Battle for Mosul: Playtest Version

[Deltapooh]

I'm shutting down Playtest to try and resolve alot of issues found. I thought the scenario was near completion. However, based on information provided, that's clearly not the case.

I really appreciate all the insight provided by playtesters. You guys saved my butt from releasing a very buggy scenario, which would have betrayed the effort I try to put into my work.

So it's back to the drawing board :nuts:

[Black Moria]

I will try it out and let you know.

[kbluck]

After playing the scenario a bit, here are my thoughts for improvement...

1. Where's the enemy? Not in OBJ Royal, apparently. I found some hiding out to the west after a diligent search, but after waiting for several game hours, running units all around, and even shooting at them, I couldn't provoke them into attacking me in any organized fashion. Admittedly, its pretty realistic historically speaking, but pretty boring game-wise.

I'd sprinkle the objective, and in fact the whole map with Fedayeen, and have the mechanized forces to the west kick off a counterattack around the top down the highway as soon as the first lift comes into the LZ. That'll liven things up a bit.

2. The infantry elements are pretty well organized. But where's the fire support? At a minimum, there should be company and battalion mortars, and I think a battery of 105s wouldn't be out of line for a BN(-) operation like this. I know the OH-58Ds can carry Hellfires, but for this mission I personally would arm them with rockets and MG since the primary threat is infantry. The troopers have plenty of anti-armor capability to handle any expected armor threat.

The Iraqis should have mortars too, although their field artillery is probably out of action by now.

3. It's a long, long walk for dismounts. It'll typically take until +3h:00 just to get both companies into the objective. Having them clear to the other side is another 3 hours easy. Then hunting down the actual enemy which is about 10 more klicks to the west... well, all in all, that's a pretty darn good day's march for any infantryman. I guess you could continue to shuttle with the helos, but there's only one LZ marked in the graphics, so that would be a leap of judgement.

4. The map looks absolutely fabulous. However, I noticed that the scale for the bitmap seems way too large when you really start examining it. Do the Iraqis really have mile-long mosques and highways a half-mile wide? Each of those grid squares is a full kilometer, and many of them are completely filled and then some by one building. No wonder those poor troopers have such a long hump ahead of them. Rightfully, I'd say that objective should be half or even a third of its current size.

5. Looks like you used MS Word for the OPORD. That inserts a whole lotta garbage into the HTML, including an ActiveX control which the order view dialog doesn't like, causing an occasional error dialog. I'd recommend getting yourself a different HTML editor.

6. When it comes to archiving, ZIP is pretty standard. RAR is nice and all, but most ordinary people have no idea what it is. I'd recommend ZIP, but if you really want to use RAR, at least tell people where to get the software to open it. Or even better, make it self-extracting.

7. I don't think the sounds made it into the download.

--- Kevin

[Deltapooh]

Where's the enemy? Not in OBJ Royal, apparently. I found some hiding out to the west after a diligent search, but after waiting for several game hours, running units all around, and even shooting at them, I couldn't provoke them into attacking me in any organized fashion. Admittedly, its pretty realistic historically speaking, but pretty boring game-wise.



Odd, there should be a large infantry force occupying the objective area, and immediate surrounding. Many are hiding in buildings. I'll look into this.

I'd sprinkle the objective, and in fact the whole map with Fedayeen, and have the mechanized forces to the west kick off a counterattack around the top down the highway as soon as the first lift comes into the LZ. That'll liven things up a bit.

There are two event box triggers in the scenario. One is located at the LZ. The moment helios arrive, enemy vehicles hiding out in the map should move to reinforce the objective.

2. The infantry elements are pretty well organized. But where's the fire support? At a minimum, there should be company and battalion mortars, and I think a battery of 105s wouldn't be out of line for a BN(-) operation like this. I know the OH-58Ds can carry Hellfires, but for this mission I personally would arm them with rockets and MG since the primary threat is infantry. The troopers have plenty of anti-armor capability to handle any expected armor threat.

This is one of the things I've banged my head on for some time now. I wanted to add either the M102 or somekind of dismount mortar force. However, mortars in ATF are not the greatest weapon. Secondly, there is the issue of collateral damage.

Adding 2.75-in rockets would not be a problem. I was thinking about allowing Hellfire missiles to be used against infantry in enclosed areas, but decided against it. I can change that.

3. It's a long, long walk for dismounts. It'll typically take until +3h:00 just to get both companies into the objective. Having them clear to the other side is another 3 hours easy. Then hunting down the actual enemy which is about 10 more klicks to the west... well, all in all, that's a pretty darn good day's march for any infantryman. I guess you could continue to shuttle with the helos, but there's only one LZ marked in the graphics, so that would be a leap of judgement.

The enemy should be concentrated in OBJ ROYAL. It would take some time to two companies to clear a defended compound such as the VIP. I felt that all the walking would compensate for the lack urban modeling (multi-story buildings)


4. The map looks absolutely fabulous. However, I noticed that the scale for the bitmap seems way too large when you really start examining it. Do the Iraqis really have mile-long mosques and highways a half-mile wide? Each of those grid squares is a full kilometer, and many of them are completely filled and then some by one building. No wonder those poor troopers have such a long hump ahead of them. Rightfully, I'd say that objective should be half or even a third of its current size.

Yeah, that's a drawback. The map .bmp covers a rather small area. I thought about just editing the original .bmp, but voted against it.

One solution that pops into my head would be to increase the speed of infantry troops. Unrealistic yes, but it would help simulate the actual scale of the map.

. Looks like you used MS Word for the OPORD. That inserts a whole lotta garbage into the HTML, including an ActiveX control which the order view dialog doesn't like, causing an occasional error dialog. I'd recommend getting yourself a different HTML editor.

I have FrontPage. HTML is not a strong point.

6. When it comes to archiving, ZIP is pretty standard. RAR is nice and all, but most ordinary people have no idea what it is. I'd recommend ZIP, but if you really want to use RAR, at least tell people where to get the software to open it. Or even better, make it self-extracting.

I don't like RAR. However, I couldn't get the file size down to under 3mb without splitting, which is what I plan to do with the final version. You are correct though, I should have mentioned that.

I don't think the sounds made it into the download.

I didn't see that one. You're absolutely correct. I'll upload immediately. I apologize.

Thanks for your help guys. I really need it.

[Deltapooh]

Fixing bugs

[Deltapooh]

Small update. Adding an M119A1. Now I have to make an M1069 piece. TilePiece program is a lifesaver.

[kbluck]

Speaking of M119, here's a germane question for CPT Proctor:

What effect does the "towed" checkbox have?

What is the correct way to implement towed pieces like the M119; combined with the prime mover, or as two separate units that "hook up" for mobility? There doesn't seem to be any towed artillery in database1 for inspection, unless you consider the OPFOR 120mm mortar "towed artillery".

While I'm thinking about artillery, when exactly does the "out of traverse" time kick in? For pieces with full 360 traverse like M119, are they ever "out of traverse"?

--- Kevin

[Deltapooh]

Some good questions there.

[Pat Proctor]

What effect does the "towed" checkbox have?

None. It is a place holder for future functionality.

What is the correct way to implement towed pieces like the M119; combined with the prime mover, or as two separate units that "hook up" for mobility? There doesn't seem to be any towed artillery in database1 for inspection, unless you consider the OPFOR 120mm mortar "towed artillery".

Model it as the howitzer PLUS prime mover. Check out the 2A45 w/ MT-LB for an example of how to implement this. The "emplace" time would be the "unlimber" time in this case, and the "emplaced" graphic would either be the howitzer by itself or, more realistically, the howitzer plus prime mover, separated.

Here is a little realism bonus for you: A M119A1 section consists of the Howitzer, the prime mover, and an ammo truck. The prime mover will only carry 22 rounds, because it has to carry the crew. The ammo truck will carry 66. I would model the howitzer + prime mover as one piece, and the ammo truck as a seperate piece.

While I'm thinking about artillery, when exactly does the "out of traverse" time kick in? For pieces with full 360 traverse like M119, are they ever "out of traverse"?

If you give left and right limits of -99, the out of traverse time NEVER kicks in. The traverse for an M119 howitzer is 100 mils left or right (I think, it has been almost a year). That means that the gunner can turn the tube left or right this far without moving the howitzer, just using the hand crank. Any distance farther than this, and the crew must pick up the trails and spin the howitzer around, and the gunner must re-aquire his aim point, or worse pick up a new aim point. This all takes a lot more time than cranking a handwheel.

How's THAT for grognard? ;)

[kbluck]

A M119A1 section consists of the Howitzer, the prime mover, and an ammo truck. The prime mover will only carry 22 rounds, because it has to carry the crew. The ammo truck will carry 66. I would model the howitzer + prime mover as one piece, and the ammo truck as a seperate piece.

From what I've been able to uncover, the section consists of only the howitzer and HMMWV prime mover, which as you say carries about 22 ready rounds. There is also a battery ammo section of either 2 or 3 5-ton FMTV trucks each with 5-ton trailer, the count depending on the division type (Light 2, AA/Abn 3.) Based on planning factors I've looked at, each of those trucks can carry 170 complete rounds, which based on an estimated weight of around 60 pounds per for shell, powder, casing, fuzes, and packaging, does not seem out of line.

By comparison, the same FMTV can carry only about 96 155mm rounds, which is why there are six of them for the light division's M198 155mm battery.

The traverse for an M119 howitzer is 100 mils left or right (I think, it has been almost a year). That means that the gunner can turn the tube left or right this far without moving the howitzer, just using the hand crank. Any distance farther than this, and the crew must pick up the trails and spin the howitzer around, and the gunner must re-aquire his aim point, or worse pick up a new aim point. This all takes a lot more time than cranking a handwheel.

As for the traverse, it seems that the M198 has a definite traverse limit of 400 mils to either side. The M119 (and M102) is less clear to me. Specs repeatedly claim a full 6400 mil traverse on the firing platform, with the trails supposedly having a wheel to facilitate such traverse, but some other indications seem to relate that it is possible to see an out-of-traverse on the system. One of them mentioned something about a handspike being involved. So, I can't really tell what the limit is supposed to be at this point. The only thing that is readily apparent to me is that traversing the M119 is considerably less complicated than traversing the M198.

So, I guess it all depends on what we mean by "out-of-traverse". Perhaps there are really three situations: minor adjustment not requiring any repositioning worth mentioning, traverse requiring some recalculation and crew shuffling but not reemplacement of the piece (what the M119's "360 traverse" really means?), and traverse requiring the gun to be completely unemplaced and reemplaced as if the gun was moving to a new location (M198 outside of its 800 mil arc.)

--- Kevin

[kbluck]

OK, having found an operator's manual for the M102 howitzer, here's what I found:

The firing platform is staked to the ground and forms a turntable for the piece. The platform does not need to be repositioned for any traverse, as it allows a full 360 degrees of rotation.

Whenever the mission calls for a shift of more than 200 mils off they current lay, the "rapid traverse" procedure is carried out. Essentially, the cannoneers pick up the trail and rotate the gun around the firing platform to the new approximate azimuth pointed to by the section chief. The gunner and asst. then re-lay the piece with the original aim point if the traverse was small or the aiming stakes if the traverse was large. The standard for the entire procedure seems to be around 15 seconds, but I doubt that's achieved routinely.

The British L119, virtually identical to the M119, is listed as having a traverse of 11 degrees. That matches pretty closely to your recollection of 100 mils for the M119.

The M198, on the other hand, must be jacked up out of the ground, travel wheels deployed, manhandled into the new position, and then relaid as if it had just arrived. The standard is supposedly around 75 seconds, but some AARs from JRTC say that batteries take on average about 15 minutes to execute an out-of-traverse mission.

--- Kevin

[Pat Proctor]

The battery ammo section, of FMTV's is a seperate entity. Each section has two HMMWV's. One is the prime mover for the howitzer. The other is an ammo vehicle. They are both upgraded HMMWV's, designed to carry more weight. I think it is an M1038, but it has been 9 months since I was in a light battery.

I am certain about the 2 HMMWV's per section, though.

[kbluck]

I am certain about the 2 HMMWV's per section, though.

Yes, of course you're right. Having squinted at the line items for the TOE and carefully added up all the plusses and minuses, I discovered a total of 12 HMMWVs for the battery howitzer sections. Curiously, they only listed the prime mover in the "major equipment" summary. That'll teach me not to read the lines.

--- Kevin

[Pat Proctor]

I think they do that because the lack of a prime mover deadlines the section, while the lack of an ammo carrier does not.