ineffective artillery

[Charles2222]

AmmoSgt: A few comments of yours I'll address, and maybe a general comment of mine later.

HC Smoke was what was used rarely in ammo , but commonly in smoke generators , Hmmm now that you mention it US Smoke Generators aren't in the game either.. but I digress...

And yes, so I'm sure a number of other nations that had smoke generators aren't represented.

( Ok not exactly every direct fire cannon.. the US 37mm didn't have WP as far as i know.. but it did have a grapeshot round for anti personel use , but thats not in the game either)

I think you're mistaken. Is it not the 37mm US gun that has the highest rated HE factor amonst 37mm's? I think it likely also that it outshines even the GE 75L24 in HE rating (primarily made to be anti-personnel). Maybe I'm wrong. I doubt it. Which of course if I'm right means it is modeled, or perhaps it's not high enough and that's your contention?

You do realize, of course, that when you earlier described the Western Front as basically a GE non-armored one, you were in effect saying, what I've realized all along, that the Eastern Front was the one that got the best of the GE armor regularly. I didn't realize WP was so awesome. So with such a weapon like that, and such overwhelming air superiority, how in the world did it take them so much longer then the GE's to take that same land?

Even the Morale/ experience rating values are wacky to cause US gear to be more expensive. The cost difference between experience 65 and 70 is the largest jump between any 5 points for very little actuall battlefield effect.

Firstly, the US troops are WAY overrated in quality considering most of them were barely trained if at all at the start of the war, so the cost increase is due to the failure to recognise their gross overrating. And though you think it unfair, and it sort of is, when you consider that sometimes whilst I try to draw up a US campaign force, the mandatory cheap armor is tough to come by, but it also has a huge benefit. The huge benefit is that each of those AVF's are so expensive is because they're so overstuffed with MG's. The GE players would love to see their TMG fire every single time with the main gun, believe me. Man those GE AC's are like 40 rounds of main gun ammo and 60 of MG. What are you going to do with that? That's barely enough to even qualify for spraying down infantry with.

US 60mm Mortars in Infantry units don't even have smoke fer petes sake.. much less WP, why is that?

One, because they're not modeling WP for whatever reason, assuming you're correct. Two, and probably more accurately, because I think you'll find simliar mortars without smoke. The GE 50mm doesn't have any either I'll bet and with 10 hex range what good is it anyway (the GE 50mm with smoke I mean)?

The cost difference between experience 65 and 70 is the largest jump between any 5 points for very little actuall battlefield effect. Yet US Troops going ashore in North Africa are a 70 while the British that have been fighting in North Africa since 1940 are a 65? that adds what? over 10% to the cost of US gear. Why Not at least try and get it somewhat right for the Allies.

You are damning your own case here a bit you know. You just proved what is already known as fact, that the US is so heavily overrated that it starts out higher than those long-battling Brits. Don't complain about the pricing either, though I know not having enough cheap units can be a bugbear at times, but look at the difference between the equipment. The Brits generally have inferior amounts of ammo, number of guns, etc, what do you expect? Should a tank with a 6pdr and 1 MG cost the same as one with a 75L38 and 2-3 MG's? I think you'll also find that even if the US infantry, for example, doesn't have a superior number of guns and/or ammo, then they do have superior amounts of men to the squads. Some of us would kill for those 12 man squads. Do you realize how awesome a 10-12 man squad assaulting tanks is compared to 8-10? I'm all a fan for truly representing things as they were (if GE had only 10 men so be it. If US had truly 12 men, so be it), as much as is possible, but don't act like the US is always getting the short end of the stick when we're comparing their cost and act like there's no reason for it. You have serious numbers and serious effect, you're going to have serious cost. Come on AS, let's not be such a homer. Surely you can see that the US infantry is among the best in the game (considering the numbers especially), so why not a greater cost (actually the GE infantry may be more expensive, whether they have greater firepower or not, and with a limit of 10 men that's extremely difficult to make up for)? If I'm playing US, I'd like to see some units with less guns, so I can have some cheaper stuff too, but the other side of that is the situation where all you have is the cheap stuff, like the Italians. The Italians beg for one of those 160mm armored AFV's!

I witness also that you later got into the idea of trashing that the US guns aren't able to do indirect fire and whatever other things you claim they could do. You know what that would do to their costs if they could? It would strengthen your complaints about US stuff costing more than they do now.

BTW, if that super-powerful Stuart 37mm grapeshot that you say isn't modeled, was, it would be more expensive. Isn't it's price expensive enough as it is? The system of pricing, if fair, surely isn't going to take a blind eye to a gun's HE factor skyrocketing! As far as I'm concerned the billion MG's and the main gun are more than enough expense when I pick the US.

[Irinami]

A middle-of-the-road reply to both.

1.) Pricing depends on how you are considering the cost. If you are considering it over all, then the US, the USSR, and the Chinese camps should all pay much less per person. Massive pools of human bodies make it cheaper for them than, say, Japan, to "purchase" a soldier. Also, consider manufacturing capability--which the OOB's tend to do.

2.) An argument could be made that WP is modelled through the Warhead and HE Kill ratings. If it is not modelled to a player's satisfaction, all they need to do is poke around the included OOB editors and prop up their Warhead and HE Kill ratings a touch. Remember, the progression is not linear. I admit, though, I sure wanted to see a hex burst into flame when I blew smoke the first few times. (Anecdotally, a neighbor had a WP grenade he blew on the concrete slab that used to be the floor of a large barn. IMPRESSIVE!!)

Just my $0.02.

[AmmoSgt]

Charles I am not complaining about the cost of US units as based on capability.. I know how the formula works more or less and that doesn't bother me. Inflating the cost by inflating the experience does bother me .. but many countries have inflated experience and morale rating for political purposes.. I don't think the US rating ( and therefore cost ) is inflated for political purpose ( ie National Pride like some are) , I think the 65-70 price break is extrodinarily large to inflate the price and the US is rated way high to take advantage of that.
If US SP Support 75mm on amtracs and Stuarts, and Early war Half Track SP's having full capability cause the price to go up somewhat so be it , thats the formula. If rating their experience more realistically cause the price to go down so be it.
I notice you chose not to dispute my contention the US Artillery is under rated in regards to the explosive content and overall weight in the shells. I would settle for that. I notice you do not dispute the radio situation or the artillery call doctrine problems , and the lack of some proportionality in call times . I notice you do not dispute that VT fuzes are not addressed.
As to the 60mm mortars not having smoke .. exactly my point, since the German 50mm mortars don't have smoke in real life, US 60mm mortars which had not only smoke, but WP in real life don't have smoke in the game ..Fair is fair ? Right?
I notice you did not dispute the inflation of the German PanzerShreck to match range and acuracy of the US bazooka ( the US Bazooka going thru 2 seperate downgrades before they decided to up grade the Panzershreck so they would be "fair". Please notice I am not complaining about the US not getting the M20 3.5 inch bazooka the last few months of the war, but ,aw heck, I'll mention it.
I never said the WF was an Infantry only situation .. German Army had a couple hundred Infantry divisons, most without any trucks to speak of, and only a couple dozen Armored Divisions , most somewhat understrenght. Do the Math, German Simply had more than 8 Infantry Divisions for every Armored or truely mechanised infantry division. And German Doctrine was to mass Armor and not parcel it out . Westerm Allies and Russia both out produced Germany in Armor better than 5 to 1 .. so it stands to reason Germany often faced Allied Armor on both fronts with Infantry only( Usually, in fact most of the time). As to how long it took to retake the West Front .. I'll give you two reasons, One the usual, supply over the beaches and thru damaged ports , thats the obvious one, Two .. I happen to think the Germans fought slightly better than the French and the Belgiums .. I would point out German lost about as many folks fighting the French and Belgians and Dutch , as the US loss Fighting the Germans. So maybe it was just supply. After the Bulge it was pretty much Infantry only in the west for the Germans . The Reason why our casuilties were low and the Germans were high in the west was simply US/ Brit Artillery and the Tactics that went with them.
Nations design equipment to fit tactics .. US Didn't see the tank as an Anti Tank Weapon Primairly ..hence many MG's and a good HE Gun.. we had to adjust a little .. Germany saw Tanks as anti Armor early on and planed Mech infantry to protect them hence thicker armor bigger gun less machine guns.. it is the way they were designed to fit the expected tactics .. Germany added Mg's to Stugs for the same reasons we put 76mm on Shermans .. reality bites..both didn't adjust enough ( intersting footnote, Germany took smoke projectors OFF Tigers because they were so unreliable and dangerious to the tank) , but we had Air and Arty.
And Thats my point. The US developed advanced Arty and Arty tactics before the war, and Infantry weapons and tactics to match, Armor was an after thought , Germany developed advanced Armor and tactics and aside from the MG's, Infantry Weapons and Artillery Tactical develoment suffered ,. Each nations Stepchild suffered to some degree on the Battlefield. But just as German Armor should be represented in all of it's full glory and the short comings of the Infantry and Artillery to the degree they existed ( lack of mechanization Primarily, and supply because of that) . Then Allied Artillery and Infantry should be represented to it's full Glory and the armor suffer as it does for it's weakness. Thats the whole darn point.. The Armies are DIFFERENT, they have DIFFERENT strenghts and weaknesses. To only represent the Strenghts of the German armor , Highlight the weakness of US Armor and average out the rest in the name of "fairness and Balance" is not doing the game or the players a favor.
Do it right.. at least have the tools present and properly represented .. let the formula work to price the units and let the proper experience differences create the numerical imbalance.
A perfect example is , Both sides suffered from a shortage of infantry soldiers .. te Germans got old men and boys barely trained to fill the gap.. the US , enjoying Air Superority, disbanded 114 (or thereabouts) AAA Bn's in the ETO and Freed-up better than 300,000 troops for the Infantry. ( I can find the link on that if you insist). One thing effects the other, and such realities should be reflected in experience and morale.
Irinami .. nice try, but their ain't no WP in the game, WP is both casulity and smoke at the same time. No such round exists in the game.. if it was simply a matter of strenghts that would be one thing , and resonable folks could argue about duration of smoke v casuilty production.. but all smoke is smoke and US smoke doesn't make any casulities at all .
Charles I don't think anybody else really had Smoke Generator Companies with smoke generators in any large numbers , maybe some smoke pot type things , but I am talking about dedicated full time troops with generators capable of continusily producing everlasting permenant smoke barriers ( HC type Smoke, not WP).
Charles You may be right about the 37 grape being represented, and that may be just underrated IMHO , but if that is what it is then, I am happy with it being underrated but represented. I would think it would have a higher rating and a shorter range for grape with a more standard rating with a longer range for regular 37mm HE .. perhaps the game cannot handle 2 HE's , if that be the case, then the compromise will have to do, if that is what it indeed is.
Let me go back to you comments about the German ( and everybody elses) 2inch/50mm mortars.. You make my point ..US mortars are different ..longer ranges, heavier shells, lighter to carry, more and better ammo, and more ammo types.. Thats life .. Just as a Tiger is bigger and thicker and better gunned than a Sherman , so a US infantry mortar is better than a german Infantry mortar. I do not advocate we remove one ammo type from the game from the Tiger because it has a longer killing range than a Sherman to make things "fair and balanced" . I advocate we arm the US mortar with every ammo type it actually had ( and the Bazooka ).
In Short , in answer to the basic thread question " Is Arty ineffective ( in relation to real world ) Yes and No .. all Arty is an averaged fair and balanced abstraction in the game.. some nations Artillery ( and associated doctrine, tactical usage, and ammo ) was better/ different/ worse than other nations in real life..if the current rating are anywhere near correct for one particular nation , they cannot be anywhere correct for another nation.
Listen to Viking.. give the US Player some WP please.

[VikingNo2]

Yeah listen to Viking yall all heard that right:rolleyes:

Tired of reading now need sleep, but first I need to Kill, Willy twice, RB twice, M4, Overlord, RobW, Berserk, Paddington, FrankW ah scew it need to kill everybody:rolleyes:

[Losqualo]

Originally posted by AmmoSgt
...( intersting footnote, Germany took smoke projectors OFF Tigers because they were so unreliable and dangerious to the tank)...

Err, this is a bit too vague for my liking.

The smoke dischargers on the Tiger wer not unreliable but had the tendency to be fired unintentionaly when hit by gunfire.

This may be nit-picking, but I wanted to make that clear.

[Frank W.]

i have not read all, but i´m more on the side of charles.

the us is already strong in the game ( at least in 44+45 ) why give them even more ?

the bazooka and all the 50cal mg on every tank + vehicle are some of the "uber weapons" IMHO. if a us tank misses his main gun shot on a HT he still have a chance to kill it w/ the 50cal. no other nation´s tanks can do that ( exc. some late war russian ones ). the bazooka M9 is far better than all other german pz. faust or pz. schreck because it even have a good hit change at 3-4 hexes what seems to much for my liking. i don´t know if the bazooka was really a so powerful, acurate weapon though.

add to that the firepower of US squads and the low arty delay and think twice if u mean the US is to weal in the game.

[Charles2222]

AmmoSgt: You said you understood the price formula, but apparently not completely; see here:

Charles I am not complaining about the cost of US units as based on capability.. I know how the formula works more or less and that doesn't bother me. Inflating the cost by inflating the experience does bother me .. but many countries have inflated experience and morale rating for political purposes.. I don't think the US rating ( and therefore cost ) is inflated for political purpose ( ie National Pride like some are) , I think the 65-70 price break is extrodinarily large to inflate the price and the US is rated way high to take advantage of that.

It sounds like you're a little off-focus there. Part of the price formula IS the experience, and part of it is the equipment. You can ignore the equipment's role in the formula all you want, but it's a major contributor, perhaps even moreso than the experience. Why you'd focus on one and not the other is a mystery to me. If you had inexperienced units, the cost would be lower. If they didn't have so much MG's, etc., then they would be cheaper.

As for the political end of the spectrum, if indeed one could term that as political, I'd say green troops coming out as more experienced than either the GE's or GB is about as good a case of that as I can imagine. I also question why the US has 12 men (and JA and USSR) to many other nation's 9 or 10. The USSR definitely makes some sense, but not so much the US and JA. I suppose what the other poster before me posted, about quantity of men comes into the formula there, though it may not be admitted, but with all the infantry shortages the US had on the Western Front I'd say they certainly don't justify 12 men (maybe the Marines in the Pacific would though).

I notice you chose not to dispute my contention the US Artillery is under rated in regards to the explosive content and overall weight in the shells. I would settle for that. I notice you do not dispute the radio situation or the artillery call doctrine problems , and the lack of some proportionality in call times . I notice you do not dispute that VT fuzes are not addressed.

Like a lot of people around here I don't have thorough knowledge of everything. Seeing as how you come across as you do have that on those subjects, but your treatment of areas I do know, and your treatment of those, leaves me doubting, so I don't chime in. I do, however, make reference to your occasion to exaggerate, such as referring to WP being so dominating, and then coorelating that to the comparatively poor result in their French liberation compared to the GE invasion of France. Either Monty and a few others were THAT BAD, or the super weapons, ie the WP's and US artillery of the WWII world, really weren't that good. It doesn't add up.

As to the 60mm mortars not having smoke .. exactly my point, since the German 50mm mortars don't have smoke in real life, US 60mm mortars which had not only smoke, but WP in real life don't have smoke in the game ..Fair is fair ? Right?

I suspect whether the 60mm had smoke or not wasn't very high on the list. It was probably thought that if the GE and USSR short-range mortars didn't have smoke the US ones wouldn't either. Smoke isn't exactly the most pressing issue of the WWII wargamer, but when they last 8 turns they sure press me.

The Armies are DIFFERENT, they have DIFFERENT strenghts and weaknesses. To only represent the Strenghts of the German armor , Highlight the weakness of US Armor and average out the rest in the name of "fairness and Balance" is not doing the game or the players a favor.

It's just not like that as I earlier pointed out. I think it's a fair guess to say each nation has been snubbed in some sort of manner, be that some attempt at 'balance',or false patriotism, or whatever. You're sweeping with a very broad broom and I've already told you how the US has 12 man squads to the GE 9 or 10's. There could be any number of possible issues, including the issue of killing GE big guns by the visibility cut down so often, but it not like an anti-US campaign as you keep saying, otherwise we wouldn't be seeing these GE anomalies.

Charles I don't think anybody else really had Smoke Generator Companies with smoke generators in any large numbers , maybe some smoke pot type things , but I am talking about dedicated full time troops with generators capable of continusily producing everlasting permenant smoke barriers ( HC type Smoke, not WP)

Actually that would surprise me somewhat (and of course we don't see the Doras of the GE's represented either), as I know they had smoke detachments for covering the strategic bombing sites. Perhaps this here will be enough to dispel the idea that the US was the only one to form any sort of smoke units, and in this case certainly battlefield ones. See Intelligence Bulletin Vol.I, No.5, Section III.: http://www.military-info.com/Aphoto/Sub ... .htm#smoke

Notice the word "smoke troops". I notice later mention is made of JA use of smoke, but no mention of "smoke troops". You should actually find it quite odd that virtually every nation wouldn't have some sort of people versed more in the use of smoke, even be that their relative sole assignment. I'll bet anything they had smoke generators and/or smoke units during the crossing of the Meuse in '40.

From what I understood from one net article I found, Ploesti was
guarded with 2,000 smoke generators. From what I've also seen of the US use of these things, a great deal of it was very likely the "smudge pot" sort of thing. Although I don't know how much the strategic defense of the Reich had allocated the sort of smoke generators used there, to combat units, but it did say that the chemicals involved became in something of a short supply. And, of course, if the same could be said of combat smoke troops, then surely the game doesn't have a chemical availability toggle to differentiate the end of the war from the beginning.

I also found evidence that the GE's were experimenting with smoke generators in WWI, so their not being very adept at it, whatever form it took, would come something of a shock.

Here's some perhaps interesting data I dug up from V7.1 last night:

M3 Stuart: 63pts.
acc-11, kill-4, pen-71, apcr-86, 1 AAMG, 2MG's
armor turret-56,25,25,12 hull-44,25,25,12
speed-34,rof-6,lift capacity-(6!),

The last Stuart (not talking about the Chafee here), was similar but had upgraded armor, mostly frontal with increased penetration to the gun. The gun also increased to an HE value of 8!

By comparison, as I suspected, the GE 75L24 fared worse. The 75L24 is a 6 HE value. You'll also notice another trend. At least the Shermans and the PZIV's when they went to the longer 75mm/76mm guns had their HE value drop to 5. So the early Stuart 37mm is worse than the 75L24, but the latter 37mm is better, and signifigantly better then the then standard issue GE 75mm (and US 76mm).

One last thing that proved a little surprising to me. The PZIIL while cheaper then the Stuart, had a much better main gun for HE value (14). One problem is that it had only one MG, and a number of other issues (like not being able to penetrate a wet rag). What's more, as I was picking in 11/44, the PZIIL couldn't even be bought, even though it's availability is claimed to run through '49. Of course the PZIIL, and indeed the earlier II variants had what amounted to an anti-aircraft gun as a main gun, so that would explain the good kill rating. Other than any anti-aircraft type gun mounted as a main gun, I don't think you'll find any that rate above the latter Stuart gun, in fact, quite surprising, even the 88L71 only has a 7 for HE kill.

Although the Stuart is the cheapest tank you can buy for the US, though I wouldn't have known it, I suspect the GE situation late in the war is even worse because you can't pick the light tanks anymore. The US player may not realise what an absolute gem they have in the Stuart, despite it's expense, as it's late gun penetration can knock out anything less then a Tiger from the flanks, in many cases even at a good distance (since a lot of the GE TD's are in the 30-40mm armor range) and with such speed at that. Maybe an 8 HE rating isn't WP, but it beats a KTiger HE.

On the infantry front, you don't like the expense of the US army because of being forced to have the overrated 70 experience factor. That's usually a suffering point that most people are willing to bear I would imagine. In any event, perhaps with CL, or the much more distant CL Western Front module, they can put in the ahistorical uber-infantry rating they have now, with all those 12 men, and then also put in the more common 55-60 rated US infantry perhaps alongside giving them only 10 men and maybe classifying them as 2nd line troops, and then you could have your el-cheapos. Maybe with CL, every nation should have at least a cheap infantry, 2nd line sort of cheap option.

Oh another thing. Don't think a 5-10 experience hike doesn't make a difference. You may not see it too terribly well, but what is a little more boost than that, for what little I've played them, the difference between the SS infantry and the standard Wehrmacht is quite noticeable. You play with 55-60 rated US infantry after playing with 70 rated ones, and you'll suddenly wonder whatever you saw in buying cheaper troops. By that train of thought I'm not trying to say one who has bought SS will regret going back to Wehrmacht, because the Wehrmacht 65-70 (at it's prime) is pretty useful, but when you go back to 55-60 it'll start the tears to flowing.

[AmmoSgt]

Frank , it is not about "Giving " the US more.. The US Army already had all this stuff in WW2.. it is just a matter of inculding it in the game so the US can properly use US Tactics..
Frank How would you feel if Folks said that German Armor is powerful enough already with Panther Tanks , so lets leave out Tiger Tanks?
And Yes the Bazooka was that good .. better in fact than it is represented in the game .. Good Enough to stay on active duty with the US Army until the late 1960's ..
The Answer to german Anti Tank weapons being weaker than a Bazooka is not to downgrade the bazooka to make things fair.. The Answer is to properly and correctly model all the weapons . Thats like saying Sherman Tanks are weaker than Tigers so we have to weaken the Tigers in the Game... is that what you want ?
This whineing by the Tiger Kitties Starts every time somebody asks that US stuff gets a proper rating. It is sad really.
Frank in WW2 US Art response time was 2 minutes ..German Artillery response time was 12 minutes .. thats 6 times slower , thats history .. They have already articically inflated German artillery response time to about only Twice as slow as US Arty so the German Player will quit whineing.
How much of a handicap does a German Player need before he is ashamed to say he won a game for God's sake . As it is Anybody who knows how baddly the US Forces are dummed down and how much the German forces are inflated laughs at you guys when you think you won a game as it now stands .. Geeze louise.. deal with it .

[AmmoSgt]

Charles my whole point is Give units the weapons and armor and ammo and speed they had in WW2 and charge by the formula .. it is not about making things cheaper.. it is about making things correct .. The Unit pricing Formula is normalized at experience 70 .. a seperate Formula is used to compute the purchase price based on experience .. and we both agree the US is not an Experience 70 coming ashore in North Africa .. maybe at Normandy for Elite and experienced units but not North Africa.
Smoke generators at fixed instalations is not the same as mobile Field units .
Yes the US 76mm is a weaker HE round than the US 75mm Tank Gun Round , that was part of the trade off .. The Rating for the late 37mm grape sounds about right at 8 , but it should be a very short range maybe 10 hexes max range maybe even 6 max range to be fair.. however the 37mm HE at 4 sounds right for regular HE , which the later Stuarts should also have but out to full range.
Charles I post links to articles to inform those folks who are not familiar with the areas I am adressing.
If other nations are missing equipment they actually had then I will support folks who want it inculded in the game and who know about it.. Every Country should have an advocate.. I would never say deny the Bulgarians , or the Germans something they actually had .
Sorry about the FACT that the US had 12 men in a Squad but thats the way the TO&E's read.. Sorry the German only had 10.. Sorry that US Halftracks could seat 13 and 251's could only seat 10.. Sorry that the US put more MG's on their tanks .. Sorry the US fielded a 50 cal MG and the Germans Didn't Sorry the Balistics are different between a 50 cal bullet and a 30 cal bullet. But that History, thats the way it really was.
If you feel your favorite army is missing something , then fight for it , don't try to keep other folks favorite Armies stuff out of the game. That doesn't make the game better. Don't try to make all the Armies the same .. they aren't the same , each had different strenghts and weaknesses . You can't honestly want to misrepresent one side so another side has an artifical advantage , do you? Could you take pride in a win by the favored side if it was done by artifically changing the rating to give one side an advantage ? You would have to believe folks are stupid and don't know the facts to do that.
Most of this has been discussed before , ad nasuem, denying US 60mm Infantry Mortars WP or even smoke is a deliberate concesion to the German Players who whine about their mortars not having smoke and their short range. You do not see US players whining about the Tigers having better armor than Shermans .. Ever wonder why that is ? It is because the German Players know they cannot win an honest battle against properly represented US Forces . So they get Tigers in every battle , endless King Tigers , upgraded Panzer Shrecks and will only fight dummed down American Forces with Hamstrung Artillery .,. and then do their silly little nazi dances if they eek out a win, and they still whine about 50 cals geeze louise get some pride .

[m10bob]

SPWAW is a simulation of a number of actual events,places,and historical armies,but it seems a greater emphasis has been placed on making the simulation "balanced",rather than a priority on historical accuracy.
We (for years) have seen both camps of thought pushed to the nth degree,and so far,"balanced gameplay" has won out,and the people who have done their bookwork have always been slammed.
It's good we all can be so passionate about this game,for whatever side we are on,but IMHO if we want to play a "balanced game",maybe we should go back to Chess?
The fact is,Ammo Sgt and Les the Sarge and I are on the same page here..
Recently,I started a thread about BAR ammo,and learned that the U.S.Army fielded nothing BUT AP ammo to the grunts!
At this,the gameplayers came out of the woodwork defending what nations "had" AP ammo..(Not that they used it exclusiveley mind you,but that it was "available")
The point was,If the Americans used NOTHING BUT AP,why not put it in the game?
Why not put napalm in the game at St Lo,(where it was used)?
Why not white phosphurous,Grape shot,etc??
Seems we go out of our way to field certain nations tanks(even when only 20 or less were ever made),than to include things that were an everday occurance?..
No 2 armies were alike,and it is to their credit those armies were able to function with WHAT THEY HAD,and learned to make allowances for their enemies' differences.
Maybe somebody needs to look at re-doing the OOB's for the game starting with a base skeleton,and then 2 seperate mods,(one for the "balanced" gameplayers,the other for historical accurateness)..
The doctrine of the U.S.army (especially Patton)was that tanks were not to fight other tanks,but to say it did not happen is to ignore Caen,(Brits),the Bulge,etc..Of course the Panther and Tiger had no rival in the Allied camp.Never did...
However,the Allies did have other ways to compensate for this,and we just don't portray all of what they DID have accurately..
My particular brand of prejuidice(for historical accuracy)is from having my own meat in the fire(as it were),and I don't claim to be an armchair general/philosopher on "how it might be"/or should be..Just looking for...well,truth?:)

[VikingNo2]

How about this throw in a little WP, and lets talk about something else,

When we start talking about 'Balanced Game players " vs " Historical Game players " Its starts sounding like the whole CC on CCoff thing again ( Still got a headache from that one )


The tread was INEFFECTIVE ARTILLERY, so I can sum it up for all, the arty in SPWAW is effective, and we would like WP added if possible. One of the best things about H2H is the delay for the US Big arty was upped a little, which make things better IMHO, US mortars should be .01 or .02 thats how the US fought, however instant arty with 155mm was a bit much. Adding WP would be nice maybe LEO can do it:D


Hugs for everyone

[Frank W.]

Originally posted by AmmoSgt
Frank , it is not about "Giving " etc......

mhh.. i think you missunderstood me here.

i WANT historic ratings in the game, and if the US had this
bad WP it should be in the game.

and i always said the low delay for US onboard arty is okay,
because they had the best arty system in WW2.

but i´m w/ viking here that heavy OB batteries should get a higher delay.

my favourite nation in the game IS the US, i won ( okay, let´s say better draws ) most PBM with them while losing w/ the brits + germans. so i´m perhaps sorry for my oponents that are plagued by the fast mortar fire and deadly bazookas

no, not really.

i will play more brits + russians they are the weakest nations from the "big players" IMHO, so even more challenge i think.

[AmmoSgt]

Frank .. the funny thing is that it is NOT the US Arty that is too fast .. The US Artillery is actually capable of responding in 2 minutes 1.0 in game turns or less , and thats for off board .. US Platoons had PORTABLE radios and Platoon Sgt's a LT's had the Training to call Arty. Any other Army only had vehicle mounted Radios so .. Infantry with manpack Radios would be very very RARE in any other Army , and it would be Rare that anybody other the the Company CO would have a clue about how to call Arty .. even the Companies own Mortars would have to be line of sight for commo in any Non-US Army , or have a prepared in advance fire plan( of course landline in a static situation such as a defense or even sometimes a deliberate delay, Even a impromptu rear guard action would be having a communication problem with unit mortars safely hidden over behind that hill.
Germans typically required a 12 minute effort and had to communicate thru the complete chain of command to call "offboard" Arty , The US had a seperate "Arty Net" without chain of command conciderations allowing any non engaged Battery in the Corp, yes Corp to respond to some Platoon Sgt with His butt in a bind. Germany and other nations did not do this , Arty was assigned to a specific Command , say Div or Other smaller maneuver Group , Bde / Kamphgruppe, and it was jealiousy guarded and hoarded and not shared with other Units in the Area unless the next higher command intervened. So For the Germans 6.0 in game turns for off board and onboard very limited on who could call for Arty .. The Games all seeing God's eye is a real problem here , for the US, a unit on the Map, only needs to communicate to a Platoon leader to have the Arty see what God's eye sees . For the Germans they would have to get the word by landline or Runner or flag signal to either Co Hq or a Designated Arty Spotter on loan from the Arty Unit itself, and then they would have a much much smaller pool of available Arty (offboard) that they could request fires from ( because of the structure and doctrine and the Higher Command issues) if they are not already engaged or under orders not to fire because US Air might spot them ( a real concideration) . US Troops drew from the Corp Arty pool , concider what a Corp pool looks like .. Each regiment ( assuming 3 Divs in a Corp, and thats small, but for simplicty's sake) has a Battery , plus a Div has a Arty regiment of 3 Bn's of 3 or 4 batteries , plus a usually attached independant Arty regiment if Combat is anticipated, so 9 more Batteries, ( thats 21 -27 Batteries at each Div) Plus the Corp would have a couple of Regiments of BIG stuff, 240mm ( 240mm aka 9.4 inch is not in the game, but typically a 8' GUN Bn would have a Battery of 9.4 inch Hows) and 8 inch Hows Bn's with 155m Long Tom Batteries. That's about 90 Arty Batteries, much better odds of finding an unengaged Battery than the maybe 3-6 batteries that might be attached directly to the manuver units, Bde/Kamphgruppe, in the Germany Army at the scale of units used in SPWAW. Brits would have the good call times like the US , but from a smaller preassigned pool , much like the Germans , Russians by all that right and fair should almost have to preplan any off board Arty before the Game starts , maybe regimental heavy mortars offboard on call for adjusted fires , only adjusted by specific FO's from that battery.
So lets see, US in the 0.3-0.4 category, realistically maybe 0.8 ( and remember these artifically high experience levels for the US can shorten this ) V. the 1.2 or so for the Germans when realistically it should be more like 4.0- 5.0 turns, assuming a "turn is aprox 2.5 minutes.
In other words , if anybody's Artillery is "too fast" in the game it is the Germans and Russians. If The Germans were reduced IN PROPORTION to the US "Fast" call times they would still be around a 3.0 call time. and if the US was given correct Experience ratings they would have more/ cheaper ( as is correct, or even more correct a little more ammo per Arty Unit for the same "In the Game after Adjusting for experience price" than other countries) Arty, but slightly slower call times than they currently have. I don't think US units should have a base experience over about 65 until 1944 in the ETO , Better morale than the Gemans for sure but not high experience ratings .. thats just plain crazy. Airborne and Post North Africa Amphibious Troops maybe +5 , but not even that going ashore in North Africa. Landing in Italy/ Sicily , OK maybe a +5 for experienced troops( on a base of 65) .. By Normandy yes base 70 and +5 for Amphib Troops Airbore Ranger types , sure, US pretty much had it together by then .. but Good God, North Africa ?? no way

[Voriax]

Ammo, one question.

It's my understanding that one (main?) contributing factor for that US arty fast response time was that they had very comprehensive maps *and* they had a huge amount of pre-calculated fire missions within that area.

Now assuming their preplanned calculations do not cover the request, what was the response time then?
Also, was it possible for a single FO to call upon *every* arty unit in range to fire at single target? And to actually manage to get them hit that target?

Voriax

[chief]

Voriax:
while your waiting for a better reply from AmmoSgt let me add a little history.

Prior to WW2 a smart man at West Point worked up a mechanical calculator for Artillery batteries. This particular calculator computed the flight time of a shell (any size) to a given target for a given range. (no I don't know his name). This computer gave US (and later British) batteries the ability to coordinate all the firepower to land/hit all at once. You can see the devastation this causes because normally after the first round everyone goes for cover or digs a deeper foxhole (and prays). You seldom get advance warning of the first volley. Also this calculator allowed for rapid changes of coordinates and better service to front line FO's.

I hope this helps a little.

[AmmoSgt]

We had the Maps .. Air Recon to make the maps and analog computers to pre-make the range tapes for any situation .. the process was incredibly simple .. a battery would set up and give it's grid to the Computation Section at Bn, the Section would print out tape measures calibrated to the map scale and adjusted for the Gun Type and Various Ammo Types so the Setting could be read Directly from the tape. You lay the tape on the map from Gun Grid to Target you get azimuth and range setting directly from the tape , only takes about 15 seconds ... You gotta Realize we brought 6 Coca-Cola Bottling plants ashore at Normandy to support the Troops .. we had massive Air Recon and Photo maps were a snap . Beer was harder we had to capture that.
You want to change ammo you switch to the prepared tape for that weight round and the charge you want to shoot , took 5 seconds to hang one tape on the nail and take the other tape off the nail... the hard part was making the tapes .. The Analog Computers would crank for almost 45 seconds making a tape for a new battery at a new grid .. whole set could be printed out by the time the guns were in position, before the sand bags were in place. Usually the Advance Party got the tapes while they were still driving aiming stakes , before then Guns came up the road. Time of flight of the round took longer than getting the actual settings for the gun, Firing solutions in under 30 seconds from request to dialed in on the gun and lanyard pulled was the goal at an individual battery .. with everybody on the same net , Batteries would report back times in less than a minute to a central FC Center at Corp or Div base line would be the longest Flight time ( Built into the tape for manual fuxe settings ) that would be transmitted as the base time and the TOT ( Time on Target) would be established .. Batteries would then fire TOT so all shells from all Batteries would arrrive at the Target at the same time regardless of the position or caliber of the various batteries .. added less than a minute to a TOT Mass shoot's arrival time .. Consequently massed instantanious Fires Gave little reaction time for the Target to seek cover from subsequent salvoes , because everything arrived at the same time .
The US has Improved on this system to the point that the now canceled Crusader 155mm SP could deliver 8 rounds , using different flight arcs to arrive TOT all in the same second using just one gun tube. I think 4 rounds is the current max with a single Paladin M109A6 Tube. But in WW2 a Bn of 18 Guns or a Bde of 48 guns ( or more than one Regt) could put 18-48+ rounds on the same target in the same second from 6-9 or more different locations around the Battlefield , only limit was the Corp net maybe Max 90 Batteries. Of course pulling in that many could add another minute or two due to the limitations of single channel voice polling of the Battery flight times

[Voriax]

Chief, thanks for the reply.

One reason for my question is that a smart man in Finland developed arty practices during early 30's into level normally attributed to US arty only.
However lack of ammunition, guns and comm gear often reduced the effectiveness of Finnish arty.

And that effectiveness was main reason why the Sov attacks were stopped in '44...at best some 200 tubes were firing at an area of 2-3 football fields...breaking up Sov attacks before they even begun.

Voriax

[chief]

Ammo Sgt:

I was close, forgot about the tape. I told Voriax you'd give him a better answer.

[chief]

Voriax:

I'm sure we were not the only ones who came up with that idea but in Europe it was put to use by US effectively. And if my sources are correct it was not used in PTO at all ??????

[Voriax]

Chief, I'm not an arty man so I cannot describe it properly. At least not from memory. No mechanical calculators but for example a special 'diagram' that allowed immediate corrections for each gun not depending where the gun was in relation of target..the FO just told the results and the gun crew made the necessary adjustments with this device...I see if there is any web info.

I'm not saying that our system was as effective as US method, but I'm pretty certain it was better than other systems.
For example, Sov arty was just about incapable to do any sort of concentrated fire at one point..they just drove all guns in a battery in a line, put same settings in each of them, fired a shot, raised a bit, fired another shot..repeat...

Voriax