Do you use indirect fire?

[Joisey]

Thought it would be interesting to get an idea of how prevalent the use of a house rule for indirect fire is. Alot of people have mentioned it in their posts.

I myself immediately allowed it from the first game I set up. I think it is unthinkable to have mortars that can't indirect fire, since by their very nature they ONLY fire by ballistic trajectory.

What say you?

[Old Fart]

I am not in favor of indirect fire. Since all units are visable to your opponent at
the start of the game, indirect fire allows you to cherry pick your targets at
will. I feel fairly certain that anti-tank guns will be targeted first. Then machine
guns. It's too much of a gimme.

At the time, without global positioning satelites, artillery fire could prove to be
inaccurate. Friendly fire incidents occured on a regular basis. Generally a lot
of shells were throw into a area to achieve the desired effect.

However, if you want to complicate the issue by setting up a drift table, then I'm
all for it. Something like:

1st shot : 1 -4 drift. 5-6 on target.
2nd shot : 1 - 3 drift. 4 -6 on target.
etc. etc. etc.
Once on target, all follow up shots on target.

Old Fart

[Domhnall101]

I use it.
Officers are the only ones that can spot. We assume that the inacuracies are built into the combat values and a drift is just built into a miss. Don't see it as likely that fire would drift 100m to the next hex and then find the unit in that hex by 'accident'
We do add +1d when firing direct to allow for improved targeting because of direct los.
Keeps shifting to-hit values to minimum so you don't have to track how many shots were fired, who fired at who and did the target move. But at the same the +1 shows the difference between direct and indirect fire

[WpgWarMachine]

I play with indirect fire... as long as a friendly unit can spot the target.