Arty Units

[Arjuna]

Peter if we gave players perfect intel, do you think they wouldn't cheat while playing?

[MikeJ19]

Good evening all,

SeinfeldRules, I agree with the power and scariness of having the 105mm rounds landing close to you - I have felt it sometimes. I also agree that an Arty Bn can be very strong in the defence. I also think that Daz made a very good point. An Arty Bn actually takes up a large amount of terrain - and that is not well represented in the game. Which is fine, but can lead to some strange results at times. Finally, I agree this is Command Ops and not an artillery game - so some of the inaccuracies are fine.

Phoenix, you raise a very good point - it is very possible that what I "believe" is an Arty unit is actually something else. I had not thought of that. I really like the FOW and agree with Dave about 'cheating'.

Well, it is time to go back to watch the NHL Playoffs and playing...

[Phoenix100]

They'd only be cheating themselves, Dave.....

I was thinking more that giving some of the players who regularly 'test' in an unofficial way (Daz springs to mind, for example, but there are others) the ability to play both sides (I assume, that, as God, you have that, Dave...)really only because it might reduce your workload by eliminating some false calls. Don't want it for the game, for actually playing it.

[jimcarravall]

ORIGINAL: phoenix

But is it an arty Bn, Mike? At the very least you need to surrender to check that the intel is good. I often see arty Bns doing odd things, only to find out later it's in fact an Engineer co or some such. Even if you surrender the info you get is still subject to FOW, so hard to be sure without sending a unit right up to it, then surrendering, maybe. I'm not sure what this scenario is, or if it's something you set up yourself, but is that really an arty unit? And what has it been engaging you with? As I remarked before, these big US field arty units sometimes have about 8 tanks at their disposal. Again, be nice to know exactly what the unit is. They should give us the debug version, or whatever version it is that dave, Miguel et al use so they can actually see what is really happening. If people like Daz and others who regularly 'test' could do it with the version of the game that allows you to play both sides then the number of false 'bug' or 'improvement' reports might be halved!!

I think he's referring to the historical battle of Salerno rather than a Command Ops scenario.

From Hyperwar Salerno to Cassino, Chapter 7, The Beachhead:

"By 1715 a sizable force of German tanks and infantry was in the corridor unopposed, and by 1800 enemy artillery was emplaced around Persano. Soon afterward, fifteen German tanks headed straight toward the juncture of the Sele and Calore Rivers. Their advance was accompanied by a display of fireworks--an extensive use of Very pistols, pyrotechnics, and smoke--intended either to create the appearance of larger numbers or to denote the attainment of local objectives.40 By 1830 German tanks and infantry were at the north bank of the Calore.

"Between them and the sea stood only a few Americans, mainly the 189th and 158th Field Artillery Battalions. In positions on a gentle slope overlooking the base of the corridor, the batteries of these battalions opened fire at point-blank range across the Calore and into heavy growth along the north bank of the river.41 At General Walker's command, a few tank destroyers of the 636th Battalion coming ashore that afternoon hastened to the juncture of the rivers to augment the artillery. Howitzers of other battalions and tanks in the area added their fires where possible.

"Immediately behind the artillery pieces, only a few hundred yards away, was the Fifth Army command post. While miscellaneous headquarters troops--cooks, clerks, and drivers--hastily built up a firing line on the south bank of the Calore, others hurriedly moved parts of the command post to the rear. The spear that General Clark had visualized poised at the center of the beachhead had struck.

"Finding the situation "extremely critical," facing squarely the possibility "that the American forces may sustain a severe defeat in this area," General Clark arranged to evacuate his headquarters on ten minutes' notice and take a PT boat to the 10 Corps zone, where the conditions were better for maintaining what he called a "clawhold" on Italian soil."

[Rock64]

A word of caution on historical narritaves. They can be biased... For every detailed, heroic stand, there is a vague entry on failure.

"The German attack in the Losheim Gap during 16 December had gone according to schedule. The northern arm of the 18th Volks Grenadier Division envelopment had penetrated as far as Auw and overrun most of the American artillery positions."


I think the game favors artillery too much. Yes, it's deadly and there is no argueing the narratives of how much of a force it could be. But I believe the game takes what artillery "could do" and made it "always does". The heroic effort side of the curve has become the middle of the curve.

[jimcarravall]

ORIGINAL: Rock64

A word of caution on historical narritaves. They can be biased... For every detailed, heroic stand, there is a vague entry on failure.

"The German attack in the Losheim Gap during 16 December had gone according to schedule. The northern arm of the 18th Volks Grenadier Division envelopment had penetrated as far as Auw and overrun most of the American artillery positions."


I think the game favors artillery too much. Yes, it's deadly and there is no argueing the narratives of how much of a force it could be. But I believe the game takes what artillery "could do" and made it "always does". The heroic effort side of the curve has become the middle of the curve.

Problem is, when attempting to create a simulation of World War II, developers are left with either history and analogies from practical experience as a basis for defining the conflict.

Sticking with well referenced, and ideally peer reviewed historical accounts particularly when validated by citations of experience from individuals who indicate they served in the military as artillery specialists is the safest manner to craft a story -- in this case the "story" of how effective artillery was in World War II.

[dazkaz15]

This is an extract from an article I read a long time ago, and I actually have employed many of the tactics from it in my games.
A typical example of it can be seen in my Greyhound Dash AAR, slide 8 to slide 13.

Its from:

Source: U.S. War Department "Handbook On German Military Forces" (Mar'45)
Officially released from restricted status by the U.S. Army Center For Military History

(3) ARTILLERY-TANK COOPERATION

Artillery support is of decisive importance for the preparation and the successful conduct of a tank attack. A unified command for the entire artillery controls the artillery fire as long as the infantry and tank units are fighting on the same line. When the tanks break through the enemy forward defense lines, the self-propelled artillery or any other artillery battalion designated for the support of the tank unit is placed under the command of the tank unit commander.

The Germans believe that the artillery fire must not check the momentum of the attack. Consequently the heaviest fire must fall well ahead of the tanks or outside their sector.

The mission of the artillery preparation before the attack is to destroy, or at least neutralize, the opponent's antitank defense in the area between the line of contact and the regimental reserve line. Continuous counterbattery fire prevents the enemy from shelling the tank assembly area and from breaking up the preparation of the tank attack.

The artillery has the following missions before the tank attack:

Counterbattery fire on enemy artillery located in positions which command the ground over which the tank attack is to be made.

Concentrations on enemy tanks in assembly areas.

Harassing fire on all areas in which the antitank units are located or suspected. Fire is heaviest on areas in which tanks cannot operate but from which they can be engaged effectively.

Adjusting fire with high explosives on probably enemy observation posts commanding the sector to be attacked. These observation posts are blinded with smoke as soon as the attack begins.

Experience has taught the Germans that the flanks of a tank attack are vulnerable. Therefore they assign to the artillery and the rocket projector units the task of protecting flanks by barrages using high explosives and smoke shells.

The artillery has the following missions during the tank attack:

Counterbattery fire.

Blinding enemy observation posts.

As the attack progresses, engaging successive lines of antitank defense, especially areas to the rear and flanks of the sector attacked.

Screening the flanks of the attack with smoke and neutralizing the enemy's infantry and rear areas.

Delaying the movement and deployment of enemy reserves,, particularly tanks.

The Germans stress that this wide variety of tasks must not lead to the wholesale dispersal of effort. The main task of the artillery is at all times the destruction of the enemy's antitank weapons, tanks, and artillery.

Liaison between artillery and tanks during the attack is established by the commanding officers and the artillery liaison group, which normally moves with the first wave. Artillery forward observers, if possible in armored observation posts, ride with the most forward elements. A German field expedient is for the tank unit to take along a forward observer in one of it's tanks. It often happens that the tankman himself has to take over the observation of the artillery. He himself can request fire and shift concentrations when the situation requires such changes.

[dazkaz15]

I have gathered up a load of quotes from the web, and everything I have read thus far over the years, has continuously reinforced the views expressed here by these very experienced commanders, of the time.

Nevertheless the 25-pounder was considered by all to be one of the best artillery pieces in use.
The effects caused by the gun (and the speed at which the British artillery control system could respond) in the North-West Europe Campaign of 1944–1945 made many German soldiers believe that the British had secretly deployed an automatic 25-pounder.[5]

"The artillery was my strongest tool. Often it was my only reserve .... I repeatedly said it was more a matter of the infantry supporting the artillery than the artillery supporting the infantry.... I wish I knew the countless times that positions were taken or held due solely to TOT's ...."
Major General R. 0. Barton
Commanding US 4th Infantry Division World War II
(Reminiscing with his division artillery commander)

"The thanks of the infantry, in my opinion, must be treasured more by every artilleryman than all decorations and citations. "
- Colonel Georg Bruchmuller,
Imperial German Army Artillery Officer and Father of Modern Fire Support

"If you don't have enough artillery, quit."
-General Richard Cavasos

The speed, accuracy and devastating power of American Artillery won confidence and admiration from the troops it supported and inspired fear and respect in their enemy.
Gen Dwight D. Eisenhower

Artillery conquers and infantry occupies.
J.F.C. Fuller

In many situations that seemed desperate, the artillery has been a most vital factor.
Gen Douglas MacArthur

The harder the fighting and the longer the war, the more the infantry, and in fact all the arms, lean on the gunners.
Field Marshal Montgomery

I do not have to tell you who won the war. You know, the artillery did.
Gen George S. Patton

The World War demonstrated the importance of Field Artillery. The majority of casualties were inflicted by the arm.
Gen John J. Pershing

"Our artillery . . . The Germans feared it almost more than anything we had."
- Ernie Pyle "Brave Men", 1944

"If, -after the battle is over, your infantry don't like you, you are a poor artilleryman."
Captain Henry Reilly The Field Artillery Journal, September-October 1940

Artillery is the god of war.
Stalin

Renown awaits the commander who first restores artillery to its prime importance on the battlefield.
Winston Churchill

My main criticism of the way Artillery is handled in Command Ops is that I wonder if the guns have to much ammunition available than is historical.
I remember reading a long time ago now, a post by Lieste I think, about the weight of ammunition available in game is directly translated to shell weight, not taking into account the packaging, and the propellant, cartridge cases etc
I wonder if that might be the reason that there seems to be so much ammo available for artillery use, or maybe that it is a realistic representation? I don't know.

[jimcarravall]

ORIGINAL: dazkaz15

I have gathered up a load of quotes from the web, and everything I have read thus far over the years, has continuously reinforced the views expressed here by these very experienced commanders, of the time.

Nevertheless the 25-pounder was considered by all to be one of the best artillery pieces in use.
The effects caused by the gun (and the speed at which the British artillery control system could respond) in the North-West Europe Campaign of 1944–1945 made many German soldiers believe that the British had secretly deployed an automatic 25-pounder.[5]

"The artillery was my strongest tool. Often it was my only reserve .... I repeatedly said it was more a matter of the infantry supporting the artillery than the artillery supporting the infantry.... I wish I knew the countless times that positions were taken or held due solely to TOT's ...."
Major General R. 0. Barton
Commanding US 4th Infantry Division World War II
(Reminiscing with his division artillery commander)

"The thanks of the infantry, in my opinion, must be treasured more by every artilleryman than all decorations and citations. "
- Colonel Georg Bruchmuller,
Imperial German Army Artillery Officer and Father of Modern Fire Support

"If you don't have enough artillery, quit."
-General Richard Cavasos

The speed, accuracy and devastating power of American Artillery won confidence and admiration from the troops it supported and inspired fear and respect in their enemy.
Gen Dwight D. Eisenhower

Artillery conquers and infantry occupies.
J.F.C. Fuller

In many situations that seemed desperate, the artillery has been a most vital factor.
Gen Douglas MacArthur

The harder the fighting and the longer the war, the more the infantry, and in fact all the arms, lean on the gunners.
Field Marshal Montgomery

I do not have to tell you who won the war. You know, the artillery did.
Gen George S. Patton

The World War demonstrated the importance of Field Artillery. The majority of casualties were inflicted by the arm.
Gen John J. Pershing

"Our artillery . . . The Germans feared it almost more than anything we had."
- Ernie Pyle "Brave Men", 1944

"If, -after the battle is over, your infantry don't like you, you are a poor artilleryman."
Captain Henry Reilly The Field Artillery Journal, September-October 1940

Artillery is the god of war.
Stalin

Renown awaits the commander who first restores artillery to its prime importance on the battlefield.
Winston Churchill

My main criticism of the way Artillery is handled in Command Ops is that I wonder if the guns have to much ammunition available than is historical.
I remember reading a long time ago now, a post by Lieste I think, about the weight of ammunition available in game is directly translated to shell weight, not taking into account the packaging, and the propellant, cartridge cases etc
I wonder if that might be the reason that there seems to be so much ammo available for artillery use, or maybe that it is a realistic representation? I don't know.

The major command factor missing from the original discussion was the duration of the defense.

Artillery defeated the German attack on Salerno, but it was only long enough to allow line units to redeploy to better defensive positions in relation to the attack axis than was provided prior to leaving the artillery out to dry.

The narrative I read indicated that the artillery units stopped the Germans in their tracks, but the ultimate defense was dependent on other support units redeploying to a position that precluded the Artillery being on the front line.

In the Saipan scenario, the Japanese force final assault was defeated by the Marine 10th Artillery battalion sited behind the 27th division defensive positions. It was because the mass of humanity sent on the attack had been worn down as it chaffed through successive infantry lines to reach the artillery position.

In the Battle of Gettysburg, Picket's charge succeeded in reaching Cemetery Ridge, but those reaching the ridge had insufficient strength to break the Union position prior to defeat a follow on Confederate assault.

[dazkaz15]

ORIGINAL: MikeJ19

Good day Jim.

Good questions. Here are my thoughts.

A deployed artillery Bn is focused on putting rounds down range. If they are attacked by infantry only a few of the howitzers would likely be able to engage the infantry. Furthermore, the direct fire sites on the guns are still not very good, so I think that in WWII they would likely have been worse. If attacked on the flank or rear, the artillery Bn would likely see it echelon - soft skinned supply vehicles, command posts etc - taking the biggest hit. So, overall I would likely give the Infantry company very good odds at destroying or damaging a fair chunk of the artillery Bn. At the least it would be an even fight - even if the Artillery Bn was dug in.

Having spent lots of time on towed artillery, a good time to deploy for a Bn is likely about 10 minutes. Not all guns will be ready to go that quickly, but enough for game purposes. It also takes time for the Bn to hook up the guns to the gun tractors when they decide to move - so likely another 10 minutes is a good estimate.

If a towed artillery Bn is moving it is extremely vulnerable to enemy action. None of the howitzers would be able to come into action - ready to fire - for about 3-10 minutes and the gun crews are in the gun tractors and in most cases unable to respond to fire very quickly. Finally, unlike the infantry, the artillery did not spend much time working on responding rapidly to attacks while on the move - as attacks were not supposed to happen often.

As a side note, the Soviets used their artillery - towed and Self-propelled - move frequently in the defence mode - to delay or block penetration of the Soviet defence lines. So, the Soviet artillery received more training and had more experience by 1944 in defending.

I hope this helps,

Mike

What size guns did you serve on Mike.
My experience is with the 25pdr and the 105mm light gun.
We were all highly trained with artillery, and infantry skills, having all had to pass the Royal Marines Commando course, so my experience might not be representative of the average Artillery Battery, but if it took us more that 3 min to get into action, for direct firing, from being limbered, (not rotated for long distance traveling) to putting round down range, that would be a very poor show indeed.
I would say that 2.5 min was more the average.
Of course this depends a lot on the design of the Artillery piece, the training of the crew, and more importantly the expectation of having to deploy quickly, during a move (state of reediness).

I know from WIKI that the 8.8cm Flak was able to deploy in about 2.5 min, but that's all I could find about WW2 deployment times on line.

"Many of these improvements were incorporated into the Flak 36, which had a two-piece barrel for easier replacement of worn liners.
The new, heavier, carriage allowed it to fire in an emergency when still on its wheels and without its outriggers, but with a very limited traverse and elevation.[2]
For normal emplacement, one single-axle bogie was detached from the front outrigger and one from the rear, side outriggers were then hinged from the vertical position to the ground; the total time to setup was estimated at two-and-a-half minutes"

Do you have any timings for other WW2 Artillery pieces, or any way of finding out?

One minute of game time is about 8-10 seconds on the slowest speed.
So in about 30 seconds of real time, most field Artillery should be able to deploy and fire in an emergency, and I am finding that in game they take quite a bit longer than that to get rounds down range when given a bombard order from moving.
This is what you would expect considering that the guns first have to be surveyed in for indirect fire, but for direct fire they should be much faster than that.
I've not had time to look into that yet, but ill keep an eye out for it when I start playing again.
Ill try and post some examples, when I get more time.

[MikeJ19]

I spent a portion of my early career on 105mm howitzers - I've also spent time on M109s and the LG-1 (a light 105mm howitzer). We were fairly quick at bringing a gun into action likely a couple of minutes for direct fire. During this, we were very exposed - no trenches and really no place to hide. I expect that gunners in WWII would be very quick in coming into action. Canadian gunners do some infantry training, but not that much. We certainly did not have to do anything like a Commando course - a few gunners do, but the vast majority do not.

If an Arty unit is moving an gets a fire order, it should likely take 3-5 minutes for a "quick action" to starting putting rounds down range. This fire would be less accurate than a normal fire mission as the guns would not have received survey data. Within the constraints of the game, this is a very minor detail.

My father - also a gunner - volunteers at the Canadian War museum so I will see if I can find out more information on the time it takes to come into action of some of the guns.

Have a good day,

Mike