Air support

[sburke]

Haven't seen this applied yet in the AARs and perhaps it is still under development, but am wondering how air support functions in CMBN. In CMSF it is pretty precise, but I can recall games in CMAK where my air support would commit some friendly fire. Frustrating but at the same time pretty cool. Is that going to be a possibility in CMBN?

[scottie]

IIRC there was little INF to air comms i.e lack of coordinated CAS in this era , tended to be roaming fighters picking targets of opportunity. So maybe adding in an air asset to a battle acts in the same way it did in cmx1 .... certainly not called in on a precise target like CMSF. I did believe air assets with in though.

[Broadsword56]

The US Army Air Corps killed enormous numbers of friendly troops in Normandy with airstrikes gone awry. The bocage made it hard to see and ID troops on the ground, and there were problems with the "recognition panels" being too small, as well as the limits on radio communications mentioned above. So I hope there is at least the chance of aerial friendly fire in this game. It would also even the odds a bit for the German player, given the overwhelming US air superiority in this campaign. Any US player calling in airstrikes would have to weigh the benefits against the very real possibility of friendly fire.

[ZPB II]

In CMA especially, I've suffered some horrible friendly fire casualties from my own air assets, so it's already possible. I expect WW2 CAS to be even more inaccurate.

[WineCape]

Haven't seen this applied yet in the AARs and perhaps it is still under development, but am wondering how air support functions in CMBN. In CMSF it is pretty precise, but I can recall games in CMAK where my air support would commit some friendly fire. Frustrating but at the same time pretty cool. Is that going to be a possibility in CMBN?

The words 'pretty precise' should be construed as "danger close" in most CMBN battles.

[Chops]

In CMSF it is pretty precise, but I can recall games in CMAK where my air support would commit some friendly fire. Frustrating but at the same time pretty cool. Is that going to be a possibility in CMBN?

Uh..ummm...I guess you are not familiar with the "Drunken Shotgun of the Gods"....speakin' of Fratricide.

[Pete Wenman]

It's so cool to watch the dust kick up from a strafing run as 8x .50cal's put out lead.

Where it is relative to the target is a different matter ;-)

[c3k]

Several of the British attacks out of Caen utilized heavy bombers, similar to Cobra's bombing. In a singularly inept manner, the pathfinder bombers marked the target with orange smoke. Guess what color smoke the ground units were using to mark their lines? Yep, orange. Pretty slick staff work there. Coordination couldn't get any better. After that mess, they decided to try again the next day. (After clearing away the bodies.) Oh, points to the staff work at the IGS/RAF command level: they used the same orange smoke again. Consistency was rewarded with similar friendly casualties.

Heavy bombers and front line attacks didn't work too well.

[Brille]

Friendly fire would be nice......back in the CMBB/CMAK-days it was and it is always fun to watch a Jabo going down on it´s own men...well...watching from the opposing front of course.

Speaking of air support: Now that we have "physical" trees and nice spotting mechanics...will it be possible to hide tanks under trees, making it nearly or even completely impossible for any aircraft to spot them ?

[Brille]

Friendly fire would be nice......back in the CMBB/CMAK-days it was and it is always fun to watch a Jabo going down on it´s own men...well...watching from the opposing front of course.

Speaking of air support: Now that we have "physical" trees and nice spotting mechanics...will it be possible to hide tanks under trees, making it nearly impossible for any aircraft to spot them and of course to shot them (directly) ?

[scottie]

Heavy bombers and front line attacks didn't work too well.

Heavy bombers were all pre-planned mind, cannot be described as combat air support.

[scottie]

The US Army Air Corps killed enormous numbers of friendly troops in Normandy with airstrikes gone awry. The bocage made it hard to see and ID troops on the ground, and there were problems with the "recognition panels" being too small, as well as the limits on radio communications mentioned above. So I hope there is at least the chance of aerial friendly fire in this game. It would also even the odds a bit for the German player, given the overwhelming US air superiority in this campaign. Any US player calling in airstrikes would have to weigh the benefits against the very real possibility of friendly fire.

The break out at Saint Lo springs to mind, i think 600 infantry casualties were taken there where a pre battle aerial bombardment crept in the wrong direction.

[Peregrine]

Friendly fire would be nice......back in the CMBB/CMAK-days it was and it is always fun to watch a Jabo going down on it´s own men...well...watching from the opposing front of course.

Speaking of air support: Now that we have "physical" trees and nice spotting mechanics...will it be possible to hide tanks under trees, making it nearly impossible for any aircraft to spot them and of course to shot them (directly) ?

I would hope so as you could park tanks in light trees with the old engine to hide them, no guarantee but it did reduce the chance of them becoming targets.

[Magpie_Oz]

Several of the British attacks out of Caen utilized heavy bombers, similar to Cobra's bombing. In a singularly inept manner, the pathfinder bombers marked the target with orange smoke. Guess what color smoke the ground units were using to mark their lines? Yep, orange. Pretty slick staff work there. Coordination couldn't get any better. After that mess, they decided to try again the next day. (After clearing away the bodies.) Oh, points to the staff work at the IGS/RAF command level: they used the same orange smoke again. Consistency was rewarded with similar friendly casualties.

Heavy bombers and front line attacks didn't work too well.

Which attack are you taking about ? Op Charnwood the bombers attacked at night, same with Op Totalize, so the colour of smoke would be irrelevant, Op Tractable was in the daylight however a smoke screen was laid down to mask the advance so it seems unlikely it was to show the FLOT , the preliminary bombardment before Goodwood did not cause friendly casualties

The Tractable and Cobra heavy bomber raids caused friendly casualties but the others were deemed quite successful, which is why it was tried on several occasions.

[Peregrine]

These large raids are outside of CMs scope anyway.

[GhostRider3/3]

Large Air Raids by the Allies killed many civilians and friendly forces. Caen, I beleive 30,000 were injured and killed, not to mention the Germans had already left primarily. St. Lo, and Operation COBRA all had allied casualties from the Bomber raids.

What would be cool but not necessary is the ability to see the attack plane come in... different perespective, but again this is a ground combat game, and not aerial.

[sburke]

Back to the original question - I think my answer was covered by George MC in the thread on Bocage Tactics- There is a risk of friendly casualties. I wasn't asking regarding the use of heavy bombers in Goodwood and St Lo, only P51 and P47 aircraft support are included for CAS. I suppose you could use Naval Artillery to simulate a larger air strike if you wanted to try and build a St Lo campaign, but from what I have read the German front line units facing the Americans in Cobra were not particularly impacted by the airstrikes. They were dug in and outside the main bombing zone. It was the reinforcing units in reserve that took the brunt. Personally I am not real curious about trying to include that.

What I would like is the opportunity to shoot down my own planes if the sissy pilots shoot at my ground forces. :-D AND I want the points for it. BTW is there a graphic for my troops to flip off the pilots in these incidents?

Guess we will find out when we get our greedy little paws on the game. Will be curious if there are any options to purchase more skilled pilots with less risk of friendly fire, but as that would have been completely out of the scope of what a Company or Battalion level commander could expect, it is likely too unrealistic to bother considering.

So now what can we debate to kill time till the release date?

[Michael Emrys]

So now what can we debate to kill time till the release date?

Hey, how about those Mariners?

Michael

[sburke]

Hey, how about those Mariners?

Michael

I'll stick with the Sharks. Baseball is too early in the season and too slow to keep my mind off how close we are to a release date. I really hope they surprise us with a few days earlier rather than a few days later. ...or how about now? Now? now maybe?

[Chops]

Will vehicles and infantry be able to take cover from air attack in trees/vegetation/buildings in CM:BN?

Will units be much less likely to be hit from air attack at night?

Will enemy aircraft have a "god's eye" view of the battlefield and be able to hit anything regardless of the type of cover or terrain where a targeted unit is located?

I am not sure exactly how cover/hiding from air attack is modeled in CM:SF. I have seen things that at times make me think that units can hide from air attack and other situations that make me question whether or not it is possible in CM:SF. However, Fratricide from air attack is modeled in CM:SF.

It is well documented that the Germans did their best to hide their tanks/vehicles from air assault during the day.

[Brille]

I would hope so as you could park tanks in light trees with the old engine to hide them, no guarantee but it did reduce the chance of them becoming targets.

Thats true but the possibility of beeing spotted was nevertheless quite high (lets say still about 50% for example).

But I was talking about rather less percentance...maybe 20% or even 0%. Just remember Bil´s AAR, standing with his tanks in "deep forest". It should only be possible for planes to spot the enemy tanks if they fly on really low altitude with the vehicles standing at the edge of the forest or if they´re "directed" by groundtroops (radio, smokebombs, tracers, muzzleflashes whatsoever...).

[Michael Emrys]

We're totally into the realm of speculation here since very little official has been said on the subject.

Will vehicles and infantry be able to take cover from air attack in trees/vegetation/buildings in CM:BN?

One would expect that any sort of overhead cover, such as trees, would reduce the chances of being spotted and shot at. Other types of cover, such as tall grass or shrubbery would not. I would expect buildings would offer concealment, at least for personnel units, unless the building itself was being targeted.

Will units be much less likely to be hit from air attack at night?

One would expect so. In fact I would give good odds that it couldn't happen at all, since the planes announced for the game did not conduct night time missions SFAIK.

Will enemy aircraft have a "god's eye" view of the battlefield and be able to hit anything regardless of the type of cover or terrain where a targeted unit is located?

In this era? No.

I am not sure exactly how cover/hiding from air attack is modeled in CM:SF.

Doesn't matter. Airpower and the capabilities thereof are massively different in the two eras. Don't assume that anything it can do in SF can happen in BN until you have the game and can see for yourself.

Michael

[Chops]

I am with you Michael regarding the vastly different capabilities of airpower from the two era's. Let's hope it is modeled.

In CM:SF recently (Germans vs. Syrians), I had several BMP's get hit while located in or on the edge of woods, and then finally a tank was hit while surrounded by trees. I also had infantry hit in a building. Kind a makes me wonder what's up. Blue didn't have any FO with a laser designator on the infantry that I was aware of.....maybe they did. Of course modern technology has the ability to do all that I just listed.

With the situation in Libya, I have read reports that "rebel" forces have accidently been hit by NATO, and that even a Libyan plane was able to evade NATO and hit the anti-gadhafi forces. So with all of the latest technology, stuff still happens.

[gunnersman]

I have not seen anyone answer to this yet:

Haven't seen this applied yet in the AARs and perhaps it is still under development, but am wondering how air support functions in CMBN?

I have not found the quote yet, but, I seem to recall in a post not too long ago that air support was treated in a way similar to preparatory bombardment. You may call in air support only during the first turn, or in the setup phase. I'm not sure exactly which. But I do not believe it is handled the same way as it is in CMSF where you call in air strikes at will (so to speak).

I'm going by memory here so any correction would be appreciated.

I hope this goes towards answering your question.

[SKELLEN]

With the situation in Libya, I have read reports that "rebel" forces have accidently been hit by NATO, and that even a Libyan plane was able to evade NATO and hit the anti-gadhafi forces. So with all of the latest technology, stuff still happens.

Also remember that Gaddaffi's forces have swapped their Amour vehicles in some cases and are now driving around in cars, pickups etc similar to the rebels in an obvious attempt at fooling or making life harder for NATO aircraft.