|
The depiction of Indirect Artillery in Wargames
Michael Dorosh
Canada Calgary Alberta
-
As an addendum to this blog entry on the portrayal of Indirect Artillery in Wargames, I'd like to start a Geeklist of games and discuss different ways in which they have portrayed Indirect Artillery. The attached article gives a bit of a summary of artillery's development in the First and Second World Wars, but that shouldn't limit the responses here.
-

Michael Dorosh
Canada Calgary Alberta
-
With a (for its day) complicated Artillery Request/Spotting Round/Fire For Effect system of off-board artillery, the indirect fire in Squad Leader was both sophisticated and elegant, if not especially realistic, with "leaders" lugging around radios, and a system of calling down fire that was an amalgamation of several nations' actual procedures. Like all of Squad Leader, though, it was designed to be fun and easy to do, and mostly worked.
-
-

Michael Dorosh
Canada Calgary Alberta
-
A First World War game without artillery would be an odd thing, and this game focusing on some of the more "interesting" tactical weapons like tanks and flamethrowers does pay homage to different types of tactical artillery missions in the pages of its brief rulebook.
-
-

Michael Dorosh
Canada Calgary Alberta
-
ASL expanded the basic off-board artillery rules with the often-discussed "battery access" rules requiring red/black chits, or cards, and also added a variety of barrage type fire missions, with ASL's usual mania for detail. I'll let other commenters flesh out all the ways in which ASL has attempted to portray indirect fire.
-
-

Michael Dorosh
Canada Calgary Alberta
-
Like ASL, the Combat Mission series has developed over the years, from early beginnings as a fun "popcorn" type game into a more serious simulation. The first title, CM:BO had a simple artillery model which in the newest generation game engine has added more realistic procedures.
-
-

Michael Dorosh
Canada Calgary Alberta
-
The "CMX2", or second generation Combat Mission game engine improved the offboard artillery procedures dramatically, with additional procedures for radio contact, battery access, and the ability to control number of tubes participating, length of fire mission, etc.
-
-

Michael Dorosh
Canada Calgary Alberta
-
The first World War II title for the second generation Combat Mission series further developed the off board artillery rules. National characteristics seem to be primarily modelled by delay times.
-
-

Davido
United States Mather California
-
Panzer Leader had crude but effective indirect fire rules:
Quote: INDIRECT FIRE Only units marked M or (H) may engage in Indirect Fire. Orders for indirect fire attacks must be written during the Combat phase of the turn before the attack is resolved. (ex: in Turn 3's Combat phase, player writes down attacking unit and target hex for Indirect Fire in Turn 4.) Once the order is written, the attack must take place as written or the attacking unit may not fire at all in that turn. (H) units must be over ¼ of their Range away from their target hex to use Indirect Fire. A friendly combat unit must be able to trace LOS to the target hex per Spotting rules. LOS to the attacking hex(es) is not required at any time. Wagons and trucks may not be used for spotting. Loaded and/or dispersed units may not be targeted for Indirect Fire. IF always affects ALL units in the target hex. Indirect Fire and Direct Fire may not take place against the same target hex in the course of one phase. If all units spotting for a target hex are destroyed, dispersed, or move before IF is executed, roll one die: 1-2 IF hits target hex 3-5 IF is off-target, hitting a neighboring hex (roll die – 1-6 clockwise with 1 due north) 6 IF fire is ineffective Resolving IF attacks: Add up attack strength of all units attacking target hex Divide total by number of units in target hex (transporter/transported count as 1 unit) Apply result as new attack strength to each unit in target hex; resolve individually on the CRT ex: 80 attack factors vs. 3 units in target hex w/defenses of 10, 8 and 3; 80 div 3 = 26; 26-10 = 2-1, 26-8 = 3-1, 26-3 = 4-1 courtesy of http://www.unlikelyprofessor.com/wargames/PZLDRulesMain.html
of course, this led to the infamous "sacrificial wagon" as 120 Attack vs. 40 defense of a bunker is a solid 3-1. Put a wagon on it and the Wagon gets vaporized but the bunker can survive a 60-40 (round down to 1-1) shelling.
-
-

Michael Dorosh
Canada Calgary Alberta
-
The 1st Edition TCS rules are constantly evolving as this series evolves. A fairly complex set of artillery procedures are included, and each player has a "Fire Plan Sheet" to record their file plan before the game, consisting of Pre-Planned Fires, Target Reference Points, and to track missions and ammunition. Called fires are the standard type of mission, but there are also Final Protective Fires, and modelling of artillery seems to match that in other games - spotting rounds, delays, etc., with dice rolls thrown in to some mechanics (i.e. you can only "check fire" on a single dr of 1-3) to add uncertainty.
-
-
9.
Board Game: Omaha
[Average Rating:7.08 Overall Rank:3305]

Michael Dorosh
Canada Calgary Alberta
-
The 2nd Edition TCS rules include "Miller Tables" designed by Rod Miller, designed to overcome limitations of using six-sided die.
-
-

Michael Dorosh
Canada Calgary Alberta
-
The TCS rules version 3.0 were rewritten and condensed.
-
-

Michael Dorosh
Canada Calgary Alberta
-
The Version 3.1 rules further refined offboard artillery; one item addressed specifically was the ability of mortars and infantry guns to place smoke. Confusing and technical language was also removed/refined (the previous version referred to "Effective Sheafs (EFS)" for example, artillery-specific terms which the designer - a former U.S. Army mortarman - would have been familiar with).
-
-

Michael Dorosh
Canada Calgary Alberta
-
In 2009, GD'42 shipped with the Version 4.0 TCS rules.
-
-

Nick West
Scotland Colinton Edinburgh
-
One of the biggest flaws with this otherwise fine game, was the complete absence of any indirect fire rules.
As hopefully can be seen from the image ID chosen, units with full anti-tank capability got a red dot, those with partial A/T (presumably HE capability) got a black dot and the rest got nothing.
But there was no indirect HE fire whatsoever,even when it was well recorded that one of the major factors in the British 1st Para Division not being completely overrun at Arnhem was the indirect fire from the oncoming ground forces.
for an opportunity missed.
-
-
|
|