Artillery Spotting & Changes
From the Matrix CS Forum:
Before you make such a radical change, even on the optional level, it would behoove the Designer to read up on and learn some details about American, and Soviet, Field Artillery doctrines, which are totally different. Many of the statements made in the correspondence concerning this subject are inaccurate regarding the 4 basic field artillery missions or the 7 inherent responsibilities of each of them; one of which specifically deals with the Artillery Battallon responsibilities for FO support of the maneuver units in each of the DIRECT SUPPORT (DS), REINFORCING ®, GENERAL SUPPORT (GS), or GENERAL SUPPORT REINFORCING (GSR) missions (US Doctrine).
Soviet Artillery Battery Commanders in fact do not "request fire" as an American 2LT/FO would do, they "order fire" and perform the FO function themselves ('on the hill"). As the Soviet doctrine minimizes on-call fires, and emphasizes preplanned fire with complex fire support coordination but relatively unsophisticated fire direction, it will be extremely difficult to come up with a rule which accurately represents each of the doctrines.
I don't have your solution: I am pointing out the difficulty of making a meaningful change without further basic research. I am knowledgable about US Field Artillery doctrine developed during WWII and am familiar with the basic Soviet doctrine ("RAGS and DAGS"). But cannot comment on French, Commonwealth, German or Italian WWII field artillery doctrines.
Any change which does not address ALL of these doctines would be at best superficial. As I am certain that the US doctrine has NOT been accurately addressed, such a change would be sophomoric!
Call me a naysayer! Yes I am. The present system sufficiently models field artillery fires in the game in a generic way. Make a change if you will; but make it an educated, meaningful one, or don't bother.
By the way, the change described in the correspondence bears no resemblance to the way FA fires are handled by the HPS Panzer Campaigns engine, either with or without the optional "indirect fire by the map " rule!
< Message edited by timshin42 -- 1/19/2009 2:35:09 AM >
I agree with this presentation by timshin42.
Before too many changes take place, in all categories beyond artillery, timshin42's words should be considered: Make a change if you will; but make it an educated, meaningful one, or don't bother.
Words to live by?
RR
|