Mobile arty

[foxtrot]

Hi all, just a question regarding something I've noticed of late. Mobile arty (Wespe, Priest, British 25 pounders, etc.) seem to be remarkably accurate and effective against armour (either taking tanks out directly or demoralising the crew rapidly). I'd be surprised if they really ever were this good? One or two of these guys can really shift the balance of power in a game and I'm curious to know whether they were really used this way against armour? Thoughts on a postcard...

[Honour79]

I agree. They are way too powerful and accurate.

[gortwillsaveus]

This has been discussed before,....but,...
A tank crew, especially in WW2 tanks, is not impervious to an artillery bombardment, especially by a 10.5-cm leFH 18 barrage.
Factor in the concussive effects (let alone a direct hit) of the blast and it sure as heck would decrease morale.
Factor in that Wespes were usually organized into batteries of six howitzers with up to five batteries to an Abteilung (battalion).

Ever see see a video of the present-day US Paladin as they fire a barrage? Devastating to say the least.

Take a look at this site: http://axistanksworldwarii.devhub.com/b ... 897-wespe/

In my honest opinion,..I think too much credit is given to WW2 tanks as a super protective vehicle,..and not enough credit is given to arty.
I was in a few WW2 tanks at a tank museum at Aberdeen Proving Grounds in Maryland.
It was almost a let down to see just how primitive the tanks appear when viewed in person.
And that's from a huge WW2 tank fan.

[Old_Warrior]

Actually the US forces found artillery to be one of their BEST ways of stopping an armored attack. Their tanks often could not duke it out with the German armor and the infantry was at a loss when it came to the heavy tanks.

There are a lot of examples from official records of artillery disrupting an attack. Not knocking out the tank as much as dazing the occupants or perhaps knocking off a tread.

As this is a beginner level game I doubt that we will ever see radios and spotting rules BUT I think that some clever programmer could build a script that would add this in. I am NOT clever!

[bjarmson]

gortwillsaveus and Old_Warrior are correct. American artillery was use extensively, and very successfully, to disrupt Panzer attacks and destroy or incapacitate German tanks. And tactical airpower also played a role in destroying Panzer units.

[Ranger]

As a former experienced Forward Observer (FOO) who has called and adjusted fire missions with artillery (105mm, 155mm, 8inch) and mortars (60mm and 81mm), I can tell you that indirect fire support from artillery/mortars can be very accurate indeed. And this accuracy is without the aid of modern devices like GPS and laser range finders. Just using a map, compass, binoculars, and a radio, the exact same way FOs did it in WW2.

Besides competent Fire Direction Control (the guys who listen to the FO and tell the howitzer crew where to point their cannons etc) and competent surveyors to plot the exact location of each gun in a battery, only two things are required for highly accurate artillery fire. #1) Gun registration.. a sort of test fire thats observed and adjusted by the FO for "fine tuning" and "calibration" ("zeroing" in rifle marksmanship language). #2) accurate target location by the FO.

So as you might imagine, gun registration and accurate target location is easier in a static defense than it is a mobile offense. So it should be expected that defensive artillery fire will, more often than not, be more accurate than offensive artillery fire (assuming either or both the FO and battery are on the move etc). As a matter of fact, if the FO and gun batteries are simply competent, and have had a short amount of time to prepare, it should be expected that defensive artillery fire can be exceptionally deadly accurate with first volley fire for effects.

As for accuracy in the mobile offense, this is where proper fire support planning and experienced FOs and FDC/survey/gun crews make a difference in offensive fire support accuracy etc.

How much of this relates to artillery in BA? Only as much you, or the modders, or developers, want it to.

Cheers,

Thomas

[foxtrot]

Thanks guys, all very interesting. Appreciate the detailed input!

[enric]

The problem of the accuracy of IF in BA, in my opinion, comes from the fact that IF, in BA, can be placed without a FO (doesn't exits as unit).
You can place IF on any tile, even if no unit is sighting the tile, and in case you have a unit sighting the tile no connection between the sighting unit and the firing unit is needed.

I began to mod this in Vitality, for now, it's just an approach: the off-board artillery must be initiate after a leader has established radio control with the battery.

[foxtrot]

I think that would definitely be somewhat more realistic. This kind of comes back to the perennial issue of simulating local versus global unit visibility and the fog of war in games. I remember that this was always a bone of contention in the combat mission games too. It'd be great if you could have multiple players playing together as teams and relaying information to each other about the local environment. I guess the issue with that is having a player base big enough to support this. Not sure if that would work with BA?

[enric]

... It'd be great if you could have multiple players playing together as teams and relaying information to each other about the local environment. I guess the issue with that is having a player base big enough to support this. Not sure if that would work with BA?

This is a "core" change in BA, no a modding option.
Furthermore, I'm not sure of the playability of multiple players for side. Many times it has became a frustration experience.

[foxtrot]

Probably just wishful thinking