What? No Counterbattery...

[Werewolf13]

... or at least I can't find it in BFTB. Which seems wierd since one of the things that US Army Artillery in WWII did better than everyone was counterbattery. And IIRC counterbattery was in the very 1st version of a command ops game: Airborne Assault (or maybe I'm mixing that up with another game).

Anyway does BFTB have counterbattery? If so how does one use it. If not then why not?

[wodin]

It should happen..the AI will do it if they have a target..or you can do it manually. This was mentioned recently actually..not sure where, sure someone can link you to the discussion though.

[Phoenix100]

The AI does do CB fire, yes. How do you use it? The AI will do it for you. Or, as Wodin says, you can plot it yourself by placing bombard orders on selected arty targets. Some people think the AI doesn't do enough CB fire, or give enough priority to it. There is some talk of a button (way in the future) to dedicate some arty units to CB fire, I believe. I've always been fairly happy with what the AI does.

[dazkaz15]

From my experience the AI does counterbattery fire when it sees enemy Arty, including having my own Arty counter fired on.

The issue is having, and keeping the enemy Arty under observation.
I have some questions for you.

1.) How long do you want your AI artillery to carry on firing on a target once it has become obscured by dust and smoke? If it has retreated you will be firing on an empty location.

2.) What level of intelligence do you won't your AI arty to fire at suspected enemy arty positions? If the intel is not good you may be firing on units that are not Artillery.

3.) How recent a siting should your AI arty fire at a suspected position? Current, recent, all? If it fires on an old position you will be wasting rounds.

4.)What target deployment level do you won't your AI arty to fire at? If its entrenched you may do very little damage for a huge expenditure of rounds.

5.) As counterbattery is usually used to suppress artillery that is currently firing, how far do you think a friendly unit should be away from the firing artillery to plot an accurate target position, assuming no visual identification of the target is possible, and the Hostile Battery has been located by Sound Ranging, or Flash Spotting?
Baring in mind the different terrain, and weather problems, especially in the BFTB scenarios.

6.) Do you think the AI should cheat to ensure counterbattery fire takes place, automatically?

[Phoenix100]

Questions for who, Daz? For me? As I said, I've always been fairly happy with AI CB fire. I have seen it happening on blank spaces where my arty used to be as well, by the way.

[dazkaz15]

No it was a question for Werewolf1326.
I must have clicked on your post to get the input window up, sorry.

He is obviously not very happy with the way that the AI uses the artillery in the CB roll, and I was wondering if he has fully considered how difficult it is to implement this very complex, and variable kind of bombardment.
Even today it is still hard to find, and neutralise artillery. Especially towed artillery.
Although I must admit that with todays modern battlefield electronics, and communications it is getting a lot easier to find, and take it out.
Radar has played an important roll, since but it was in its infancy during WW2.

The most common way to locate hostile batteries during WW2 was aerial photography, and spotter planes, and the weather in the BFTB scenarios almost rules this out completely.

Sound ranging, and Flash-spotting were used at a Corps level, but took a long time to set up, so were used mainly in static type battles in a defensive role rather than blitzkrieg style like we have in BFTB, and HTTR, as it took time to set up the sensors, and survey it all in, and by the time that has been done the battle has moved on.

[Werewolf13]

ORIGINAL: dazkaz15

No it was a question for Werewolf1326.

He is obviously not very happy with the way that the AI uses the artillery in the CB roll, and I was wondering if he has fully considered how difficult it is to implement this very complex, and variable kind of bombardment.

Not unhappy at all. Just wondering how a detailed sim like BFTB didn't include it.

Even today it is still hard to find, and neutralise artillery. Especially towed artillery.

Uhhhh... Nope. Even when I served in the early 70's a field artillery battery dedicated to counterbattery could drop a round on a firing enemy arty unit within a minute, sometimes less. Our guys could drop a round into a 12' circle. It didn't take eyes on the unit to do it either. Ghz frequency precision radars could track the fired rounds, calculate where they were fired from and send the information to the counterbattery unit very quickly. And that's with 70's tech. I can't even imagine how good they are at it now.

No the arty didn't have that kind of capability in WW2.

That said I hadn't considered either the environmental or geographical conditions extant in the Ardennes at the time. The weather especially, would have made counterbattery difficult as you pointed out.

You pointed out some things I indeed had not considered. thanks.

[dazkaz15]

ORIGINAL: Werewolf1326
Uhhhh... Nope. Even when I served in the early 70's a field artillery battery dedicated to counterbattery could drop a round on a firing enemy arty unit within a minute, sometimes less. Our guys could drop a round into a 12' circle. It didn't take eyes on the unit to do it either. Ghz frequency precision radars could track the fired rounds, calculate where they were fired from and send the information to the counterbattery unit very quickly. And that's with 70's tech. I can't even imagine how good they are at it now.

No the arty didn't have that kind of capability in WW2.

That said I hadn't considered either the environmental or geographical conditions extant in the Ardennes at the time. The weather especially, would have made counterbattery difficult as you pointed out.

You pointed out some things I indeed had not considered. thanks.

I am very out of touch with the modern battlefield I must admit, but judging by the fact that artillery is still being deployed, and used effectively, i.e. It is not being destroyed every time they fire, there is obviously countermeasures in place to mitigate the effect.

If you take the Falklands Campaign as a not so modern example, in 1982 I don't think there was a single counterbattery fire mission conducted effectively by Argentina. There were a few stray rounds that landed close, but that was just the Argentinians firing blindly over the hills hoping for the best.
I know that the Argentine gun positions were fired on in Port Stanley by Naval Gunfire, but that was because the Brits had observers in the hills surrounding it with eyes on the target.

Obviously the Gulf wars were very different, as it was a very one sided battle, where the coalition completely dominated the battlefield.
From what I have read CB seems to have take the form of shoot and scoot, similar to the tactics that the Germans used with the Nebelwerfer, using the MLRS systems with radar to engage Hostile Batteries, then move out before they can retaliate.
I heard that the MLRS rockets were often on their way to the Hositle Battery before its fired rounds had even landed.

Do you know of any Coalition guns that were successfully bombarded by counter battery fire?

So I stand by my point that even though the tech is there, and theoretically it can be very accurate, it doesn't seem to have made the artillery piece on the modern battlefield obsolete yet, so clearly it has its limitations.

Now roll back 70 years, throw in some very bad weather, a fast moving front line, and restricted ammo supplies, as well as countless other impromptu calls for fire, to directly support an attack or defense, then its no wonder not a lot of counter battery fire is going on.
I have no idea how you would program a game to make such a complex mission like this effective, without it feeling like the AI is cheating.
I think if you feel you need more Counterbattery fire you will probably be better of doing it manually.
Maybe it can be programmed into the game that when an artillery unit fires its current level of intel goes up a notch. I.e. if it was recent/good before it fired it would now become current/excellent, but I think that's a very gamey solution.

[Perturabo]

It depends on scenario. If artillery unit is hidden behind an obstacle, it's understandable that CB fire isn't coming because the game doesn't simulate artillery fire detection.
On the other hand it (lack of CB) also often happens when an artillery unit is visible which is a problem.

ORIGINAL: dazkaz15

I think if you feel you need more Counterbattery fire you will probably be better of doing it manually.

Then the AI will be at disadvantage.