Re-visiting Artillery's Effectiveness During the CW.

A multiplayer online persistence game for Scourge of War.
Lead your division from battle to battle where your casualties really
count.
Willard
Reactions:
Posts: 278
Joined: Mon Apr 05, 2010 3:34 am

Re: Re-visiting Artillery's Effectiveness During the CW.

Post by Willard »

In the GCM, gun crews are reduced from 15 to 10. Garnier did that in an effort to make counter-battery fire more effective.

But, obviously, that's not working.

". . . but I think??? everyone is starting to come to a consensus that they prefer the 1.2 stock artillery for the most part."

Not sure about that as most of us MP players haven't played with the stock (1.2) guns.
That was the consensus of those talking in TS last night before you arrived.

As for the reduction of gun crews, the intent may have been to improve counter-battery but it didn't work as the critical factor is the number hits scored by the opposing gun crew, not the size of the gun crew. All this reduction has done is once again tweak the game to favor infantry. By reducing gun crew numbers by 33% it increases the speed that they rout when facing infantry. Gun crews of 15 rout at 6 - which requires a loss of 66% of the gun crew. Gun crews of 10 rout at 6 which requires a lose of 40% percent of the gun crew. As counter battery fire isn't effective and infantry fire is, this decreases the time that batteries can stand up to infantry, which further decreases artillery's already nerfed ability to defend itself with rifle ranges at 220 yards and decreasing canister effectiveness by 1/4.
SouthernSteel
Reactions:
Posts: 529
Joined: Sat Apr 24, 2010 1:07 am

Re: Re-visiting Artillery's Effectiveness During the CW.

Post by SouthernSteel »

Actually, I'm not sure gun crews of 10 rout at 6. Not 100% sure there but I've had guns fire with 4 men or so. Still, I guess it wouldn't hurt to go back to 15. And as for playing with the stock 1.2 guns...didn't we play with them when the patch first came out? Or was that already a Garnier-modified version? I know there was a point there when there was a huge, noticeable change in the guns.
"The time for compromises is past, and we are now determined to maintain our position and make all who oppose us smell Southern powder, feel Southern steel."
Jefferson Davis, 1861
Willard
Reactions:
Posts: 278
Joined: Mon Apr 05, 2010 3:34 am

Re: Re-visiting Artillery's Effectiveness During the CW.

Post by Willard »

Actually, I'm not sure gun crews of 10 rout at 6. Not 100% sure there but I've had guns fire with 4 men or so. Still, I guess it wouldn't hurt to go back to 15. And as for playing with the stock 1.2 guns...didn't we play with them when the patch first came out? Or was that already a Garnier-modified version? I know there was a point there when there was a huge, noticeable change in the guns.
Sometimes the guns will fire off a round or two even after they routed.
There is a bit of a delay.

We may have played but I am not sure.

Just played a stock sandbox game with 1.2 stock Yank guns.
Knocked out 5 reb guns and inflicted 33% of total casualties.
Used Sedgewick's Corps which has the largest number of batteries.
Going to try a Reb battery to compare.
Incidently, was still running up casualties using shrapnel and shell.
Post Reply