Infantry support weapons direct suppresive fire

[Tazak]

I'd like to see a direct suppressive fire capability added to various infantry support weapons such as MMG/HMG/AGL etc

This would give players the options to lay down fire at suspected enemy locations in support of an attack/defence. I see this type of attack as mainly affecting readiness with a very low chance of damaging units (should any actually be in the target location) while using a fairly large amount of ammo thus preventing players from constantly using this ability in a 'recon by fire' method.

[IronMikeGolf]

That would be a rather radical model change. It sounds like you are saying a player would order such an attack, like arty missions. Currently, all direct fire is handled by the AI. That would be a big change to give the AI this capability, I suspect.

How would this be different from the Readiness decrease a direct fire attack currently has? Are you suggesting a larger Readiness decrease, larger non-AT and non-AD ammo decrease, and very low casualty probability?

[CapnDarwin]

It would be a major change in behavior, but the bigger question would be doctrine. Would you actually just shoot at a location without sighting an enemy? This seems to 1) waste ammo and 2) reveal my position to the enemy.

Can any of our military guys state when this would be used? I'm curious.

[Mad Russian]

As suppressive fire before an attack yes. The rest of the time, not in my experience, for the reasons you stated.

The only exception to that doctrine that I'm aware of is what was called the 'Mad Minute' in Vietnam. Where the first thing in the morning US units would fire from their NDP's to breakup any Communist dawn attacks. That's the only time I know it was done besides before an assault.

Good Hunting.

MR

[CapnDarwin]

But you would at least want to have a target is my point. Now Vietnam is a different issue since you knew they were there somewhere every morning and you had a at least some intel. When attacking, you would by definition, have a targetable enemy you were going after. I guess I'm still processing this against the game's mechanics.

[cbelva]

In a tactical game this would make more sense. There are times you would fire into an area to try and suppress suspected enemy. There is also such a thing as "recon by fire". However, those  are all decisions made by the on sight commander (Sergeants, Lieutenants, and Captains). This is not a tactical game.
 
This is a game that places you in command as a battalion or brigade commander. The aim of the game is to make you think and act like a battalion/brigade commander and their staff. You would not be making those low level decisions. The best way to simulate this would be 1) fire arty and mortars into a hex to suppress what may be there (a tactics that would be in the realm of a Bn/Bde Commander's zone of responsibility), and/or 2) place a unit or units in an overwatch position as the maneuver force moved to its obj. That way if the enemy does appear, the over watch group is in a position to react and suppress the enemy before they disrupt the attack.

[pzgndr]

Looking ahead, you guys could consider adding more FM 3-90 security orders besides screen; i.e., guard, cover, area security and local security for designated hexes/areas.  Certainly guard and cover could be helpful, to order a unit to one location to overwatch another location, and to place fires on that location if suspected enemy appears.  Along those lines, more FOW effects showing suspected enemy units [?? markers or something] rather than actual spotted units would add some flavor to the game.  But this game having 500m hexes, there's only so much engine noise and dust clouds you might pick up on at ranges beyond an adjacent hex.  If/when you go to 250m hexes then this may become more doable.