CM arty modeling

[KV7]

Thanks andy.

I understand that is a third/fourth rate fix and the mechanics aren't yet there to do it properly. If the game code could be fixed to make it work that would be great.

Would a second weapon slot on the mortar with acc 100, ammo 1 work, perhaps with more HE kill and HE penetration to model the increased acc, then you can call it in like any other arty and be pretty sure it will land on the hex it was called in on.

You could of course then use it in direct fire mode, with visability at 80-90 you could snipe targets from your deploy zone, just run away if you get any atgm or arty attacking your position.

The downside here is that when you call the mission you need to turn on the right slot on the mortar you gave the fire mission to to choose the right round. Otherwise it will just shoot both the normal and guided round at the same target, and blow through all your guided munitions.

[Mobhack]

Accuracy does not affect indirect fire - only direct fire. Thus of no use for simulating laser guided or GPS indirect fires.

Use a GPS equipped FOO (with TI or GSR) and a laser range-finder with LOS on the target and your indirect fires will be rather accurate. Part of that technology 'package' could be rationalised as the use of LGM, where appropriate.

Andy

[KV7]

Fair enough, I always thought it did, becuase a rocket rife mission will scatter everywhere, whereas if you use a howitzer it is 0-3 hex deviation only. I assume that is becuase of weapon class ?

[Mobhack]

Indirect accuracy is affected by weapon class - MRL MPI scatter is significantly more than tube arty and the battery has a wider pattern. Mortar battery patterns tend to be wider than guns, but scatter is about the same.

Mainly though, it is the difference between having an observer with eyes-on or not that affects arty scatter (and also size of the battery's pattern).

Unobserved fire is wilder - it is searching map fire. Firing on a gold spot is more like observed fire though, even if blind fire.

Andy

[FASTBOAT TOUGH]

Well I'm bringing back an "old friend" it's needed again. So the discussion will have to be with the U.S Army, the data is based on extensive testing but also post combat analysis as well. Pages 2 - 5 are the most useful to the discussion on the main forum page. Please read as myself and others have that were involved at the time. The tables in the refs cclearly shows if anything CM and Unitary rounds were generally under strength in the game at that time and now for the sake of discussion. Makes you wonder why the Swedes spent so time and money to ensure that they're Leo MBT's were the best top protected in there class. They saw what top attack weapons can do to tanks after testing they're own 120mm AT mortar round on a bunch of T-72 tanks they had. It's in this thread somewhere started by DRG. This issue keeps popping up every 2 - 4 years it seems and keep doing so I'm sure. There's another thread on this topic that also started in JAN 2010 in here or the main forum. Also note the first couple pages of the thread you're in now. Always nice to get feedback from guys who were there as well.

Regards,
Pat