NATO Artillery in "Quietly Flows the Donau"

[wandrr]

I have played this scenario several times, including computer vs computer. Every time, if the German artillery is left to its own devices (actually, on call under FCSS control after it arrives at 0820), the artillery does exactly nothing. It just sits there with a HOLD order and ON CALL. At the end of every game, it has 100% ammunition, 100% readiness, and 80% morale, still ON CALL, even though many other units are being slaughtered, and some juicy enemy stacks appear and are sighted.

To be specific, over several turns, the Czech units are in a large stack of five to nine units at hex 4020, sighted by a German unit, but the artillery just sits there. This seems like a prime artillery target. Even counterbattery is never invoked, even though the Czech artillery units repeatedly fire some deadly barrages. I have a couple of save games at key points which should show this situation. All the saved games were computer vs computer, untouched by human hands (other than to save the game).

Quietly flows the Donau 230502_1028 @ 47_pct__0952_hrs.zip

7 units stacked at 4020. 3./FArtBtl41 has done nothing.

(713.85 KiB) Downloaded 12 times

Quietly flows the Donau 230502_1028 @ 80_pct__1111_hrs.zip

Game basically over. Still Arty has been completely quiet.

(887.58 KiB) Downloaded 12 times

If I were the real higher commander of the NATO force, I would be looking for some answers - why did the artillery do absolutely nothing? In the game, this seems to be a possible problem with the "automatic" FCSS implementation. I do note that the SOP for the artillery unit shows Medium Range, whereas the bridges are beyond medium range. Can the AI or FCSS not change the SOP?

[cbelva]

Thanks for reporting this. I will take a look at this. The arty should not have a Hold order for sure.

[wandrr]

I thought the HOLD order means that a unit will dig in and defend vigorously if attacked. In addition, the ON CALL order should mean that the unit is prepared to accept fire missions from whoever issues them. It would seem logical that an artillery unit could be subject to holding a position, and simultaneously being on call for fire missions. Picture the tubes being dug into good fire pits and all the usual artillery preparations being completely on line.

Appreciate you taking the effort to investigate further.

[cbelva]

We had a problem early in development where arty were going to hold and shouldn't. For them to be used by the FSCC they need to be "on call". I will take a look at see if this is the cause. If not, I will bump it upstairs to the programmers to look at.

[WildCatNL]

Hi Arnie.

Thanks for the save game file. Charles and I had a look at your save game.

When executing an On Call order, your battery will start receiving fire missions from the FSCC (when FSCC enabled). When executing an Counter Battery order, the battery will start receiving counter-battery fire missions from the FSCC. Without On Call or Counter Battery orders, the battery won't be receiving fire missions from the FSCC.

Orders such as Hold, Screen, On Call last 'forever' (actually, 23hrs59min), and the game should not allow you to sequence them as you did (Hold, followed by On Call), as that doesn't make sense. I'm filing a bug for that.

Especially off-map artillery such as this towed 155mm FH70 has little to fear other than counter-battery fire. The best defense against counter-battery fire is to Scoot (displace) after each fire mission, not digging in.
To make the unit scoot, set the unit's SOP Relocate When to After Each Fire Mission. It also helps to keep fire mission short (less than 10 minutes, which is the about the minimum response time for a hostile counter-battery to hit your battery when it is being detected).

[wandrr]

Just to be clear, I did not set up the HOLD, then ON CALL. The scenario or the AI did it. The save game files are from a "computer plays both sides" game. I did nothing to any unit. I did pause and resume several times to save the game, but that is the only interaction I had with the battle progress. I would have thought that the AI could modify the orders or the SOP. I suspect this is a bug either in the design of the scenario or possibly in the AI.

During other games when I personally controlled the NATO side, I definitely issued BARRAGE orders to the artillery unit and that worked fine. I also totally understand the RELOCATE AFTER EACH FIRE MISSION order in the SOP as well as the rationale for using it.

[cbelva]

No, I know you didn't place it in a Hold order. That one is on me. During the development process, a bug was introduced that set arty to Hold instead of On Call. I thought I had corrected all of them. This one appears to have gotten by me. A corrected version of this scenario will go out in the next patch.

[wandrr]

Thanks, Charles. That still leaves the question of why the AI could not change the order. I will leave that with you and await the next update.

I appreciate your prompt responses!

[CapnDarwin]

I am going to JIRA the point about the AI needing to select On Call if not shooting or scooting under FSCC control. Good point.

[cbelva]

JIRA normally does. I was surprised that it didn't.

[IronMikeGolf]

I thought the HOLD order means that a unit will dig in and defend vigorously if attacked. In addition, the ON CALL order should mean that the unit is prepared to accept fire missions from whoever issues them. It would seem logical that an artillery unit could be subject to holding a position, and simultaneously being on call for fire missions. Picture the tubes being dug into good fire pits and all the usual artillery preparations being completely on line.

Appreciate you taking the effort to investigate further.

This is off topic from the scenario bug, but I want to address concepts a moment.

"Hold" is not "On Call" with better protection. Now, in fairness, the likelihood of "Hold" for an artillery battery would be rare in the late Cold War era, but wasn't that unusual for Soviets during early WW II. Hold would indicate the guns being used in a direct fire mode and thus wouldn't be wired in for indirect fire missions. A lot of that is due to the geometry of battery deployment. In late Cold War and earlier, batteries firing indirect deployed in a "gun line" that matches the most frequent expected sheaf (open vs parallel, mostly). Most frequent was open sheaf and so batteries set up so when each piece fired, there was a really good chance that the firing data for the base gun could be used for all guns. This simplifies the amount of calculations (don't need a custom solution for each piece) and makes fires much more responsive.

But, it is NOT a deployment that is very self protective from responding to direct fire. Hold would be and Hold carries with it the expectation of using the guns in direct fore and so, siting them is like an AT gun.

Now, we don't support arty guns in a direct fire mode as yet. Nor do we make a distinction between indirect fire and direct lay of a battery, as yet (direct lay meaning you shoot a sheaf like a normal indirect mission, but the base gun sees point of impact in the gun/mortar sight). This is on the roadmap and the Cold War issue is a WP FSE (Forward Security Element) has a battery of either mortars or 122mm howitzers under a company commander's control and is forward to the point of contact. We also need to account for the possibility in large urban areas of howitzers used to rubble defender positions. Again, there is modeling work needed for that.

Another thing to consider is the transition time into and out of Hold. There is utility for WP to use arty in direct fire mode in a defense. Notable is there are 2 HEAT round type available for 122mm gung (SP and towed) whereas on the NATO side, there is only Copperhead 155mm HEAT. As always, situation dictates, but consider the utility of a 122mm battery focusing on IFV/APC/Infantry targets and how that frees up heavy anti-armor systems to focus on tanks. Could be interesting.

So, after all that, let me circle back. An indirect fire unit in Hold is de facto disconnected from the fire support system and is dedicated to the "local fight". That means company level (in most cases) as opposed to Bn/Bde/Regt level.

[wandrr]

Thanks, Jeff. I had not considered the direct fire mode for the artillery.

So, HOLD and ON CALL are incompatible orders. Perhaps prevent the user (or the AI) from issuing both simultaneously. Are there any other pairs or sets of incompatible orders?

Anyway, I do not want to stir up a hornet's nest. You folks seem to have a handle on this. Thanks again.

[Tcao]

Now, we don't support arty guns in a direct fire mode as yet.

I could be wrong but I thought arty can do direct fire in FCSS. I still remember the scenario "Lesson of War" , my Marder IFVs and Panzergrenadiers were destroyed by two battery of moving 2S3

[CapnDarwin]

Pretty sure direct fire works. Jeff notes a much deeper model that we need to work into the game's AI logic.