Indeed, I only meant it relatively, insofar as an imbalance means either infantry or artillery will be "more imperiled," as it were.
I was of the opinion that 200 yard muskets would be, at the very least, an interesting experiment. The more I see in the actual MP games, however, the more I am starting to believe that it will be a short-lived experiment. At or under 200 yards, the artillery doesn't need any additional boost. Those that charge, in any formation, on guns, will take cannister and then double cannister. If you think a shot of double cannister doesn't sting, either in line or column, I think you ought to look again. I'm the one who gave Seal that dose of cannister in 1304. Basically the majority of his casualties were from charging my guns, and I gave his troops all they could handle. His tactics were rewarded accordingly, in my opinion. It was an unusual circumstance in that I was in a fairly poor position and was being overrun by 2+ divisions, but yes, some people do seem to like to go for guns.
All in all, though, if I am reading your suggestion correctly - that you want guns to be more powerful than they are in Garnier's current Platte set-up, I think they are actually quite fine. On good ground, I have had a battery of 4 guns consistently kill 50-100 men per battle, and that's usually not firing the entire 90 minutes, depending, and includes no cannister. Look at my guns for 1304 if you want to see the type of damage cannister can do in about 20 minutes. Additionally, I think counter-battery can, at times, be overpowered, where I can, say shoot 12 guns off Culp's Hill at an enemy battery on much lower ground and not score 1 hit, yet they can plaster my guns on higher ground, with defensive terrain bonus. I was of the opinion that counter-battery fire was a thing of the past in the current set-up, but the only thing I've seen recently is it being oddly slanted to one side or the other.
Just a couple of points to consider:
I don't necessarily want guns MORE powerful, I just want ahistoric tactics punished appopriately. I definitely don't want canister to be more effective in casualties, but I would like to see a greater fatigue and morale malus on impacted units to represent the psychological impact that is currently missing from our digital soldiers.
As it stands now, there is only 1 type of gun used in G's mod - the 10 pder. The lack of diversity, IMO, limits the nuanced tactical advantages of using the differant gun types. As G' has rightly pointed out, in stock games there is a disproportionate amount of casualties inflicted by cansiter. This is correct for most players, however not all of us roll the guns up as moving shotguns. I am not patting myself on the back, BUT I have been able to reach 25% casaulties with proper gun placement and usage with minimal/no canister expended.
Consequently, IF long range and counter-battery fire were improved just a bit I believe you would see more players using the guns historically. Improved counter-battery fire will be the biggest deterrent to players rolling guns - even more so than 250 yard ranges. In the stock game, I can destroy batteries that attempt that tactic pretty darn quick - the problem is that I can't destroy them faster than they can inflict damage on infantry. IF I have 16 guns targeting a battery rolling up to 500 yards, I should be able to knock those guns out pretty darn quick - not in the 15 mins of game time it takes now (in the stock game).
As I have mentioned previously, G's mod has reduced arty inflicted casaulties to about 10-15% whereas the stock game has it about 25-30% (provided players aren't rolling batteries around like uber tanks). I don't want it at 40-50% even if that may be the historical return. I would like to re-approach the 25-30% range provided those rates are more spread out so canister isn't causing almost all that pain like it does for most players.
There are several ways to accomplish this without causing unnecessarily higher kill hits. By increasing fatigue and morale malus for units under fire - for example those in column formation - it can achieve similar results without necessarily increasing the arty casualty percentage. Tactics we use, such as deploying units in column right up to the battlefield, weren't done in the CW because a 12 pd ball hitting a unit in column would roll through them like pins in a bowling ally.
Regarding Culp's Hill, there are two issues that aren't really considered. First, all terrain is accessible by arty in game when in reality there should be some places that they couldn't access. I don't know if it is possible to change that in game - basically giving some areas a movement rating of zero for arty to make it is impassible (Such as LRT where the Yanks traditionally had problems finding good level ground to set guns up). The second issue is that Culp's Hill has crappy LOS for the guns. IF you check each gun individually, you will sometimes find that their LOF is blocked for targets and the guns end up with targeting problems. That is why I never put my up there except in a couple of choice spots that I won't reveal!!! Additionally as those guns are usually targeting units north towards town, there is alot of land out there that is deceptively higher than you think. It may appear you are shooting down, but alot of time you are not. Finally, if you are going to target guns, make sure you select the target arty button. If you leave it to the AI, the guns move around too much with their constant re-targeting between inf and arty units in range.
Reference the 200 yard range, the point I didn't articulate earlier is this: IF both guns/inf can hit each other at 200 yards it creates an interesting dilemma. A player holding good defensive ground with a couple of batteries can now hold it with a brigade and that arty. It frees up a 2nd brigade that they normally would need to hold back. Why? Because you don't need to necessarily cover the entire front of the batteries with troops to soak off 250 yard targeting infantry. You can create a situation where you are covering a portion of the guns - but not all - as you want that enemy infantry coming to you now as they can't sit back and stack to pick off the arty. The key here is what you do with that extra infantry as the assaulting enemy needs to carefully plan the assault or they become susceptible to a flanking manuever. IF played properly, it gives the defender some more options, but also allows an attacker to concentrate MORE troops at the point of attack vice keeping extra troops back to cover up all his guns.
