Dust means death

[John Malcolm]

First of all - Hi from a long time lurker brough back by the new game

I'm sure many people will be familiar with the photo from Normandy of a sign reading 'Dust means death'. I haven't been able to look into this in the game so far, but do vehicles travelling on dirt roads in dry conditions kick up dust which would be visible to the enemy whether or not they have LOS to the area?

A seond related question regarding on board mortars. Supposing I have a unit capable of calling for this support, observing a wood. There are contact icons in the woods. No friendly units are known to be in this area. Why can't that observer request mortar fire into the middle of these woods where he doesn't have LOS. It seems odd that the observer is unable to call for fire in these situations. The enemy could be forming up for an attack and he is unable to call for fire unless he can seem them at the edges.

[Jaws]

Hello

Answer 1: yes, yes

Answer 2: Basically you are right... if you can see dust you have LoS somewhere near the dust. That point could be targeted by a FO. And you can’t target anything if you have no LoS. You can discuss about this but I don’t mind. This helps to keep the game playable when playing H2H. Peolple could buy tons of arty and bomb any most likely hide spot until they win.

[Volodnikov]

I think you should be able to place at least one TRP during the course of battle.

[stikkypixie]

In the first builds of CMSF (the modern warfare predecessor of CMBN) every vehicle made dust clouds (on the right ground conditions) and they could be seen. Unfortunately the way the dust clouds were implemented, it was possible to exactly pinpoint the number of vehicles and where they were going, which is obviously unrealistic. So BFC decided to remove the dust clouds unless you could spot the vehicles.

As for dropping artillery in the middle of a forest, no idea how that worked in real life. In the game you can only do it if you have LOS or a target reference point. Just curious here, would it be possible in real life? Wouldn't it be hard to judge how deep a forest is?

[Wodin]

A target reference point is a pre planned arty point...so it would be highly umrealistic to be able to put one in during the course of the battle...

[Volodnikov]

Well, yeah, I mostly mean the function of a TRP in which LOS isn't required. It would be difficult to determine how deep a forest is, but can't the mortars adjust? If a forest is on a map and it's kind of obvious that there's something going on there, I would think that it wouldn't be too difficult to eventually hit it.

[Nijmegen]

If you have LOS to the edge of a wood, and a map that tells you roughly how large the wood is and so forth, you should be able to call in artillery on it. It might not be the most accurate - say you're on a level with the edge of the treeline and are dropping behind, you won't know how far behind - but it's doable.

Strict LOS rules for artillery needn't apply, so long as the commander knows that he can get very inaccurate results. Likewise, he can strike very lucky.

I wonder when the Commonwealth module comes out will we see more advanced arty? The British love of set piece, creeping barrages and all that.

[womble]

If you have LOS to the edge of a wood, and a map that tells you roughly how large the wood is and so forth, you should be able to call in artillery on it. It might not be the most accurate - say you're on a level with the edge of the treeline and are dropping behind, you won't know how far behind - but it's doable.

Strict LOS rules for artillery needn't apply, so long as the commander knows that he can get very inaccurate results. Likewise, he can strike very lucky.

I wonder when the Commonwealth module comes out will we see more advanced arty? The British love of set piece, creeping barrages and all that.

I have to concur here. Perhaps it just wasn't done, but if a spotter calls in an azimuth and range, the battery aren't going to know whether the spotter can see the target location, and if the spotter wants to use the azimuth and range of '50 yards inside that treeline', they should be allowed to call it in. Spotting rounds should be expended as usual, and if the spotter can't see to correct, the mission will go wild somewhere, as usual. So the 'no LOS' refusal to click should be a warning, not a blanket denial.

[Jaws]

As for dropping artillery in the middle of a forest, no idea how that worked in real life. In the game you can only do it if you have LOS or a target reference point. Just curious here, would it be possible in real life? Wouldn't it be hard to judge how deep a forest is?

You can plan arty everywhere in real life. Rules of Engagements are the only restrictions. But its almost as useless as carpet bombing… but if you have enough bombs maybe you hit something… even own troops…

[goodwood]

I'm no arty expert, but why does FO need a line of sight to call in a bombardment? If I'm a FO and I suspect enemy movement behind a hill or forest, I get my trusty map out Identify the area on the map and call in a strike on that area using a map grid reference isn't it that simple?

[stikkypixie]

I'm no arty expert, but why does FO need a line of sight to call in a bombardment? If I'm a FO and I suspect enemy movement behind a hill or forest, I get my trusty map out Identify the area on the map and call in a strike on that area using a map grid reference isn't it that simple?

Even if it was possible to pinpoint the area exactly on a perfect map, wind and other atmospheric conditions will influence the path of the mortars, making it impossible for the artillery fire accurately. It is very hard to account for the factors. Also remember that usually you only want to hit a *specific* part of the woods or otherwise you'll be wasting ammunition. That's why the FO needs spotting rounds before calling in fire.

[Jaws]

I'm no arty expert, but why does FO need a line of sight to call in a bombardment? If I'm a FO and I suspect enemy movement behind a hill or forest, I get my trusty map out Identify the area on the map and call in a strike on that area using a map grid reference isn't it that simple?

It can be done by pre-planned arty. Arty is not like oh I have tons of ammo just throw where ever you think there might be an enemy in real life. Arty in divided in levels of command and priorities and arty is basically scarce (I know there are exceptions). Also a FO have to report the results after a call for fire. Example of an call for fire with no eyes on target from FO who targets enemy behind a hill could be like this….Foxtrot give me all you have on grid 12345678 possible enemy I don’t see but suspect they are there… Here Foxtrot bombardment incoming.. splash… lots of impacts….what were the results?.... Well eh.. I saw a lot of explosions and we could have hit maybe something… Hypothetically it be go like this but no commander would ever accept this. Basic rule is always have eyes on target these days and in ww2 too except for pre-planned bombardments.

[JonS]

As for dropping artillery in the middle of a forest, no idea how that worked in real life. In the game you can only do it if you have LOS or a target reference point.

That's not quite true. In the game you can also draw a linear across the forest between two observable points, or draw an area that overlaps the part of the forest you're interested in. Both will 'waste' rounds on points you aren't interested in, but that's where you have to weigh up whether the target is worth it or not.

Just curious here, would it be possible in real life?

Very possible. There are numerous tricks - like adjusting with smoke, watching for the rising dust, adjusting with airburst, listening for the time interval between when the round should have impacted and when you hear the boom (then dividing by 3 to get the distance between you and the round in kilometres), or dropping one round and listening for the bearing then dropping a second a known distance from the first and getting the bearing to that one and using basic trig to work out how far away they are - to adjust onto a target you can't see directly.

Wouldn't it be hard to judge how deep a forest is?

Very, but a good map helps. As does good command of the ground (basically; being elevated a bit so you can look down onto the forest). If you're in the forest, though, it becomes really really hard. And dangerous.

[herr_oberst]

I suppose you could target a point at the edge, get the spotting round(s) set, then call a small adjustment directed into the woods with your FFE.

[c3k]

How do you know there's enemy behind that hill/forest? In a game of CMBN, you have that knowledge: a battle is about to start. (Well, in most scenarios. Otherwise you'd sit there staring at your screen for awhile.) How does that FO know a battle is about to start?

If you want, you can get TRPs and place them all around in blind spots. That should help.

[lookeylou]

uh oh. a its too hard thread.

no spotting rounds =wasted ammo

[Michael Emrys]

Spotting rounds should be expended as usual, and if the spotter can't see to correct, the mission will go wild somewhere, as usual.

I wonder about calling in a spotting round on the near edge of the woods. Once the FO got those falling on target, he should be able to give a correction to the point he thinks the enemy might be. At least that ought to have been possible in reality. Whether the game is capable of reproducing that is another matter.

Michael

[Michael Emrys]

I suppose you could target a point at the edge, get the spotting round(s) set, then call a small adjustment directed into the woods with your FFE.

You beat me to it.

Michael