PBEM: to allow AI arti or not? Also, teach me how to use direct support please.

Share your best strategies and tactics with other players by posting them here.

Moderator: MOD_Flashpoint

Post Reply
MaxDamage
Posts: 96
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2015 6:19 am

PBEM: to allow AI arti or not? Also, teach me how to use direct support please.

Post by MaxDamage »

What do you think on the subject.
If you re hosting a PBEM, which option do you prefer? The auto AI artillery makes arti much stronger and flexible. Which is more realistic and/or balanced?

Can someone please explain how to use direct support and what benefits it brings over using on call?

A few other questions as well:
-when you use on call for your troops instead of hold, do they still use terrain masking features to gain additional protection?
-i ve noticed move - deliberate makes the units still shoot on the move. how does that happen? do they actually fire on the move or stop and shoot until the encounter is no more?
Tazak
Posts: 1461
Joined: Sat Sep 03, 2011 11:57 am

RE: PBEM: to allow AI arti or not? Also, teach me how to use direct support please.

Post by Tazak »

Personally I find use of the FSCC acceptable, without it you limit your fire missions horribly, re3meber the game puts you in the command seat of the formation where you are not expected to get involved in every last detail and only being able to use your arty every command cycle is frustrating when you see a huge target that has disappeared by the time your command cyclke comes around (yes its not a given that the FSCC will hit it but its better to have the opportunity)

Using direct support allow your troops to call for fire support rather than a chance the FCSS will provide fire support. To use it select your arty piece and choose direct support, then select the unit it will be 'slave' to, sit back and enjoy [8D]

Using on-call for troops is pointless its an arty function only as far as I know.

your troop will fire on the move regardless of the movement order chosen,
AUCTO SPLENDORE RESURGO
MaxDamage
Posts: 96
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2015 6:19 am

RE: PBEM: to allow AI arti or not? Also, teach me how to use direct support please.

Post by MaxDamage »

I ve heard that you can "direct support" a commander unit of any sort and all its subordinades will be calling for artillery with direct support. Is that true?

Are you sure the "on call" doesnt work for the troops and only for artillery? Even simple troops have radio delay after they have received orders. Might help mitigate that. I will have to test it.
MaxDamage
Posts: 96
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2015 6:19 am

RE: PBEM: to allow AI arti or not? Also, teach me how to use direct support please.

Post by MaxDamage »

Yes on call doent work for troops, tested it now. It may be useful if you want your troop to NOT dig trenches (because it will increase the order delay if he needs to move again) and to NOT screen though.

Btw what are the exact penalties for being outside the command radius? More likelihood to rout and much less benefits from resupply?
IronMikeGolf
Posts: 1054
Joined: Fri Mar 19, 2010 7:53 pm

RE: PBEM: to allow AI arti or not? Also, teach me how to use direct support please.

Post by IronMikeGolf »

1. FSCC: Turning that off simulates, in my mind, the top level commander personally authorizing each and every fire mission. Turning it on and not designating any missions yourself simulates the normal fire control process. Turning it on and designating targets yourself simulates the commander giving priority of fires to a specific unit or subordinate unit mission.

2. My understanding that the engine overhaul for the 2.1 version of the game will allow you to put a battery in direct support of a unit and its subordinates. Currently, it is only the specified unit. In the US Army, that is called "Dedicated Battery".
Jeff
Sua Sponte
MaxDamage
Posts: 96
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2015 6:19 am

RE: PBEM: to allow AI arti or not? Also, teach me how to use direct support please.

Post by MaxDamage »

Ok so i ve got another question. I ve just had a mech-rifle company kill a chieftain mk11 at the range of ~1200 m. The weapons this MR company has are: bmp2D (autocannon, machinegun), infantry(rifle, underbarrel grenade launcher, machinegun, rpg-18 - range 200 m), manpad infantry and AGS infantry.

What killed the tank? flank shot from the autocannon?

btw what does it mean that rpg has 200 m range. It can only be used on the same square the company occupies?
Tazak
Posts: 1461
Joined: Sat Sep 03, 2011 11:57 am

RE: PBEM: to allow AI arti or not? Also, teach me how to use direct support please.

Post by Tazak »

I'd wager the BMP2's got a soft kill with the 30mm taking out optics etc.

the 200m range on the RPG is used when the engine calculates range to target, I'm not 100% sure but I believe its from the edge of the units 'hex' into the next hex
AUCTO SPLENDORE RESURGO
MaxDamage
Posts: 96
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2015 6:19 am

RE: PBEM: to allow AI arti or not? Also, teach me how to use direct support please.

Post by MaxDamage »

I have another small question.

Lets say you ve got a scout and an ordinary unit in the same hex. Lets say the scout detected the opponent's unit but an ordinary unit didnt although he physically could do it, just the dice roll failed. Can an ordinary unit shoot the scout's opponent? Maybe they need to be in the same regiment or something?

In other words, how do the units share targeting information and if they do which conditions must be met?
User avatar
CapnDarwin
Posts: 9254
Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2005 3:34 pm
Location: Newark, OH
Contact:

RE: PBEM: to allow AI arti or not? Also, teach me how to use direct support please.

Post by CapnDarwin »

One thing it should point out in the rules (assuming I was awake enough to include it) is units won't call in danger close strikes on themselves. So having infantry as direct supported units in close fights won't support with attacks on adjacent targets. Direct support is better served for Recon units to bring in quick fire and suppress enemy units.

@MaxDamage - from steam: From a global sense the enemy units is seen, but each unit must still spot the enemy for themselves to fire on it.
OTS is looking forward to Southern Storm getting released!

Cap'n Darwin aka Jim Snyder
On Target Simulations LLC
MaxDamage
Posts: 96
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2015 6:19 am

RE: PBEM: to allow AI arti or not? Also, teach me how to use direct support please.

Post by MaxDamage »

I ve seen some vehicles have night vision/light amplification and thermal vision at the same time. Whats the point of that? Can anyone explain when could one unit benefit having both?
User avatar
CapnDarwin
Posts: 9254
Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2005 3:34 pm
Location: Newark, OH
Contact:

RE: PBEM: to allow AI arti or not? Also, teach me how to use direct support please.

Post by CapnDarwin »

Just shows that both systems are on the platform. They would be used by different crew members. In game there would be no real impact in having both.
OTS is looking forward to Southern Storm getting released!

Cap'n Darwin aka Jim Snyder
On Target Simulations LLC
IronMikeGolf
Posts: 1054
Joined: Fri Mar 19, 2010 7:53 pm

RE: PBEM: to allow AI arti or not? Also, teach me how to use direct support please.

Post by IronMikeGolf »

Also, in some cases, multiple fire control/sight systems represent back ups to to the primary for a particular weapon. For example, The M1 series and the M2/M3 series have a primary sight with normal optical and thermal modes and have ballistic correction inputs. Both have an optical stadia backup sight, too.
Jeff
Sua Sponte
Tophat1815
Posts: 1824
Joined: Mon Jan 16, 2006 4:11 pm

RE: PBEM: to allow AI arti or not? Also, teach me how to use direct support please.

Post by Tophat1815 »


Hmmmn,on moonless dark nights where there is little light to amplify wouldn't having a thermal sight be clearly advantageous? Also poor weather or enemies use of smoke for concealment a thermal sight would spoil their day. Rather than a luxury to have both i'd hope it was standard to have them both on systems.
IronMikeGolf
Posts: 1054
Joined: Fri Mar 19, 2010 7:53 pm

RE: PBEM: to allow AI arti or not? Also, teach me how to use direct support please.

Post by IronMikeGolf »

Tophat1812,

That's why many tanks of that era equipped with light amplifiers for their sights mounted IR searchlights. Arty and mortar illum also works.

A full moon cuts both ways. It can, under some circumstances, force you to put on the daytime safety filter (a greatly reduced diameter aperture. sometimes just a pinhole) to keep from burning out the image tubes. This reduces the image resolution and turns the dimmer areas of the image to black. The best situation is overcast with either urban skyglow or a full moon lighting up the clouds.

I'd take thermals over light amplifiers hands down. And I used thermals in my turret as the primary mode, day or night.
Jeff
Sua Sponte
MaxDamage
Posts: 96
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2015 6:19 am

RE: PBEM: to allow AI arti or not? Also, teach me how to use direct support please.

Post by MaxDamage »

Do you play PBEM with limited orders on or off?
IronMikeGolf
Posts: 1054
Joined: Fri Mar 19, 2010 7:53 pm

RE: PBEM: to allow AI arti or not? Also, teach me how to use direct support please.

Post by IronMikeGolf »

I play this game with limited orders off. The reason is the option is an oversimplification of reality on the ground and, for me, lowers the fidelity of the game.

We, as players, play multiple roles and command at multiple levels simultaneously. With this option, all orders are treated the same (operational and tactical orders). Right now, this and order delay is the biggest beefs I have with this game.

I ave, in my career, received FRAGOs over the radio wile on the move and executed them. Some were of the sort of being a tweak to an existing order, list "swing left and attack from the south" or "occupy Hill 780, conduct hasty defense oriented northeast". These kinds of orders were tactical orders, meaning, they are fighting orders, not planning ones. They are the decisions of the company commander. And they happen with little (a minute or less) or no delay. Platoon leaders, upon getting onto the specific piece of terrain will also adjust so they can accomplish their assigned mission (and then inform their company commander).

Putting all orders into one bucket and rationing them out each command cycle is forcing us, as player commanders, into picking which company and platoon leaders can actually command at that point in time and that is too big a disconnect for me.

Jeff
Sua Sponte
Post Reply

Return to “The War Room”