AT support fail?

[impar]

Puzzled with this.

An 8.8 in AT mode, a Panzerjager 35R (SPAT) and a Panzer IIIH (with the AT support hero), walk into a bar... Nah! They were just bunched together on a ukranian countryside east of Kiev, supported by a 15cm gun, when they were attacked by a recon, three tanks and a KV-2 in ART mode. I expected each of those units to give proper AT support, they did not.
The KV-2 I understand, indirect fire because ART mode, but all the others should have suffered support fire. They didnt.
Also, the 15cm gun east of the 8.8cm didnt fire support the 8.8 or the Panzerjager 35R.

Should I just fire the commanding officers of those units?
Bug? Other explanation?

End of turn:

Beginning of next turn:

[gokkel]

AT support units don't give support fire for other AT support units, they can only support other unit types. So having multiple of these units next to each other is not very useful.

[adiekmann]

AT support units don't give support fire for other AT support units, they can only support other unit types. So having multiple of these units next to each other is not very useful.

I experienced recently a similar thing, a PAK being attacked with a Mk.III tank with the AT hero doing nothing. Well, that explains it, but I don't know if I agree with that rule. Multiple art can fire in support of one another, so why not AT?

[impar]

AT support units don't give support fire for other AT support units, they can only support other unit types. So having multiple of these units next to each other is not very useful.

Other AT support units arent friendly?


And the 15cm, an ART, doesnt support a friendly AT unit?

[dalfrede]

Multiple art can fire in support of one another, so why not AT?

The concern was that AT would become too powerful and affect game play.

[gokkel]

AT support units don't give support fire for other AT support units, they can only support other unit types. So having multiple of these units next to each other is not very useful.

Other AT support units arent friendly?


And the 15cm, an ART, doesnt support a friendly AT unit?

Yes, sadly the tooltip doesn't provide that critical information. The 15cm will only provide support against soft targets for AT units.

[impar]

That makes a campaign without tanks even harder...

PS:
Reloaded the save game and grabbed one of each T-34, KV-2, T-50 and a BT-7.

[SineMora]

Indeed, ATs don't get fire support against hard targets, presumably owing to fears that it'd lead to deathstars. Considering that a single heavy tank with a strong AT supporting it is already nigh impossible to defeat without significant fire support or air assets, I'd say those fears of what would happen if especially SPATs could support each other are well founded.

[PoorOldSpike]

...I expected each of those units to give proper AT support, they did not.

Just a guess but from the direction the Russki guns are pointing in their feeding frenzy, it looks like they ignored the best-armoured Pz III and opted to go for the "softer" 88 and SPAT.
If they'd gone for the Pz III perhaps the 88 and SPAT would have opened up on the Russkis with the clear message "On yer bikes Ivan"

[Kerensky]

The reason AT units don't support other AT units is the same reason Fighters don't support other Fighters units.

If you think of it like that, it makes sense.
No one ever questions or ask why fighters don't escort fighters, do they?

Arty supports arty because suppression based support isn't very harmful. Annoying, but not deadly. Direct damage support fire is absolutely lethal.

[Schlack]

Top tip, Camo hero on your support AT, if there's no enemy recon unit its quite OP. You would think the AI could see the wreckage....

[Horseman]

The reason AT units don't support other AT units is the same reason Fighters don't support other Fighters units.

If you think of it like that, it makes sense.
No one ever questions or ask why fighters don't escort fighters, do they?

Arty supports arty because suppression based support isn't very harmful. Annoying, but not deadly. Direct damage support fire is absolutely lethal.

Based on that line of thinking - wouldn't it make sense for artillery with AT support to be able to support other units with the AT trait?

That way only dedicated AT guns wouldn't be able to support each other?

[impar]

Arty supports arty because suppression based support isn't very harmful.

So, why doesnt a 15cm support a friendly AT unit being attacked by a hard target?

[dalfrede]

So, why doesnt a 15cm support a friendly AT unit being attacked by a hard target?

Support against hard targets is provided via ATsupport trait, not ArtySupport trait.
It is the trait not supporting the trait, not unit type not supporting unit type.

[Horseman]

So, why doesnt a 15cm support a friendly AT unit being attacked by a hard target?

Support against hard targets is provided via ATsupport trait, not ArtySupport trait.
It is the trait not supporting the trait, not unit type not supporting unit type.

But a 15cm will support another 15cm against a hard attack.

It's not that we don't understand how it works. We're asking why artillery doesn't support AT. Considering the reason given for art being able to support other art against soft targets by Kerensky in the quoted post.

[Retributarr]

It's not that we don't understand how it works. We're asking why artillery doesn't support AT. Considering the reason given for art being able to support other art against soft targets by Kerensky in the quoted post.

"Common sense/reasoning"... should tell you... that... Artillery should be able to render support fire for any ground unit that is under assault by another soft-rated unit!.

[Kerensky]

Glad we're enjoying the overcomplication of rulesets with subrules and exceptions.

[Horseman]

Glad we're enjoying the overcomplication of rulesets with subrules and exceptions.

But there's already an exception.... 15cm art will support fire in defence of other 15cm artillery against hard targets which according to the rules it shouldn't? Or should it?

As to the person saying "comon sense and reasoning should tell you......" so all your artillery supports against soft targets? Thought not. Let's leave the snarky comments out because they're not really useful.

Sorry guys - this particular rule isn't too clear. Or not working exactly as intended. I'm not sure which.

So how about an actual explanation of what the rule should be?

Kerensky you already stated that art will support other art against soft targets because it's suppression damage and not too OP. Whilst direct AT fire can be devastating and allowing AT to support Each other would be OP. I don't disagree with any of that.

But why then does Art not support AT against hard targets, it's still mainly suppression fire is it not?

[Kerensky]

Kerensky you already stated that art will support other art against soft targets because it's suppression damage and not too OP. Whilst direct AT fire can be devastating and allowing AT to support Each other would be OP. I don't disagree with any of that.

I think you're mistaking my guess/opinion on why it works a certain way as me having put the rule there in the first place.

[Horseman]

Kerensky you already stated that art will support other art against soft targets because it's suppression damage and not too OP. Whilst direct AT fire can be devastating and allowing AT to support Each other would be OP. I don't disagree with any of that.

I think you're mistaking my guess/opinion on why it works a certain way as me having put the rule there in the first place.

Ha - I forget you're not actually one of the devs. On a completely separate topic, was the fallweis scenario one of yours?