[Basic] Skill of the week: Artillery (and Forward Observer)

[sir_pudding]

Originally Posted by Ulzgoroth

Interestingly, and I think appropriately, Low Tech specifies Artillery for obligate high-angle cannon (p88) and mechanical artillery (p82).

...I'm not sure how this works with using Gunner for a mortar in direct lay. I might appeal to the matter of sights and the lack thereof of more primitive systems. With a well-designed range-adjusted ballistic sight and standardized ammunition you can make a straightforward mechanical process out of a task that calls for sophisticated-for-its-time science and a touch of art when done with a TL3 bombard.

Alternately those weapons are listed under Artillery but aren't actually very often used with that skill. It's not clear to me that you don't use Gunner to shoot trebuchet at visible targets.

[Ulzgoroth]

Originally Posted by sir_pudding

Except the "FO" in this instance is just doing what the squad leader does in a direct lay. I'm not really seeing much difference.

I thought in direct lay you directly laid a sight attached to the mortar on the target?

Originally Posted by sir_pudding

The FDC is supposed to be setting up their gear while the guns lay in (including stakes). You can't really do it with two people.

But Kromm is talking about a situation where you may have a very tiny, irregular team, not a proper unit. I wouldn't be at all surprised to see a PC party wanting to carry around a mortar that only one party member has any clue how to handle.

I mean, would you say that it's outright impossible for one person to set up and fire a mortar? If not, it pays to bear in mind that the way PCs do things will not necessarily be the way the armed forces prefer to. Your typical PC 'sniper' isn't planning on having another character be their spotter, either.

EDIT: So to the point, it seems like there might be situations where characters do in fact want to take indirect mortar shots without setting up a FDC. Actually, in addition to the 'lack the manpower' case, there'd also be the 'don't have the space or gear' case, or the 'our FDC person is so inhumanly good they don't want to bother with that stuff' case.

Originally Posted by sir_pudding

Alternately those weapons are listed under Artillery but aren't actually very often used with that skill. It's not clear to me that you don't use Gunner to shoot trebuchet at visible targets.

I think it's clear that whoever wrote that bit of Low Tech did not think that, given the text. And I think IQ/A is much more appropriate for operating such devices than DX/E. So I'm in favor of drawing lines such that Artillery is the correct skill there.

[sir_pudding]

Originally Posted by Ulzgoroth

I thought in direct lay you directly laid a sight attached to the mortar on the target?

True. And on further reflection:

But Kromm is talking about a situation where you may have a very tiny, irregular team, not a proper unit. I wouldn't be at all surprised to see a PC party wanting to carry around a mortar that only one party member has any clue how to handle.

Okay, but in the case Kromm describes the "Observer" is doing both the regular FO duties, as well as providing fire direction with no (or minimal) equipment. He's observing the target and issuing the fire command directly to the gun and converting his corrections into "gun dope" in his head. This isn't a situation with no FDC but an FO that has to act as FDC too (which maybe rates the -10 for "no FDC" from High-Tech).

I mean, would you say that it's outright impossible for one person to set up and fire a mortar?

Depends on the mortar. The heavier they are, the more minimum crew they need.

I think it's clear that whoever wrote that bit of Low Tech did not think that, given the text. And I think IQ/A is much more appropriate for operating such devices than DX/E. So I'm in favor of drawing lines such that Artillery is the correct skill there.

But then we get this weird thing that direct fire with high angle weapons uses Artillery up to TL5 and then switches to Gunner for TL5+. Why?

[The_Ryujin]

Hey, Sir Pudding. Given that RAW doesn't map with your experience in how artillery roles work in real life modern combat (which is understandable since if GURPS gave that much detail to everything, the basic set would be a phone book heh), how would you tweak the skill to better map reality?

Or.... if you're feeling smart pants enough... How bout tackling an pyramid article on the subject? That would much win.

[sir_pudding]

Originally Posted by The_Ryujin

Hey, Sir Pudding. Given that RAW doesn't map with your experience in how artillery roles work in real life modern combat (which is understandable since if GURPS gave that much detail to everything, the basic set would be a phone book heh), how would you tweak the skill to better map reality?

Ideally? Reintroduce the FDC skill. Have the FDC chief roll to eliminate some or all of the -10 penalty and/or give a bonus to the FO. Also act as an error correction (the FDC can roll if either the FO or Gunline fails and on a success allow them to reroll). All of this will also effect the time of the response (replacing (probably) the random time from the High-Tech rules).

There are three elements of Indirect Fire and really ought to be in GURPS too.

You could also do a simplified version where only the FO roll matters. What doesn't make much sense is putting so much emphasis on shooting the guns after they've already been laid on target, as that really only fails at critical failure level.

I'd also clean up when you are supposed to use Gunner instead of Artillery. It's probably simplest to (as I think Ulz is suggesting) just call all fires from high-angle fire weapons and mechanical artillery Artillery regardless of TL.

Or.... if you're feeling smart pants enough... How bout tackling an pyramid article on the subject? That would much win.

Doesn't seem appropriate for Alternate Dungeons or Spaceships II, at least I don't want to write the article that it would have to be to fit those themes. If an appropriate theme comes up, then I've got an article.

The main problem is that I still need to do some research to make it broader than USMC Mortars, but cover TL5+ fires from all guns and all services.

[Ulzgoroth]

Originally Posted by sir_pudding

Okay, but in the case Kromm describes the "Observer" is doing both the regular FO duties, as well as providing fire direction with no (or minimal) equipment. He's observing the target and issuing the fire command directly to the gun and converting his corrections into "gun dope" in his head. This isn't a situation with no FDC but an FO that has to act as FDC too (which maybe rates the -10 for "no FDC" from High-Tech).

In the case Kromm describes, that is being done by someone, yes. Whether it's the FO, the gunner, or some combination of the two is (I think explicitly) unspecified.

Originally Posted by sir_pudding

Depends on the mortar. The heavier they are, the more minimum crew they need.

Sure. I was going for "Is it the case that for all mortars it is impossible for one person to set them up and fire them", to mangle a mathematical formalism. (I could go dig up the necessary symbols to write it out quasi-properly but it's probably best that I don't.)

Originally Posted by sir_pudding

But then we get this weird thing that direct fire with high angle weapons uses Artillery up to TL5 and then switches to Gunner for TL5+. Why?

Well, my previous proposal was that the development of standardized ammunition and mechanical sights that adjust for range allows for simple versions of the indirect fire task to be handled without needing someone to do the math on the spot.

EDIT: I wouldn't necessarily be against using Artillery for all indirect fires, but my current thought is that Artillery should actually be the FDC skill, and Gunner the skill for the hands on the weapon. (And the FDC, not the actual shooter, making the master roll to hit.)

[sir_pudding]

Originally Posted by Ulzgoroth

In the case Kromm describes, that is being done by someone, yes. Whether it's the FO, the gunner, or some combination of the two is (I think explicitly) unspecified.

Originally Posted by Kromm

but you're relying on somebody else to observe the rounds falling and speak the very same corrections he would make by hand if he were the gunner, I'd treat that as a Forward Observer-Artillery task, not as a Gunner task.

If he's speaking deflection corrections, then he's acting as fire direction. Also note that a "direct hit" in mortars is within 25 meters of the target (and the smallest possible correction is 25 meters), so in the kind of apparently "danger close" situation that Kromm is describing there aren't going be a lot of adjustments, anyway.

Sure. I was going for "Is it the case that for all mortars it is impossible for one person to set them up and fire them", to mangle a mathematical formalism. (I could go dig up the necessary symbols to write it out quasi-properly but it's probably best that I don't.)

Well, the lightest mortars can more easily be operated by a single gunner, sure. You need at least two people to lay in stakes though. It is impossible to look through the sight to direct the stakes and to lay them at the same time (it's like surveying, basically).

Well, my previous proposal was that the development of standardized ammunition and mechanical sights that adjust for range allows for simple versions of the indirect fire task to be handled without needing someone to do the math on the spot.

I think that might be tortuous reasoning to justify weird rules.

[sir_pudding]

Originally Posted by Ulzgoroth

EDIT: I wouldn't necessarily be against using Artillery for all indirect fires, but my current thought is that Artillery should actually be the FDC skill, and Gunner the skill for the hands on the weapon. (And the FDC, not the actual shooter, making the master roll to hit.)

The whole ST-Based loading roll makes that rather dubious, besides Kromm being fairly insistent that Artillery is the skill of laying and firing pieces.

[The_Ryujin]

Originally Posted by sir_pudding

Ideally? Reintroduce the FDC skill. Have the FDC chief roll to eliminate some or all of the -10 penalty and/or give a bonus to the FO. Also act as an error correction (the FDC can roll if either the FO or Gunline fails and on a success allow them to reroll). All of this will also effect the time of the response (replacing (probably) the random time from the High-Tech rules).

There are three elements of Indirect Fire and really ought to be in GURPS too.

OK, that seems like a simple enough tweak though I wonder if we can count this skill as an optional specialty for artillery?

I'd also clean up when you are supposed to use Gunner instead of Artillery. It's probably simplest to (as I think Ulz is suggesting) just call all fires from high-angle fire weapons and mechanical artillery Artillery regardless of TL.

Yeah, definitely. That's how I'd do it.

Doesn't seem appropriate for Alternate Dungeons or Spaceships II, at least I don't want to write the article that it would have to be to fit those themes. If an appropriate theme comes up, then I've got an article.

The main problem is that I still need to do some research to make it broader than USMC Mortars, but cover TL5+ fires from all guns and all services.

Fair enough though I'd most def be intreasted in a article on this if it happens.

[Ulzgoroth]

Originally Posted by sir_pudding

If he's speaking deflection corrections, then he's acting as fire direction. Also note that a "direct hit" in mortars is within 25 meters of the target (and the smallest possible correction is 25 meters), so in the kind of apparently "danger close" situation that Kromm is describing there aren't going be a lot of adjustments, anyway.

For that particular snippet of phrase, yes, that sounds like the FO also doing the fire direction.

For the overall situation, the FO calling in whatever they'd 'usually' call for a fire request and the gunner converting to deflection could be done too. Maybe one or the other is less impractical, I couldn't say.

Originally Posted by sir_pudding

Well, the lightest mortars can more easily be operated by a single gunner, sure. You need at least two people to lay in stakes though. It is impossible to look through the sight to direct the stakes and to lay them at the same time (it's like surveying, basically).

Useful information!

Originally Posted by sir_pudding

I think that might be tortuous reasoning to justify weird rules.

Possibly. On the other hand, if you do make that Artillery, then what about grenade launchers and low-velocity cannon? At what angle of elevation does the skill switch?

Also, when you get down to it...do you think it's an IQ/A skill?

Originally Posted by sir_pudding

The whole ST-Based loading roll makes that rather dubious,

How? I mean, obviously, that would be a Gunner rather than Artillery roll under my take, but...

Originally Posted by sir_pudding

besides Kromm being fairly insistent that Artillery is the skill of laying and firing pieces.

We're pretty bare-facedly breaking with the way GURPS 4e is written to handle artillery, here. I don't think that insistence is applicable at this point.