Realistic Artillery Management - FOO Rule

[RERomine]

First, does the FOO rule mean that only FOO's can call in artillery? I'm assuming this is not true, but relates only to FOO units due to their ability to get arty on target faster and more accurately.

Yes, one fire mission can be called by each FOO available. A fire mission can be anywhere from one gun to multiple regiments.

Second, if the above is true then why can't other HQ units call in arty support? I know that it is possible and quite frequently done.

Typically speaking, HQ units calling artillery was just an American thing. It had something to do with the wholesale availability of dry cell batteries and consequently, radios. Most other nations used specialized teams (FOOs - the UK had this down to a science) or in the case with the Russian, artillery was preplanned. As a means to make the rule simple and general, no HQ units can call fire missions, except as mentioned below.

Third, if my first question is true and only FOO's can call in arty strikes - then what happens if they're all killed? Would that mean no more arty 'cept those used in close support?

If all FOO units are destroyed, the A0 unit can call artillery. If no FOO units are purchased, the A0 unit can call artillery.

[Weasel]

Please help me to understand the FOO rule. Yes, it is in plain english but I'm from Alabama...

First, does the FOO rule mean that only FOO's can call in artillery? I'm assuming this is not true, but relates only to FOO units due to their ability to get arty on target faster and more accurately.

Second, if the above is true then why can't other HQ units call in arty support? I know that it is possible and quite frequently done.

Third, if my first question is true and only FOO's can call in arty strikes - then what happens if they're all killed? Would that mean no more arty 'cept those used in close support?

Honestly, I have not been following the rule - but none of my opponents have mentioned it either. I'm amicable to any pre-game agreements (within reason), but don't assume your opponent is playing the same rules you are.

Ye-Haw (Hurrah in Southern US Dialect)

You can DL the FOO RESTRICTION RULE on the main SP message page. All of your questions are answered there (but what RERomine said is correct).

[Cross]

I see at least three issues which seem to have come up as a result of this discussion.

1. Sheafs

Half of the people who have posted on this thread, appear to agree that a FOO rule should allow for sheafs.


Dispersals
This came up as a secondary issue to sheafs.

Some seem to be suggesting sheafs are accomplished by dispersals. I disagree, because dispersals are accidental misses, sheafs are deliberately targeting a wider area.

If I wanted to accomplish dispersal I should:

A. Keep a FOO out of LOS
B. Keep a FOO suppressed
C. Use a FOO with less artillery skill/experience

None of which makes sense.


2. Adjusting plots

The shifting of plots and strikes seems to be the main area of confusion with the current FOO rule, but not necessarily the main objection.
Maybe I will understand it after drinking six Canadian beers.

Creeping Barrages
This came up as a secondary issue to adjusting plots.

Some, perhaps most, believe a FOO rule should allow creeping barrages. It was certainly standard artillery practice. Hmmm…or does the current FOO rule allow Creeping Barrages…must drink more beer…


3. Policing or monitoring a FOO rule

Most think this should be as easy as counting fingers. Some think only the middle finger needs to be counted.

IMHO this should be as simple as making sure your opponent is dropping arty in same number of clusters/sheafs as he has FOOs.

This may be another reason to get rid of any special plot adjustment rules, which are hard if not impossible to police.

---

[animal mother]

Please help me to understand the FOO rule. Yes, it is in plain english but I'm from Alabama...

Oh boy! Even native speakers of English do not understand the FOO rule. I think I will not try to understand it.
But serious now: I think that idea with a basic and an advanced rule is quite good. Everybody could choose what suits them best.

Cheers
Michael

[Cross]

But serious now: I think that idea with a basic and an advanced rule is quite good. Everybody could choose what suits them best.

Cheers
Michael

I think you are right Michael.

If I could put forward a preliminary suggestion for a Basic FOO Rule:

1. Only FOOs may plot artillery; unless you have no FOO (because of unavailability or attrition) in which case your AO unit may plot.

2. One target ‘sheaf’ per FOO.

3. FOO may plot a sheaf by targeting guns within 2 hexes of any other plot.
FOO can cluster his guns, plot them in a line, a circle and even a curve, as long as each plot is within 100m of any of his other plots.

4. Whenever a FOO chooses to correct or adjust fire, he must plot his guns according to rule number 3.

---

This is just my idea for a Basic FOO rule, that allows for sheafs. Feel free to suggest changes, or even something completely different.

[seabolt]

Even I could manage with something like that set of rules, Simon. I like them quite a bit. If I may offer some revisions:

***

BASIC FOO RULES

FOO: Forward observer.

CC/A: Company command with artillery. (Some nations offer artillery companies, and many infantry or support companies have artillery assets in them. This is the company 0 unit for those units.)

A0: Duh.

Controller: The FOO, CC/A, or A0 unit that called a given sheaf.

Plot: Noun only in these rules, the gold spots created for artillery fire missions. (Elsewhere, used as a verb for call or adjust, below.)

Sheaf: The combined plots of all artillery units under a given controller. A sheaf may have a single plot (especially if a CC/A is the controller). Ie, a fire mission.

Call: To bring a new sheaf into play.

Adjust: To shift an existing plot to a new location.

1. FOOs may call fire for any artillery. CC/As may call fire only from units under their command. If no FOO is available in a given turn, the A0 may act as an FOO.

2. One sheaf per controller.

3. All plots in a sheaf must be within 2 hexes of another plot in the sheaf when assigned. (Of course, some may scatter after the mission is fired.) Sheafs with only 1 plot disregard this rule and rule 4.

4. On each subsequent turn, the controller must adjust fire so that all plots are again within 2 hexes of another in the sheaf. The controller may move every plot---thus shifting or reshaping the sheaf---as long as they all end up within 2 hexes of another. (This usually will cause different delays in the sheaf. You may ignore this.)

5. Plots may be dropped from a sheaf at any time. Plots may not be added after the sheaf is called.

6. A controller may not begin a new sheaf until all plots have been removed from the board from the old sheaf.

-- 30 --

[Imp]

But serious now: I think that idea with a basic and an advanced rule is quite good. Everybody could choose what suits them best.

Cheers
Michael

I think you are right Michael.

If I could put forward a preliminary suggestion for a Basic FOO Rule:

1. Only FOOs may plot artillery; unless you have no FOO (because of unavailability or attrition) in which case your AO unit may plot.

2. One target ‘sheaf’ per FOO.

3. FOO may plot a sheaf by targeting guns within 2 hexes of any other plot.
FOO can cluster his guns, plot them in a line, a circle and even a curve, as long as each plot is within 100m of any of his other plots.

4. Whenever a FOO chooses to correct or adjust fire, he must plot his guns according to rule number 3.

Said I was going to butt out but you are sort of getting somewhere so my version

1)Units allowed to call in a fire mission
Only FOOs may plot artillery; unless you have no FOO (because of unavailability or attrition) in which case your AO unit may plot.
NOTE This means your AO unit may only plot if you have no FOOs & no other unit may ever do so.

2) Fire mission units involved
2A) A FOO may only have one fire mission at a time so if it wants to target elsewhere it must first cancel its current fire mission.
2B) All guns from a Battery must be used on the same mission
2C) Any number of Batteries may take part in the mission
2D) It can add or cancel Batteries to that mission

3) Fire missions target
A Fire missions plots must be placed as follows
3A)All plots must be within 2 hexes or less of any other plot from the same Battery.
3B)If more than one Battery takes part it must use the same plots as the first battery.
NOTE This means plots can have a max of 1 hex between them & the total no of plots cannot be larger than the number of guns in the biggest Battery that is involved.

3) Simplified as Battery size varies
A Fire missions plots must be placed as follows
3A) A max of 3(4?) plots may be placed & they must all be placed within 2 hexes or less of another plot.
3B) If more than one Battery takes part it must use the same plots.
NOTE This means plots can have a max of 1 hex between them & the total no of plots can be from 1-3(4?).

4) Correcting (adjusting) fire missions
The FOO may adjust the mission target according to rule 3)
NOTE this means once you have finnished moving the plots they must have followed the same rules as you use to place a new mission.
This may mean that some guns may not fire this turn as you must maintain the grouping.

To Sum Up
1) AO May only call in a fire mission if you have no FOOs
2) Only FOOs & AO may call in a fire mission
3) Each FOO has 1 Fire Mission consisting of a max of 3(4?) plots.
When you end your turn these plots must all be within 2 hexes of each other or less.
4) All guns in a battery must be used in the mission.
5) The mission may be made up of any number of batteries & you may add or cancel them at any time.

These rules will allow people to place a limited dispersal patern if they wish. They will also limit chasing units as have to maintain grouping.

My view is all in one hex is unrealistic but allowing a dispersal pattern of more than 3 targets also is as game adds spread already as less accurate than is realistic. Also you have to limit from a policeing point of view.

Why not try it to see if works. If it gives to big a spread try with all must be adjacent to another plot. If spread still to big then we are back to the original rule but at least we have explored the options.
Somebody get off the fence please the original work that went into this is exellent but thats not to say its right yet so lets play with it a bit more & include artillery placement.

To the 1 hex target camp try it, to the spread camp forget terminology like sheafs & accept in the intrests of making usable can only have limited dispersal. As to things like creeping barrages forget it they would be a special case starting & ending on specific turns.

If we can't play nicely as suggested 2 versions could be done but lets agree folks for the sake of tourneys & the like.

[animal mother]

Hello again!

In my opinion, I like the basic version by Cross which is quite simple to apply and I have understood it after reading it the first time. But I like also the point by Seabolt with 'who can plot what'. I can live with that.

But this does not mean everybody should or could. It is like SG has written in the Set up Limits : Put 2 grognards in a room and you will get 3 opinions.

What do you think about it?

Cheers
Michael

[Walrus]

Hi Guys

It has been interesting to read all these posts.
I think there are some great ideas floating around but I would like to make one crucial point...

Just because we are referring to the FOO ''rule" does not, and never has, made it an actual rule per se.
It is merely a guideline for players who wish to play using a slightly more realistic arty system, helpfully contributed by Chris.
The main idea was that you could set up a battle, then agree to the the use of the FOO rule and then you could then both just crack on with the battle without having to debate and restate your arty routine preference yet again. Especially when it came to playig against new opponents.

It seems that some of you guys are bent on getting a change to the 'rules' rather than realising that they are just set a of guidelines that can be altered or ignored according to taste and style of players and type of battle.

If anyone wants to VERY CLEARLY write a set of rules / guidelines for using arty in SP games, I am sure that we could post them up in the Important Threads section here at the SP forum and they could then be used by anyone that wanted them.
You could agree to use Weasel's, Cross', Imp's or none at all...or any one of those, but with slight agreed variations...whatever.

Now, in saying that, there is no point have 15 sets of arty rules is there It would just be annoying and confusing, especially for those of us for whom English is not their first language.

So...let the discussion continue, and why don't a few of you put your money where your mouth is and try a few test battles against each other using the rule sets and see how they pan out.
I can assure you that many battles were played testing Chris' FOO rules idea before it was offered to the community for use by those who wished it.

Can I suggest that the most important thing, far more than sheafs or no sheafs etc....is the ability for it to be easily understood by all prospective users and even more importantly, policed during the game.
Avoiding confusion or suspicion of 'bending' the rules is always a prime concern of mine, and I am sure of all of you, so the more simple it is, the better it will work.

IMO, you'll end up with a slightly changed version of Chris' idea...partly because it aready basically works and partly because you'll all end up bickering over terminology or minor points and not get around to actually doing anything constructive :stir:

So...have at it chaps! It's good to see some healthy debate, whether Vesku likes it or not :whis:
Anything that helps us all get a better and more interesting experience when we are playing this game is always a good thing.

So...let's get a vote going, or a poll...or some tests done.
Hurrah!

[RERomine]

As I had suggested earlier, I would just rename the existing "rule" as FOO Rule - Basic, so that anyone who has played this and gotten use to it can still do so. Don't change that one at all.

The new "rule", defined as FOO Rule - Advanced should include all the variations being discussed. I agree the rules should be simple and reasonably verifiable.

Count me in on testing it.

Soooo, who writes them up??? :)