Counter-Battery Process?

[scJazz]

Probably not the first to bring this up but... any reason why unused Airstrikes can't act as CB? Kinda fixes that "whole longest range wins" thing doesn't it?

[Suhiir]

Originally Posted by scJazz

Probably not the first to bring this up but... any reason why unused Airstrikes can't act as CB? Kinda fixes that "whole longest range wins" thing doesn't it?

Of course it is possible to alter the game code to allow this. But I don't even want to think of the man-hours it would involve. And that's not even trying to take into consideration how the heck would you implement off-map anti-aircraft?

For my part in the mini campaign I've been working on (forever) I simply bought an HIMARS section and re-labeled it "Ctr Btty Air" and set it's reinforcement turn to 50 (the max allowed). For most scenarios that's longer then the turns the scenario lasts, for the others by turn 50 it has fired all it's ammo doing counter-battery before (well, 95% of the time) turn 50 so the player never gets the ability to lay a rocket cluster munition barrage. Works out pretty well if you ask me

[scJazz]

Originally Posted by Suhiir

Of course it is possible to alter the game code to allow this. But I don't even want to think of the man-hours it would involve. And that's not even trying to take into consideration how the heck would you implement off-map anti-aircraft?

For my part in the mini campaign I've been working on (forever) I simply bought an HIMARS section and re-labeled it "Ctr Btty Air" and set it's reinforcement turn to 50 (the max allowed). For most scenarios that's longer then the turns the scenario lasts, for the others by turn 50 it has fired all it's ammo doing counter-battery before (well, 95% of the time) turn 50 so the player never gets the ability to lay a rocket cluster munition barrage. Works out pretty well if you ask me

HEHEHEH

I was thinking about the coding required to pull off my idea while walking to the store.

Your plan is definitely best!

My idea would require some stunt like...
1) All Aircraft are assumed range 999 for CB
2) All OM Arty is assumed to have Area SAM for defense
3) Now run SAMs for defense
4) Assuming you aren't dead yet run CB Airstrike
4A) Perhaps some weapons aren't used like HARM or Mavericks

[EOT]

Yes this makes sense to use air strikes to hunt and destroy Arty!.
That is what the Allies(U.S.) did during the Gulf War(1990). Once they had air superiority they went hunting for Iraqi Arty and CB'd with MLRS & Air strikes. The Allies were afraid of the Iraqi arty because they had base bleed ammunition and smooth bore arty with longer range capability. One of the reason's Gerald Bull was assassinated in 1990 for his work on an Iraqi Supergun.

A CB function for air strike formations a player/AI might have in SPMBT would have to occur automatically and would have to pass Air defence interception first. Unless a player/AI had air superiority than they should not be allowed to perform an Air Strike CB mission. To complete a CB mission you would have to intercept all the other sides CAP mission and strategic Air defence.

Maybe their could be 25% dice roll to see if shorter range off-map guns could complete a CB on a longer range guns?

I think Andy & Don would say there are to many what if's and it would not be in the scope/spirit of the original game.

[Marcello]

Originally Posted by EOT

The Allies were afraid of the Iraqi arty because they had base bleed ammunition and smooth bore arty with longer range capability. One of the reason's Gerald Bull was assassinated in 1990 for his work on an Iraqi Supergun.

Actually those guns were not smoothbores,a dicey proposition for long range artillery, they engage the rifling via small finns in a fashion reminiscent of some mid 19th century rifled guns designs. This made possible to design much more aerodynamic shells.Also "brute force" measures such as more powerful charge and longer barrel were employed.
I am not sure but I suspect that all the talks about coalitions fearing iraqi guns was more some analyst second guessing the matter rather reality. Absent good supporting C&C and reconnaissance they would be unable to exploit the extra range in any seriously effective fashion.

In any case it shoud be noted that US artillery being outranged in terms of pure gun performance is not exactly a novelty.Even the new M777 is still outranged by even such a common and antique weapon as the 130mm M46.

[EOT]

Originally Posted by Marcello;790207[QUOTE

In any case it shoud be noted that US artillery being outranged in terms of pure gun performance is not exactly a novelty.Even the new M777 is still outranged by even such a common and antique weapon as the 130mm M46.

I didn't realize they had that kind of range! What kind of CEP do they have at those ranges?

[Marcello]

Originally Posted by EOT

I didn't realize they had that kind of range! What kind of CEP do they have at those ranges?

Supposedly it had good accuracy (though it should be noted that with artillery one should think both in terms accuracy and dispersion), it was expected to perform CB missions after all, but I cannot find any source expressing it in terms of probable error.

Are some getting out of touch with reality and forgetting this a game here after all?

Mine was an observation on a couple of issues, not on the game mechanics.

[FASTBOAT TOUGH]

I might be missing something here but if range was a factor in off map CB fire missions then how could the examples in Post #14 Item #1 have occurred? They represent only a fraction of such occurrences that have happened since I started playing the game through all the patches over the years. And CB is a part of my tactics as I go deeper into my generated campaigns typically consisting of 21 to 23 battles. As noted I have been CB fired on by 105mm off map against my 155mm off may units and have taken hits and returned the favor against larger caliber tubes the AI had. So by logical deduction one of two things is happening
1. Range doesn't matter for CB fire missions or 2. Something isn't working right on my game in the software program.
I know there have to be software parameters set up to "lock in" the off map area and it might be closer then we think because I thought there was a bug fix about 2 to 4 years ago that fixed something affecting the AI off map reinforcements getting destroyed by random planned or arty directed against on map AI units that were close to the edge of the map causing inadvertent damage or destruction to reinforcement units off map in the adjacent hexes at the point of entry, which I've done a handful of times myself by pure dumb luck.

Suhiir-You might be right about the Marine thing, but have you ever had Don raise the surrender flag to you!?! But I really think the last thing Don wants us to do is make it a race to find out which branch is worse!?! We both might want to consider the following then!! Don and us !! Seems when the flag was raised I did the same thing must of been that NH-90 helo I put in last years or previous years list for
NEW ZEALAND!?!

To everyone have a good night!

Regards,
Pat