ORIGINAL: Andy Brown
Yes it is. The information regarding artillery ammo states comes via the notional FOO whose job depends on knowing such things.
What I'm arguing is that the immense effort that goes into 3D graphics (to increase player immersion in the game) is wasted if those graphics don't represent what is actually being simulated. It's worse if they actually misrepresent it, as I feel the case is here, visually indicating an accurate bombardment when the game mechanics have decided otherwise.
For Off map indirect artillery fire, each gun tube has a sheaf area based on the size of the gun. When you set the target you are setting the center of that sheaf. But the fire will probably not be on target, especially the first salvo (and rocket artillery has even more drift). It should migrate closer to that target point with each salvo. But every unit in that sheaf area has a chance of recieving damage. The animations you see on the map should be reflecting the actual shaef area that is being impacted, as for each subsequent salve, the center of that shaef should get closer to the target area. But, it is still an area of effect (for 150mm I think is 100mx150m area).
After the game was released, there was a fair amount of discussion about the effectiveness of Artillery, primarily against Armour Units so, with some imput from some players here, we made some adjustment of the smaller caliber effectives vs ArmouredUnits. We also found that the animations were not always tracking the actual sheaf location very well and we made corrections to that so that the animations now are appearing in the sheaf. We've also had a few discusions about how we might want to address the effectiveness issue in future games in the series. Perhaps we can address your concerns more fully when we make those changes.