Slitherine

quote:

ORIGINAL: BK6583

I played all of these extensively too. However, what finally just plain discouraged me from playing the Napoleonic versions and what I would dearly loved fixed involves the sequence of play between artillery and cavalry charges. If you've ever played "Horse and Musket" and tried a cavalry charge against artillery the chances were you suffered considerable losses and probably routed. That's because the artillery was afforded the ability to fire defensively when the cavalry moved adjacent to them. In the Battleground Napoleonic series, cavalry gets to charge AFTER the defensive fire sequence. Yes, IIRC you were afforded an opportunity to defensively fire on moving cavalry but a good opponent knew how to maximize terrain masking and by and large avoid it or least be at a range where the arty wasn't as effective. At any rate, cavalry could basically charge with complete impunity against tons of artillery units because none of the artillery could fire when the cavalry charge was one hex or adjacent to the artillery, where they were at their most effective. In my view, this needs to be reexamined, because as it now stands, it's just too unrealistic.

quote:

That's because the artillery was afforded the ability to fire defensively when the cavalry moved adjacent to them. In the Battleground Napoleonic series, cavalry gets to charge AFTER the defensive fire sequence.

"Git thar fust with the most men" - Gen. Nathan Bedford Forrest

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rhetor

As far as supply wagons are concerned, I consider the way these are to be used in the original battlegrounds as a great flaw. In the games the supply wagons do not resupply artillery units at all, but only infantry, why is it so is beyond me, and secondly, in the real battles usually it were the units and batteries which went back to the supply units to refill their ammo, not the supply units going near the front line.

And, last, but not least, the artillery batteries should get fatigue while firing, and should lose ammo after a few turns of constant firing. In real battle it was absolutely impossible for a battery crew to sustain the maximum rate of fire for longer than an hour, maximum. The gunners would get completely exhausted. That is why the artillery commanders would repeatedly remind their gunners not to fire too quickly, save when repelling an infantry attack.
1 point of fatigue for each salvo in an offensive/defensive fire phase would resolve this problem. And we would be rid of batteries unlimbered in the morning and firing away till nightfall in every fire phase. A drastic limitation of artillery ammunition levels should also help getting rid of that problem.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ashantai

To be fair, they did the best they could for the battleground games. Since fatigue only went up to nine, an artillery unit could only fire 4 times before getting a penalty, and with the fatigue recover rate it means that players would caracole their batteries around in an even more unhistorical way.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ashantai

15 minute turns simulate a lot, whether it be one cannon shot or five.

quote:

And how would you handle opportunity fire in an HPS situation? Would that cause fatigue too? If so, it would be monstrously unfair as people could draw the sting of the cannon fire until they were fatigued, then close in for the kill!

quote:

Even if we are sticking with the classic TS games, if you PBEM, automatic defensive fire is so very, very useful, but not so if you can't choose what to fire at! You'd necessarily have to play every single defensive fire phase, which doubles the number of e-mail exchanges!

quote:

All I'm saying is that HPS and TS did what they did for a reason, and I see no other fair alternative than the system in HPS + adding in artillery ammo per cannon, rather than per battery.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ashantai

That's all fine and well, but see my previous comments relating to infantry. They apply here. If we're going to start counting cannonballs, broadly, would you say we need to break it down into types of ammunition too? Shell, solid, cannister? Otherwise, as you suggest, it would be unhistorical to fire lots of close fire and still have ammo for it.
Also see my comments regarding supply for the artillery. Would each battery have it's own 'supply wagon'? How would that work? Would every type (the H, L K, T, V guns) need different ammunition, as historically they would. That would create a massive amount of player work. Take Gettysburg, where there were well over 500 cannons in the battle, imagine 100 extra supply wagons, some of which could be used with others, and all filling the roads, filling the terrain, getting stuck, being shot. No, it'd break the system.

The alternative would be to have artillery carry their own ammunition, but then how could it be resupplied?

Historical accuracy is good, but at the price of more micromanagement than you have already for an army of 80,000 men it is not worth it!!

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ashantai

I perhaps am. But not to seem aggressive, and I hope I don't, but what alternative do you have? Making fatigue go up is certainly a good idea, but what else is there that can be done simply? Supply wagons that work for cannons too? I'm interested in your views.