Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 21

Thread: Artillery in other games

  1. #11
    Hopefully. I never thought we'd get to this many

    I think on the scaling we are at 1 or 2 guns at most would be fine for a battery of artillery. It'd be more effective when aimed.

    The random artillery right now does very much annoy me at times. It just doesn't make sense for shots to come in right into the fray in a densely wooded area.

    Quote Originally Posted by Oleander View Post
    And solid shot pretty much became the mainstay of both armies because the fuses were so unreliable. A lot of people argue that's why the Confederate artillery wasn't as effective on Day 3 at Gettysburg. They were shooting pretty much straight on, so solid shot damage was minimal. Had they moved the guns where they could shoot down the ranks it would have been a lot more effective.
    My understanding is a lot of the guns were trying to fire obliquely. Also by Gettysburg I've been told that the Union army abandoned solid shot in use for rifled pieces. The round solid shot tended to bounce and roll at high speeds but the rifled 'dart' solid shot either stuck into the ground or careened more inneffectively like a football. I'm not sure about how Confederate rifled artillery used solid shot at that point.
    Last edited by Poorlaggedman; 12-21-2018 at 05:45 PM.
    Gameplay Suggestions: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JjUuaVXTJsY


    Old Pennsylvania Discord: https://discord.gg/MjxfZ5n

  2. #12

    USA Sergeant

    thomas aagaard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Location
    Aalborg, Denmark
    Posts
    591
    Actually both sides used shells extensively. And that is for both smoothbore and rifled guns.

    At Gettysburg, the ineffectiveness of the CSA artillery was not because of using solid shots, but by using shells with faulty fuses.

    When firing a fused shell the goal is to get it to detonate over the target. Spreading fragments over the enemy.
    This have the advantage of spreading the fragments in a larger area than if it hit the ground and it make cover irrelevant.

    If it fail to do so, the result is that you "overshoot" the target with shells landing further away. As happened a lot with CSA artillery.


    The big issue is the fact that you need to cut the fuses, it take time and you need to do it pretty precise.
    (or alternatively you only have fusses for set ranges)
    And they need to be consistent across thousands of fuses. Something that is not easy to manage production wise.
    (and even the weather effect how fast the fuse burn)


    That is why impact detonated shells became popular... they are not as effective as a timed fuse that work and is fired perfectly.
    But they are way more reliable.
    Thomas Bernstorff Aagaard

  3. #13

    USA General of the Army

    Oleander's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    646
    My understanding was that they started with shell then switched to round when they found out the shells were missing. I could be wrong.

  4. #14

    USA General of the Army

    A. P. Hill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Location
    In Maryland State Near to both Antietam and Gettysburg, Harper's Ferry et al.
    Posts
    3,390
    Quote Originally Posted by Oleander View Post
    ... I could be wrong.
    You could be.

  5. #15
    Marse Robert's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2018
    Location
    San Diego
    Posts
    6
    I can't remember where I read it, but the devs posted that they would like to be able to turn this into a full size recreation of the entire civil war as far as virtually possible. I think there's plenty of room to expand on the subject, there were literally thousands of battles, skirmishes in the Civil War and I believe they intend on creating extremely large battlefield situations like Gettysburg or perhaps even Vicksburg. I'm excited as hell by the possibilities.

  6. #16
    Marse Robert's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2018
    Location
    San Diego
    Posts
    6
    Let us bury these poor, dead men and never speak of this again...

  7. #17

    USA General of the Army

    Oleander's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    646
    Quote Originally Posted by A. P. Hill View Post
    You could be.
    If I'm wrong then I'll admit it, I haven't studied the war in depth in 10 years and I've forgotten more than I ever remembered. So sorry General.

  8. #18

    Join Date
    Dec 2018
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    29
    Game balance is a fine art, particularly when powerful weapons become available. I don't envy the developers!

    I don't want to see endless barrages on the contention point(s) so it has to be restricted in some way. The loading/aiming has to be sufficiently difficult/time-consuming to ensure you don't have that. Certainly, limited ammunition or drip-fed over time.

    It would be fun to man artillery but crew size would have to be reduced/artillery pieces restricted. That way, you don't get fully-manned artillery and not enough infantry!

    On a larger map, and with more contention points and troops, artillery could be a great addition and open-up tactical play.

    "C’est magnifique, mais ce n’est pas la guerre: c'est de la folie"

  9. #19
    I'm not sure artillery is really feasible in this game. Take Gettysburgh. The upper most estimates for artillery pieces are around 300. So take the union. With their 100,000 men, and 300 artillery, that's one artillery piece per 333.3 soldiers.

    So even if the game incorporated cannons but only had 1 per side. Given each side has a max of 75 men. I don't think the ratio means it's a good idea.

  10. #20

    USA General of the Army

    A. P. Hill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Location
    In Maryland State Near to both Antietam and Gettysburg, Harper's Ferry et al.
    Posts
    3,390
    Quote Originally Posted by Oleander View Post
    If I'm wrong then I'll admit it, I haven't studied the war in depth in 10 years and I've forgotten more than I ever remembered. So sorry General.
    Greetings Oleander,
    A simple check of the load out for the ammunition boxes will re-affirm. The ammo box for the 3 inch rounds, (6lb, & 10lb,) will have space for 50 rounds, 25 per side, these rounds are listed in the Ordnance Manual of the time thus:

    • the outside rows: (both left and right,) solid shot x 5 each total of 10 rounds

    • the next inside rows: (both left and right,) case shot x 5 each total of 10 rounds

    • the next two inside rows: (both left and right,) shell x 5 each total of 10 x 2 total 20 rounds

    • the row next to the divider: (both left and right,) canister x 5 each total of 10 rounds.


    Ammo chests of the larger calibers carried less rounds and rows, but were similarly arranged. 12lb Napoleon / 12lb Howitzer chests were thus:

    • the outside rows: (both left and right,) solid shot x 4 each total of 8 rounds

    • the next inside rows: (both left and right,) case shot x 4 each total of 8 rounds

    • the next inside rows: (both left and right,) shell x 4 each total of 8 rounds

    • the rows next to the divider: (both left and right,) canister x 4 each for a total of 8 rounds total of 32 rounds in these chests.


    12 pounders, and larger caliber guns, usually had a pair of cassion units per gun, whereas the 3" rounds only needed a single cassion unit per gun




    Quote Originally Posted by anderon46 View Post
    I'm not sure artillery is really feasible in this game. Take Gettysburgh. The upper most estimates for artillery pieces are around 300. So take the union. With their 100,000 men, and 300 artillery, that's one artillery piece per 333.3 soldiers.

    So even if the game incorporated cannons but only had 1 per side. Given each side has a max of 75 men. I don't think the ratio means it's a good idea.
    Artillery is entirely feasible for this game. Especially when you stop and think that currently the game is only supporting "Skirmishing". The future is to open the entire 4km x 4km Antietam map for battle action. Also do not limit your population to 150 men. It has been the intent of the dev team to up the population in the future. They will always be pushing the envelope of the engine.

    And it seems kinda weak, don't ya think to open an whole 16 square km map to just 150 guys? Populations will expand, and artillery as well as cavalry will be entirely feasible.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •