Counter-battery fire

[SlapHappy]

Battlefront has put a lot of work into making a realistic artillery model into the game.

That being said, are there any plans to simulate counter-battery fire? Remember, it was at least fairly common to use artillery against enemy artillery. This is at least a viable option in the WWII versions of CMII.

Does Battlefront have any comments on this and how it could be implemented?

[JonS]

Not that I'm aware of - simming "CB" is primarily a Scen Designer issue. From what I recall, BFCs consistent policy has been that if it makes it to the battlefield, it's good to go (hence no mechanical breakdown for vehicles, fuel doesn't run out, and no CB).

Jon

[hoolaman]

Its a fair point though because even if arty "makes it to the battlefield" once it starts firing there might be only a short period before it is silenced if there is the possibility of effective CB.

Especially in CMSF, the Syrian guns really should in most cases only get 30 seconds of firing in before they are nailed or forced to move.

So it probably does have an effect on the tactical game and would not even need to be directly controlled by the player.

[JasonC]

Methinks you overestimate the speed of CB considerably. In the active phase of the present Iraq war, US artillery battalions averaged a couple of fire missions per day - not per minute. That is still enough to run the enemy out of batteries in a couple of weeks, since a multiple of US battery-days soon outnumbered Iraqi batteries. But not in minutes or hours.

[ChrisND]

Especially in CMSF, the Syrian guns really should in most cases only get 30 seconds of firing in before they are nailed or forced to move.

Arty/mortar mortar rounds can't even get to the target that quickly if fired at the same time as the Syrian /pedant mode

[SgtMuhammed]

CB consideration is one reason why I tend to put more mortars in my scenarios and fewer arty pieces for Red. Mortars are more mobile and can be set up in areas that are harder to see from the air, a big killer for the enemy big guns.

[JonS]

Its a fair point though because even if arty "makes it to the battlefield" once it starts firing there might be only a short period before it is silenced if there is the possibility of effective CB.

Especially in CMSF, the Syrian guns really should in most cases only get 30 seconds of firing in before they are nailed or forced to move.

So it probably does have an effect on the tactical game and would not even need to be directly controlled by the player.

Yeah, but the Scen Designer can do that just as effectively as a convoluted algorithm the player has no control over. Just make Syr ammo "Scarce" or "Severe". That was what I was talking about.

Also; SgtMs point about mtrs vs arty. Again, a Scen Designer issue.

[Sergei]

Good lord, I hated the CB in SPWAW. If there's no way to turn such feature off, then you lose a good bit of flexibility in designing battles - it's akin to if CAS showed up randomly to bomb Syrian T-72's even when there is no air support in the OOB. While such things would happen IRL, it would seriously alter balance. In SPWAW, for some armies (like Japanese) it was worthless to buy off-board artillery, knowing that they'd die after one turn of firing - better to buy on-board batteries instead...

Let's just assume that all Syrian and US artillery involved in a battle are within range of the battlefield, but too far from each other to nuke each other up. Or the artillery men are too busy reading porn mags to bother.

[hoolaman]

Yeah, but the Scen Designer can do that just as effectively as a convoluted algorithm the player has no control over. Just make Syr ammo "Scarce" or "Severe". That was what I was talking about.

Also; SgtMs point about mtrs vs arty. Again, a Scen Designer issue.

Yes 30 seconds is a bit of an exaggeration, but modern CB should have the position of the firer very quickly and respond soon after. I will obviously defer to the artillerymen on this one.

As for being a designer issue, I agree up to a point, but you can't simulate a mortar battery with large amounts of ammo but only an option to fire for a minute before moving to another position, and the potential to be lost for good if they linger and get killed.

I don't want it to sound like I think CB is a must have, but it is a factor in modern war that could be added in a more detailed way.

[JonS]

I don't want it to sound like I think CB is a must have, but it is a factor in modern war

I agree, although it's been a factor in war since at least 1917 (the Charge Of The Light Brigade could be seen as a form of CB). However, it is never the concern of company commanders, heck it's seldom even the concern of bn COs (except insofar as they always want more of it). As far as they're concerned, either the enemy has artillery in the current battle, or he doesn't. Similarly, either the commander has friendly artillery available, or he doesn't. Why he does or doesn't isn't so much of a concern.

A scen designer can handle 'off-map/out-of-scen' CB in a variety of ways.

[SlowMotion]

One reason why CB wouldn't always work in 30 seconds is trying to avoiding civilian casualties. The location of mortar(s) might be known quickly, but before using some weapons (CB or air support) the allied may want to ensure what's in that place first.

I think there have been quite many cases in current wars where a mortar might shoot briefly from some town area, then hide or change place.

[Fenix]

AFAIK big artillery pieces can and ussually do perform CB tasks in combat situations. If i'm not wrong, as soon as the ordnance leaves the barrel, the enemy knows the exact location of the shoot and can attack your position with their own artillery or launch an airstrike on it (if possible), so the battery should be moving after one or two strikes.

I guess it has not been implemented just because it would be a pain in the ass and would severely limit the use of artillery, as you could only perform a pair of attacks before having to move to another area or maybe even losing your pieces.

IMHO, of course

[stierkampf]

we (the swiss) always presume counter battery fire in training. the howitzers will change their positions after every fire! in theory, if the enemy has his artillery (and the radar to track the shells and then calculate) in position in anticipation of your firestrike, CB fire can arriive very shortly (if i remember it correctly, 2 minutes was mentioned.) but i strongly doubt that the syrians possess the means for CB, especially the radar. also, the US have the air superiority, shich makes the use of artillery a very dangerous thing.

[Woodmeister]

Arty crews won't be distracted by porn mags. The Syrians won't have any and NATO troops are subject to random baggage checks! (The host nations don't like it so porn is treated as contraband just like alcohol).

Counterbattery fire is one of those "beyond the scope of the game" things that scenario designers will have to sort out for us on our behalf.

[SlapHappy]

I understand that it is entirely possible to "simulate" the effects of counter-battery fire (to some extent) within the framework of the mission design. However, here are some things you can't do:

You could have the option to assign some of your artillery to use as counter-battery fire. This could use up some or all of your loadout to accomplish. Perhaps the effectiveness would be dependent upon your level of ammo commitment. In this case you are making a tactical decision on how to allocate your assets. Otherwise you have no say in how the results turn out.

Secondly, you could have different results based on your counter-battery commitment. An enemy battery could be destroyed outright, could be "disrupted" such that there is a temporary loss of the battery until a certain point in the battle (and may function with diminished capability if used after recovery).

My point is that you would need to set the ground rules for counter-battery fire such that they are making an actual effect on the tactics one might employ when it is utilized.

[SgtMuhammed]

That decision though is out of your control. The arty that is assigned to the manuever units are the guns that are dedicated to support those units with fire. CB dedicated units wouldn't be part of what the manuever commander could expect for support. Say you have a 3 battery arty unit. 2 may be designated to CB while the other is dedicated to direct support of the manuever unit. The manuever commander wouldn't have 3 arty icons (to put it in CMSF terms) he would only see one. If the manuever unit happens to locate an enemy arty position he can call fire on it or "his" guns can be taken by higher but normally that decision making takes place at a higher level than is simulated in CMSF.