Disabled Armor-Indirect by the Map-and more about Gardening Later

[dawags]

"In my opinion you could not be more wrong. Being able to charge straight at the enemy with your armor with no fear of enemy artilley dumbs down the game. Now if you are facing a foe with quality artillery you have to think."-Hawk

Don't think this is a relevant statement relative to the problem...

One does not worry about indirect in this manner...it is indirect.
Charging at the enemy relates more to direct fire. You may actually be better served to "charge" at the enemy in this regard. Indirect only hurts you when it hits you, it is much more likely to do so, when you stay in one place to shoot...:chin:

The issue here is the nature of indirect fire and its results.
My point here, and Dan's assertion to it, is that a result on indirect that is plotted and planned into spotted terrain should get more credit and have more effect than indirect that is thrown "by map" into unspotted terrain, and happens to land on a target (hex).

We do agree on the concept of "landing on a hex" and the result thereof. I just think the application is wrong.

My point here is that a hex represents a large piece of terrain. Your likelihood of actually hitting what is located in it by indirect fire is much better if you can see what you are shooting at...do you dispute this?

I would like to see indirect by map and its results on armor be mitigated in the same manner that indirect by map and its results on infantry are mitigated. Currently you receive the same "roll" on the same table regardless of whether you see what you hit or you don't. The likelihood of disable is thus the same.

Essentially you need to spot infantry to maximize artillery on indirect, you do not however, currently need to spot armor to maximize its effect. It is a "glitch" in the game. It does not reflect any sort of reality, unless you believe that artillery spotting is a waste of time.

dawags
:cool2: