Why no repeats?

[Peregrine]

Here's my suggestion on how this could be implemented in-game.

1. An Arty mission is called in as normal and goes to FFE.
   
2. After it completes or is cancelled, a "REPEAT last fire mission" button appears for that battery/gun/mortar below the other mission types (point, area, linear)
   
3. If the unit is on-board and performs any other orders (move, fire, face, etc.), comes under any level of suppression or loses C2, the REPEAT button goes away.
   
4. Otherwise, the REPEAT button remains active for X number of turns (amount X depending on the level of support; for example Battalion 81mm mortars might be able to REPEAT for 9-10 turns while Corps 155mm Howitzers only can REPEAT for 5 turns) The X number could appear on the button to help the player remember how long this command is available?
   
5. If calling a REPEAT, the FO does not have to have LOS to the target; it fires with the same accuracy as the previous mission.
   
6. If the REPEAT button is selected, all of the mission parameters (type, duration, number of tubes, etc.) from that unit's previous mission are re-used and cannot be modified until the mission is in FFE. (this should reduce the potential "gamey" use of quick missions to register a target then blanket it with an emergency barrage later in the game.) If adjustments are called in, normal spotting rules (including LOS and any delays) are back in effect.
   
7. If the REPEAT button is selected, the mission parameters are displayed along with the normal target indicators.
   
8. If the REPEAT button is clicked but the fire mission not confirmed, then it's just like any other arty request that isn't confirmed and nothing happens.
   
9. Once the REPEAT mission is in FFE, it's treated like a normal fire mission and can be cancelled, adjusted or REPEATed.
   

Instead of quick firing you would do the opposite. You would fire heavy maximum and immediately cancel as it goes to FFE. Maybe medium/light maximum if you think too many shells would fall before the cease fire gets through.

[JonS]

Did the guys in WW2 know their craft or were they just cowboys throwing bombs about?

Cowboys? Certainly the RA was - and is - filled with chaps who are over 6ft, brave, witty, urbane, handsome, strong of jaw, noble of purpose, and pure of heart. I'm not sure about those other people though.

And finally moving to the game terms - would the suggested implimentation by jarink above sound like a sensible way to model the repeat command in a way that adds a bit of flavour, without adding god like abilities to recall any mission by any unit?

Didn't read my post, huh? Or sburke's?

Sure, 'Repeat' is a conceptually pretty straightforward idea, and if there were only one observer and one fire unit it would be pretty strightforward in practice. The problem is when you have multiple observers and multiple fire units, and the combinatorial options grow exponentially. Conveying which FO or observer unit has a valid 'Repeat' option available, from which fire unit, to what target and with what settings in a straightforward and understanable way is a non-trivial task.

And, even if you manage that feat, you're still struggling with the basic premise that artillery (like everything else) in CM is already much faster, more flexible, more predictable, and more reliable than any commander in 1944 could reasonably have imagined. Also, this kind of functionality is really only relevant as battles get up over battalion sized, on maps larger than 1km², and more than 90mins long. While CM will happily allow battles that size, I don't believe it's intended to be used that way. Decrying a lack of functionality for situations it isn't really meant to cover doesn't carry a very strong imperative. IMO, etc.

Regards

Jon

Edit: this is somewhat tangential, but I know a bloke who was GPO with 7RHA in Helmand a few years back. When they arrived, and after the previous mob had departed, they had a look at the target records they'd inherited and discovered there were hundreds and hundreds of the bloody things. It seemed like every intersection, tree, house, and dtch which had ever been fired at - and quite a few that hadn't - had been recorded as a TRP, 'just in case.' Infantry in contact and the FOs were spending more time tying to read their maps buried under all the TRP markings and then arguing about whether fire was coming from VX1234 or VX 1243 than they were if they'd just started from scratch. Remember, this is with a computerised CP, automated target record keeping, GPS, and excellent comms. So they deleted all of them, re-recorded a single generic TRP at a good location at a density of less than one per km², and cracked on with their damn job.

[gunnulf]

Cowboys? Certainly the RA was - and is - filled with chaps who are over 6ft, brave, witty, urbane, handsome, strong of jaw, noble of purpose, and pure of heart. I'm not sure about those other people though.

Didn't read my post, huh? Or sburke's?

Sure, 'Repeat' is a conceptually pretty straightforward idea, and if there were only one observer and one fire unit it would be pretty strightforward in practice. The problem is when you have multiple observers and multiple fire units, and the combinatorial options grow exponentially. Conveying which FO or observer unit has a valid 'Repeat' option available, from which fire unit, to what target and with what settings in a straightforward and understanable way is a non-trivial task.

And, even if you manage that feat, you're still struggling with the basic premise that artillery (like everything else) in CM is already much faster, more flexible, more predictable, and more reliable than any commander in 1944 could reasonably have imagined. Also, this kind of functionality is really only relevant as battles get up over battalion sized, on maps larger than 1km², and more than 90mins long. While CM will happily allow battles that size, I don't believe it's intended to be used that way. Decrying a lack of functionality for situations it isn't really meant to cover doesn't carry a very strong imperative. IMO, etc.

Regards

Jon

Edit: this is somewhat tangential, but I know a bloke who was GPO with 7RHA in Helmand a few years back. When they arrived, and after the previous mob had departed, they had a look at the target records they'd inherited and discovered there were hundreds and hundreds of the bloody things. It seemed like every intersection, tree, house, and dtch which had ever been fired at - and quite a few that hadn't - had been recorded as a TRP, 'just in case.' Infantry in contact and the FOs were spending more time tying to read their maps buried under all the TRP markings and then arguing about whether fire was coming from VX1234 or VX 1243 than they were if they'd just started from scratch. Remember, this is with a computerised CP, automated target record keeping, GPS, and excellent comms. So they deleted all of them, re-recorded a single generic TRP at a good location at a density of less than one per km², and cracked on with their damn job.

Cheers old fruit. I have agreed all along across many posts here that dig deep and it does get complicated with too many variables. But all that is being proposed really is the simple version as per jarinks summary. 1 spotter in contact already with 1 firing unit. If no other tasking happens first then a button could be available to click and fire again at a much reduced time than begining the process from scratch. KISS.

Re. the helmand TRP-fest: I have no doubt that 6 months sat in the sangar then a combination of keeness and bordom contrived to let them get carried away a tad... and no doubt a whole horde of dropshorts coming in cleaned up the system, bless them. However in Normandy wouldnt have been in location quite that long obviously... All said next regimental event I am going to collar one of the old and bold mortar boys and sit him in front of the game and pick his brains

In the meantime lets see what happens in future versions.

[JonS]

But all that is being proposed really is the simple version ...

Ok, now I know you aren't reading my posts.

1) KISS is nice, but even simple is going to be complex, ad take a lot of development to implement

2) even given 1), 'Repeat' isn't really appropriate to CM anyway.

next regimental event I am going to collar one of the old and bold mortar boys and sit him in front of the game and pick his brains

Sure. Make sure you emphasise to him that CM is not Invertron, WIFT, or IFOT though.

[gunnulf]

Ok, now I know you aren't reading my posts.

QUOTE]

I did read them... but I...did...disclose...I...were..inf..an...try... Me don't read too clever

Have a good day old chap and will have to wait out to see if the developers make any sense of it all.