Discussion - Arty/Air Support Improvements

[RT North Dakota]

Originally posted by tharawdeal:

It might be interesting if the scenario designer could "check a box" and specify:

1. You have no fire support.

2. You have fire support on positively identified targets only.

3. You have full fire support.

But overall, I think it's a minor issue, and I understand why things are the way they are.

Ignore my last - I agree with this guy!

[Battlefront.com]

Tharawdeal, that is the sort of direction we would go to solve something like this. Unfortunately, this is "design creep" and it is very, very dangerous. Once you start going down a road like this it becomes difficult to stop adding things of a similar concept. I'm not saying that these are necessarily bad things to add, but they almost always have unintended consequences. I would say that probably 1/2 of our CM development time (CMx1 included as well as CMx2) is a direct result of unintended consequences.

Unlike artificial environments where someone can just say "we aren't going there" we have the responsibility of simulating reality and that means no hard lines can be drawn. Think of a game like C&C or WarCraft. They can just say "we're putting in 10 units per side and that's it" or "we're going to have three types of terrain... fast, medium, and blocked, never any shade of gray inbetween" or "we don't care about morale, physical fitness, or any of that other garbage. We have a Damage/Health Bar and that's all we need".

Trust me... the guys that claim that we've made a RTS/FPS game instead of a military simulation are just silly for a number of reasons. If we wanted to do that we would have been done 2 years ago and none of you would like it

Steve

[tharawdeal]

I understand about design creep; sometimes less is more. It's better to have 5 fleshed-out, bug-free features that work really well every time than 10 minor ones that are hit-and-miss, or that somehow interfere with what's already been done. In other words, I believe in the twin axioms of "if it ain't broke, don't break it," and "get the live RPG round out of your own leg before you try to take the ricochet out of your buddy's."

Still, it's fun to talk about what we'd like to see. After all, it's understood that nobody can force you to add something to a game, so talk is just talk.

[ August 14, 2007, 12:07 AM: Message edited by: tharawdeal ]

[FkDahl]

Will indirect anti-tank mortar and artillery fire be included? Let's assume Syrian special forces manage to acquire Swedish Strix 120 mm anti-tank mortar rounds (through bribes) or that Russian laser guided anti tank mortar round ...

It opens up another tool for the infantry commander facing tanks ...

[Statisoris]

Has anyone ever seen the precision strike option for artillery that was mentioned on page 81 of the manual? Has this been cut, just not enabled yet, or am I just missing it? I've tried using Bradley & Stryker FIST units to call in artillery, but have never seen this as an option. Do you have to target a specific enemy unit or are you suppose to be able to target a building using precision strike?

[cassh]

illum rounds??

[Battlefront.com]

Ah... the Precison thing IS in the manual. Blast, that's a bug We had that in back when we thought Copperhead rounds for the 155s were still in service. That was the only purpose for that Mission. There are some new guided munitions that are just coming on line, but they are ridiculously expensive and are probably not going to be used for the sorts of combat CM is simulating. That's just a guess, but it seems likely. I'll make sure that gets cut out for revised versions of the manual.

Illumination missions... we just didn't have time to add it. We cut that one from the ToDo list about a year ago, in fact. We hope to get it into some future version.

Steve

[theFightingSeabee]

I have some experience as a forward observer, and this is what we need...

1. Smoke

2. Adjust fire needs to be fixed... someone said they don't know why you would use it, well a good FO can "walk" artillery around, alot like using the line mission, but able to adjust on the fly. Some infantry can also advance behind a forward walking bombardment, it's an old ww1 and ww2 tactic, but can still be used. Or you could take out several positions that aren't in a straight line, or go after a moving group of bad guys.

3. I would like to know just how many shots are available to me. It sucks wasting too many and coming up short when the going gets tough.

4a. One of the main things about artillery is that it can be shot at targets that you can't see. For example, we (in the military) would map out areas behind hills or in low areas and call them OCT's, On Call Targets (this feature was in cm1). This was done in areas we knew we had no line of sight, with the math already worked out for the arty guys so they could strike quickly. That's the whole point really, if you can see something you can shoot it. Artillery can get to where you can't see. So I guess my point is that you should be able to plaster areas you have no line of sight to, ofcourse with decreased accuracy, unless already an OCT, then it's quick and accurate.

4b. Same thing with the air strikes, they can see things the grunts can't see.

5. wish... there is now gps guided arty rounds, that are extremely accurate. <wink wink

6. another wish... cluster munitions from aircraft. < wink

OK, other than that, I LOVE this game, uh.. simulation. While it needs some more tweeks, maybe add some new stuff, it's pretty darn close. Keep it up guys, and I'll keep buying your games , uh... simulations.

[Chad Harrison]

I love they new system, but as has been mentioned, I would like to know exactly how many rounds I have for a selected artillery asset instead of just seeing a number of 'bars' representing current ammo levels.

Or atleast a general feel for how many missions I can call in; ie. I can do two short missions or one long mission.

[Truppenfuhrung]

Originally posted by Battlefront.com:

I'll make sure that gets cut out for revised versions of the manual.

In the revised version, you should include the meaning of the "+" symbol:

[Berlichtingen]

Ok, have played around a bit with it and here are a few things I see as missing:

1) White Phosphorous/Smoke

2) Repeat missions. We should be able to have the battery repeat a mission rather than recalling it.

3) Uh... batteries? I don't know Army doctrine, but the Jarheads use whole batteries, not sections for fire missions. I'm fairly certain that would be true of any Soviet style army such as the Syrians.

4) Pre-registration. Common in defensive positions

[The Limey]

I'll just echo the positive reviews (though several of the suggested improvements sound pretty good too). The added flexibility of the interface is great. The first time I watched a salvo of airbursts exploding above (and decimating) an enemy trenchline my jaw dropped.

[Mud]

For at least some of the aircraft models, seems it'd make sense to allow designation of an area in which the air support is to make a pass through (in terms of area covered, not in the strict sense of overflight) while engaging targets of opportunity, without designating specific target.

Or to engage multiple point targets within a particular vicinity, but without actually directing them to obliterate all the area in between unless it seems appropriate.

[theFightingSeabee]

Mud, I think the the first idea would only work with choppers. They will often cover convoys or other formations, but as far as fixed wing jets, they won't just drop bombs with friendlies in the area without an exact point to attack. I like the second idea with the choppers too. It just seems like an apache has different capabilities than a fast mover.

[MikeyD]

From Steve:

"On map mortars will (someday) get into the game."

I think he meant back into the game!

Last time I looked there was still an early Bet screenshot up on the CMSF site showing a sweet 60mm mortar in use. One thing that'll spur their work on the mortar is that the coding should be applicable to a WWII title too.

[stikkypixie]

I don't know if this has been mentioned before, but it seems that every unit regardless whether they are Syrian or US can call down an arty barrage. Is this suppose to be the case? Or have I just been playing special scenarios?

[Mud]

Originally posted by theFightingSeabee:

Mud, I think the the first idea would only work with choppers. They will often cover convoys or other formations, but as far as fixed wing jets, they won't just drop bombs with friendlies in the area without an exact point to attack. I like the second idea with the choppers too. It just seems like an apache has different capabilities than a fast mover.

I had in mind things like the guns on an AH-64 for this, although it may make sense for AC-130's -- haven't checked that, or whether they're even available -- or, if they're added in at some point, UAVs.

It'd also have to be balanced in terms of total endurance, so that a scenario designer could impose -some- limit if the player's forces aren't the only priority for the air assets.

[sandy]

An answer to stickypixie's question would be nice

I have no idea if any US unit regardless of type could really call up arty/air (I'll leave some US expert to pronounce on that...)

But is it really realistic to depict every bunch of Syrian squaddies with that capability? That I find hard to believe.

[JonS]

Originally posted by stikkypixie:

I don't know if this has been mentioned before, but it seems that every unit regardless whether they are Syrian or US can call down an arty barrage. Is this suppose to be the case? Or have I just been playing special scenarios?

Not all spotters are created equal.

[Berlichtingen]

Originally posted by stikkypixie:

I don't know if this has been mentioned before, but it seems that every unit regardless whether they are Syrian or US can call down an arty barrage. Is this suppose to be the case? Or have I just been playing special scenarios?

From my experience, anything battalion level or higher was called in only by FO teams. Air was never called by anything but a FAC team. That's my experience from the Marines

Note on FAC teams. They had three radios. One FM radio to talk to battalion and such. An AM radio to talk to the squadron. And a UHF radio to talk to the birds. The AM and UHF radios weren't comon issue, so that made it impossible for anyone else to do it

[ August 16, 2007, 06:25 PM: Message edited by: Berlichtingen ]

[thewood]

Just curious, how close are Marine SOPs for support to Army

[Berlichtingen]

For air, not close at all. The Marines are the originators of CAS, and they are still the best at it. For artillery, I'm not sure. The Army is more enamored of gadgets as I recall, so I expect their doctrine is quite different

[tc237]

Almost anyone in the Army can call in arty, the question is if the mission is approved by higher HQ.

As a TC or PSG I would only have to call my FO with a grid and he would take care of the rest.

(although we always trained to "do it the right way")

If the FO is any good he is constantly tracking his attached elements and monitoring the situation of other units.

When he gets a call from one of his platoons, he knows where they are and what they need, the FO does all the technical work, clears friendlies, etc.

Usually the FO would stay back and out of direct fire, with a view of the fight, too valuable to be up front. He would be working with the arty batteries and helping to coordinate things the CO/XO.

We could also call the CO/XO or call BN directly.

All depended on the situation and who has "Priority of Fires" That is an important part of what unit gets fire support first.

-One thing that would be nice is assigning up Pre-plotted arty at scenario setup.

Say one Pre-plotted target per arty unit.

[SlowMotion]

Stikkypixie wrote:

"I don't know if this has been mentioned before, but it seems that every unit regardless whether they are Syrian or US can call down an arty barrage. Is this suppose to be the case?"

I don't know how it should be, but like I wrote few days ago in manual p.77 it reads

"As a general rule, any US ground unit can theoretically request both types of Support, while only a few specialized Forward Observer units can call in Artillery for the Syrian side."

So hopefully they'll change the manual if current code works.

[Battlefront.com]

Berli,

You are correct that (theoretically) only the FAC (called JTAC now) calls in the strike. However, anybody can request it. These differences are categorized as CAS Level I, II, and III. It allows support to come in even if the JTAC isn't there, however the checks and balances delay things. FBCB2 has changed a lot of this recently too.

Steve