Grouping artillery units

[vj531]

Using Höfen Ho-Down playing Axis side as an example, it would be useful to be able to group bombardment units and then give orders to that group as and when needed?

Having to go back to each unit to reissue orders can be a lengthy and distracting process.

Thought?

[spelk]

You can use the Fire Support (FS) tab to list all Arty you've given commands to, and you can issue new commands to them from that list without having to find them on the field.

I presume you can detach and then group them and move them as one if you want to use them as a single entity though.

[MarkShot]

To get arty units to be moved to a fire base, you must move them individually. Otherwise, the unit in command moves to the location and the others just move far enough to have that location in range.

He he he ... sounds like we another check box.

[simovitch]

Make sure 'rest after bombard' is not checked and let the AI manage your FS bombardments; it does a pretty good job of selecting targets.

[loyalcitizen]

Just left click and drag over several arty units. They will group up and when I give a fire order to the group, it sure seems like a lot of firepower heads towards the target.
Perhaps they are following the lead of their new arty HQ or perhaps it just looks like more fire is directed there. I dunno, as I don't micromanage my arty and it goes where I want it to mostly.
It also lessens the load on the higher HQs when you "lasso" several detached arty and create a command structure within those units.

[sanch]

Something I discovered: If your Corps has several artillery units under its control, you can give a fire order to the Corps. Because there's multiple artillery units, a lot of stuff lands on the target.

But the part I don't really understand (assuming the Corps is the big boss), is when I look at the OB, I see the Corps under player control, with no apparent way to release it from player control. And what the ramifications of that may be, I have no idea.

Similarly, if you have, say a Division under the Corps, and the Division has artillery, you can do the same thing with the Division. However, when you are done with the shoot, you can reattach the Division to the Corps. But again, whatever side effects there may be from the reattach, I don't know.

But I've found that if you assign division/corps assets to attacking battalions/regiments, the AI will handle the attached units pretty well, including nasty fire shoots on targets.

So I (thus far), have tended to hand out most of the division/corps units to the attacking battalions, and leave back just enough artillery for the occasional big dump on a target.

[MarkShot]

The map boss is kind of a special unit on the map as at any given moment >>> it is you, the player <<<. It is who you are in virtual simulated world. It can change based on what reinforcements arrive. You will always be the most senior unit on the map.

So, how does it behave differently. Well, even if you have given subordinates orders and are displaying the command player structure, when you click on the map boss, every unit on the map will receive a highlight. This is unlike selecting other HQs which will not highlight any units which were given direct orders, dettached, or cross attached.

The map boss unit can only be in one of two states, following the orders which you have given to it OR waiting for orders from you the player. Control of it can never be returned to some AI superior, because of its unique role in being you.

I hope that helps.

[loyalcitizen]

ORIGINAL: loyalcitizen

Just left click and drag over several arty units. They will group up and when I give a fire order to the group, it sure seems like a lot of firepower heads towards the target.
Perhaps they are following the lead of their new arty HQ or perhaps it just looks like more fire is directed there. I dunno, as I don't micromanage my arty and it goes where I want it to mostly.
It also lessens the load on the higher HQs when you "lasso" several detached arty and create a command structure within those units.

Ok, just confirmed. A single Bombard order to the dedicated HQ or the de facto HQ in a large grouping of arty units WILL direct all fire to the target. This is a great way to cut down on the load to your higher HQs, which often have 10+ single arty units attached.

[vj531]

Now I'm thinking am I being "unrealistic" grouping mass artillery.
it certainly makes life a lot easier but is it a little gamie?

[MarkShot]

If you read any of my guides, you will see that I commonly create firebases. I was told by more military knowledgeable team members that that usage of arty was not common in WWII and didn't really come into fashion until Vietnam.

[Adam Parker]

ORIGINAL: sharper

Now I'm thinking am I being "unrealistic" grouping mass artillery.

This has come up before in other designs. One of the biggest shortcomings of SSG's games such as Battle For Normandy for example. was its absence of restrictions placed upon the use of artillery (interestingly, regardless, the title still managed to create historical macro end-game outcomes).

Without Corps, Divisional and Regimental artillery boundaries, the AI would rush its arty from one end of the map to the other each turn to develop the best combat shifts per the game's CRT.

SSG finally overcame this IIRC with its Battlefront and Kharkov titles.

However, without getting to the rulebook section yet, I always thought the arty in BFtB was spotter based and only spotters within an arty unit's hierachy could direct its fire. If not, should be.

If this is a game-breaker or uber head-head gamey-tactic, then possibly the easiest solution programming-wise may be to disallow human control of arty assets.

[loyalcitizen]

ORIGINAL: sharper

Now I'm thinking am I being "unrealistic" grouping mass artillery.
it certainly makes life a lot easier but is it a little gamie?

If it is a little gamey to group them up into large firebases, I mitigate that by rarely giving them direct orders. I let the AI handle the shooting and it does a fine job.

[RayWolfe]

ORIGINAL: Adam Parker
However, without getting to the rulebook section yet, I always thought the arty in BFtB was spotter based and only spotters within an arty unit's hierachy could direct its fire. If not, should be.

Some years ago, I suggested some sort of fix might be to have a spotter (FOO) as an equipment type. If the "spotter equipment" was killed - as in routed remnants - then arty spotting would not be possible. However, your thoughts on spotters within hierarchy, does not accord with British FOO'S ability to call for support all the way from troop (4 guns) up to division (72 guns) and then right up through Corps to Army level. (I believe the Americans had a similar system.) ........ and, it was used A LOT. George Blackburn's Guns of war is one example of a British (Canadian) gunners experiences in NW Europe and the use of higher unit requests initiated by a mere troop FOO.
Cheers
Ray

[wodin]

Anybody think the Arty is to precise at the moment....I know it was the cause of huge casualites but it sometimes feels the Arty can suddenly decimate an entire force in no time at all....this I know happened and the Germans hated the American Arty but with having an abstract kind of map it does seem an awful lot of Batteries are hitting the target....seems more like how I imagine modern Arty could perform...just a thought...poor old Skornzey got a bag full of shrapnel...the Arty decimated an entire battalion very quickly indeed...Maybe the spotting rules need to adjusted....just because the unit counter has line of sight of another unit counter doesn't mean that the FOO can see everything...they might see some troops and guess where the rest are or even hear engines so direct Arty in but I bet alot missed.

[fleischer]

ORIGINAL: Adam Parker
However, without getting to the rulebook section yet, I always thought the arty in BFtB was spotter based and only spotters within an arty unit's hierachy could direct its fire. If not, should be.

That is true - if the arty unit is not in the same hiearchy as the caller, it can't fire in support. The interesting question, I think, is how the artillery is influenced by spotters when the player controls it - i.e. can you shoot blind/at distant targets and still receive the same precision/firepower?

It would be nice to get some clarification on this from the devs, since it's such a crucial point.

[Arjuna]

If you order a bombardment onto a location and the target is unregistered, then it takes several minutes to register and this comes off of your mission duration. The net effect is that you have less rounds on target. What should happen to make this realistic is that we should test to see if any unit can spot it, but this could slow the game down significantly with potentially up to hundreds of LOS checks ( or as many as there are friendly units on map ).

[GoodGuy]

ORIGINAL: MarkShot

If you read any of my guides, you will see that I commonly create firebases. I was told by more military knowledgeable team members that that usage of arty was not common in WWII and didn't really come into fashion until Vietnam.

I wouldn't bet on that.
As far as I know, some TOT (Time on target) bombardments were used either shortly before/after or during the Ardennes offensive here and there, and in 1945, the US Army had experimented with TOT since 1942. Given, it did not become a regular habit, as either the "barrage" (belt of fire, stationary [standing] or moving [rolling] in front of attacking friendly troops) or "concentration" used to be the usual type of bombardment.

With concentration, "two or more batteries engage the same targets".

Note: batteries, not several regiments.

http://www.balagan.org.uk/war/ww2/snippet/artillery.htm

Same goes for German units, most likely, the Schwere Artillerie-Abteilungen had 3 batteries usually, sometimes 2. So grouping say 2 arty units in the game, wouldn't be gamey, as they depict something between 4-6 batteries. Grouping 3 or more may be gamey, though.

[Arjuna]

Perhaps we could start by decreasing the prob of adding arty units to an on call request. This would tend to limit the number of coordinated responses.

[wodin]

ORIGINAL: Arjuna

Perhaps we could start by decreasing the prob of adding arty units to an on call request. This would tend to limit the number of coordinated responses.

Perfect Dave....great solution...I'm happy with that.

[fleischer]

ORIGINAL: Arjuna
If you order a bombardment onto a location and the target is unregistered, then it takes several minutes to register and this comes off of your mission duration. The net effect is that you have less rounds on target. What should happen to make this realistic is that we should test to see if any unit can spot it, but this could slow the game down significantly with potentially up to hundreds of LOS checks ( or as many as there are friendly units on map ).

What exactly, does "uregistered" mean?