Why can't German Arty be assigned to DIV!!!

[Flaviusx]

I haven't found artillery divisions particularly useful for defensive purposes. Of course, by the time I get them, I'm hardly worrying about defense, nor have I ever used them for such. I pile them on some unlucky German and plaster them in mass attacks. (Not by themselves. Solo bombardments are pointless and a waste of their potential. They come into their own when combined with rifle formations in deliberate assaults.)

[CarnageINC]

ORIGINAL: BigAnorak

Everyone has a different view on the amount of micromanaging they want to do. Whether I get the support from the corps HQ or the division directly has never seemed an issue to me compared to the direct benefit I see from pioneer, Stug and 88mm flak support units.

It was never an issue with me until I started noticing that all my Hvy Arty wasn't being used. I have no clue on how effective it will be because I've never seen it in action unlike the other assets you have mentioned.

[ComradeP]

Flavio: whether artillery is too weak depends on how you think it should work. Remember the tests where something like 2000 artillery pieces were added to a division? The key issue is that they have to be used in concert with something and are then mostly a force multiplier, which sometimes gives odd results, like that battle in a test I ran where including a single sapper brigade in an attack by artillery divisions completely changed the battle. Artillery by itself causes few losses, but when attached to a battle it suddenly causes a lot of losses relatively speaking. It's that difference that can sometimes make it seem ineffective.

Also keep in mind that Bob's talking about Axis artillery, and the Axis are in some ways severely handicapped by having battalions instead of regiments and not being able to reach historical concentration of artillery with the artillery actually doing something when attached to a HQ (example is, again, Sevastopol 1942).

[FredSanford3]

To me it's not an issue of desire for additional control, my issue is whether artillery is treated correctly by the game engine. Can you see a actual German field commander saying "eh, go ahead and disband the field-caliber artillery, it's irrelevant anyhow"? Just the fact that an experienced tester doesn't give much concern to his artillery is a big warning flag IMO that something's not right with how the game uses the most potent battlefield weapon in WW2.

[Sabre21]

This issue was brought up ages ago by the testers, I know I did within a month of when I started 2 years ago, others have too. This was just one of those design decisions that have stayed in place. I was pretty adamant about it at first but have mixed feelings now considering the way things have turned out. Play balance is always a key issue here and thinking about the ability to attach 3 heavy howitzer units to a Panzer division in 41 may unbalance all that. Remember that attached support will always participate so making a hasty attack with 3 divisions could get you 9 free support units above what the hq sends in. If these 9 were primarily arty, I suspect then game balance will get broke.
 
As for getting your support units to participate, it works for both sides and is based on leader roles. So if you have a leader with a poor initiative rating (section 11.2.3 of the manual), chances are you won't get any Hq assigned support units. Also if the Hq has exceeded its command point ratings (section 7.6.2) then for every point above its CP rating, the die roll is modified by a +1. When you consider that these die rolls are using a D10 (I'm pretty sure it is a D10), then it doesn't take much to prevent support units or reserves from kicking in.
 
Also if your Hq had not yet moved during the current turn and is within 5 hexes of the battle, it can provide support units even in hasty attacks. As the Germans, I always move my hq's last and place them as far forward as possible but do keep them within 25 hexes of a railhead.
 
Andy

[Flaviusx]

Pieter, the Sevastopol issue is why I'm leaning in favor of some kind of limited arko solution. Give the Germans their own artillery divisions, so to speak. Just a few, mind you, and eliminate those battalions getting sucked into the arkos.

[Flaviusx]

Andy, we could always limit the number of artillery attachments to, say, one per division, if we decide to go this route. (For the Germans, anyways. I'm still against arty attachments for the Soviets, period, they don't need this nor do they make sense given their doctrine.)

That should keep it down to a dull roar.

Although for the US I might even be willing to forego that restriction.

[CarnageINC]

ORIGINAL: ComradeP

Also keep in mind that Bob's talking about Axis artillery, and the Axis are in some ways severely handicapped by having battalions instead of regiments and not being able to reach historical concentration of artillery with the artillery actually doing something when attached to a HQ (example is, again, Sevastopol 1942).

It would be nice to have the ability, should one choose to do so, to mass Axis arty if they so choose to do so. They could only do so on a limited scale do to the smaller unit size and amount avaliable to the OOB.

This isn't a history game that needs the exact same results as the real war was, players should have the ability to formulate their own strategy's within the game engine instead of such ridge rules that are now in place.

[Sabre21]

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx

Andy, we could always limit the number of artillery attachments to, say, one per division, if we decide to go this route. (For the Germans, anyways. I'm still against arty attachments for the Soviets, period, they don't need this nor do they make sense given their doctrine.)

That should keep it down to a dull roar.

Although for the US I might even be willing to forego that restriction.

I could agree with that as long as the unit that gets attached is motorized for panzer/motorized units. Kind of hard to get horse drawn guns to move as fast as a tank.

[JR5555]

Maybe the developers could create another HQ option like Build Up to incorporate the majority of artillery into battles at a higher cost of supply.

[Sabre21]

ORIGINAL: CarnageINC

ORIGINAL: ComradeP

Also keep in mind that Bob's talking about Axis artillery, and the Axis are in some ways severely handicapped by having battalions instead of regiments and not being able to reach historical concentration of artillery with the artillery actually doing something when attached to a HQ (example is, again, Sevastopol 1942).

It would be nice to have the ability, should one choose to do so, to mass Axis arty if they so choose to do so. They could only do so on a limited scale do to the smaller unit size and amount avaliable to the OOB.

This isn't a history game that needs the exact same results as the real war was, players should have the ability to formulate their own strategy's within the game engine instead of such ridge rules that are now in place.

A lot of these rules are there for game balance and also to help prevent players from getting too gamey. The testers have spent a lot of time trying to break the game engine and many things were changed as a result although the no arty or Luftwaffe support units being assigned to German divisions has been there from the start.

[FredSanford3]

I can see how attaching 3 arty units to a Pz Div and using them wherever the division goes is a problem. In reality they (and their ammo) wouldn't be able to keep up, and they wouldn't have good locational data that's needed for effective indirect fire. The place where artillery shines IMO is on defense- I'd say perhaps let's keep the arty at Corps/Army, but give a substantial negative modifier (i.e. much more likely) to the allocation die roll if the defender is fortified to any level. This would simulate the defender's ability to pre-register artillery in any sort of prepared defense. It should also be 'rolled' against the commander's infantry rating IMO, since there's nothing 'spur of the moment' in planning artillery coverage on defense- it's standard stuff any competent commander in any army would do when setting up his defensive deployment. It would also counter balance the Soviet arty divisions later in the game.

[CarnageINC]

ORIGINAL: Sabre21

This issue was brought up ages ago by the testers, I know I did within a month of when I started 2 years ago, others have too. This was just one of those design decisions that have stayed in place. I was pretty adamant about it at first but have mixed feelings now considering the way things have turned out. Play balance is always a key issue here and thinking about the ability to attach 3 heavy howitzer units to a Panzer division in 41 may unbalance all that. Remember that attached support will always participate so making a hasty attack with 3 divisions could get you 9 free support units above what the hq sends in. If these 9 were primarily arty, I suspect then game balance will get broke.

Andy

Has this concept been tested before? I agree with only SP arty being able to be attached to Panzer Divisons, that would prevent Karl's from appearing there. [:D] The SP arty would be a great idea I think. But as far as German Bn. Arty they, IMO, are not strong enough that if you were to put them en mass to have a over powering effect. I think this would need to be tested before you go on and say 'you suspect it might unbalance things.'

[pompack]

ORIGINAL: hattrick1


Maybe the developers could create another HQ option like Build Up to incorporate the majority of artillery into battles at a higher cost of supply.

While I have no feelings on this suggestion one way or the other, I do believe that it touches on the problem with direct attachment of artillery (German). I don't recall the figures exactly, but I seem to remember that divisional artillery consumed over 60% of the total supply requirements for a division in a quiet sector and considerably more during an attack. Divisional attachments could easily double the supply requirement for a division which would seriously destort the supply model.

[Klydon]

An easy way (and fairly realistic) is that artillery would have much less of an effect with hasty attacks and a much bigger effect with deliberate attacks. This is somewhat already in the game with the various rules about committing support units and that artillery units can be used at range on deliberate attacks, but given the issues the Germans are having in massing artillery for set piece battles (Sevastopol or any other city busting exercise) perhaps some tweaks are in order. 

[CarnageINC]

ORIGINAL: Sabre21

ORIGINAL: CarnageINC

ORIGINAL: ComradeP

Also keep in mind that Bob's talking about Axis artillery, and the Axis are in some ways severely handicapped by having battalions instead of regiments and not being able to reach historical concentration of artillery with the artillery actually doing something when attached to a HQ (example is, again, Sevastopol 1942).

It would be nice to have the ability, should one choose to do so, to mass Axis arty if they so choose to do so. They could only do so on a limited scale do to the smaller unit size and amount avaliable to the OOB.

This isn't a history game that needs the exact same results as the real war was, players should have the ability to formulate their own strategy's within the game engine instead of such ridge rules that are now in place.

A lot of these rules are there for game balance and also to help prevent players from getting too gamey. The testers have spent a lot of time trying to break the game engine and many things were changed as a result although the no arty or Luftwaffe support units being assigned to German divisions has been there from the start.

I understand what your saying about keeping things on a even keel, but players should be give some sort of lee way in being able to create their own doctrine for certain things. For me, arty is my itch that I want fixed, others its the air war.

I think a little freedom would go a long way in letting players experiment with the doctrine they want to. Even like Flaviusx said, limiting each DIV one arty would be a massive improvement. The SP arty would need to be implemented because people would abuse using Hvy arty in Panzer divisions. Can you imagine a Karl heavy mortar trying to keep up with the Panzers...[:D] "Hey wait up!"

[karonagames]

Just the fact that an experienced tester doesn't give much concern to his artillery is a big warning flag IMO that something's not right with how the game uses the most potent battlefield weapon in WW2.

Perhaps I should clarify: the reason I was considering disbanding the battalions was that having 40 of them ,sitting in OKH rebuilding, was over-stretching the production capacity at that time, and slowing down artillery getting to where it was needed most - the front line units - it was not because I was dismissing the potential effectiveness of the artillery itself.

[Sabre21]

ORIGINAL: CarnageINC

ORIGINAL: Sabre21

This issue was brought up ages ago by the testers, I know I did within a month of when I started 2 years ago, others have too. This was just one of those design decisions that have stayed in place. I was pretty adamant about it at first but have mixed feelings now considering the way things have turned out. Play balance is always a key issue here and thinking about the ability to attach 3 heavy howitzer units to a Panzer division in 41 may unbalance all that. Remember that attached support will always participate so making a hasty attack with 3 divisions could get you 9 free support units above what the hq sends in. If these 9 were primarily arty, I suspect then game balance will get broke.

Andy

Has this concept been tested before? I agree with only SP arty being able to be attached to Panzer Divisons, that would prevent Karl's from appearing there. [:D] The SP arty would be a great idea I think. But as far as German Bn. Arty they, IMO, are not strong enough that if you were to put them en mass to have a over powering effect. I think this would need to be tested before you go on and say 'you suspect it might unbalance things.'

Please let's don't go down the path of what may have been tested or not. A lot of things have been tested over the last two years and more and personally I spent upwards of 14 hours a day last winter doing nothing but testing (I'm retired), so it smacks a bit of an insult to say what you did above. We have an exceptional testing team unlike any I have seen in 10 years of testing. So I can tell you with a lot of reliability that placing 3 heavy howitzer units with a 41 panzer division may unbalance things.

On the other hand I agree with Flavio that adding in a single arty support unit to a division for the Germans would probably be a good compromise and not unbalance the game providing it is motorized for panzer/mot units. The bottom line though it is not up to any of us, it will be up to Joel and Gary. I will throw my hat into the ring though for the 1 arty division suggestion.

Andy

[karonagames]

I will throw my hat into the ring though for the 1 arty division suggestion.

As would I, with the motorised with motorised proviso.

[CarnageINC]

Sorry Sabre21, you are correct, I have not a clue on what has been tested and what has not.  I apologize [:(].  I'm just very passionate with my crusades and I would love to see artillery tweaked so its more effective than what it is for the Axis.  Thanks for throwing your hat in for 1 arty attachment, its a comprise that is fair to the original design idea and what some players want changed.  Please add the SP arty for panzer divisions, I would hate to see something gamey with hvy arty being able to flow with those guys. 

LOL, and all this coming from a ex-tanker, please don't tell anyone I got on the 'Kings of the Battlefield' bandwagon, I would never live it down. [:'(]