Will artillery be more flexible this time around?

[wokelly]

I always found artillery to be modeled poorly in previous WWII CMs, to the point where I rarely used it with any flexibility other than pounding a town. It was especially annoying when playing with CW forces which were generally the lightest on squad firepower of all countries, artillery always played a major role in compensating for weak squad firepower in real life but rarely in game. So I have a few questions:

-Will we see rolling barrages for soldiers to advance behind? This was certainly not something that could be repeated several times, it usually led the solders into an objective but if they fell behind they had to make due with their small arms or they fell back and organized a second barrage.

-Will we have the ability to lay smokescreens on the flanks of the barrages as well as use rolling barrages with a mix of smoke and arty? Both were oft used tactics for the CW forces, often a continuous smoke screen was laid on an open flank to keep the Germans away who did not know what was on the other side.

-Can we expect decent ammo for the artillery, because it was rarely there in CMO or CMAK. I know the devs dont want people arty spamming but the Allies stockpiled great amounts of arty ammo for their forces prior to major attacks, enough that artillery requests were rarely refused due to ammo being exhausted. I have been reading a great book about a single days battle at Rauray on 1 July 1944 where a single regiment saw tens of thousands of artillery rounds fired in its support including over 3000 rounds from the regiments five 3 inch mortars (that is 600 rounds per gun). Most CMO or CMAK missions you get maybe 300-400 rounds total in support fire for scenarios which represent major allied attacks which is quite limited.

Artillery played a major role in Allied doctrine, and even the Germans unleashed at times very heavy barrages on the Allied lines during counterattacks. Yet in the previous CM games artillery has generally taken on a pretty secondary role which I think ignores its actual significance. I am really hoping the new CMBN will properly represent artillery and make it flexible enough to use as it was at the time.

[scottie]

Im guessing you havent played CMSF then ?

Arty is awesome now , slightly less flexible in CMBN comparied to CMSF due to comms but still improved a great deal.

[Cambronne]

I am not enthusiastic about the arty in CMSF.Let aside the preplanned bombardment,the AI most of the time cannot use the artillery.

[stikkypixie]

I am not enthusiastic about the arty in CMSF.Let aside the preplanned bombardment,the AI most of the time cannot use the artillery.

"* Computer player uses artillery and air support dynamically throughout the game, not just pre-planned strikes."

[Cambronne]

"* Computer player uses artillery and air support dynamically throughout the game, not just pre-planned strikes."

theoretically yes,but don't rely on it if you want to make a scenario. I have rarely if at all seen it using the assets during the battle.

[Guest]

The computer player *definitely* uses artillery dynamically, and well. Just when I think I've driven advancing AI troops to ground they direct a load of mortar fire on my most important positions. It's beautiful, really, apart from them tearing apart my defenses.

[Cambronne]

It may be true sometimes if the AI is on defense,but when attacking,the AI arty doesn't work .The FO advances towards enemy positions as if he is regular infantry,totally forgetting that he has to observe and bombard,not to assault the positions.

[stikkypixie]

theoretically yes,but don't rely on it if you want to make a scenario. I have rarely if at all seen it using the assets during the battle.

Depends if you play against red or blue. Red artillery takes forever to arrive and you need the right spotter in place.

[Guest]

It may be true sometimes if the AI is on defense,but when attacking,the AI arty doesn't work .The FO advances towards enemy positions as if he is regular infantry,totally forgetting that he has to observe and bombard,not to assault the positions.

Erm, I'm pretty sure I just gave an example of AI using artillery on the offense.

[Sergei]

The AI uses it according to side specific abilities and limitations, so a Syrian AI player is not going to summon divisional artillery strikes in a timely fashion. Meanwhile a US AI player should be able to bring mortar strikes in much quicker.

The Syrian behaviour has also changed in the latest versions, btw! Earlier only Forward Observers could order fire missions but now any connected HQ can do so.

[Field Marshal Blücher]

It may be true sometimes if the AI is on defense,but when attacking,the AI arty doesn't work .The FO advances towards enemy positions as if he is regular infantry,totally forgetting that he has to observe and bombard,not to assault the positions.

This is the scen designer's fault, and nothing inherent to the game.

Also I have to say, without going into too much (i.e. NDA-breaking ) detail, AI-controlled (and non-preplanned) artillery can be brutal in CMBN. I have to confess, I was not used to taking accurate enemy artillery fire in CMx2, and I had to change my tactics substantially as a result.

[Cambronne]

Yes,my experience was with the Red AI.

[Cambronne]

Also I have to say, without going into too much (i.e. NDA-breaking ) detail, AI-controlled (and non-preplanned) artillery can be brutal in CMBN. I have to confess, I was not used to taking accurate enemy artillery fire in CMx2, and I had to change my tactics substantially as a result.

good to know

[dan/california]

That is not really the case. Syrian FOs will call fire on any units that stay in LOS too long. I recall this specifically from several scenarios. It is absolutely nerve wracking to play.

What the AI can't do is make informed guesses about if sees A and B it should probably be calling fire on C where the bad guys are going to be in minute or ten. Two things that make it less effective than it might be otherwise are generally lousy Red force coms, and the combination overly specific knowledge of enemy units types combined with very effective blue optics. To whit Red FOs have mountains of ordinance dispensed in their direction with great frequency, and Red is too dependent on that limited supply of observers.

[MikeyD]

Most CMSF scenarios were, for the most part, delibrately designed to minimize artillery. There's no game engine prohibitions against giving Syrians a a half dozen elite spotters and a dozen heavy artilery rocket launchers. Its avoided by designer because it is not condusive to good gameplay. I've built a couple scenarios that start out with an effective artillery strike. And I got howls of protest over it!

[stikkypixie]

I always found artillery to be modeled poorly in previous WWII CMs, to the point where I rarely used it with any flexibility other than pounding a town. It was especially annoying when playing with CW forces which were generally the lightest on squad firepower of all countries, artillery always played a major role in compensating for weak squad firepower in real life but rarely in game. So I have a few questions:

-Will we see rolling barrages for soldiers to advance behind? This was certainly not something that could be repeated several times, it usually led the solders into an objective but if they fell behind they had to make due with their small arms or they fell back and organized a second barrage.

-Will we have the ability to lay smokescreens on the flanks of the barrages as well as use rolling barrages with a mix of smoke and arty? Both were oft used tactics for the CW forces, often a continuous smoke screen was laid on an open flank to keep the Germans away who did not know what was on the other side.

-Can we expect decent ammo for the artillery, because it was rarely there in CMO or CMAK. I know the devs dont want people arty spamming but the Allies stockpiled great amounts of arty ammo for their forces prior to major attacks, enough that artillery requests were rarely refused due to ammo being exhausted. I have been reading a great book about a single days battle at Rauray on 1 July 1944 where a single regiment saw tens of thousands of artillery rounds fired in its support including over 3000 rounds from the regiments five 3 inch mortars (that is 600 rounds per gun). Most CMO or CMAK missions you get maybe 300-400 rounds total in support fire for scenarios which represent major allied attacks which is quite limited.

Anyway, no rolling artillery unless that is changed from CMSF. You can however choose to target along a line, a disc or point target.

Smoke screens along the side are not available as an option, but if you have enough artillery assets you could plan this.

From your comments I guess the kind of fire missions you are thinking off are probably out of the scope of a typical CM engagements (especially the one with the smoke). But if a scenario designer chooses to do so, he/she can give a player enough artillery to saturate any map. Most scenario do not last a whole day and in CM if you want you can just buy 100 FOO's and have drop artillery all day

[Cambronne]

That is not really the case. Syrian FOs will call fire on any units that stay in LOS too long. I recall this specifically from several scenarios. It is absolutely nerve wracking to play.

What the AI can't do is make informed guesses about if sees A and B it should probably be calling fire on C where the bad guys are going to be in minute or ten. Two things that make it less effective than it might be otherwise are generally lousy Red force coms, and the combination overly specific knowledge of enemy units types combined with very effective blue optics. To whit Red FOs have mountains of ordinance dispensed in their direction with great frequency, and Red is too dependent on that limited supply of observers.

But how can the spotter keep LOS on target if he keeps assaulting?Or is he programmed to stop once he gets LOS on an enemy unit?

[Field Marshal Blücher]

But how can the spotter keep LOS on target if he keeps assaulting?Or is he programmed to stop once he gets LOS on an enemy unit?

Again, this is the scen designer's fault. The spotter is not "programmed" to either assault or stop assaulting by the game but by the scenario designer.

[Cambronne]

hmm,so it seems the spotter needs a AI script just for him and allocate a whole group just for him? But in QBs?

[Guest]

hmm,so it seems the spotter needs a AI script just for him and allocate a whole group just for him? But in QBs?

I don't create spotter-specific scripts, but in my test scenarios the AI uses artillery. So, no: you don't need to do that.

[Cambronne]

so,if you have a group (that includes a FO) with an "advance" mission,the FO should follow the script and try to advance to the objective.In that case,in order to bombard his target he needs to stop and keep the LOS on the target,but he cannot do it since he is scripted to advance toward the obj.

[MikeyD]

Even at their best QBs will never match a properly crafted scenario. So saying FOs in random-generated ME QBs are having troubles is like saying my car doesn't handle properly when I only drive with my feet. A hand-crafted senario will put a competent FO in a good position for observation and keep him there, and the types of ordinance available will be appropriate to the mission at hand. Yes, I have done an AI script just for a spotter, in the same way I've given HMG teams their own AI groups or anti-tank teams their own AI groups.

[MeatEtr]

I am not enthusiastic about the arty in CMSF.Let aside the preplanned bombardment,the AI most of the time cannot use the artillery.

You want proof the AI can use arty very deadly then try the Mud Marines scenario. I had close to a whole company get decimated from the AI and arty.

[MeatEtr]

Even at their best QBs will never match a properly crafted scenario. So saying FOs in random-generated ME QBs are having troubles is like saying my car doesn't handle properly when I only drive with my feet.

Hey now, using your feet to drive worked great for the Flintstones.

[Vark]

If you are interested in CW artillery, Nigel Evan's site http://nigelef.tripod.com/index.htm is a must read.