing to show for it.

[ May 09, 2005, 07:23 AM: Message edited by: JasonC ]

[Nemesis Lead]

Jason,

Horsefeathers? I like the overwhelming majority your posts, but find your arrogance in lecturing experienced CM players a bit disconcerting (you really need to work on this). Time to de-bunk portions (not all) of this attrition-based theory of yours.

You seem to assume that CM opponents always confront you with an integrated MLR. In reality, you are much more likely to face platoon-sized strongpoints. They may be mutually supporting, but having a platoon rendered ineffective puts you into a heap of trouble as I will explain (again) below:

Point of fact--a medium sized map is over 800 meters across. Most opponents defend with a company of infantry (occassionally reinforced by a platoon) in a 1000 point QB. If flags are spread out (which they often are), each platoon could find itself with a frontage of nearly 300 meters to hold (and the platoon will be no more than 80-100 meters across if you want to take advantage of command bonuses--less in restrictive terrain). Further, if an opponent holds an infantry reserve (not likely) or concentrates his defense (very likely), his frontages may increase much further on the "open" side of the map.

Small arms fire (HMGs excepted) loses effectiveness very quickly beyond 100 meters, especially if the attacker knows how to use cover and suppressive fires/smoke. Losing a defending platoon means that unless two platoons were tightly tied in (somewhat rare, actually), the surviving platoon will be hard pressed to stop (much less destroy) your COMPANY (or more and with supporting heavy weapons) as it surges through the gap since it will be firing at you from beyond 100 meters (and probably much more). HMGs may slow you, but you are likely to break through if you are using vets.

I do this all the time, Jason. The big danger is that your arty misses and you have to slog your way through. Even then, you are still likely to break through. The question is--will you have the strength left to pivot and roll up your opponent's line? Often, this will not be the case if the money that you spent on arty has been wasted on a strike that misses. But then, the pre-planned bombardment is all about taking this risk, isn't it? This risk is why I don't often do this.

The only plausible counterargument that one might have is that flags are often concentrated on one side of the map and the defender does not have to defend the full 800 meters. The solution: Attack the open flank and roll up your opponent from the side--CM defenses invariably face forward and (again) few people refuse their flanks. Force them out of their forward facing holes and into mobile battle!

Also--I take SERIOUS issue with your supposition that you primary goal should be to destroy the defender. When two GOOD CM players meet, it is VERY, VERY rare that one force will be destroyed or forced to surrender. Save your finished games--you will note that at the end of a game 40% or more of the defending infantry usually survives (in many cases, the survivors will not even fire a shot because they are on the part of the line that was not attacked). Personally, in my 100+ QBs I have NEVER had an autosurrender forced on me because my force was destroyed. When I do force autosurrenders on others, my opponent is usually a newb who put all his eggs in a few expensive units that get destroyed. CAPTURING FLAGs, CONCENTRATING FORCE, and MANUEVERING TO GAIN POSITIONAL ADVANTAGE are the keys to victory on the attack. You get good attrition results from CONCENTRATION AND MANUEVER. You get points from FLAGs to offset the losses and firepower "wasteage" you incurred penetrating the MLR.

Jason--you usually give good advice. In this case, you are giving very bad advice. A attrition-based strategy is unimaginative and adherents will never join the ranks of great CM players.

Again, I will demonstrate this to you in a game if you like.

Best Regards,

Nemesis

[Nemesis Lead]

Hi Jason,

I see you edited your post by withdrawing your "horsefeathers" comments and generally making it much less condescending.

Thanks for that, as your original post made me pretty mad.

Always up for a game, if you are willing. I usually play on weekends.

Nemesis

[ May 09, 2005, 08:31 AM: Message edited by: Nemesis Lead ]

[walpurgis nacht]

Originally posted by Nemesis Lead:

I save the final results of my 100+ QBs. I took at look at the results and noticed is that 80%+ of the time, human opponents are dug into cover (trees, heavy buildings, etc.) near flags. Further, units are often packed fairly close together in order to take advantage of leadership bonuses. This goes for newbies AND vets (much as vets would like to deny it).

You won't find me bunching up! :)Unless it's a Tuesday and I'm playing Flenser.

Useful post Nemesis. I assume this is the Nemesis from over at CMHQ? I couldn't agree with you more about prep bombardments being a waste. With few exceptions I never do this for the reasons you outlined. One note to mention that is at least worth considering on this topic is that arty is more effective in CMAK (than BB). It's not a drastic difference, but it's enough that arty should clearly be thought of differently. I would much sooner consider prep bombardment with light FOs in AK.

In contrast I tend to agree with Jason more, at least philosophically about destroying the enemy forces being a higher priority than the flags. Certainly it isn't black and white, and you can often use control over an enemy flag, to lure him into positions to better destroy his forces, and so on. Best to use both in your tactical thinking for the synergy.

As to most games end with the plenty of enemy forces still on the board . . well, in my experience that's just because my opponents tend to surrender or something well before the time limit is up.

[imported_no_one]

Why won't you people grow up.Stop leaning on the little QB's and flaggies like a childhood blankie.Play a huge advance/assualt operation PBEM against a valued and liked opponent--don't start one versus someone you have never played before.I have said this until I am blue in the face.No one seems to listen.

In QB's it is all but impossible for one side or the other to completely eliminate anything.In an operation it is different.In an advance/assualt operations EVERYTHING is different.Much more realistic,much more valuable for experience,etc.

In regard to some of the things that Nemisis Lead posted.The reason that the majority of advice given on this board doesn't work for people is because the advice given is so broad.JasonC always talks about some perfect battle on some perfect battle map.Most everyone else talks about weee little QB's and flaggies,I talk about huge operations.This,in my opinion,is why some advice seems wrong,some of the time.

Ultimately,any narrow-minded way of thinking is wrong.Sometimes you gotta do this,sometimes you gotta do that....

[JasonC]

Nemesis, if your opponents defend spread across the whole map without a reserve in one thin line without moving, then they are idiots, so what, means nothing. (And why would I think you are a good player? I have no reason to, certainly not from anything you've said). If you hang a platoon out to dry because the computer put a flag someplace stupid of course you lose both.

A deployment is meant to (1) defend the defenders by integrating them with one another and making them difficult to get at and (2) to be robust, flexible, and make good use of terrain (3) to kill as many attackers as possible in chosen traps. If it also holds 2/3rds of the flags, gravy. Ignore the freaking flags, stay alive and deliver all your ammo into the enemy main body.

And I wasn't talking about autosurrender, I am talking about winning the force on force engagement, so you are left with a force that completely outclasses the remaining enemy, and you can do whatever you like. Which is what usually happens in my experience, to one side or the other. Close fights are rare. (Also, just as an aside, a 1000 point defense based on infantry typically has 4 to 6 infantry platoons).

You say you surge through the position of one dead platoon with a company and roll up the flanks regulary, ignoring fire beyond 100m. To me that just says, your opponents don't know what they are doing. It is very easy to hold attackers in any open ground long enough to make short, simply platoon repositionings. A main body, defending or attacking, is always to be built around a higher HQ, to be flexible in deployment - anybody tied to 40m leading strings doesn't understand the command system.

You then go on to say you don't use prep fires because they might miss. Um, hello, what was the subject under discussion in this thread? Who was the one maintaining that you can't afford to spend a company worth of points on a prep fire unless you can be sure it takes out serious enemy forces? What were you promising to demonstrate, that you think you are good at CM, or that you could spend 300 points on a prep fire, only mess up one platoon, and still make it pay through dynamic synergies?

[Nemesis Lead]

Walpurgis--it is me Nemesis from CMHQ. You and I need to get another game in to break our 1 to 1 deadlock (I really hate tie records). Your turn to attack. Just PLEASE don't use any pre-planned bombardments on me...

Jason C--you managed to misinterpret what I said again. I am not saying that opponents usually defend the whole map. I am saying that they often, out of necessity, do not present you with continuous (or in some cases even supporting) MLRs and attackers can often take advantage of this to concentrate overwhelming force (including heavy arty) against a section of the opponent's line, rupture it, and turn his flank. Military Strategy 101--nothing genius here. My point all along is that you cannot think in purely attritional terms. Sometimes you have to "invest" (i.e., accept a less than favorable resource exchange ratio) upfront to reap rewards later.

Me a good player? I guess there is only one way for you to find out, but twice you have not responded to my challenges. Frankly, I think you know better.

Also funny how you seem to regard anyone with a slightly different point of view than you as an idiot (too bad people did not see your "Horsefeathers" post that you took down). Is it possible there is truth in what BOTH of us are saying or is everything black and white, right and wrong (with you being right)? You seem to have issues with a multitude of people in this community.

Is it them OR...just maybe....is it you?

[JasonC]

P.S. on the "you should respect us experienced players" complaint, this sort never seems to get what I am about, here. I don't write for experts and I frankly don't care what they think of me or of what I write. I write advice for typical CM players, calling 'em as I see 'em, not as you lot do.

If you want to give them your own advice, nobody is stopping you. I think it is great when e.g. Walpurgis gives his own tactical tips. But I'll disagree with any such advice I don't consider sound (for typical players), all I please.

As for changing my opinion of you or your methods, fergetaboutit. I have neither the time nor the inclination to track your various monster egos, and I'm sure you don't give a lick about mine. If you care what I think of you (I can't imagine why you would, but if) the one way you can improve said opinion, is to be truly helpful to average CM players here.

I don't give a rats rear how well you play CM and I never will. How well you help others, that I care about.

[JasonC]

As for the usefulness of overrunning thin enemies with concentrated maneuver groups, sure I understand that. I think it is a lousy way to spend arty, which you shouldn't need for it when conditions are good for a local many on few. A wee blast of half a module to mess up one platoon, fine, I already explained that can pay for itself in pure attrition terms.

But no, I continue to think the statement that you can and should overpay arty shells that do little, just to break a particular spot that is supposedly magically more important, no, I think that is stupid 9 times out of 10 and bad advice. If you can't get in with half a cheap module and maneuver forces, you won't improve matters by dropping a full 150mm module on one platoon.

If you are going to spend that kind of arty all at once, you better have the majority of a company under the beaten zone. You don't put that kind of firepower were he ain't to help an end run, you put it where he is. If you are hitting where he ain't with your maneuver forces, you won't need 250-300 points of arty to get through his "ain't" area.

[walpurgis nacht]

In my experience, the more inexperienced your opponent, the more useful arty is. It becomes seriously limited in value with great players . . . who simply will not bunch up their troops.

I think it could be useful to break away from the philosophical here and lay out just exactly HOW arty is most effectively used. There are so many points to make, but the one that strikes me the hardest and I see it against virtually every player I play against is: Don't blow it up just because you can!!! Wait until your are close enough to capitalize on the suppression/routing by COMPLETELY DESTROYING THE INTENDED TARGET. That means sucking it up and advancing through MG fire and the like. Once you're close enough hide and rest your boys up ready to thrust. Let the arty loose. Throw out a split squad to draw fire. Watch the arty drop them, charge, and clean them pinned troops up like a true capitalist bastard.

[Nemesis Lead]

We are done here. Laz and Blaz got much more than he bargained for.

[laze and blaze]

Yes I did! It was somewhat instructive however.

[ruf9ii]

ive got another question regarding artillery.

a couple of days ago a mate and i had a hotseat game (5000 pts, attack/defend). i spend a whooole bunch of points on the large arty (8"howitzer and 210mm) and prep fires along his whole front.

about 10(?) turns later the salvos stopped coming in and there was nothing left alive to greet me...nothing worth mentioning anyways.

this seemed to work great, but upon reading wat u guys have posted, it appears my enemy just didnt set up very well...

ive also got a comment about the usefulness of artillery. well, the incendiary rockets more precicely... i think u dont have to get a high conventration of enemy for them to work. just dump em where u want to enter and if there is anybody there, clean up. if nobody is there you've found yourself a whole to work through.

of course a half squad recon is a whole lot cheaper, but i dont think it is as effective in that only one enemy may 'pop-up' and eliminate it in half a turn.

[Olle Petersson]

Here's my take on the issue:

Rockets are good for area fire. Use them, en masse, to upset large areas, not point targets.

Quite a while ago I did this in a quite large CMBO PBEM.

Playing as defending German, with low quality troops, I got myself four modules each of 155mm and 210mm rockets, together with a bunch of TRPs. (I still had points left to get some tube artillery as well, to support my infantry.)

I set those rockets up as prep fire, targeted side by side on four TRPs with one module of each calibre for each TRP. That was sufficient to cover almost all of my opponent's setup zone! (All I left was a small 25m strip at the far rear of the map, expecting my opponent to have just about nothing stationary that far behind with a covering ridge some 100m ahead.)

Why risk missing the enemy when you can make sure you hit 'em all in the first blow?

The rockets really messed up all troops in the huge area covered! Problem for me was that the opponent really did start with everything on the rear edge of the map, only moving a few scouting units ahead into my kill zone...

My choice of arty was based on tests I did balanced with cost efficiency.

The 155mm rockets are good at making infantry run, much like 8cm mortars. They're cheap!

210mm rockets really hurt running infantry, and direct hits take out armoured vehicles. They're affordable in smaller quantities.

300mm rockets are grim reapers, but they cost a bundle!

Cheers

Olle

[imported_no_one]

Prep fire on an attackers setup zone is gamey as hell.I am glad it didn't work for you.