Coastal Artillery Question

[sPzAbt653]

Tested with Fall Weiss of the WWII - Misc Folder, moving the Schles.-Hols. Naval Unit one hex northeast gets the results seen. So yes, it seems that this has been fixed in later [beta as of this date] versions.

[VHauser]

Okay, I've spent the past two days trying to come up with a workable solution to the coastal fort problem and I've finally been successful. I've been up all night testing and so far the results have been perfect.

This solution will work with any version of the game. The game treats coastal artillery like defenseless ships, right? Well, the answer is: not always. There is a way to make coastal artillery not act like defenseless ships. Use aircraft. Naval units treat aircraft like aircraft even if those aircraft are in the TO/E of a coastal-artillery unit. I have tested and confirmed this.

The implications and applications of this are enormous and game-changing. Want to inhibit amphibious operations during bad weather? You can use air/coastal artillery units to do this. Want to simulate heavily-mined areas of water (like the southern entrance of the Adriatic)? You can do this with air/coastal artillery units. The possibilities are endless. However, "With great power comes great responsibility." Which means that you can easily make your game unwinnable/unplayable, so great care and caution must be exercised.

[76mm]

ORIGINAL: VHauser
There is a way to make coastal artillery not act like defenseless ships. Use aircraft. Naval units treat aircraft like aircraft even if those aircraft are in the TO/E of a coastal-artillery unit.

I don't really understand...does putting aircraft in the TOE solve the problem completely somehow, or are all of the other line items destroyed other than the aircraft?

Either way a strange (but ingenious) solution to a strange problem!

[Zovs]

Also which DB are you using?

Fortifications and those other fortified units seem unique to your case.

[VHauser]

ORIGINAL: 76mm
I don't really understand...does putting aircraft in the TOE solve the problem completely somehow, or are all of the other line items destroyed other than the aircraft?

I zeroed out the other equipments in that example because I only wanted to test aircraft (I even tried naval equipments at one point because I wanted to see if the Agility rating would carry over--it doesn't).

Anyway, all non-aircraft equipments (including naval equipments) are treated exactly as described previously in this thread.

Basically, you are creating a fortified airfield that contains a permanent aircraft garrison.

WARNING: This is an extremely powerful tool that can easily unbalance/ruin a game if the scenario designer is not VERY careful! [I'm reminded of the scene in Person of Interest where Root tells Control, "It'd be like giving the keys to a jet to a five-year-old, irresponsible and stupid."]

[VHauser]

ORIGINAL: Zovs
Also which DB are you using?

It doesn't matter what .eqp file you are using. ANY non-aircraft equipment (player-designed or not) is treated exactly as described previously in this thread. Infantry, tanks, ships, etc., doesn't matter. I suspect that enemy naval units are using their AAA rating when facing "coastal artillery aircraft". Which is why (I suspect) aircraft have better survivability.

[76mm]

ORIGINAL: VHauser
Basically, you are creating a fortified airfield that contains a permanent aircraft garrison.

But is it possible to limit the range of the aircraft (or any other weapons in the coastal artillery counter) to the range of the artillery that the coastal artillery battery is supposed to represent?

Seems like aircraft would range over half the map (or more)?

[VHauser]

ORIGINAL: 76mm
But is it possible to limit the range of the aircraft (or any other weapons in the coastal artillery counter) to the range of the artillery that the coastal artillery battery is supposed to represent?

Yes, but that would involve creating a modified .eqp file. Personally, I prefer customized .eqp files, so that is not a problem for me, but others prefer the stock .eqp file.

In the example I posted above, I drastically cut the range of those seaplanes to 8 hexes (most other air units in my .eqp file have ranges 30-100). I chose 8 hexes due to the range of the Blohm & Voss BV 246 radio-guided anti-shipping missile developed by the Germans late in WW2.

But you can give your coastal artillery aircraft pretty much any range you want. However, I can only seem to give them anti-shipping ratings of 120, 240, or 360.

Anyway, as I stated above, this is a VERY scary tool that has implications and applications far beyond what is being discussed here.

[76mm]

ORIGINAL: VHauser
]Anyway, as I stated above, this is a VERY scary tool that has implications and applications far beyond what is being discussed here.

Well, thanks much for your experimentation and reporting on this issue. For now though, I think I might just wait for the patch! [:)]

[VHauser]

ORIGINAL: 76mm
Well, thanks much for your experimentation and reporting on this issue. For now though, I think I might just wait for the patch! [:)]

I think you are wise.

Unfortunately, in my case I've been working on a project for many months now and my health is not the greatest. I'm kind of on a clock here and the longer I delay the project, the increased possibility that it won't get finished at all. So, I'm going to press on. When the next patch is released, I'll hopefully not have to make too many changes because I plan to use coastal artillery aircraft VERY sparingly and carefully.

[Lobster]

ORIGINAL: VHauser

ORIGINAL: 76mm
Well, thanks much for your experimentation and reporting on this issue. For now though, I think I might just wait for the patch! [:)]

I think you are wise.

Unfortunately, in my case I've been working on a project for many months now and my health is not the greatest. I'm kind of on a clock here and the longer I delay the project, the increased possibility that it won't get finished at all. So, I'm going to press on. When the next patch is released, I'll hopefully not have to make too many changes because I plan to use coastal artillery aircraft VERY sparingly and carefully.

This is true of many of the people who play this game and/or design scenarios. Unfortunately the people in charge do not seem to give a crap. They continue to allow this to plod along slower than molasses in Antarctica.

[rmeckman]

It looks like this problem as already been identified and will be corrected in the next patch. Curtis Lemay mentioned that the Overlord 44 scenario does not appear to suffer from this problem. I checked this and noticed that the majority of the German fortifications are fixed rather than coastal artillery (similar icons). The coastal fortresses are reorganizing on turn 1, so they can't fire when the Allied ships move within range. By turn 2, at least some of these coastal forts become active. Moving Allied warships within range of these forts will evaporate them during counterbattery fire as described earlier in this thread.

If someone really wants a temporary fix before the next patch, one option is to assign the coastal fortress a secondary unit icon. If this secondary icon is a ship type, the counterbattery damage computations will change. In the Fall Weiss example I posted earlier, the hit causing 16% damage will be assessed by marking one MMG team as 16% damaged rather than taking out 16 teams. One big drawback to this approach is that the hybrid fort/ship will disappear when an enemy land unit tries to occupy the hex, since ships have to leave an enemy occupied location. This drawback can be mitigated a little by moving the non-artillery fortress equipment into another unit (infantry, garrison, etc) that can still defend the hex.

[thomasharvey]

Once the next patch comes out some fine tuning may be in order. At that time this issue should be resolved.

[John T_MatrixForum]

ORIGINAL: rmeckman

It looks like this problem as already been identified and will be corrected in the next patch. Curtis Lemay mentioned that the Overlord 44 scenario does not appear to suffer from this problem. I checked this and noticed that the majority of the German fortifications are fixed rather than coastal artillery (similar icons). The coastal fortresses are reorganizing on turn 1, so they can't fire when the Allied ships move within range. By turn 2, at least some of these coastal forts become active. Moving Allied warships within range of these forts will evaporate them during counterbattery fire as described earlier in this thread.

If someone really wants a temporary fix before the next patch, one option is to assign the coastal fortress a secondary unit icon. If this secondary icon is a ship type, the counterbattery damage computations will change. In the Fall Weiss example I posted earlier, the hit causing 16% damage will be assessed by marking one MMG team as 16% damaged rather than taking out 16 teams. One big drawback to this approach is that the hybrid fort/ship will disappear when an enemy land unit tries to occupy the hex, since ships have to leave an enemy occupied location. This drawback can be mitigated a little by moving the non-artillery fortress equipment into another unit (infantry, garrison, etc) that can still defend the hex.

Yes It worked reasonable well for unarmoured coastal artillery.
Have you tried to add armoured turrets ?

Should we try to make entries in the Neq file for coastal artillery ?
Extremely small target for being a ship, and armour as per the turret.

Cheers
/John

[rhinobones]

ORIGINAL: John T_MatrixForum

Yes It worked reasonable well for unarmoured coastal artillery.
Have you tried to add armoured turrets ?

That’s about what I suggested in post #51, but no one seems to have taken it seriously.

Regards, RhinoBones

[VHauser]

That’s about what I suggested in post #51, but no one seems to have taken it seriously.

Regards, RhinoBones

Armored or un-armored makes no difference under the current combat-resolution procedure. It converts EVERYTHING (except air units) to a weak naval unit.

[Lobster]

ORIGINAL: VHauser

That’s about what I suggested in post #51, but no one seems to have taken it seriously.

Regards, RhinoBones

Armored or un-armored makes no difference under the current combat-resolution procedure. It converts EVERYTHING (except air units) to a weak naval unit.

That makes no sense what so ever. I would consider it broken.

Edit: I forgot. It's fixed in some patch appearing sometime in the future.

[VHauser]

At last I have a working solution to the coastal-artillery problem. This WILL work.

Step 1. Build a naval task force of the appropriate strength.
Step 2. Add the "fixed artillery" symbol as the 2nd unit type. This immobilizes the unit.
Step 3. Open the Unit Report and add whatever supporting ground forces to support the unit.
Step 4. Place the unit in Tactical Reserve (which is the default state for fixed artillery anyway).

Good to go.

[Zovs]

The only problem is that it will always look like a ship. What if you flipped the icons? Looks funky.

If there was a fix that updated it you’d have to fix your scenario.

[VHauser]

ORIGINAL: Zovs

The only problem is that it will always look like a ship. What if you flipped the icons? Looks funky.

If there was a fix that updated it you’d have to fix your scenario.

Okay, I've reversed the unit symbols and it still works. And this will work even if a fix is updated because this is just a mutated version of naval vs. naval combat to simulate coastal artillery, but actually has nothing to do with coastal artillery.