Artillery

Talk and Learn about the military aspects of the game.

Moderators: Balthagor, Legend, Moderators

Caleb
Corporal
Posts: 4
Joined: Jan 26 2004
Location: Italy

Post by Caleb »

On 2002-12-11 23:31, Hellfish6 wrote:
Well... MLRS units should have outstanding anti-armor capabilities. That's what they were designed for.
Hmm... sorry for digging this one out, but it seems nobody yet did...
As far as I know, MLRS units are meant for fire saturation, not anti-armor support artillery. I copy here the stats for the MLRS, taken from The Operational Art Of War, Volume 2 equipment list:
MLRS 227mm SPMRL, year 1983, anti-armor: 0, no anti-armor munitions, anti-personnel: 93, range: 36km.

A little explanation for those not familiar with TOAW may come in handy: 93 AP is a very high value, meaning "personnel" with "infantry on foot or unarmored vehicles". 0 AT means they'd do very minor damage on tanks (TOAW assumes an AT value equal to about 10% of AP if no dedicated AT weapon is present), basically only a direct hit would damage an armored vehicle.

Besides, I checked every other rocket artillery on the list, and every single one of them has 0 AT and a very high AP value (top o' the line being the Soviet BM-9A52-2 300mm SPMRL, AP: 168, made in 1988)
User avatar
Hellfish6
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 217
Joined: Jun 17 2002
Location: Seattle WA

Post by Hellfish6 »

In retrospect (that comment was written over a year ago) I'd agree - the typical MLRS round is much more potent as an AP weapons with effects against light armor than it is tanks. However, there are rockets available specifically equipped with what are called "Brilliant Anti-Tank" submunitions who home in specifically on armored vehicles. I think this should be factored in somehow.
ilkhan
Warrant Officer
Posts: 43
Joined: Feb 07 2004

Post by ilkhan »

Yeah I'd have to agree the MLRS has some really potent Anti-tank capabilitys when coupled with ICM. Plus the fact that the sub-munitions would be top attack, where the armor on 'most' tanks is light.

These sub-munitions would probably act like sub-munitions from cluster bombs with a top attack HEAT bomblet about the size of a beer can. These can kill most tanks.

By the way speaking of book info have any of the dev's read a book called 'How to Make War' by James F. Dunigan **May have misspelled his last name** He is a table top wargames maker with some really good info on just about everything there is on War. Plus its a good read. There are 3 versions out all paperback one published in '83 one in '93 and the newest one '03 (my copy of '03 gets here thursday :smile:)
Just FYI
User avatar
Balthagor
Supreme Ruler
Posts: 22083
Joined: Jun 04 2002
Human: Yes
Location: BattleGoat Studios

Post by Balthagor »

On the MLRS comments, we're still working on the balancing so I'll add this all to my notes. (Don't let me stop the discussion thought).

On the book, I just googled it and it looks quite impressive. Think I'll pick that one up. Thanks. (btw, two Ns in Dunnigan) :wink:
Caleb
Corporal
Posts: 4
Joined: Jan 26 2004
Location: Italy

Post by Caleb »

On 2004-02-15 01:54, Hellfish6 wrote:
In retrospect (that comment was written over a year ago) I'd agree - the typical MLRS round is much more potent as an AP weapons with effects against light armor than it is tanks. However, there are rockets available specifically equipped with what are called "Brilliant Anti-Tank" submunitions who home in specifically on armored vehicles. I think this should be factored in somehow.
I know it's an old post, but I've seen noone else did point out the stuff so I thought, what the hell... may come in useful. Ok, I admit I've had the mental image of MLRS wreaking havoc on armored divisions (which is almost the opposite of what happens in every strategy game, from TOAW to the Panzer General series) :wink:
Btw, can you give more info on this BAT rounds? Could it be implemented as a particular MLRS unit, available some tech-levels later?
User avatar
Balthagor
Supreme Ruler
Posts: 22083
Joined: Jun 04 2002
Human: Yes
Location: BattleGoat Studios

Post by Balthagor »

In theory, it's already in. We've got 4 versions of ATACMS in the list of missiles. I think it's the ATACMS IIA that has the BAT. It has one of the highest hard attacks of any missile units. These missiles can be fired from a few different units including M270 and HIMARS.
User avatar
George Geczy
General
Posts: 2688
Joined: Jun 04 2002
Location: BattleGoat Studios
Contact:

Post by George Geczy »

I also did run into some comments about MLRS type systems being most effective on anti-personnel, when I was researching some info on their ranges. I made a note to examine this a little further, but one factor in the game that seems to work is that armour has a good indirect defense value, making the artillery more effective against soft targets (per the above comments).

Another thing we can do is implement anti-tank submunitions as a research item, meaning you can get 'plain' MLRS first and then add capabilities by researching improved munitions. As Chris mentions we had originally done some of this via upgraded MLRS units, but we may also do some with research instead.

We will be doing a bit of the same idea in the ballastic artillery, where we will add a special research item for "extended range full-bore base-bleed (ERFBBB)", which extends the range of gun artillery munitions by 25% or so.

-- George.
Vesson
Warrant Officer
Posts: 25
Joined: Apr 29 2004

Post by Vesson »

George, or someone else... can you tell me if unit stats will be visually changed on equipment lists when stuff like EPIRBB or VLAP or whatever its called is researched?

I was about to post a bug about my M109L's firing one hex too far (78ks) as they should only shoot 53 according to stats. I have researched VLAP, but nothing else that I can find on my weapons tech has any effect on arty range I dont think.

I'd like a physical indicator on my units telling me that they either use the new ammo, or just a change in the stats... Don't know whether its hard to implement.

Thanks!
User avatar
Balthagor
Supreme Ruler
Posts: 22083
Joined: Jun 04 2002
Human: Yes
Location: BattleGoat Studios

Post by Balthagor »

Yes, the changes in range achieved through technology will be shown in updated values in the unit popup.

The ranges you are seeing are enhanced btw. Over a year ago, it was decided to have the game use "enhanced" ranges so that artillery would got an increase tied to the hex size in km. There is a game option (already there in the MP lobby I think) that allows you to play with either real or enhanced ranges. We usually go with enhanced.
chancellor
Sergeant
Posts: 21
Joined: May 08 2004

Post by chancellor »

One of rocket art.'s key roles is counterbattery fire. Longer range, bigger payload.
User avatar
BattleGoat
General
Posts: 1227
Joined: Jun 04 2002
Human: Yes
Location: BattleGoat Studios
Contact:

Post by BattleGoat »

Enemy artillery within range is generally always an automatic priority target for your artillery. (Kill it before it can kill you!)
User avatar
George Geczy
General
Posts: 2688
Joined: Jun 04 2002
Location: BattleGoat Studios
Contact:

Post by George Geczy »

Also regarding the artillery ranges, you will tend to get a 'bonus hex' due to the design - in effect, shooting from a hex to its neighboring (next-door) hex is considered "1 km distance", regardless of the hex width. Sorta like your artillery stands on one side of the line, and the target is right on the other side of the line.

Obviously this isn't entirely realistic, but you can assuming something of a 'fuzzy' placement of a unit in a hex ("a little bit here, a little bit there...")

Of course, for longer range artillery the last hex is the weakest (damage decreases with range), so the 'bonus hex' is the most ineffective.

-- George.
chancellor
Sergeant
Posts: 21
Joined: May 08 2004

Post by chancellor »

I'm gathering then that in larger scale maps artillery really looses its use. I mean if I'm playing with the 7km hexes as opposed to 37km hexes art. will be MUCH more effective in the former no?

~Matt~
Juergen
Brigadier Gen.
Posts: 709
Joined: Jul 05 2002

Post by Juergen »

At the very least it might be far more difficult for the artillery to keep out of trouble.

And the scale of "firing ranges" between tanks,infantry and artillery will get somewhat blurred...

This is one of the reasons why a map with many "small" hexes will provide more tactical options than a map with with few "large" hexes.

We need a world map with many many small hexes.
User avatar
Balthagor
Supreme Ruler
Posts: 22083
Joined: Jun 04 2002
Human: Yes
Location: BattleGoat Studios

Post by Balthagor »

remember however that we "artificially" enhance attack ranges based on the km/hex scale. There will be a game option to play with "real" ranges but on a 60km hex I think artillery will fire more than double their true range. The beta already plays with enhanced ranges on.
Chris Latour
BattleGoat Studios
chris@battlegoat.com
Post Reply

Return to “Military - Defense and Operations Departments”