"Running" from artillery

[jungelsj_slith]

One of my biggest peeves of the game right now (HTTR) is when units will "run" from my artillery bombardments. The problem is twofold:

1) Is that realistic? Wouldn't a unit simply go pinned (despite casualties), especially if it's dug in? Would a company of infantry get up and run over open ground with shells raining down?

2) I have to micromanage each artillery bombardment, re-centering the crosshair over the moving unit every couple of minutes (gametime.) If #1 is untrue or it isn't going to be addressed, it would be nice to have some sort of automated adjustment that will lock the bombard crosshair to a unit and move with it. (furthermore, is it even realistic that artillery can be adjusted that quickly? multiple times in a 15 minute bombardment?)

[Arjuna]

In general units either run away as soon as they come under arty fire or they go to ground. It largely depends on what they are doing. Troops often pulled back out of a barrage if they were in an assault or being assaulted. If they were already deployed or dug in then they would tend to hug the ground. We have reviewed this aspect in COTA and I hope we have struck the right balance. Testers so far seem heppy.

Adjusting bombardments is a tricky issue. It really requires a trained observer with a direct comms link to the guns. Typically there would be only one of these per Bn ( in a Brit/US/German force ) and so it's a tad unfair to provide such flexibility to every spotting unit, even though they can call in the fire initially. To simulate this properly we really need to add in extra units to represent the FOs, but at the moment that is not an option. We need to wait till machine processing power increases somewhat.

[sterckxe]

ORIGINAL: Arjuna

In general units either run away as soon as they come under arty fire or they go to ground. It largely depends on what they are doing. Troops often pulled back out of a barrage if they were in an assault or being assaulted. If they were already deployed or dug in then they would tend to hug the ground. We have reviewed this aspect in COTA and I hope we have struck the right balance. Testers so far seem heppy.

I'm especially happy if they decide to do a runner from a prepared position. Arty is great for breaking up fixed positions and/or suppression while the assault goes in.

Greetz,

Eddy Sterckx - hippy, hoppy and heppy with COTA so far

[cabron66]

Generally speaking, upright movement under artillery fire is suicidal and pointless. Remember that even light arty shells (in the 75mm ballpark) can be lethal out to around 100m. If there are enough of them falling around you, running is the worst thing you can do. Being upright under artillery fire is very bad, but even just lying on the ground will greatly increase your odds of survival. As long as your nerve holds you are far more likely to simply stay down.

A single battery of 105mm guns can effectively surpress a very large area hundreds of meters around depending on the arrangement of the guns. If you stand up and run for it you have a pretty bleak outlook. In a best case scenario (solid ground, light load, widely dispersed shells, decent cover, etc.) you might actually have a chance of making it out of the kill zone before you are wounded, dead or exhausted. If you are running through mud, over rough or uneven terrain, carrying a standard load, disoriented from the smoke and noise or whatever, your odds of survival are drastically reduced. Of course you can always crawl, but crawling across two or three football fields while carrying a thirty to fifty pound load is quite a feat.

Conducting a withdrawal under these conditions is similarily impossible. A unit may break and run, usually as a result of panic, but it will take heavy casualties and will not be ready for combat for some time (if ever).

Cheers

Paul

[Arjuna]

Paul,

I hope Steve Long can chime in on this as he was in Artillery. From my understanding, while fragments of Fd Arty shells ( 75 to 105s ) can reach out to over a hundred metres, this is a rare event. The average effective burst radius of a 25pdr ( 84mm ) is 30m. A Bty of 8 x 25pdrs can effectively cover an area of 100 x 100 and that's with a few gaps.

For those who have been brought up on hex games, where everyone is nicely stacked within a specific hex location, there is a tendency to view arty fire as always being directly ontop of the centre of a unit. In our system where units occupy ground on an irregular pattern this is often not the case. Just the forward edge might cop part of the beaten zone of the arty unit. In reality we may often be talking about the lead section of a company. While the lead section may indeed go to cround, often the rest will withdraw rather than be caught. One has to remember that we are trying to simulate things on an operational level, not a tactical level.

[cabron66]

ORIGINAL: Arjuna

Paul,

I hope Steve Long can chime in on this as he was in Artillery. From my understanding, while fragments of Fd Arty shells ( 75 to 105s ) can reach out to over a hundred metres, this is a rare event. The average effective burst radius of a 25pdr ( 84mm ) is 30m. A Bty of 8 x 25pdrs can effectively cover an area of 100 x 100 and that's with a few gaps.

For those who have been brought up on hex games, where everyone is nicely stacked within a specific hex location, there is a tendency to view arty fire as always being directly ontop of the centre of a unit. In our system where units occupy ground on an irregular pattern this is often not the case. Just the forward edge might cop part of the beaten zone of the arty unit. In reality we may often be talking about the lead section of a company. While the lead section may indeed go to cround, often the rest will withdraw rather than be caught. One has to remember that we are trying to simulate things on an operational level, not a tactical level.

Absolutely. There are a lot of variables involved. The lethal radius is a number that always is much higher than the actual battleground effect of the shells. Having even light cover and lying prone will save you from even near misses. I was imagining a company-sized unit, assaulting across relatively open terrain, caught under a barrage of 105mm shells being fired from guns positioned every 40 or 50 metres.

Its a complicated question. If your unit is only partially surpressed you could withdraw or even keep advancing and just take the losses. Generally you want to maintain the integrity of your unit above all else. Allowing or even encouraging your unit to split up due to a light 75mm barrage is not the best idea. Of course, if you are assaulting, you might just grit your teeth and run right through the shells. Especially if withdrawing is simply not an option.

I have to say that I agree with the original poster. Units in HTTR seemed to be able to escape artillery barrages, reorganize and continue on their way far too easily. Of course, I agree with you about the misperceptions brought about by years of hex-based gaming, but I just wanted to offer an opinion.

I mean, running away was probably something that happened all the time, especially with green troops, but it was almost always an utterly disorganized panic. I guess what I wanted to point out was the difficulties involved in moving, in good order, a large group of men out from under a barrage. I'm not saying it is impossible, but rather that it would require that a lot of factors be in your favour. If you can see your men, have the means to get an order to them and can convince them to move I see no problem. Otherwise, you would have to rely on their experience.

Cheers

Paul

[Arjuna]

Thanks Paul. I appreciate your comments. If I get time, I'll have another look at this before COTA ships. [:)]

[jungelsj_slith]

ORIGINAL: sterckxe
I'm especially happy if they decide to do a runner from a prepared position. Arty is great for breaking up fixed positions and/or suppression while the assault goes in.

I really hope that this is indeed not the case. It seems to me to fly in the face of all logic. I honestly can't remember ever reading about an instance where a unit gets up and leaves prepared positions DURING a bombardment unless they were nearly totally annihilated/routed and/or being overrun.

Arjuna, by chance, is there any code going on that gives some type of bonus to artillery that's landing on in an upright (running) group of men?

Unfortunately it doesn't look like there's a solution in the works for the tedious gameplay of following a running unit with adjustments (by hand) to each and every one of your bombardments. This is the sole reason I don't even take control of mortars anymore - it's just to tiresome to do that except for with the big, important guns.

I really hope that there's been significant work in this area because after playing again today, it seems like every single unit that I bombard begins to run when taking casualties. It doesn't seem like there's a "going to ground" type of reaction at all.

Anyway, thanks for your replies.

[cabron66]

That's cool. It's an interesting topic. Artillery fascinates the hell out of me.

There are some interesting exceptions. Just the other day I was reading Zhukov's Greatest Defeat by David Glantz. The Germans had a system of connected backup positions that allowed them to escape the worst of a barrage. Apparently, Russian pre-planned artillery was so predictable that, once it started, you had enough time to get out of the way before the worst of it got to you. Then when the shelling stopped you simply ran right back up into your primary positions and waited for the infantry.

The Russians opened Operation Mars (the companion to Uranus) with a massed barrage of hundreds of guns per kilometre and had only mixed success. They managed to completely destroy German fixed positions, but only when those positions were in a confined and easily visible place (like a town). Simple earthworks in more open terrain proved to be much harder to destroy. The gist of the story was that you could lob endless shells, but what really got the job done was an FO adjusting fire and knocking out each and every position in turn. The pre-planned stuff, although awesome to watch, was easily avoided because it followed predictable patterns.

Cheers

Paul

[sterckxe]

ORIGINAL: molotov_billy

ORIGINAL: sterckxe
I'm especially happy if they decide to do a runner from a prepared position. Arty is great for breaking up fixed positions and/or suppression while the assault goes in.

I really hope that this is indeed not the case. It seems to me to fly in the face of all logic. I honestly can't remember ever reading about an instance where a unit gets up and leaves prepared positions DURING a bombardment unless they were nearly totally annihilated/routed and/or being overrun.

See other replies in the thread - infantry did get out of the way of arty - either by going forward or retreating.

ORIGINAL: molotov_billy
I really hope that there's been significant work in this area because after playing again today, it seems like every single unit that I bombard begins to run when taking casualties. It doesn't seem like there's a "going to ground" type of reaction at all.

I should have said I'm pleased with the arty - in the upcoming COTA. (beta-tester) - units don't always run from arty, but they do have a breaking point. Units in prepared positions like dug-in in a fortress type of environment seldom break&run due to arty, but you can suppress them with it while your assault goes in. That way there's little return fire and your assault has a higher probability of making it.

Greetz,

Eddy Sterckx

[JJKettunen]

ORIGINAL: cabron66
The gist of the story was that you could lob endless shells, but what really got the job done was an FO adjusting fire and knocking out each and every position in turn. The pre-planned stuff, although awesome to watch, was easily avoided because it followed predictable patterns.

You forgot that there was a serious case of fog by the time which prevented fire adjustment during the barrage.

[cabron66]

ORIGINAL: Keke

ORIGINAL: cabron66
The gist of the story was that you could lob endless shells, but what really got the job done was an FO adjusting fire and knocking out each and every position in turn. The pre-planned stuff, although awesome to watch, was easily avoided because it followed predictable patterns.

You forgot that there was a serious case of fog by the time which prevented fire adjustment during the barrage.

True enough, but my point was not about the success or failure of the assault but more about the importance of adjusted concentrated fire as opposed to pre-planned fire. The fog was not a factor until after the initial barrage had ended. Those forces had been facing each other for months. The Russians had spent weeks registering targets and getting everything set for the big wallop. In the end, the pre-planned fire falls first and that is what matters most to my argument. Fog or no fog, the Germans knew that they were facing a certain kind of barrage, got out of the way, waited for it to end and then got back in the way.

Now, if the initial heavy artillery does not reduce visibility to zero and the air is clear enough, spotters in stage two of the barrage will concentrate fire on any remaining German positions. That is where the fog comes into play.

Of course, the thing to remember is that the Germans have had plenty of time to prepare (i.e. dig the trench network, designate fallback positions, make sure everyone knows where to go and what to do). With preparation they can pull off this kind of maneuver without it turning into a circus. It's not exactly what this thread is about, but I thought it was interesting as an example of what can be done to defeat artillery.

Cheers

Paul

[jungelsj_slith]

ORIGINAL: sterckxe

ORIGINAL: molotov_billy

ORIGINAL: sterckxe
I'm especially happy if they decide to do a runner from a prepared position. Arty is great for breaking up fixed positions and/or suppression while the assault goes in.

I really hope that this is indeed not the case. It seems to me to fly in the face of all logic. I honestly can't remember ever reading about an instance where a unit gets up and leaves prepared positions DURING a bombardment unless they were nearly totally annihilated/routed and/or being overrun.

See other replies in the thread - infantry did get out of the way of arty - either by going forward or retreating.

I have. Now read what you said in this quote and read my reply again. You said that arty is "great" for breaking up fixed/prepared positions and making them "run." This indeed does fly in the face of all logic and is incorrect. It looks as if you rephrased what you said later on, so no harm done.

[Arjuna]

Thanks for the discussion guys.

I have further tweaked the reaction code so that now if a unit is under bombardment and wants to retreat ( not rout ) it will have a 70% chance of staying put instead. This is further modified by +20% if its dug-in or better and by -10% if its Moving or Withdrawing. We'll monitor how this goes. From my initial walk through the Tempe Gorge Crisis, it does seem good. Here's is a screen dump depicting those units that have "retreated in place" due to arty fire.

[RayWolfe]

ORIGINAL: sterckxe
I should have said I'm pleased with the arty

There Eddy, it works every time ... you say you're happy with something and Arjuna changes it! [8|]
Ray

[JJKettunen]

ORIGINAL: RayWolfe

ORIGINAL: sterckxe
I should have said I'm pleased with the arty

There Eddy, it works every time ... you say you're happy with something and Arjuna changes it! [8|]

Ray

[:D]

[cabron66]

That sounds like a good idea. Great that there are people out there genuinely interested in making a good game.

Now the only question left is casualties. In other words, should there be a price to pay for retreating? Or should we assume that when a unit retreats it is doing so because it can do so safely? You know what I mean?

My concern is that a unit that breaks and makes a run for it (low morale, lack of experience, severity of the barrage, etc.) will most likely suffer heavier casualties and take a very significant hit to its organization and morale. This would be a different case than a unit that has the opportunity to withdraw in good order. Just some food for thought.

Cheers

Paul

[sterckxe]

ORIGINAL: molotov_billy

ORIGINAL: sterckxe

ORIGINAL: molotov_billy



I really hope that this is indeed not the case. It seems to me to fly in the face of all logic. I honestly can't remember ever reading about an instance where a unit gets up and leaves prepared positions DURING a bombardment unless they were nearly totally annihilated/routed and/or being overrun.

See other replies in the thread - infantry did get out of the way of arty - either by going forward or retreating.

I have. Now read what you said in this quote and read my reply again. You said that arty is "great" for breaking up fixed/prepared positions and making them "run." This indeed does fly in the face of all logic and is incorrect. It looks as if you rephrased what you said later on, so no harm done.

Ah, I see - that's what you get when you want to combine 2 statements in the same sentence with an and/or to save typing time. My bad.

Greetz,

Eddy Sterckx

[sterckxe]

ORIGINAL: RayWolfe

ORIGINAL: sterckxe
I should have said I'm pleased with the arty

There Eddy, it works every time ... you say you're happy with something and Arjuna changes it! [8|]
Ray

Uncanny, isn't it

I'm *extremely* happy with the current implementation of air assets, and especially don't want air reccon capabilities

Greetz,

Eddy Sterckx

[Trigger Happy]

ORIGINAL: sterckxe

ORIGINAL: RayWolfe

ORIGINAL: sterckxe
I should have said I'm pleased with the arty

There Eddy, it works every time ... you say you're happy with something and Arjuna changes it! [8|]
Ray

Uncanny, isn't it

I'm *extremely* happy with the current implementation of air assets, and especially don't want air reccon capabilities

Greetz,

Eddy Sterckx

I too DON'Twant air recon![:)]