direct fire splashes

[narwan]

Hi,

I just played scenario 003 as the egyptians. I noticed that my 17-pounders and 3-inch mortars did splash damage to adjacent hexes (I was firing at scout and RR jeeps) when they were using direct fire. I know that the game routines concerning splash damage have been altered but it still suprised me to see that fairly light calibre weapons have spill-over effects now too. Is there a listing somewhere of what calibres have what 'splash range'?

Also, it may have been a fluke (since it was a single game I played and there were at most 10 instances of splash damage) but I noticed that when the direct fire rounds that missed, landed in the same hex as a unit, that unit never suffered 'secondary' damage. Secondary damage from the direct fire only occured when hexes were 'hit' that were adjacent to the unit suffering secondary damage.

Narwan

[DRG]

Not all "splash damage" has an effect. This is similar to what you will now see with ground fire vs. Helos. In the past you didn't know you were being hit....but **not damaged** and that is an important distinction..... when ground fire was directed towards helos until real damage occured. Now you will see messages indicating there are hits being made. ( but not always damaging ones ) That's when the game calculates if the hit causes damage. In the past if you had a Helo and you passed over ground units that fired at you never knew if you were in any real danger until a damage message appears. The new Hit messages just let you know you are being hit and COULD be damaged. The same thing applies to the splash damage with arty ( direct and indirect ) You may see secondary rings appear around a unit but it does not lose a man. It's taken a hit but not a damaging one that causes a casualty.

The splash damage rings were a testing tool Andy added to check that units were taking hits.... NOT necessarily damage or casualties.. just hits to check that effects were going into other hexes Often there will be damage or men lost but not always and becasue it was a testing tool it also shows the potential for damage into other hexes from lighter calibre weapons ( and MG's ) becasue these all fall under the same classification in the game. It's POTENTIAL damage that is being recorded here

Don

[Marek_Tucan]

I've already seen (when testing one thing) a T-4 taken out by a splash damage of a large HE warhead. Good for me)

[DRG]

T-4 ??

[narwan]

DRG,

I'm not talking about the splash damage rings. I didn't even see any rings. I'm talking about about real damage (immobilisations, crew losses and destroyed units) done to jeeps when 17-pounder or 3-inch mortar rounds hit adjacent hexes with direct fire. The jeeps weren't mine but the opponents.

narwan

[Marek_Tucan]

DRG said:
T-4 ??

Sorry, T-34, 3 on my numpad is temporarily out of order and I haven't noticed it as it was just a quick note.

[DRG]

narwan said:
DRG,

I'm not talking about the splash damage rings. I didn't even see any rings. I'm talking about about real damage (immobilisations, crew losses and destroyed units) done to jeeps when 17-pounder or 3-inch mortar rounds hit adjacent hexes with direct fire. The jeeps weren't mine but the opponents.

narwan

So then do you think the new routines for adjacent hex damage is too effective now or was this just a general observation?

Don

[Weeble]

The number of adjacent (soft) units pinned by small-arms fire on a (hard or soft) target seems to have increased dramatically.

I have not run proper "Old"/"New" comparisons yet, but on several occasions moving one infantry section has drawn opfire which pinned the whole platoon in adjacent hexes.

I know this was a far rarer occurance previously.

So far it just makes advancing against the enemy more of a challenge!

[narwan]

Well, for one I'm still interested to know if there is a list somewhere which shows the blast range (and suppression effect range) for the different calibre's.

As to the effectiveness, although my observations have been limited I can tell you now it is probably going to dramatically affect gameplay. And very possibly be way to effective. Looks to me like a 'splash area' of 150 metres across is a bit much for low calibre rounds like 17-pounder HE rounds and 3-inch mortars rounds.

Some events from the scenario I played: one 17-pounder HE round hit and destroyed the jeep aimed at, it immobillised a jeep in an adjacent hex and damaged another one in an adjacent hex. A lucky strike for sure but:
about one third of the 17-pounder HE rounds landing in hexes next to jeeps damaged them in some way (again, rounds landing in the same hex, for example if it missed the target but still landed in the same hex, always failed to do secondary damage to the unit in the SAME hex),
an israeli mech infantry squad which had just dismounted had become pinned (no previous suppression suffered as far as I know and was at ready status prior to the firing) just because a 3-inch mortar round had landed in an adjacent hex.

I can't say that these events are typical for the mechanism as it was a single scenario I played, it's far from a valid test. But from this and the information given on the changes it seems it will be a lot easier to suppress enemy units, not just with arty, but especially with area fire and direct fire.
Whether this is good or bad, more realistic or less realistic, remains to be seen, but I suspect the dynamics of the game will change considerably. Well planned and executed attacks will be far more devastating and effective, 'less well' planned and executed attacks will be far more costly to the attackers and easily countered. And as the AI usually doesn't plan and execute it's attacks very well, gameplay against it may suffer considerably. Just my prediction though,

Narwan

PS there are already some thoughts popping up in my head on 'tricking' or 'abusing' this new dynamic but I'll refrain from posting those here. Wouldn't want people to get the wrong ideas!