Wishlist: Ammo Loadouts, and Z-fire Abuse

[Cross]

There was an interesting thread over at The Blitz wargaming club about ‘Z-fire’ (‘area fire’).

If you like, you can see the thread here:
http://www.theblitz.org/message_boar....php?tid=47692

My take on the discussion was that most people agreed that Z-fire is a realistic tactic, but it could easily be overused and annoying, with whole fronts being plastered with Z-fire and then the replays of this taking too long.

It was also brought up that the major reason for the abuse of Z-fire, was because most units just had far too much ammo. This spawned a second thread about ammo loadouts here:

http://www.theblitz.org/message_boar...8093#pid268093

There was discussion about realistic ammo loads carried by squads, and how is it that squads in SPWW2 can maintain sustained fire throughout a battle without re-supply?

I’ve been playing SP for 7 or 8 years, and I’ve never had an infantry or MG unit run out of ammo! Currently in SP, ammo shortages are usually only an issue for artillery units.

Regardless of historical ammo loadouts, this battalion level game would benefit from infantry units sometimes having to conserve ammo, or arrange for re-supply.

It seems like we could address both the Z-fire abuse issue and the overabundance of ammo by lowering the ammo loadouts. Here are some suggestions, but I’d like to hear peoples thoughts or ideas.

1. Lower the maximum ammo loads of certain units to the point that you actually have to conserve ammo or get re-supplied.

(Personally I’d leave most AFV as they are, but lower the ammo levels for infantry and MG units. Mech units could have higher ammo loadouts, but still lower than current levels.)

2. Make Z-fire cost 5x or 10x the ammo. (This may not be possible to code)

3. Create a realism slider button (like the Infantry/Tank toughness ones) to give players the choice to lower ammo loads for certain types of units.

There already exists an Ammo Limit ON/OFF button in the realism preferences; but with ammo loadouts so high for most units, it really only limits artillery.

[DRG]

Cross......people have been finding things about SP they they think should be changed since the day SP1 was released yet the game keeps chugging on and on and on and while I appreciate what you are saying I do recall running infanry low of ammo once or twice a long time ago.

Personally all I think lowering the ammo loads will do is piss off a lot of people and make buying ammo cannisters more popular

However, lets review the practical aspects of this request and for that I will quote from my reply regarding the Kradshutzen sound bug .

......."For the record there is a grand total of 46901 units in SPWW2 and SPMBT combined "

What do you think the chances are at this stage of us changing the ammo loadouts of 46901 units? Given that most have all four slots filled that would be 187,604 ( one hundred and eighty seven thousand, six hundred and four data entries )....

Granted not all are infantry but I think you'll see my point

Don't expect this to happen anytime soon in this space/time continuum ...



Don


`

[Cross]

Hi Don,

Before I posted I did briefly think about the thousands of units that would require adjusting, but after a small shudder I decided not to mention that

On the related subject of z-fire, I wonder if there's a way to code a five or ten fold ammo use for z-fire? Perhaps that's a question for Andy...

I'm not sure how widespread z-fire abuse/over use actually is. I've never had an opponent who abused it, but can imagine how annoying it must be if an opponent fired almost every weapon every turn.

As it's only a PBEM issue, I guess one solution would be to make an agreement with your opponent before a battle, either outlawing z-fire or better still limiting it in some way.

cheers,
Cross

[blitzkreig]

Thought I'd post my two pence worth.

As far as limiting the use of z fire I think the best course of action is to come to an agreement with your foe before starting a PBEM rather than adjusting the code which does allow for realism. I can think of two main "realistic" uses for it.

1. For HMG/MMG units.

Using mmg / hmgs to fire on a map location that they can't see is a tactic used in real life. I've seen a modern British Army SF (sustianed fire) platoon do this using 7.62 gpmg. By elvating the gun mount to the correct angle and using an equation to calaculate fall of shot or the beaten zone it is possible to use mmgs/hmgs to put suppressing fire onto the reverse slope of a hill etc that the gunners can not actually see.

2. To use any unit to put suppressing fire onto a location they can see that they susepct any enemy postions to be located eg treeline building etc. In game terms you fire at a hex in los that does not yet contain a visible enemy unit that has been spotted by the firer, but you think one might be there.

I have encountered PBEM foes who use a wide varitey of units to put up a wall of fire using z fire. In real life this needs the right equipment and more importantly the right knowledge to do this. Troops do not randomly fire all of their weapon systems into the air in the hope a few odd rounds might land in the general direction of the enemy. Its wastefull of ammo, it gives your postions away and you may hit friendlies.

To recall one of my old skill at arms instructors, "if you can't see it you can't kill it".

[cbo]

Originally Posted by Cross

It was also brought up that the major reason for the abuse of Z-fire, was because most units just had far too much ammo. This spawned a second thread about ammo loadouts here:

There was discussion about realistic ammo loads carried by squads, and how is it that squads in SPWW2 can maintain sustained fire throughout a battle without re-supply?

That is not strictly true, is it? Infantry units carry 80-90 "rounds" of small arms fire (rifle, MG) and an experienced unit can fire 5-6 "rounds" pr. turn if stationary, unsuppressed etc.

So if a unit was firing constantly, the ammo would last 13-18 turns - less than the duration of many battles.

Admittedly, infantry units rarely run low on or out of small arms ammunition, but that would seem to be because they spend their time out of range, moving or in a state of suppression, meaning that they do not fire as much as they could.

But if you are in a tough infantry battle, you can actually end up firing most of it, if not all - at least I have on several occassions. But I tend to like those drawn out infantry slugfests

Seems to me that infantry units need a lot of ammo for those types of battle, while they may seem overstocked for the more mobile types of fight which many players may prefer?

I’ve been playing SP for 7 or 8 years, and I’ve never had an infantry or MG unit run out of ammo! Currently in SP, ammo shortages are usually only an issue for artillery units.

While I agree that infantry rarely run out of small arms ammo, I have them run out of heavy weapons ammo often. Support weapons like mortars always seem to run low or out, be they with infantry units or seperate units. My tanks often run out of HE when fighting mainly infantry and guns, and run out of AP in tank battles. But again, I like to engage at long ranges whenever some small advantage can be gained.
As you say, artillery always runs out, it seems.

1. Lower the maximum ammo loads of certain units to the point that you actually have to conserve ammo or get re-supplied.
(Personally I’d leave most AFV as they are, but lower the ammo levels for infantry and MG units. Mech units could have higher ammo loadouts, but still lower than current levels.)

AFVs should definately be left out. They carry in the game what they had room for in reality, which may in some cases be too little as it was not unknown for crews to stack extra rounds. Making some arbitrary reduction just because some people think some other people make excessive use of Z-fire seems over the top.

I must admit, I dont really see why the tediousness of resupply is all that attractive. People who need the extra ammo would just by ammosupply and fire away. As many do now for their artillery. So fighting a Z-fire addict would remain as boring as previously.

On a side note, I seem to recall a discussion way back, when some people were angry with others for using excess artillery. To me, it seems more a case of player preferences - some like to use a lot of firepower, others prefer to manouver (or not to get shot at ).

2. Make Z-fire cost 5x or 10x the ammo. (This may not be possible to code)

Wouldn't bother me much, as I dont use the feature much, but why should it expand more ammo? IIRC Z-fire is quite in-accurate and in-effective. True, if you bunch up a lot of units in one place and the opponent pour on Z-fire from several of his units, it can be effective - but how is that not realistic?
The fire is still treated as the same "bursts" as normal fire, IIRC?

3. Create a realism slider button (like the Infantry/Tank toughness ones) to give players the choice to lower ammo loads for certain types of units.

Again, the issue is not ammo load, in my opinion, it is that some people doesn't like opponents who use a lot of Z-fire. So instead of tampering with ammo loads, why not make a Z-fire effectiveness button or a Z-fire ammo expenditure button? Or a Z-fire On/Off button? Then it would at least adress the percieved Z-fire problem.

There already exists an Ammo Limit ON/OFF button in the realism preferences; but with ammo loadouts so high for most units, it really only limits artillery.

I'd have to disagree, effectively it limits all units and weapons except infantry (and perhaps AFV) small arms.

My two ørers worth, anyway.

cbo

[Marek_Tucan]

Re running out of ammo, remember the length of the game in realtime. IIRC in real life, it was rare for machineguns and rifles to run out of ammo, units tended to run out of men way faster (I cannot recall for example British Paras in Arnhem having insufficient small arms ammo, compared to mortars and PIATs) and only on few occassions, ammo had to be rushed to the frontlines by whatever means neccessary - though it often happened in Pacific during Japanese mass night attacks, but that is quite an extreme.
And yes, I managed to run out of MG ammo few times, not only with tanks.

[Cross]

Hi CBO,

I guess we have to remember that this is only a game that attempts to simulate certain aspects of warfare. With that in mind, we can legalistically adhere to accurate historical ammo loadouts and actually make the game less realistic.

I agree that AFV and artillery units (including mortars) should be left as is.

Realistically, Infantry/MG ammo should be a concern for many scenarios and types of battles. Perhaps for an average battle (not 'infantry slugfests') ammo should only become an issue for the platoon/s that was the most engaged. Currently, this is not the case.

Ideally we would have some sort of slider button to adjust ammo loadouts for certain unit classes. It would be nice to have the choice to adjust ammo levels according to preferance/ scenario.

An ammo reduction wouldn't be only to reduce z-fire over-use, but also to make ammo conservation (for infantry) a more common issue on the SPWW2 battlefield.

The fact that re-supply may be tedius, will help reduce z-fire abuse. Also they have to pay a price to buy ordinance to use heavy z-fire, and ammo units are vulnerable to artillery etc.

The over-use of artillery is often and easily avoided by a pre-game agreement that limits arty to 10-15% of buy points.
There must be a similar (practical) way to limit z-fire, but I haven't thought of it yet.

I agree with Blitzkreigs post that z-fire is realistic, and should not be turned off, but it negatively effects gameplay when it's overused.

[Cross]

Hi MT,

You make good point about Arnhem. Not sure to what extent they had access to dropped (parachuted) ammo cannisters, I know much of it landed far afield. They also took more ammo than the average unit. I'm sure the high casualty rate helped the ammo situation; and the use of German weapons.

That said, if ammo loadouts are historically correct, and shortages by infantry were rare in one hour engagements, then I'm for the status quo. I guess I'll have to fight longer battles if I want ammo to become more of an issue.

The Z-fire overuse will just have to be some sort of pre-game agreement.

[cbo]

Originally Posted by Cross

I guess we have to remember that this is only a game that attempts to simulate certain aspects of warfare. With that in mind, we can legalistically adhere to accurate historical ammo loadouts and actually make the game less realistic.

In principle, yes, with regards to ammo loadouts, I disagree.
Seems to me that some players are simply understanding war like the British pre-1914 General Staff, that got caught with their pants down when faced with the ammo expenditure of modern war. Of course, their German 1939 counterparts made the same mistake, resulting in the German Army running into ammo shortages early in WW2.

Modern war revolves around firepower and I think the game reflects that quite well.

Realistically, Infantry/MG ammo should be a concern for many scenarios and types of battles. Perhaps for an average battle (not 'infantry slugfests') ammo should only become an issue for the platoon/s that was the most engaged. Currently, this is not the case.

....

An ammo reduction wouldn't be only to reduce z-fire over-use, but also to make ammo conservation (for infantry) a more common issue on the SPWW2 battlefield.

With a nod to Mareks comment, how often did WWII infantry run out of small arms ammunition in combat? Is it really something that occured on a regular basis in battles rarely lasting more than an hour - about the max. length of SPWW2 battles?

From reading, I can recall it happening for units cut off from supply, fighting for hours and even days or when facing an exceptionally target rich enviroment as Marek pointed out. But normally, during an average battle of rather short duration?

Perhaps comming up with some historical examples would help make the case and convince us sceptics

Ideally we would have some sort of slider button to adjust ammo loadouts for certain unit classes. It would be nice to have the choice to adjust ammo levels according to preferance/ scenario.

I'm sure we would all welcome more preference options to fit our particular interpretations of WWII warfare, but on the other hand, there are quite a few already and I rarely use any of them.

In practical terms, it really isn't unit classes which should have their ammo loads reduced, but weapon types. Reducing the ammo load of an infantry unit would also reduce the number of handgrenades, anti-tank rifle ammo, panzerfausts or light mortar ammo.
To achieve the desired effect, the only small arms and MG ammo loads should be adjusted. But even that would be difficult, as weapon classes are not really precise enought for this. For example, class 2, secondary weapons include both LMGs and handgrenades and class 3, team weapons, include both mortars and machineguns.

Even if one considered a preference for adjusting ammo loads desirable, I'm at a loss to see how it could reasonably be implemented in the game?

The over-use of artillery is often and easily avoided by a pre-game agreement that limits arty to 10-15% of buy points.
There must be a similar (practical) way to limit z-fire, but I haven't thought of it yet.

I agree with Blitzkreigs post that z-fire is realistic, and should not be turned off, but it negatively effects gameplay when it's overused

I'm sure those who "overuse" Z-fire do not think that they "overuse" anything. And this is, it seems to me, the core of the matter: That people just play the game differently. And if there are players with whom you cannot agree on how it is to be played - dont play with them.
It seems to me that most people agree that Z-fire is a realistic tactic whether it is used to simulate recon by fire or suppression by un-aimed fire.
The real "problems" seem only related to that fact that it is "boring" to watch and make replays take too long. And it is only so, it seems to me, because it results in a lot of firing - which is not in itself unrealistic.

(btw, couldn't you just reduce message delay and animation to make replays shorter?)

Anyway, it is up to the powers that be to adress it, if they think it is an issue. I just want to make that argument why I dont see it as an issue at all.

cbo

[Marek_Tucan]

Copying over from the Tank-Net, basic load .30-06 for US infantry 1941.

From a 1941 U.S. publication. "the Infantry Mailing list." the ammuniton load for an infantry regiment was given as follows;

For riflemen with either M-1 or 1903/1917 rifles 40 rounds per man. with 192 rounds of M-1 ammo and 120 rounds of bolt-action rifle ammo held on unit ammunition train. A further 96 rounds of M-1 ammo was held on the ammunition train of a a higher echelon unit while only 60 rounds oaff addition al bolt action rifle ammo was carried. total was 328 rounds ofor M-1s and 220 rounds for bolt action rifles.
96 rounds were to be issued to the M-1 riflemen prior to combat in 48 round bandoleers with the remaining 96 rounds staying with the train as a reserve. Bolt action riflemen were issued two 60 round badoleers prior to combat with no reserve in unit ammuntion train.

Ammo for the Browning 1919A4 (aircooled) is given as 3000rounds on the prime mover or Am truck, 2000 rounds on the unit Am Tn and a further 1000 rounds with the train of a higher unit for a total of 6000rounds per 1919A4 in the Regiment.

That means quite plenty of ammo was available. Given the most frequent mode of fire even for MMG or HMG were short bursts, I think the ammo dotation is in fact underwelming in SP