Command Ops: Artillery under AI control and you

Share your best strategy tips with other gamers here.

Moderators: Panther Paul, Arjuna

User avatar
BletchleyGeek
Posts: 4460
Joined: Thu Nov 26, 2009 3:01 pm
Location: Living in the fair city of Melbourne, Australia

Command Ops: Artillery under AI control and you

Post by BletchleyGeek »

Hi,

as I promised to Harry, I'll try to describe here how does the AI manage artillery on behalf you the player. The system was reviewed during development of build 258, resulting in a number of changes and fixes that the patch notes only mention in passing (see the reference to static artillery units not firing).

When one of your forces makes a request for artillery support, the request is propagated through the player-defined command structure, and received by all eligible artillery units. When certain conditions are met, there's a chance that the arty unit will accept the request and become part of the available pool of on-call artillery support. There are 3 factors influencing the chances of the request being honored:

1) The ammo level of the artillery unit. The less ammunition is available on hand, the lower the chances for the request to be honored.

2) The distance between the unit making the request and the artillery unit along the player-defined command structure. For instance, the chances of artillery assigned to a different Corps than that of the unit making the request are very low. There's as well an asymmetry between Axis and Allied powers: the decrease in the chances of the request being honored as the command distance increases are steeper for the Axis than for the Allies.

3) The Judgement rating of the artillery unit immediate HQ commander. When the Judgement level is below 50, the chances of the artillery unit committing will become more erratic, sometimes lowering it, sometimes increasing it. This accounts for dubious or unsound commanders, which either conserve their ammunition too much (think of the Isaldwhana quartermaster) or happily commits his unit to too many requests (running out of ammo very quickly).

The question some of you might be wanting to ask is: so, how does this may influence how I approach Command Ops?

Attached to this post I have uploaded a savegame of our beloved Hofen scenario on Day 2 (with my plan which consisted in stockpiling supplies and resting during Day 1, criticism is welcome). As you can see, I have already positioned I/752, I/753 and I/751 to launch an assault over Monschau and Hofen. In the screenshot you'll be able to see that I have attached some (not all) of the artillery assets of 326 VG Division to the Battalion. By doing this, I am quite certain that the infantry conducting the assault will receive as much artillery support as they need and the Axis doctrine and command structure is able to provide.

This does not only help at having the arty directing fires for me, it also helps the AI planning considerably. Note that mission planning assesses the combat strength of the force against the strength of the enemy forces near the mission objective (the latter mediated by the available intel on those enemy forces), and might take some questionable decisions if it's not sure it's stronger than the enemy.

If you let the game run and wait until 8:20-9:20 you'll should see how as the US troops in Monschau and Hofen are uncovered a quite satisfactory rain of steel falls over them.

Image
Attachments
HofenArty..eII752.jpg
HofenArty..eII752.jpg (991.98 KiB) Viewed 1385 times
User avatar
BletchleyGeek
Posts: 4460
Joined: Thu Nov 26, 2009 3:01 pm
Location: Living in the fair city of Melbourne, Australia

RE: Command Ops: Artillery under AI control and you

Post by BletchleyGeek »

Regarding counterbattery fire. As far as I know there are two ways that enemy artillery units are spotted and counterbattery fire is then spotted:

* Units detecting them with their built-in cheap and cheerful Eyeball MkI sensor platforms (either by seeing the guns themselves or indirectly by spotting the flash, something which can be regulated via map layer effects in MapMaker)

* Starting enemy force intelligence level (set by the scenario designer on ScenMaker). This accounts for air recon (before the battle, interrogation of prisoners and wireless intercepts). I think there's no "magic" intel info being gathered once the battle starts.

Sound ranging and wireless interception aren't in Command Ops, since it's not modeling sound propagation nor command & control communications over radio networks.
User avatar
BletchleyGeek
Posts: 4460
Joined: Thu Nov 26, 2009 3:01 pm
Location: Living in the fair city of Melbourne, Australia

RE: Command Ops: Artillery under AI control and you

Post by BletchleyGeek »

Last but not least. I'm sure Dave will appreciate any comments you guys have on the existing systems and on ways on how to improve them. My advice to you is (1) to keep in mind Panther Games' motto: "Realism when it matters", (2) references to primary or secondary sources backing your statements aren't mandatory but will be very appreciated.

Note: The saved game is available here

https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B60Fz61 ... sp=sharing
Phoenix100
Posts: 2962
Joined: Tue Sep 28, 2010 12:26 pm

RE: Command Ops: Artillery under AI control and you

Post by Phoenix100 »

Very helpful, BG. Many thanks. Will download and study. Just to make sure I've got it (idiot that I am) - you're saying the arty works better to support you (via the AI) if it's attached as close as poss to the assault troops, has plenty ammo and a commander with great judgement?

If that's so it will certainly change the way I've been playing, because I haven't moved the arty around like that at all.

Peter

EDIT: Just fired it up. Interesting. It certainly looks very effective. Excellent.
User avatar
Arjuna
Posts: 17768
Joined: Mon Mar 31, 2003 11:18 am
Location: Canberra, Australia
Contact:

RE: Command Ops: Artillery under AI control and you

Post by Arjuna »

BTW the judgement level being used is that of the commander controlling the arty not the arty unit itself.
Dave "Arjuna" O'Connor
www.panthergames.com
User avatar
RockinHarry
Posts: 2344
Joined: Thu Jan 18, 2001 10:00 am
Location: Germany
Contact:

RE: Command Ops: Artillery under AI control and you

Post by RockinHarry »

Thanks BG! [8D] I´ve a number of questions, but need to retain them til early next week, since I´m away over weekend now.
RockinHarry in the web:

https://www.facebook.com/harry.zann
jimcarravall
Posts: 642
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2006 1:11 am

RE: Command Ops: Artillery under AI control and you

Post by jimcarravall »

ORIGINAL: Bletchley_Geek

Last but not least. I'm sure Dave will appreciate any comments you guys have on the existing systems and on ways on how to improve them. My advice to you is (1) to keep in mind Panther Games' motto: "Realism when it matters", (2) references to primary or secondary sources backing your statements aren't mandatory but will be very appreciated.

Note: The saved game is available here

https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B60Fz61 ... sp=sharing

Thanks for the information, particularly for describing it at a functional command level instead of how the software accomplishes the task.

Aside from the command levels from which current armies can initiate direct communication with rear fire support elements, the process mirrors fire control doctrine and "SNAFU propagation" in best laid plans.

I'm curious if the difference between German artillery command and control (C2) compared to Allied C2 is influenced by German combat doctrine, the quality of the communications grid, strategic supply issues for that era, something else I'm not considering, or all of the above.
Take care,

jim
User avatar
BletchleyGeek
Posts: 4460
Joined: Thu Nov 26, 2009 3:01 pm
Location: Living in the fair city of Melbourne, Australia

RE: Command Ops: Artillery under AI control and you

Post by BletchleyGeek »

ORIGINAL: phoenix
Very helpful, BG. Many thanks. Will download and study. Just to make sure I've got it (idiot that I am) - you're saying the arty works better to support you (via the AI) if it's attached as close as poss to the assault troops, has plenty ammo and a commander with great judgement?

Yep.
ORIGINAL: phoenix
EDIT: Just fired it up. Interesting. It certainly looks very effective. Excellent.

I've gone over something like 10 replays of that situation, and while the American troops get pummelled - there's a ton of arty available - that doesn't mean that the subpar infantry troops are going to perform very well. A common outcome is that the I/753 sometimes has one or two companies routing after suffering heavy losses. That's why I have the second 751 Rgt Bn in reserve.
User avatar
BletchleyGeek
Posts: 4460
Joined: Thu Nov 26, 2009 3:01 pm
Location: Living in the fair city of Melbourne, Australia

RE: Command Ops: Artillery under AI control and you

Post by BletchleyGeek »

ORIGINAL: RockinHarry

Thanks BG! [8D] I´ve a number of questions, but need to retain them til early next week, since I´m away over weekend now.

Enjoy your weekend Harry :)
User avatar
BletchleyGeek
Posts: 4460
Joined: Thu Nov 26, 2009 3:01 pm
Location: Living in the fair city of Melbourne, Australia

RE: Command Ops: Artillery under AI control and you

Post by BletchleyGeek »

ORIGINAL: jimcarravallah
Thanks for the information, particularly for describing it at a functional command level instead of how the software accomplishes the task.

No worries. To be honest, synthesizing the info above took me some time.
ORIGINAL: jimcarravallah
Aside from the command levels from which current armies can initiate direct communication with rear fire support elements, the process mirrors fire control doctrine and "SNAFU propagation" in best laid plans.

I'm curious if the difference between German artillery command and control (C2) compared to Allied C2 is influenced by German combat doctrine, the quality of the communications grid, strategic supply issues for that era, something else I'm not considering, or all of the above.

Dave is the man who can answer best that question.

On the "SNAFU propagation" thing, those are precisely my thoughts.
User avatar
BletchleyGeek
Posts: 4460
Joined: Thu Nov 26, 2009 3:01 pm
Location: Living in the fair city of Melbourne, Australia

RE: Command Ops: Artillery under AI control and you

Post by BletchleyGeek »

ORIGINAL: Arjuna

BTW the judgement level being used is that of the commander controlling the arty not the arty unit itself.

I've edited the OP to clarify this - ah, English sometimes betrays me - very important point for scenario designers.

I've also revised the wording. If there's some sentence that doesn't read quite right, please, let me know.
navwarcol
Posts: 637
Joined: Wed Dec 02, 2009 2:30 pm
Contact:

RE: Command Ops: Artillery under AI control and you

Post by navwarcol »

ORIGINAL: phoenix

Very helpful, BG. Many thanks. Will download and study. Just to make sure I've got it (idiot that I am) - you're saying the arty works better to support you (via the AI) if it's attached as close as poss to the assault troops, has plenty ammo and a commander with great judgement?

If that's so it will certainly change the way I've been playing, because I haven't moved the arty around like that at all.

Peter

EDIT: Just fired it up. Interesting. It certainly looks very effective. Excellent.
I do think he is not referring to moving the arty, physically near the requesting troops, but rather in the OOB it needs to be closer. For this reason many German units during the war kept artillery attached to the frontline units that were likely to need it, rather unlike American doctrine which attaches most arty assets at Corps level. The German doctrine was more likely to have artillery batteries of 3 guns, attached at regiment level, compared to American and other allied, with 20-30 gun artillery battalions attached at corps levels.
Phoenix100
Posts: 2962
Joined: Tue Sep 28, 2010 12:26 pm

RE: Command Ops: Artillery under AI control and you

Post by Phoenix100 »

Thanks Navwarcol for clarifying. That's what I meant - attached in the OOB as close as poss (and I haven't shifted things, for arty, in the OOB like that in the past). I don't suppose the physical proximity makes much diff if the range is ok. Though I believe it affects orders delay - the distance between subordinate units, am I right? But arty seems a little immune to the normal orders delay, no?
navwarcol
Posts: 637
Joined: Wed Dec 02, 2009 2:30 pm
Contact:

RE: Command Ops: Artillery under AI control and you

Post by navwarcol »

Haha, figured likely you already knew, just was making sure. Yes, I think the physical distance from HQ slows down orders for line units, but from play so far,seems not to affect arty.
User avatar
wodin
Posts: 10709
Joined: Sun Apr 20, 2003 3:13 am
Location: England
Contact:

RE: Command Ops: Artillery under AI control and you

Post by wodin »

Jim not sure different combat doctrines for nations is in game at present..I think thats something being introduced in the EF game..maybe wrong though.
jimcarravall
Posts: 642
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2006 1:11 am

RE: Command Ops: Artillery under AI control and you

Post by jimcarravall »

ORIGINAL: wodin

Jim not sure different combat doctrines for nations is in game at present..I think thats something being introduced in the EF game..maybe wrong though.

Maybe a better way to ask the question is what causes German units to have different C2 responses for artillery support than what Bletchley_Geek indicated the Allies show?

Navwarcol may have explained part of it based on where artillery is allocated within a command structure, making massing heavy fires less likely when AI artillery direction is handled at the regiment level instead of the at the Corps level.

Take care,

jim
User avatar
BletchleyGeek
Posts: 4460
Joined: Thu Nov 26, 2009 3:01 pm
Location: Living in the fair city of Melbourne, Australia

RE: Command Ops: Artillery under AI control and you

Post by BletchleyGeek »

Well, there are some doctrinal differences between sides, such as the one I mention about German artillery being less likely to be supporting forces outside their command structure sub-tree, but at the moment they're hardcoded and are not exposed to designers.

Dave is aware that for Eastern Front games - where doctrinal differences between sides were much more evident and important - this needs to be redone (and there's plans and discussions on how to best achieve this so it is exposed to scenario designers). He might want to further comment on that when there's more "meat" to the sketched systems.
jimcarravall
Posts: 642
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2006 1:11 am

RE: Command Ops: Artillery under AI control and you

Post by jimcarravall »

ORIGINAL: Bletchley_Geek

Well, there are some doctrinal differences between sides, such as the one I mention about German artillery being less likely to be supporting forces outside their command structure sub-tree, but at the moment they're hardcoded and are not exposed to designers.

Dave is aware that for Eastern Front games - where doctrinal differences between sides were much more evident and important - this needs to be redone (and there's plans and discussions on how to best achieve this so it is exposed to scenario designers). He might want to further comment on that when there's more "meat" to the sketched systems.

Thanks for the explanation.

I was thinking that a scenario designer's ability to adjust attributes for Training, Leadership Development, Organization, Material, and Soldiers was enough.

Forgot the "D" in DTLOMS focuses all the rest, and the AI can't read doctrine manuals. [:)]
Take care,

jim
User avatar
RockinHarry
Posts: 2344
Joined: Thu Jan 18, 2001 10:00 am
Location: Germany
Contact:

RE: Command Ops: Artillery under AI control and you

Post by RockinHarry »

So here´s some questions:

What actually makes a particular unit call for "Arty support"? Does it actually need to be attacked by nearby enemy ground troops, or is it rather the TLOS rating of enemies that might yet not be immediately "threatening"?

How much influence on that has the "Default Enemy APer FP" and "Default Enemy AArm FP" as set in the ESTAB for Axis and Allied sides? Do these influence just intel, or also "threat" perception and thus AI engagement behavior?

How much influence has the "% of enemy to kill" and "Total kill points" settings in Victory Conditions, on AI engagement and Arty usage?

With regard to german and allied doctrines, there surely can be made some more in depth debates. I see a number of errant assumptions above...
RockinHarry in the web:

https://www.facebook.com/harry.zann
User avatar
dazkaz15
Posts: 1267
Joined: Fri Dec 14, 2012 11:15 am

RE: Command Ops: Artillery under AI control and you

Post by dazkaz15 »

There are three big problems with attaching artillery units directly to the Bn HQ that might be bugs.

1, It dramatically increases the command load, and response time of the Bn HQ. So that adding just a few artillery assets will grossly over load it.

2, The artillery units are added to the line units formation foot print, so you can no longer attack with a close Bn formation.

3, There is no preliminary bombardment of the attack objective, as the attacking units close on it, and trying to do so manually with the artillery units will remove them from the attacking formation, and cause it re plan, or abort.
Post Reply

Return to “The War Room”