Artillery Test Fire

[Neutral Party]

I guess nobody told Zhukov

[imported_no_one]

If you are responding to me,I rather doubt that,in any real life situation,any of them were packed into really small "designer created" setup zones.

If you can't understand what I am saying,or why/how prep fire(against attackers in thier setup zones)--IN CM-- is gamey,then there is nothing I can do for you.

[Nemesis Lead]

No-one,

Prep fire against setup zones in QBs are not neccessarily gamey (provided you are on a medium sized map or larger).

In real life, defenders very often shell suspected attack assembly areas.

This REALLY hurts you if you miss--it is a big gamble and defenders are severely punished for "start line fires" that miss.

I have done this three times (mostly for fun) defending in no-rarity games with very cheap Soviet heavy arty. Once, the results were spectacular (80+ kills referenced above), once I "broke even" (killed/routed a platoon with a 64 point barrage) and once I missed completely.

In scenarios with small/known/restricted set up zones or small maps, I agree that this is pretty criminal.

All the best,

Nemesis

[imported_no_one]

Originally posted by Nemesis Lead:

No-one,

Prep fire against setup zones in QBs are not neccessarily gamey (provided you are on a medium sized map or larger).

In real life, defenders very often shell suspected attack assembly areas.

My point exactly.Note the word "suspected" assembly areas.In real life,it would be much,much more unreliable to do this.Not to mention that in real life,no one in their right mind is going to lump together to the degree that you are often forced to by a design.Also,in real life,you may have intel that suggests that they are there,but you can't be sure.In CM,on turn one,you KNOW;no doubt about it.In CM,it can be like shooting fish in a barrel.

***Possible spoiler**.Look at the scenario entitled Jagermeister(?).I believe it comes on the BB CD.While massive arty for the defender is not available,this is just a really good example of restrictive setup zones in CM.I actually asked my opponent if he would be ok with me prep firing against him in this scenario.I had an out-of-LOS 105mm FO,and I had his entire setup zone under observation.He obviously said it would suck,and I agree.

In a QB,you can tell easily,and exactly where your opponents setup zone is.If you have a gridded terrain mod,all you have to do is count the squares.

Medium or larger maps will not necessarily eliminate this problem.Often times the edges of the map aren't overly populated,as the attacker chases the lil flaggies.

I do not care if YOU think it is gamey or not;I do.Others do,as well.I would suggest that you ask before you do it against someone.

Edit to add:

The only possible exceptions,are similar to what you mention.If you find yourself **in a scenario or operation** and you are a defender with heavy arty(rockets...long delay's,etc)the it may be ok.Note that I did not included a QB in which units are purchased.In that case,you should have gotten some TRP's.

Horrible weather in a random QB may also be an exception.IOW,if you find yourself with no other option.

[ May 11, 2005, 11:55 AM: Message edited by: no_one ]

[walpurgis nacht]

Originally posted by Nemesis Lead:

Prep fire against setup zones in QBs are not neccessarily gamey (provided you are on a medium sized map or larger).

It IS gamey to prep bombard the attacker's setup zone in my book even on large maps. Especially once you learn how to measure the setup zones in QBs, so you literally know exactly how far forward the attacker's setup zone is.

[Nemesis Lead]

Guess we agree to disagree then.

[ May 11, 2005, 06:59 PM: Message edited by: Nemesis Lead ]

[edgars]

Originally posted by Walpurgis Nacht:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Nemesis Lead:

Prep fire against setup zones in QBs are not neccessarily gamey (provided you are on a medium sized map or larger).

It IS gamey to prep bombard the attacker's setup zone in my book even on large maps. Especially once you learn how to measure the setup zones in QBs, so you literally know exactly how far forward the attacker's setup zone is. </font>

[ruf9ii]

i cant recall if prep fires are used as defenders, but i cant imagine why you would. all you would need is a bunch of TRP's at key concealments or choke-points.

the trp's (as descriped in the manual) are just points that have been pre-logged by the artillery team. that is they dont have to calculate any new trajectories and velocities, its already been done

[edgars]

TRPs are different, and no problem with using them as defenders.

However prep fire is a plan, which is laid out prior to the battle. And you as a defender can't possibly know the exact minute when the enemy will start to attack. In other words, in real life you don't know at what time there will be a Turn 1.

[Kingfish]

Originally posted by edgars:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Walpurgis Nacht:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Nemesis Lead:

Prep fire against setup zones in QBs are not neccessarily gamey (provided you are on a medium sized map or larger).

It IS gamey to prep bombard the attacker's setup zone in my book even on large maps. Especially once you learn how to measure the setup zones in QBs, so you literally know exactly how far forward the attacker's setup zone is. </font>

[walpurgis nacht]

Originally posted by Kingfish:

Both side's employed spoiling barrages to good effect. I can think of a few that happened during the Normandy campaign.

I was thinking Kursk right off hand.

Of course there are plenty of exceptions. I was just thinking of your typical 1000 point attack/defense QB game with a medium map, where the attacker's setup zone is exactly .5 the size of the defenders so the front end of it is something you can forecast down to the exact pixel. With only 2-3 covered approaches on the forward edge of the setup zone it's just bleeding obvious where to prep bombard. You know me, I'm full of gamey tactics but this one is too rich for me blood :cool:

[Kingfish]

But that tactic cuts both ways. He may guess correctly, and blow away a portion of your force, or he may not. Either way he has locked in one of his most important assets, with no hope of ever using it again.

IMO, a prep barrage by the defender gives the attacker more of an advantage.

[Brent Pollock]

I was musing on this on my way to work this morning...from a scenario design point of view, one way around this is to either:

1. give the attacker a very deep set up zone or;

2. have few or no attacking units start on map, with all starting to arrive several turns in.

A lack of LOS or TRP would also prevent the attacker from smashing the set up zone. For QBs, all bets are off.

Having that said, smashing a set up zone is precisely what every defender always hoped to do in real life. Best anecdote for this is the almost continuous mention of Western Allied units receiving a German defensive barrage after the attacking preparatory barrage had started. If a defender has a line of listening posts and some TRPs, they should be rewarded by being able to dump HE on the attacker.

Originally posted by no_one:

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

[JasonC]

Brent - if the attacker has 400-500m to set up in, fine. If he has 2000 points crammed into 160m along one edge, with 2 woods to put people in and one hill creating low ground, there is no realism in it whatever. Attacking deployments were up to 2 km deep in the real deal.

[GS_Guderian]

It could be ok, if setup BEFORE the 1st turn.

Sadly you have to do it once the game starts, on some maps you are able to see the enemy by then.

Then it has a foul flavour, yes.

[Olle Petersson]

Originally posted by no_one:

Prep fire on an attackers setup zone is gamey as hell.

Is it, really?

"Intel reports show the enemy is building up a high concentration of troops directly in front of your sector. An attack is probably imminent, and your weak units are unlikely to prevent a major breakthrough.

Since no reserve troops will reach you in time we've ordered our corps artillery to blanket the suspected area to break off the attack."

The other option available is to have more and/or better defenders using direct(ed) fire on spotted enemies.

Pointwise it's a simple tradeoff between initial firepower and remaining firepower. My remaining firepower was almost abyssmal.

Depending on the terrain, it can be viewed as gamey to prepfire the small portion of the map actually useful for setup by the enemy. In my case I plastered ~90% of the setup zone in a QB, which includes large areas where I was pretty sure there was no enemies at all.

Originally posted by Kingfisher:

... in real life the other side's forces didn't magically appear arrayed across your front in attack formation either. It took time to assemble these units and bring them up to the front line, time that could have been used by the opposing side to call down a spoiling barrage.

My point exactly. The defender don't know what minute the attack is planned to start, but only hope his barrage will drop before the attackers have moved out.

Cheers

Olle

[ May 15, 2005, 02:39 AM: Message edited by: Olle Petersson ]

[yuvuphys]

You're dropping the rounds the instant the attack starts. As the defender, you can't know exactly when the attack starts, so it seems very gamey to me. If you want to simulate a spoiling barrage, you should simulate that beforehand by giving the attackers some casulaties from the start.

[JasonC]

It really isn't the timing, people. It is the space. Attackers are forced to "overstack" in thin strips along their edge in CM QBs, particularly when cover is limited. Any arty put on cover therefore hits packed attackers. In reality, those attackers would be spaced hundreds of meters further to the rear, with only normal amounts of men in any given body of cover. That a spoiling barrage can land on attackers is realistic. That it lands on them at a time they have to bunch up to 4 times usual densities, has nothing to do with history and everything to do with map size limitations set by CPU power. If you want spoiling barrages, don't do a QB, do a scenario, and give the attacker 500 meters to set up in. Then you can fire prep barrages as the defender to your heart's content, and the effects will be realistic.

[yuvuphys]

Yes, timing is really part of it. The compressed set-up zone creates significant problems, as you assert, but the fact that the defender can always bring down a barrage the instant the attacker's artificial turn limit begins is gamey. In reality, the attacker would simply delay the attack for a little while, then press on. Not possible in CM. The point is that the spoiling barrages are a more strategic decision than is simulated tactically in CM. You have to simulate it like you'd simulate strategic bombing.

[dieseltaylor]

It is times like theese that I wonder if BFC made artillery expensive so as to fudge the situation. Obviously some thought went into this as the instant bombardment was included in after CMBO.

I must admit to not being too excited/worried if someone does spend the money that way. It is a sorry state to legislate against something that could concievably, and no doubt did, happen. I cannot think of a single QB where I have ever suffered from it. Therefore out of 50ish attack/defense I can say it is rare "problem". One might think that if it were a successful tactic it would be well-known and widely used ........... !

BTW my normal caveats I rarely play on small maps and for less than 1500 points. The majority of my games on huge,medium and large maps 2-3000 pointers.

WN

"It IS gamey to prep bombard the attacker's setup zone in my book even on large maps. Especially once you learn how to measure the setup zones in QBs, so you literally know exactly how far forward the attacker's setup zone is."

Regarding Walpurgis Nacht view that prep artillery is gamey on a large map and especially 1000 points on a medium map is too restrictive on cover.

Does that not mean that the defence would very likely have those areas covered as natural jump off points? I always try to spread widely to avoid being obvious - who knows whether a plane will appear first turn : ). I also count start lines and do not always start on it when attacking for the very reason of prep fire - so it is not impossible to avoid is it.

Generally defence is trickier to do than offence so more power to the defender : ) Personally I think it is crap defence so perhaps I should say more options to the defender.

[ruf9ii]

u think defence is harder? each to their own i guess...depends on opponent doesnt it.

but in terms of artillery support, if ur a defender u dont need to prep fire, just set up TRP's where u think they will come. just buy half a dozen so u cover all possible avenues and u should be set.

i've got something to say about should be incorporated into CMx2 as well. instead of having spotters, why could ou have a limited ammount of fire missions, that can be called in by any platoon/company leader? (or any other leader, but i dont usually put higher than company at the front). as long as they have a radio, couldnt it be assumed they have training, or at least someone with em with training.

[Brent Pollock]

Yah - that's what I was getting at with "give the attacker a very deep set up zone".

I just remembered that in my "WBRP - TAHGC TOBRUK #X" series of CMAK battles, some have the defender's FOs starting "PANICKED" (or maybe just "PINNED"...can't remember now) explicitly so they cannot drop turn one barrages.

Hmmm...think I'll add that as a design tip at the Proving Grounds.

Originally posted by JasonC:

Brent - if the attacker has 400-500m to set up in, fine. If he has 2000 points crammed into 160m along one edge, with 2 woods to put people in and one hill creating low ground, there is no realism in it whatever. Attacking deployments were up to 2 km deep in the real deal.