Why Is This – Artillery With Zero Range

[golden delicious]

ORIGINAL: jimwinsor

You know, you can still design a scenario giving infantry units ranged ability; just use the the "Infantry Artillery" symbol in your design. Put some artillery alomng with your squads, and voila! I mean, that should do the trick, right?

I really wouldn't recommend that. Your units will very rapidly lose their supply and readiness if anyone nearby gets attacked.

[Catch21]

Like I said in my earlier post:

"At the end of the day, it's a designer decision and will either add or detract to a scenario's popularity from a player perspective. You can always check the stats."

And it's a Q specific to Korsun 44. While some HQs have incorporated arty, both sides have individual ranged arty units.

Obviously depends on map scale. As a player I prefer arty separate so I can move it around where I want to direct fire. Inside HQ or other infantry units, it often IMO gets unrealistically shot up since it's adjacent to the enemy. 'Single MG-42 takes out 100 132mm Katyusha Batteries' wouldn't have been an everyday newspaper headline.

[Nicholas Bell]

You're correct, the divisional level 122 tubes in the rifle divisions were used for direct fire only. The men with the know-how and the equipment necessary for indirect fire were pooled in the non-divisional units.

Having the divisional level arty range 0 prevents them from doing what they could not - support other units.

[golden delicious]

ORIGINAL: General Staff

Obviously depends on map scale. As a player I prefer arty separate so I can move it around where I want to direct fire. Inside HQ or other infantry units, it often IMO gets unrealistically shot up since it's adjacent to the enemy.

Well a) your HQs shouldn't really be adjacent to the enemy and b) artillery shouldn't take much damage in frontal attacks anyway because its passive defender.

[Catch21]

ORIGINAL: golden delicious
Well a) your HQs shouldn't really be adjacent to the enemy and b) artillery shouldn't take much damage in frontal attacks anyway because its passive defender.

a) I know it's awful but it sometimes happens. Particularly here. Korsun. 1944. Nasty.
b) I don't know for sure but 'gut feel' is it just seems to happen. I'd rather be able to track these losses with arty in discrete units wherever possible.

[golden delicious]

ORIGINAL: General Staff

ORIGINAL: golden delicious
Well a) your HQs shouldn't really be adjacent to the enemy and b) artillery shouldn't take much damage in frontal attacks anyway because its passive defender.

a) I know it's awful but it sometimes happens. Particularly here. Korsun. 1944. Nasty.
b) I don't know for sure but 'gut feel' is it just seems to happen. I'd rather be able to track these losses with arty in discrete units wherever possible.

a) well the player should be discouraged from throwing the HQs right in with the infantry. Adding artillery helps this
b) there are obviously some losses. But it's not going to be like the first day of the Somme.

[Catch21]

ORIGINAL: golden delicious
a) well the player should be discouraged from throwing the HQs right in with the infantry. Adding artillery helps this
b) there are obviously some losses. But it's not going to be like the first day of the Somme.

a) Agreed. But in this scenario everyone needs to pitch in to have a chance to get out. Including senior officers.
b) No. But that's extreme. There aren't many days in warfare like that terrible first day on the Somme. I just notice the difference. I find I can fire arty with no losses when they are discrete units. When they are just piled in with everything else, they tend to do worse.

[tblersch]

ORIGINAL: larryfulkerson
  I cannot for the life of me see why a unit that has ranged weapons shouldn't have the range of those weapons in that unit.  It just makes logical sense to me.

I can think of at least one situation...Japanese doctrine in WWII dicatated using artillery (such as they had it) in a direct-fire mode, up near the line with the infantry. So even though it was technically a ranged weapon, most Japanese units (particularly in an early war scenario) with integral artillery probably SHOULD have a range of zero, to represent the doctrine.

[a white rabbit]

..i tried the one hex range artillery from dug-in, it may be the scen, Imphal, but maybe 30% ? move taken per shoot, nice that they can finally participate tho