Ammo resupply

[Brian]

Originally posted by Michael emrys:

Sounds to me like something improvised by this crew on an ad hoc basis. I've never heard of it before either, though I'm willing to have my horizons widened.

Michael

Its actually a fairly standard tactic with towed AT guns. Rarely do they stand and fight in real life as they do in CM, slugging it out, round for round with a tank. They'll fire a few rounds, if they don't score a hit, then they'll limber up and scoot.

While best on the defensive, obviously, its also a tactic which was used quite successfully with light AT guns on the offensive. The Germans were particularly adept at the aggressive use of AT guns on the Eastern Front.

Which is why guns were initially small and handy of course. I suspect CM makes it far too easy to spot AT guns, considering how hard I've personally found it getting them to survive beyond more than one or two turns. It seems every tank in view is automatically drawn to the AT gun, even if they're involved in fighting far more important things directly to their front and the gun has not fired.

Same of course goes for Infantry AT Weapons. The number of times I've been trying to stalk a tank with a PIAT or a Panzerschreck and had it magically both spot and even pick it out from a platoon of other men the PBI carrying the AT weapon has always dismayed me.

[edward_n_kelly]

Originally posted by Brian:

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

Sounds to me like something improvised by this crew on an ad hoc basis. I've never heard of it before either, though I'm willing to have my horizons widened.

Michael

Its actually a fairly standard tactic with towed AT guns. Rarely do they stand and fight in real life as they do in CM, slugging it out, round for round with a tank. They'll fire a few rounds, if they don't score a hit, then they'll limber up and scoot.

While best on the defensive, obviously, its also a tactic which was used quite successfully with light AT guns on the offensive. The Germans were particularly adept at the aggressive use of AT guns on the Eastern Front.

</font>

[JonS]

There are several issues with the current artillery model, but I have reason to believe that many of them will be resolved with CMBB.

With regard to limiting the number of rounds/FO ... well, its poxy in some respects, but in others it is reasonably accurate.

The Royal Artillery made a fetish out of fast response times, something that continues to this day. That applied to individual missions, and also to fire-plans*. The FO attached to a company was expected to be able to generate a fireplan for his company within a very short time in order to respond to changing tactical circumstances. These fireplans usually involve one battery**, so many rounds per gun, and a specified time limit.

For example, an FO might request his battery for a fireplan, explaining to his BC what the situation is, then the BC would reply with something like "21, you have c/s 2 at priority call for the next 40 minutes, 50 rnds HE, 10 rnds smk."

This lets the FO know he has the battery of 8 guns for the next 40 minutes, and each gun can fire up to 50 rounds of high explosive and 10 smoke rounds. The FO can then organise his fireplan - in conjunction with the coy OC - around those details.

So, getting back to CMBO, the FO ammo limit is in some cases appropriate; assuming that the FO represents one who has been given priority access to the guns with a given amount of ammo and is prepping an FOs Quick Fireplan. In other circumstances, the model used in CMBO falls down. CW FOs, in particular, had fast access to massive firepower, and effectivly unlimited ammo, with which to engage point targets, targets of opportunity, and for defensive fire. The problem is, I suspect, that most folk would find firepower of that scale would make for rather a dull game.

Looking at it from a different angle, part of the prolem is that artillery tends to take a wider view of the battlefield. Infantrymen and tankers can only affect the immediate area in which they are located, whereas artillery is omnipresent. But they can't be everywhere at the same time. So, for example, a coy may have overwhelming artillery support one hour, then nothing for the next couple of hours while the guns are busy elsewhere. I'm not sure how best to simulate this in a low level game like CMBO. In operational level games it is obvious: a battery can only support one battle at a time, so if you want support for this battle, you can't have support for that battle. But in CMBO, where there aren't any other battles, making sensible limits is a bit triicky.

Change of topic, in response to one of Brians posts: Royal Artillery gun tractors generally aren't used for ammo resup. The bty Q element has its own vehicles to handle that, under the BSM.

Regards

JonS

* and indeed, everything they did. Speed was backed up by sound drills, and independant checks, to remove error.

** At the next level up, a BC could organise a fireplan using all three btys of the regt, usually in support of a bn attack. This would of course take longer to organise, but then, the infantry would take longer to sort themselves out too. BC = battery commander.

Edit: spelling and clarity. Its just good manners.

[ April 03, 2002, 03:49 AM: Message edited by: JonS ]

[Brian]

Originally posted by JonS:

Change of topic, in response to one of Brians posts: Royal Artillery gun tractors generally aren't used for ammo resup. The bty Q element has its own vehicles to handle that, under the BSM.

I suspected as much but wasn't sure, never having been in Arty. I was in RAAOC, we knew how to get the ammunition forward, with the help of our friends in RACT (and before that RAASC) but what happens, for the most part beyond the DP is an unknown factor for me I must admit. Having however, also served in a battalion, I know what happens there.

Basically, knowing how difficult it is to prevent players from misusing dedicated assets, what I proposed I think is a reasonable and whats more playable compromise.

However, I also think you'd agree, Jon that it would be unlikely that guns would actually even appear on most battlefields of the likes of CM.

[ April 03, 2002, 09:25 PM: Message edited by: Brian ]

[DevilDog]

Going back to the original point of this thread - I think ammo resupply as such is already covered in operations, and not applicable to single battles.

I have had some hairy fights though that have hung in the balance on the matter of ammo. In other words, all my squads with ammo were dead or seriously depleted while my full up squads were pretty much out. While not realistic to get an ammo resupply, what would be realistic is to be able to scavange ammo from dead or depleted squads by moving a unit over to the dead squad and doing an ammo transfer.

I made this suggestion about six months ago, but at the time it was dismissed as being unneeded. I still think it would be a fairly important feature affecting about 1/3 of the human vs. human battles I play.

My 2 cents.

(edited because my computer doesn't know how to spell)

[ April 03, 2002, 06:29 PM: Message edited by: DevilDog ]

[gibsonm]

Originally posted by JonS:

Looking at it from a different angle, part of the prolem is that artillery tends to take a wider view of the battlefield. Infantrymen and tankers can only affect the immediate area in which they are located, whereas artillery is omnipresent As long as you are in range. But they can't be everywhere at the same time.

As long as you are in range! I've been in a few advances where the RAA has been unable to spt (oh the joys of wheeled arty in a Mech Bde!)

Hence UBIQUE or is that because ARTY has been in every major battle?

[ April 03, 2002, 11:20 PM: Message edited by: gibsonm ]

[gibsonm]

Originally posted by gibsonm:

As long as you are in range! I've been in a few advances where the RAA has been unable to spt (oh the joys of wheeled arty in a Mech Bde!)

Hence UBIQUE or is that because ARTY has been in every major battle?

[ April 03, 2002, 11:22 PM: Message edited by: gibsonm ]

[gibsonm]

Double Post

[edward_n_kelly]

Originally posted by gibsonm:

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

As long as you are in range! I've been in a few advances where the RAA has been unable to spt (oh the joys of wheeled arty in a Mech Bde!)

Hence UBIQUE or is that because ARTY has been in every major battle?</font>

So now for some "in" jokes....sigh !

UBIQUE - except where you want them and when you want them !

Edward

[gibsonm]

Originally posted by edward_n_kelly:

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

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

As long as you are in range! I've been in a few advances where the RAA has been unable to spt (oh the joys of wheeled arty in a Mech Bde!)

Hence UBIQUE or is that because ARTY has been in every major battle?</font>

So now for some "in" jokes....sigh !

UBIQUE - except where you want them and when you want them !

Edward</font>

[JonS]

* Kipling

* Ubique / Quo Fas Et Gloria Du Cunt

* More Kipling

* Artillery customs & traditions

* RCA

Ubique can be translated either as Everywhere, or Anywhere. Since the RA has been represented at virtually all engagements of the British Army, the regiment could claim a ridiculous number of battle honours. To keep things reasonable, just the single word Ubique (Everywhere) is used.

The RE also use Ubique, except they translate it as Anywhere, to reflect their willingness to throw a bridge - or whatever - up in the most unlikely spots.

Regards

JonS

[ April 04, 2002, 01:27 AM: Message edited by: JonS ]

[edward_n_kelly]

Originally posted by JonS:

* Kipling

* Ubique / Quo Fas Et Gloria Du Cunt

* More Kipling

* Artillery customs & traditions

* RCA

Ubique can be translated either as Everywhere, or Anywhere. Since the RA has been represented at virtually all engagements of the British Army, the regiment could claim a ridiculous number of battle honours. To keep things reasonable, just the single word Ubique (Everywhere) is used.

The RE also use Ubique, except they translate it as Anywhere, to reflect their willingness to throw a bridge - or whatever - up in the most unlikely spots.

Regards

JonS

Yes - was looking at that before I posted.

Having served with "drop shorts" and "ginger beers" over many years (and had the pleasure of keeping pace with them in the Sergeants' Mess as well) - a painful experience (the morning after)...

As one of the Shop Stewards (one of my RSMs) for the most powereful union in the army (the Sergeants' Mess) - I like the similie - said, "You only get a hangover if you stop drinking !"

Edward

[Vanir Ausf B]

Originally posted by Brian:

While this would not have much effect on either small battles or short ones, it would be most useful in the longer/larger ones.

Indeed, I would argue that it would only be applicable to battles at the most extreme CM scale. I have PBEMed a number of 3000 pt attack/defend games where the attacker can purchase 2 entire British infantry battalions + armor and arty support and have yet to see one of these games not decided by turn 35 at the latest. You would probably need a 5000 pt QB or equivalent sized scenario for this to become a realistic option. Not saying your idea is bad one, merely that it's non-inclusion in CM outside of operations isn't a big deal IMO.

I suspect CM makes it far too easy to spot AT guns, considering how hard I've personally found it getting them to survive beyond more than one or two turns. It seems every tank in view is automatically drawn to the AT gun, even if they're involved in fighting far more important things directly to their front and the gun has not fired.

Certainly true and not limited to AT guns. This goes back to the whole absolute vs. relative spotting issue. Not much can be done until the engine rewrite.

Same of course goes for Infantry AT Weapons. The number of times I've been trying to stalk a tank with a PIAT or a Panzerschreck and had it magically both spot and even pick it out from a platoon of other men the PBI carrying the AT weapon has always dismayed me.

It sometimes seems that the AI is able to know certain information that the player is not. I don't know if this is a bug or what.

[Brian]

Originally posted by Vanir Ausf B:

Well, I actually prefer, as I alluded to, big battles. I wonder though, how you can afford two infantry battalions with 3000 points when the game sets them at:

Green Regular

Rifle Battalion 1983 2400

Rifle Battalion w/MG Pl. 2177 2613

I've rarely been able to afford one, let alone two, even if I fight an action with 5,000 points (which I have been doing quite a few of recently as an experiment to see how well my PC handles games of that size. Indeed, I'm actually finding I quite like them - lots of units to play with and lots of room as well).

What I'd like is the option of resupply, if I feel I need it, exactly as a commander in real life has.

I suspect CM makes it far too easy to spot AT guns, considering how hard I've personally found it getting them to survive beyond more than one or two turns. It seems every tank in view is automatically drawn to the AT gun, even if they're involved in fighting far more important things directly to their front and the gun has not fired.

I realise that. I suspect also BTS needs to do a little bit of revision about what it believes are likely spotting ranges. In real life, its actually a lot harder to spot an AT gun than it is in the game.

Same of course goes for Infantry AT Weapons. The number of times I've been trying to stalk a tank with a PIAT or a Panzerschreck and had it magically both spot and even pick it out from a platoon of other men the PBI carrying the AT weapon has always dismayed me.

I think it needs explanation. I've no desire to claim its a bug or not, I'd just like to see some explanation on the matter.

[ April 04, 2002, 10:22 PM: Message edited by: Brian ]

[WineCape]

Originally posted by Michael emrys:

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

...Laarger (quick, who can tell me where that term comes from? ...

If you in fact mean 'laager', it is an Afrikans word referring originally to wagons drawn into a circle for an encampment. Was used in WW II to denote a similar arrangement of armored vehicles (although infantry and guns could be part of the arrangement with soft vehicles in the center).

Michael</font>

[Vanir Ausf B]

Originally posted by Brian:

I wonder though, how you can afford two infantry battalions with 3000 points when the game sets them at:

Green Regular

Rifle Battalion 1983 2400

Rifle Battalion w/MG Pl. 2177 2613

I guess I should have noted that when I buy British in CM I always buy airborne, which are only 1230 or so per battalion. When you are the attacker in a 3000 pt game you get 4500 pts to play with.

But like I said, I have yet to see a 3000 pt game go long enough to where resupply would be feasible. I've yet to try a 5000 pt game.

I realise that. I suspect also BTS needs to do a little bit of revision about what it believes are likely spotting ranges. In real life, its actually a lot harder to spot an AT gun than it is in the game.

I have been lobbying for much the same thing with regard to tanks. I have asked that tanks that begin the game in trees be made much more difficult to spot until they move or fire. As it is they seem to be spotted almost automatically as soon as any enemy unit enters LOS, even if they are "hiding". It makes them be of questionable value on defense compared to AT guns as it is very difficult to ambush with them. At least AT guns can remain hidden until they fire. In reality German tanks with their smokeless powder were often able to remain unspotted even after opening fire from ambush. Still, most of these problems will be solved by relative spotting. Too bad we have to wait for CM3 for it.

An interesting exception to the "if it shoots it is spotted" rule in CM is the 20mm AA gun (single) which can often shoot all day without getting more than a sound contact as long as it is at least 200-300m from the nearest enemy unit.

[Brian]

Originally posted by Vanir Ausf B: