Another Artillery discussion

[Marching Thru Georgia]

Hancock The Superb wrote:

So I would suggest that guns take not only a larger moral hit but also take more casualties, because they really don't take any at present.

I disagree. I've tested this many times, always with the same result. I put a battery of napoleons and a battery of 3 inchers on the Kansas map about 800 yds apart and have them go at it. After 50-60 rounds/gun, (solid shot), all the napoleons are either destroyed, routed due to casualties or have their caissons blown up. The 3 inch guns lose 1 or 2 guns in that time. I agree that it is probably too small a destruction rate, given the historic accuracy of the artillery, hence my suggestion that the target size be increased.

I don't agree that we need a special morale lose rate for the artillery. A man is a man, whether he carries a rifle or a rammer. Norb is correct in modeling fatigue in the game as he does. If the morale hit is too low for arty fire on a cannon crew, then it is also too low for the infantry and cavalry. That can be modded to the level the player feels is appropriate.

One morale change I do feel is appropriate is that the loss of a gun due to counter battery fire has a large morale impact on the rest of the battery. That is supported by the historical record. But as NY Cavalry points out, that may require a good bit of coding.

[Saddletank]

What people have mentioned here several times is batteries retreating and battery commanders deciding to withdraw. The problem I have with artillery in SoW is that its components (gun crews and teams) are modelled at the same level in the OOB as regiments of inf or cav, and thus each gun team makes a morale calculation and response.

This is wrong. The battery as a whole should be making a morale calculation and response and moving to the rear as a unit. Having single guns whizzing hither and thither all around your rear areas as the fight gets desperate isn't realistic. What you should have is exhausted and demoralised batteries withdrawn from the firing line.

Having a reserve of fresh batteries then makes more sense.

I think it was a fundamental mistake to slot 'gun and team' into the OOB tree at the same level as 'inf regt' in SoW.

If/when the next version of the game is developed or a full rewite into v2 happens I would lobby loudly for this change.

Another accidental benefit of organising artillery this way is to allow batteries to be attached under the command of brigades which was how some units were organised early in the war.

As for counterbattery fire I saw a Rebel 4-gun battery driven off decisively by 4 or 5 6-gun Union batteries in an MP game 2 nights ago. I agree it takes a big weight of shot to drive a battery away but it probably only took 15 minutes at a range of around a 1/4 of a mile or a bit more - 500 yards?

[Damned Black Hat]

Another aspect that could be cool is if a gun/battery's morale gets dangerously low, they would abandon the guns to head to safety. Would also be neat to have your artillerymen regain control of your guns if you recapture guns that were taken by the enemy. Both would probably be nightmares to code though.

[Saddletank]

Another aspect that could be cool is if a gun/battery's morale gets dangerously low, they would abandon the guns to head to safety. Would also be neat to have your artillerymen regain control of your guns if you recapture guns that were taken by the enemy. Both would probably be nightmares to code though.

Would need a whole new set of artillery sprites, that's for sure!

[RebBugler]

Another aspect that could be cool is if a gun/battery's morale gets dangerously low, they would abandon the guns to head to safety. Would also be neat to have your artillerymen regain control of your guns if you recapture guns that were taken by the enemy. Both would probably be nightmares to code though.

Would need a whole new set of artillery sprites, that's for sure!

And here lies the primary impediment for realistic artillery representation. More sprites doing more actions pushes the game beyond 32 bit memory capabilities. It doesn't help to have 64 bit ultra machines because presently we must stay 32 bit friendly or else lose them.

I believe most of the artillery realism issues discussed could be addressed with at least 3 sets of sprites for each battery - guns, gun crews, and caissons (including horses).

This is a very informative thread, however, it's unfortunately just beating previously beaten ground. Maybe mods can improve our present setup, some have, but MP will have to wait until Norb releases those capabilities. Until then, we encourage modding wholeheartedly, continue to stroke Norb for MP inclusion with solid alternatives, and make the best out of what we already have.

Thanks for all the great input, while remaining positive and understanding. It's this SOW Team's goals to make the best 'Musket Wars' ever!

[Hancock the Superb]

I disagree with those that say counter-battery fire is effective. I have also done my research in-game and have found odd results.

The first thing I did was open the range up to 2000 yards so howitzers and ordnance rifles cannot fire the same distances. Then I set up several union batteries on lower Cemetary Ridge and several confederate batteries along the Emmitsburg Road, a full 1000 to 1400 yards apart. I even think I crammed a few Confederate Ordnance rifles onto Seminary Ridge to fire at about 1900 yards.

I found that neither side would score a hit if the batteries were left on AI targeting or target artillery. I did this multiple times to make sure, and each side might recieve one or two casualties. Now when I selected a target, and aimed one or two guns at each enemy gun, the results were fantastic. The opposing side would melt away in 30 to 45 minutes. Note that I played the opposite side as well, using the same technique, and the first side would be dispatched just as quickly. It is evident that selecting a target somehow increases the accuracy of the guns.

But this example does not work every time. This scenario presents an excellent situation for gunners: high ground, open terrain, visible target. Different spots around the Gettysburg provide exceptionally different results: sometimes one side will have a distinct advantage, but most of the time, few hits will be scored. I can think of two reasons for this: one is that different batteries were used (which they were), and the second is that artillery in SOW is only effective on incredibly open terrain.

I would conclude that first off, batteries need open terrain to be effective, although SOW could improve things if Norb could code the complex indirect fire. Another is that batteries must be 5s or 6s to really be effective; anything below a 4 rarely scores even a single hit against an enemy battery in counter-battery fire. Although I think there are numerous other improvements that could be made, I think that we need people to do actual research (using a real cannon) to determine how civil war artillery should be correctly modeled, then having the SOW team attempt ot reproduce those findings in game.

[Willard]

I think it has been proven that Willard's guns need a 20-1 ratio to achieve any effectiveness.

BTW...I may be back very soon

Rich!!!! Great to hear from you. I will shoot you an email.

[Willard]

In follow-up to the many good comments, we need to differentiate a couple of issues. In the stock game, CB fire is very effective but artillery fire in general is probably way too high as a result. Most of those commenting in this thread play GCM where artillery fire has been downwardly tweaked. There probably is a sweet spot between GCM and stock but we can't get there now. It is my understanding that Garnier believes he can mod some of these issues but that can't happen unless Norb opens some files up. In the interim, artillery targeted CB fire and artillery targeted infantry fire are connected and any attempt to move one influences the other.

On the point of stock game CB fire, it is effective but in an improper way. Historically, guns were not knocked out at the rates or manner we would would see in game. Gun crews and horses were casuaulties, but the reality is that as loses mounted commanders would withdraw guns as the weight of CB fire suppressed the ability to return fire. This is best simulated by a combo of morale malus which decreases accuracy and fatigue malus which decreases ROF. At some point there needs to be a "breaking point" as battery commanders would withdraw the entire battery to the rear for rest/refit/redeploy. They would not leave a single gun out on the field with a crew unless it was an extreme circumstance.

[KG_Soldier]

I think it has been proven that Willard's guns need a 20-1 ratio to achieve any effectiveness.

BTW...I may be back very soon

Rich who?

[KG_Soldier]

Oh yeah. . . www.sowmp.com ,Rich.