Welcome to the LnLP Forums and Resource Area

We have updated our forums to the latest version. If you had an account you should be able to log in and use it as before. If not please create an account and we look forward to having you as a member.

Attached artillery to move forward relative to their maximum range.

kipanderson

Member
Joined
Oct 23, 2014
Messages
114
Points
18
Age
66
Location
Surrey. UK.
Hi,


I have found that if you attach an artillery unit to a battalion task force so as to give dedicated fire support during an attack the task force HQ will move the artillery unit forward as if it were a battalion mortar unit.


Request.

I attach an infantry company to an armour battalion using the Ctrl key. Also a divisional artillery battalion to give dedicated support. Assume the artillery unit has maximum range of 12 Km. I make sure the Direct Support option is checked and give an Attack order on a village.


If the objective is 10 Km or less from the location of the artillery battalion the artillery battalion does not displace forward. If the artillery battalion is more than 10 Km from the objective is does displace forward but only a range of 6 Km from the objective. Not the 3 Km or less that currently seems to happen as if the artillery were battalion mortars.


Command Ops 2.0 is even better than I had hoped for :).

All the best,

Kip.
 

kipanderson

Member
Joined
Oct 23, 2014
Messages
114
Points
18
Age
66
Location
Surrey. UK.
Konrad,


Yes... the aim is simply to be able to assign indirect fire assets other than battalion assets to support a battalion mission.

Dave may well come up with some completely different approach.

All the best,

Kip.
 

Dave 'Arjuna' O'Connor

Panther Games Designer
Joined
Jul 31, 2014
Messages
3,415
Points
113
Location
Canberra, Australia
Website
www.panthergames.com
What you really want is the modelling of how it's done in real life where an arty unit is assigned to "support" a force as opposed to being "under command" of that force. What this means is that the arty unit can be tasked by the force but not moved by it. You can get even more elaborate by then differentiating the support to either "general support" or "direct support". An arty unit would then have the restriction of only being able to provide direct support to one force. However it could provide general support to multiple forces.

To make this work though we need more changes in the UI. It would be best to change the Task Edit dialog by providing multiple tabs. One of these could allow the user to drag and drop units "under command", with another for "in direct support" and another for "in general support". Then I would need to modify the AI so the force only moved the units "under command". Also the AI would need to exclude the support units when resupplying the force. So a fair bit needs to be done to implement this. I agree it would be a good addition.
 

Joe98

Member
Joined
Nov 25, 2014
Messages
81
Points
8
Age
42
Location
Sydney
No Dave that makes it too complex.

An artillery unit is detached from it's parent HQ and attached to HQ 2

When HQ 2 moves all it's subordinates move too - which means the artillery. The arty should always be in range of all units under HQ 2.

In the meantime the arty could be "in general support" - selected by the player. Which is defined as - it can provide on call support for any unit not under HQ2.
 

kipanderson

Member
Joined
Oct 23, 2014
Messages
114
Points
18
Age
66
Location
Surrey. UK.
Dave,

"What you really want is the modelling of how it's done in real life where an arty unit is assigned to "support" a force as opposed to being "under command" of that force. What this means is that the arty unit can be tasked by the force but not moved by it. You can get even more elaborate by then differentiating the support to either "general support" or "direct support". An arty unit would then have the restriction of only being able to provide direct support to one force. However it could provide general support to multiple forces."

Yes.. :). Don't mean to contradict Joe98 we are in "each to their own.." territory.. But this is exactly what I am after and hoping will in time come down the line. With Eastern Front getting closer not only is there the on-going need for the above for its positive effects but also a need to limit the ease with which all sides throw about artillery. It is currently to easy for the Germans too to suddenly bombard an enemy unit with any artillery in range.

Artillery is rightly the last to get the full treatment in most top end wargames. For understandable reasons. (Took Combat Mission X2 about six years and I am an equally unhinged fan of that bunch too...) But this combined with a tweak to the AI to allow defending units to better hold a line/sector rather than geographical points are top of my wish list for CO2 now it has developed so far in all other areas.

Fantastic wargame/really a full simulation if usual allowance for single controlling mind......
All the best,
Kip.
 

Daz

Member
Joined
Oct 22, 2014
Messages
861
Points
43
Location
England
I would like to add my support for this feature request as well.
 

Dijon

Member
Joined
Jul 23, 2015
Messages
43
Points
8
Location
Kingston, ON
I like the approach that Dave has proposed. In fact, I would prefer that the change be taken even further to allow the seconding of units directly from the OOB editor. If we look at the Return to St. Vith tutorial scenario, we see that CCA of 4AD starts with one tank-heavy bn and one mech-heavy bn (rather than the default all-tank/all-mech structure). The follow-on CCB and CCR, however, are arranged as all-tank/all-mech and it would be convenient to coordinate all of this from one place, where it is easy to see who is assigned to whom. Just my $0.02. Great game/sim btw.
 
Top