OGSF Posted November 26, 2002 Share Posted November 26, 2002 I am wondering why FOs that do not have LOS to the end of the targetting line are even allowed to fire? If the fire is so awfully inaccurate, would/did the "real life" FOs' even bother to call in the fire mission? On a related note, if the actual fall of shell from an unsighted FO lands where the FO has LOS, why isn't it cancelled or adjusted automatically? Four-eyed Freddie knows the shells aren't supposed to be landing where he can see them, yet the fire mission continues unless the player intervenes. And another thing about artillery....advancing troops behind a creeping barrage is not really possible in CMBO or CMBB. The artillery rounds land all over the place like a mad woman's poop, no way to keep the troops up close as it moves. Yet I think advancing behind a creeping barrage was a valid tactic. And why can't FOs' call in fire missions if they are hiding? They can still see, and calling a fire mission in on a radio or telephone doesn't involve standing up and waving to the enemy while they do it. Is it the moving lips that gives them away? There have been many fine enhancements in CMBB over CMBO, but artillery seems to have lost it's "oomph" to some extent. It's a great joy to have one's fixed defences decimated on turn one to a pre-planned barrage, but the simple pleasure of dropping mortars on top of an SP gun hiding behind a building or hill has been taken away. If I recall, in CMBO an FO out of LOS to the target will simply get a wider spread in his fall of shot compared to the tighter grouping under LOS. In CMBB firing w/o LOS is a waste of ammo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Mike Posted November 26, 2002 Share Posted November 26, 2002 Originally posted by OGSF: I am wondering why FOs that do not have LOS to the end of the targetting line are even allowed to fire? If the fire is so awfully inaccurate, would/did the "real life" FOs' even bother to call in the fire mission?.Speculative fire. It was done quite a lot in "real life" - either from maps or by guestimate from what could be seen. sometimes it even hit the target! I'm sure the artillery grogs out there will tell us the correct technical term for it. On a related note, if the actual fall of shell from an unsighted FO lands where the FO has LOS, why isn't it cancelled or adjusted automatically? Four-eyed Freddie knows the shells aren't supposed to be landing where he can see them, yet the fire mission continues unless the player intervenes..How does he know the shell is his? But then in CM scale it's rare to have that much artillery that there's a reasonable chance of not being able to recognise your own, so I agree with this one. It's been mentioned before too. And another thing about artillery....advancing troops behind a creeping barrage is not really possible in CMBO or CMBB. The artillery rounds land all over the place like a mad woman's poop, no way to keep the troops up close as it moves. Yet I think advancing behind a creeping barrage was a valid tactic. .It was, but it also was only used in a type of batle that CM series doesn't really do that well - the prepared atack. The type of fire was different - normal artillery fire involved all teh guns trying to hit teh same point on the map, hence the converged sheaf. Barrages were fired with the guns all parallel so as to give a wider sheaf but less conccentration - the idea wasn't so much to destroy things as keep people's heads down. I don't think the engine can handle this at the moment. And why can't FOs' call in fire missions if they are hiding? They can still see, and calling a fire mission in on a radio or telephone doesn't involve standing up and waving to the enemy while they do it. Is it the moving lips that gives them away?.If they're hiding they are NOT looking - they are head down keeping everything out of sight. What you are describing is how troops behave when they are halted, and taking normal precautions to avoid being seen but still with their heads up. There have been many fine enhancements in CMBB over CMBO, but artillery seems to have lost it's "oomph" to some extent. It's a great joy to have one's fixed defences decimated on turn one to a pre-planned barrage, but the simple pleasure of dropping mortars on top of an SP gun hiding behind a building or hill has been taken away. If I recall, in CMBO an FO out of LOS to the target will simply get a wider spread in his fall of shot compared to the tighter grouping under LOS. .Which is quite wrong too - the shells don't care whether the observer can se the point of impact or not, so if a battery is firing without being observed the scatter of teh shot is no different to when it is being observed. What is different is that the point of aim can be off target by more. In CMBB firing w/o LOS is a waste of ammo.Yep - no-one is forcing you to do it tho. Edited to express my surprise at being able to vaguely understand one of your posts!! [ November 25, 2002, 10:28 PM: Message edited by: Mike ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Panzer Leader Posted November 26, 2002 Share Posted November 26, 2002 As the 'receiver' of that artillery barrage (the second attempt) I have to say that so far in all my games, Artillery has a much-reduced effectiveness than what it had in CMBO. His latest barrage landed off map! It was hilarious to see all those airbursts past the back edge of the map, but I can imagine the frustration. I am no grog, but I always thought that artillery was the king of the battlefield - not in CMBB! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Isenberg Posted November 26, 2002 Share Posted November 26, 2002 quote: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Originally posted by OGSF: I am wondering why FOs that do not have LOS to the end of the targetting line are even allowed to fire? If the fire is so awfully inaccurate, would/did the "real life" FOs' even bother to call in the fire mission?. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Speculative fire. It was done quite a lot in "real life" - either from maps or by guestimate from what could be seen. sometimes it even hit the target! I'm sure the artillery grogs out there will tell us the correct technical term for it. I've heard the term Recon by fire sort of like turning on a light and seeing what skitters away from it before the rolled up newspaper smacks it dead Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sabrewolf Posted November 26, 2002 Share Posted November 26, 2002 I find that firing out of LOS = hitting your own troops, no matter how much I compensate for the inaccuracies, a few shell always landed on my troop and sometimes, luckyly, on the FO itself thereby ending the barrages. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts