Artillery / CAS Area fire

[Euri]

For one to be able to call an "area fire" the spotter should have line of sight to the center of the "circle" and to a point of its circumference.

I believe the latter is unnecessary and unrealistic. It one has LOS to point A, a request to attack point A and whatever is at a range X of point A, is a perfectly valid and specific command and should not be preclude for the fact that the spotter has no LOS to the edge of the circle.

Your thoughts?

[abneo3sierra]

I think, IRL at least, that the spotter would want to see the entire range being targetted, due to , for example, ROE constraints (cannot target, as blue anyway, a mosque, etc,for political and humanitarian reasons) if you can see a point of the circle, but cannot see what is along the perimeter of the circle, then if that car with a family on their way home from a wedding party, gets bombed, it is on you for calling the strike in.

That said, not sure if that is the reason BFC implemented it,really, red would not have the same constraints to their ROE..but it is realistic in effects it produces, from the blue side at least.

[Erwin]

Euri raises an interesting point since in CMSF many times one is in open desert and often (for the US at least) it's guns free.

[LongLeftFlank]

I have thought about this myself, especially since aircraft/helo or UAV spotting could be available as well. One workaround is to stick an 8 story tower in a distant corner of the map and put an observer on it. He might catch some rounds (highly likely in 2-player mode), but can see a lot of the map.

[abneo3sierra]

Erwin, if we were "guns free" the war in Afghanistan would have ended a long time ago :-)

But the point about the other observers available that are not in game is a good one, including IMINT, etc. Still, real life rules of engagement are much stricter than those in the game, and in real life we have to avoid hitting most buildings, even,unless a damned good cause for destroying it, unlike here where you know the only people on the map, are yours, and your enemies, in real life the majority of people and places and things in your "area fire radius" are NOT valid targets...for that reason, I think it is a good part of the game, not a bug, to have to see what you are shooting at, and everything around it.

[Erwin]

abneo: I was commenting on the way the CMSF game originally dealt with the US forces. It seemed like a valid tactic to shoot at everything b4 allowing inf to advance.

People forget that CMSF is an xnt game first and as a simulation of reality a very distant second - altho' it is brilliant at verisimilitude. Hence the nature of my response to Euri.

For what it's worth... If CMSF were a great simulation of reality, we would all be playing the Syrians and Muj (in CMA) cos it would teach us great lessons on how to defeat them. However, it seems very few have played the Red side and one can draw ones' own conclusions.

In addition, anyone in the biz who has enjoyed the DoD Verification and Validation process for sims would tell you that CMSF is a non-starter as a realistic sim. While I suspect that getting DoD contracts may have once been a motivator when CMSF was being designed, I applaud BFC for deciding that it is not worth the hassle to go in that direction.

(For some reason I will have to discuss with my therapist, it always gets me going when anyone compares a CMSF game tactic to RL. Apologies for giving you back more than you expected. Rant over...)

[abneo3sierra]

erwin, my reply to you was mostly in joking also, so rant accepted :-) as for the other, it does do a good job of teaching some basic squad level tactics, especially to the "next generation" of officers who grew up playing video games. As a company level serving officer myself, I can attest to this. I have also used it to show JROTC candidates specific issues and tactical solutions to them....while it may not be entirely accurate, it is a good way to open ones mind to real life accuracies, and even in real life, the "textbook" solutions to a tactical problem, only work slightly more or less than 50%,which is something that I find humorous when people here wonder why their "perfect plans" did not work...history is full of perfect plans that failed, and imperfect ones that just got lucky.

Oh,and on that other thread, I appreciate your help, working on that IED/bunker combo right tonight :-)

Take care

[Erwin]

Looking forward to seeing/experiencing the evil juicy surprises you design with the IED/Bunker/Vehicle combo.