Whilst there are instances of support fire being seen to be generated, ( usually in respect of AA fire ), the favoured old tactic of putting Artillery behind dug in infantry doesn't seem to generate support fire?
Or have I missed something?

Moderators: The Artistocrats, Order of Battle Moderators
Whilst I can follow your argument on that, I don't agree that artillery would not fire in defence though.Qwer28 wrote:You can support fire when you attack. You use artilery for demoralized enemy and then you use infanty for attack. But arty will not automatic fire in defend. I think this is correct. You cant use artilery for defend becouse you dont have time direct position and in attack enemy and ally are so close together so you will shoot your people too. I think that is good.
Unless your enemy attacks with highly mobile units over open terrain, you - as defender - should have time to use your artillery before any enemy unit reaches attack positions. I also believe "suppression" in PzC was not permanent, while in OoBP it is.Whilst I can follow your argument on that, I don't agree that artillery would not fire in defence though.
That you can do in your turn. How i understant this game is more tactical, in one turn is less time then in Panzer general.Ballacraine wrote:
Whilst I can follow your argument on that, I don't agree that artillery would not fire in defence though.
A supressing bombardment slightly behind the vanguard was usually favourite, to soften & disorganise the attack.