Artillery in WW2 game

[panzermartin]

In CMx1 we had some unrealistic(?) fast artillery and we could even walk the barrage with constant adjustments hunting down moving troops. Response times at least for US/German were maximum 3-4 minutes for the heavier calibers. Mortars came in in less than a minute.

CMSF artillery may be accurate but is less rensponsive than that and some times delays are huge, espceially for the Syrians. Makes me wonder if in analogy we will see extremely slow artillery delivery times in the Normandy title. Or is the syrian artillery responsivenss worse than

the german or american in WW2? Also, did firing patterns exist back then, like for instances the line or area target in CMSF?

[Apocal]

Also, did firing patterns exist back then, like for instances the line or area target in CMSF?

No, the ability to fire different sheafs (patterns) was quite a laborious process before computers. Before guns began to get a BCS (battery or ballistic computer system, can't recall exactly which), layout of the battery was important to creating a good sheaf, because every gun was firing on the exact same data. If your target was perpendicular to the guns, tough shinto.

[ChrisND]

No, the ability to fire different sheafs (patterns) was quite a laborious process before computers. Before guns began to get a BCS (battery or ballistic computer system, can't recall exactly which), layout of the battery was important to creating a good sheaf, because every gun was firing on the exact same data. If your target was perpendicular to the guns, tough shinto.

As a former FDC, I can attest to what a PITA it is to adjust sheafs without a ballistic computer. And with WW2 tech and with the clock ticking? Forget it (at least if you want it soon).

[Sergei]

Unless you're in Finnish artillery, in which case the battery just instinctively knows where to point their guns and the FO fine adjusts the barrage with his telekinetic powers. This way the battery can start firing even before the FO knows he needs support, so there is zero delay.

[ChrisND]

Unless you're in Finnish artillery, in which case the battery just instinctively knows where to point their guns and the FO fine adjusts the barrage with his telekinetic powers. This way the battery can start firing even before the FO knows he needs support, so there is zero delay.

And they don't even need arty shells. Because everyone knows how deadly Finnish pine cones are.

[Jaegerwurst]

I think during the WW2 because of the static defense doctrine the attacker often could anticipate where the main defense position was. Thus they could precalculate a suitable trajectory solution prior to an attack for every fire unit.

The defender also knew where the attack would likely come from and could do some predetermined firing solutions aswell.

[MikeyD]

Don't sell WWII artillery short. I used to work years ago with an old WWII jungle fighter. He said during fighting (on Peleliu?) whenever a Japanese prisoner was captured and taken behind the lines they would often ask to see the amazing American 'automatic artillery'. They could scarcely believe such accurate efficient artillery could be done the old fashioned way.

[Sergei]

All artillery is accurate and efficient when you are at the receiving end.

[Michael Emrys]

The scariest thing about being in battle is to know that there are guys in the tree line on the other side of this field who desperately want to kill you...and may just be very good at their job.

Michael

[Dietrich]

Don't sell WWII artillery short. I used to work years ago with an old WWII jungle fighter. He said during fighting (on Peleliu?) whenever a Japanese prisoner was captured and taken behind the lines they would often ask to see the amazing American 'automatic artillery'. They could scarcely believe such accurate efficient artillery could be done the old fashioned way.

The Germans in Normandy found that Allied (especially American) artillery fire was so sudden and accurate that they called it Feuerzauber (magic fire).

[flamingknives]

"Mike Target, Mike Target, Mike Target"

[YankeeDog]

A good site I bookmarked some years ago regarding WWII artillery as it pertains to wargames:

http://www.poeland.com/tanks/artillery/artillery.html

It's not fully cited and therefore not to be taken as gospel, but the guy who wrote it seems to have done a fair amount of research on the matter.

In regards to the OP's questions, the above site has some good insights. Assuming the above site is fairly accurate, the times to FFE in CMx1 may not be all that off, at least for American and British forces. However, the accuracy you get in CMx1 for quick response fire, at least for the gun artillery, is definitely suspect.

The Brits and Americans could get open sheaf fires remarkably quickly, but open sheaf fires are much more dispersed than what you see with the "Target" command in CMx1. An open sheaf fire would be more like the "Target Wide" command in CMx1. The regular Artillery Target command in CMx1 is one targe point for all tubes -- a converging sheaf -- and these took more planning and time, though by the late war the Americans especially were getting better and better at calling these in quickly.

There are considerable national differences as well, which the website goes into. And, as noted already, things change considerably when you're talking about a planned defense or assault. In these situations, response to a reqest for fire on a pre-designated target could be very quick indeed. We'll clearly need some sort of representation of this for CMx2 WWII. Indeed, fire request on pre-designated targets didn't even necessarily require radios or a land wire line -- I've read some accounts where assaulting Soviet forces used flares or large flags to initiate or end arty barrages on planned targets in order to coordinate the artillery with their advance.

Not sure exactly how this could be represented in CM. . . do we need a flaggie unit?

Cheers,

YD

[JonS]

It's not fully cited and therefore not to be taken as gospel

That's a massive understatement. That article is - at very best - a cartoon cutout of the differences between nationalities. I cannot reccomend it at all.

[flamingknives]

Can I suggest http://members.tripod.com/~nigelef/directory.htm

At least for the British.

[Gryphon]

Another interesting question is, will we also hear the cool sound fx for requesting artillery in the WW2 game? And where are they for the Syrians? It would be brilliant hearing the FO request artillery by telephone or radio. Requesting artillery for the americans in CMSF really has some additional coolness due to these simple, yet effective, sound effects.

[SgtMuhammed]

The problem with doing Syrian requests is that we don't have a lot of voice actors who used to be Syrian FOs. Matt could probably fake something but it would be just that, fake.

[SgtMuhammed]

One thing to remember about US arty in WWII was that prewar doctrine was driven by the fact that the US Army had to try to get the most out of really crappy guns. In order to get their old 75's to be even marginally effective they had to do creative things with fire patterns and fire control, ToT barrages and such, that they were able to carry on later when they got better guns.

[Apocal]

That's a massive understatement. That article is - at very best - a cartoon cutout of the differences between nationalities. I cannot reccomend it at all.

Are the previous sections any good?

[John Kettler]

MikeyD and Dietrich,

Wasn't it Blackburn who talked about the German POW wanting to see the "automatic cannon" the British used against him? He couldn't believe it when they showed him a 25 pdr.

Ali-Baba,

I think it's fair to say that Syrian artillery responsiveness is worse than many forces had during WW II. This is especially true when you look at, for example, some of the fire missions conducted straight off the line of march by the British in Normandy, as ably related by Blackburn, and how little time it took to do the Uncle-Mike-Victor target drill on occasion. Needless to say, good timing helped!

YankeeDog,

Classically, the default sheaf for artillery fire is the parallel sheaf (all guns firing on the same azimuth), with open sheaf (diverginging azimuths)for more ground coverage at the expense of lethality, and the converged (converging azimuths) or closed sheaf for point targets. Target Wide does correspond well with open sheaf firing, as goes Target with converged sheaf, but we have no parallel sheaf, and we really need it in CMx1 and will definitely need it in CMx2 Normandy.

Regards,

John Kettler

[JonS]

Are the previous sections any good?

Barely.

The article was written by someone who knew essentially nothing about artillery, but went to one presentation, and read (browsed?) a small but biased selection of irrelevant pams.

The results are about what you'd expect, given those inputs.

[Other Means]

Can I suggest http://members.tripod.com/~nigelef/directory.htm

At least for the British.

This is the definitive site for British arty in WWII. You can only admire his dedication.

I remember reading somewhere that the quickest a British battery got rounds on target was in the order of 20 seconds?

That's as quick as modern but these guys got a LOT of practice.

[MikeyD]

Michael Emrys:

The scariest thing about being in battle is to know that there are guys in the tree line on the other side of this field who desperately want to kill you...and may just be very good at their job.

I understand that specifically was the problem in WWII (and in Vetnam) of the American method of troop replacement in front-line units. You'd have a few surviving veterans who were well aware that the people in the far treeline wanted to kill you and a steady stream of raw replacements who didn't. Some units would accumulate casualty rates above 100% over time.

[Apocal]

That's as quick as modern but these guys got a LOT of practice.

I am very skeptical that anyone has gotten indirect fire support inside of a minute in our current fights.

[SlowMotion]

If the British module has 50mm mortars, we might see pretty quick support.

[salwon]

Not sure if this has been answered anywhere: will the smaller mortars be on board?