Types of Artillery Round and their use

[CBR]

Let's see if this attachment thingie works...

Edit: just to add a few thoughts. I find it a bit odd when Kriegsspiel assumes same ROF for both 12 and 6pdr guns. And I think it must be lower for 12pdr and it does seem to be reflected in the tables, because with Rollschuss (random) the 6pdr is even better than the 12pdr. That seems to go hand in hand with Scharnhorsts estimate that lower caliber guns were better when the terrain was flat enough to allow for Rollschuss (because of higher ROF)

Maybe they were not that worried about getting a perfect casualty rate/time for long range shooting over time but focused on proper casualty rate/rounds fired.

Just proves that nerfing artillery has a long tradition.

yes and their 1862 rules then increased it again  but then seems to have made artillery a harder target by needing twice the damage to take out one gun.

We do not know how LG handles artillery. Does the engine make a difference between Rollschuss/Random and normal direct fire(elevation)?

[Hook]

Now, let's compare Holdit's excellent results with the numbers above.

I set up a quick and dirty test this evening, just to get some idea of just how powerful artillery is against infantry. Using the Montebello map and OBs, I set up the following four contests...

(iii) In the first three examples I had the infantry form line in order to minimise casualties due to penetrating roundshot.

The fourth example doesn't give casualties at various ranges so is not included here.

Since the infantry was in line, we'll use the 3 rank casualties column from the numbers above.

1. Bavarian battery (6 x 12lb, 2 x hw) vs. Russian line infantry regiment (1920 bayonets/3 battalions).

1. Artillery opened fire at +/- 1000 metres. By the time the range was 840 metres, the infantry had taken 30 losses, and at range 600 metres the infantry had taken 100 losses in total. Then there was a large jump in losses to 235 (cannister?), at which point the infantry turned and ran. Total losses: 235 (12%)

Range: 1000-840 meters
Losses: 30
Incremental losses: 30 -- This is slightly lower than the expected 42 losses

Range: 840-600 meters
Losses: 100
Incremental losses: 70 -- This is slightly higher than the expected 62 losses

Range: less than 600 meters
Losses: 235
Incremental losses: 135 -- This is slightly lower than the expected 141 losses

Conclusion:  These casualty numbers are well within the limits of the Kriegsspiel rules.

2. French battery (6 x 12lb, 2 x hw) vs. Austrian line infantry regiment (2460 bayonets/3 battalions)

2. Artillery opened fire at +/- 1250 metres. By the time the range was 680 metres, the infantry had taken 100 losses Losses rose as far as 210 , at which point the infantry turned and ran. Total casualties: 210 (9%)

Range: 1250-680
Losses: 100
Incremental losses: 100 -- This is lower than the expected 124 losses for two turns

Range: less than 680
Losses: 210
Incremental losses: 110 -- This is lower than the expected 141 losses for this range

Conclusion:  These casualty figures are somewhat lower than expected from the Kriegsspiel rules.

3. Polish battery (8 x 12lb) vs. Prussian line infantry regiment (1965 bayonets/3 battalions)

3. Artillery opened fire at +/- 1500 metres, and the infantry were on the run by the time they were 1300 metres from the battery at which point they had suffered 155 losses (8%).

Range: 1500-1300
Losses: 155
Incremental losses: 155 -- This is much higher than the expected 42 losses for a single Kriegsspiel turn, and still much higher than the expected 84 losses for two turns.  It's even higher than the max expected from rolling two sixes which would produce 120 casualties.

Conclusion:  These casualty figures are much higher than expected from the Kriegsspiel rules.

One possible reason the casualties were so much higher in the third example was that there were 8 12 pounders rather than 6.  But the difference in number of long guns doesn't account for the difference in number of casualties.  It may be that the casualties included some canister fire from a bug mentioned by JMM.

---

So, out of 3 tests we have on hand, 2 could have been reproduced by the Kriegsspiel rules and one could not.  If anyone else has tests similar to Holdit's, post the results so we can analyze them.

Hook

[Hook]

Let's see if this attachment thingie works...

Interesting, thanks.  Quite a bit of difference.  Lemme massage  the numbers.

Those  say "1824"... is this the 1828 rules or the original 1824 rules?

Edit:  quick analysis:  Roundshot is 35% what it was in the 1824 rules.  Canister is 50%.  I'm wondering if artillery casualties over the entire battle would actually *increase* due to units standing under fire longer.

Hook

[CBR]

Interesting, thanks.  Quite a bit of difference.  Lemme massage  the numbers.

Those  say "1824"... is this the 1828 rules or the original 1824 rules?

Hook

Oh don't worry about the year. The tables are actually from the 1824 ruleset I got. It just has an appendix with the 1828 supplement and that is where I copied the tables from.

If anyone else has tests similar to Holdit's, post the results so we can analyze them.

I tested with Polish 12pdr battery and got similar results in all 4-5 tests I did. The enemy unit went from 2055 men down to 1880, give or take a few.

[Hook]

The tables are actually from the 1824 ruleset I got. It just has an appendix with the 1828 supplement and that is where I copied the tables from.

Thanks.

I guess we need to talk about units routing.  From my reading of the rules, casualties don't matter.  The entire unit could die to the last man and he'd still advance against the artillery.

Units under canister fire do have to take a test for whether to stand/advance or retire 250 paces.  This is rolled on the 3:2 dice in favor of the artillery.  So there's either a 2/5 or 3/5 chance that an infantry advancing through canister fire would be forced to retreat.  Any idea what that number should be?

Hook

[Hook]

I tested with Polish 12pdr battery and got similar results in all 4-5 tests I did. The enemy unit went from 2055 men down to 1880, give or take a few.

I read about your test, but you didn't give casualties at ranges.  Do you have those handy?

Hook

[CBR]

I'm wondering if artillery casualties over the entire battle would actually *increase* due to units standing under fire longer.

Kriegsspiel only has actual morale effect from artillery when within canister/low elevation range. It is fair to say that artillery would have enough ammo to produce considerable casualties because there is no easy routing as in LG.


CBR

[CBR]

I read about your test, but you didn't give casualties at ranges.  Do you have those handy?

I did provide a number. The infantry routed at about 1200 meters distance in all the tests. And the battery expended 7 rounds of ammo. The the bug appeared and delivered canister fire and produced extra losses. But if the ammo counter is correct then all casualties up to the routing point were coming from round shot

[Hook]

I did provide a number. The infantry routed at about 1200 meters distance in all the tests. And the battery expended 7 rounds of ammo. The the bug appeared and delivered canister fire and produced extra losses. But if the ammo counter is correct then all casualties up to the routing point were coming from round shot

Ok, I'm calculating that as 175 casualties over 2 turns.  Higher than it should be, and similar to but even higher than what Holdit got with the same battery.  There may be another bug at work here with that battery.  Have to wait for JMM to update the code to test it.  I'll check that one in the beta when I get the next update.

If you run that test again, look in the Tracking folder for the analyse.kia file which has casualties caused by each action.  Grab this file right after the battle, because if you watch a replay it will clear out the file.  Maybe it'll help us figure out what's going on.

Hook

[CBR]

I sent my save files to JMM. He did notice the canister bug and talked of a problem with accuracy over distance. So maybe round shot hit rate also goes down after it is corrected. Thx for the info about .kia file. I'll be sure to check that in the future.

[HarryInk]

Impressive work, fellas.  Ta

[CBR]

Ok then...

Did another test and checked out the .kia and .ana file (.ana gives range of shots it seems)

I made sure the battery was fully deployed and it fired 8 salvoes with each salvo producing 4 hits and each hit producing 4 casualties. So 16 casualties in each salvo for a total of 128 (the regiment reached 5% losses in that last salvo)

The battery started firing at 1472 meters and the last salvo was at 1204 meters.

I doubt my earlier tests really produced 160-170 casualties as the F2 map simply did not update properly, and might have added something from the canister even though the ammo counter did not show it.

If we compare the firepower from a 12pdr battery in Kriegsspiel for the 1500-2000 paces range band against an advancing infantry unit (we have to add one if not two salvoes in LG but I'll be nice and add just one)

LG: 144 casualties
1824: 83
1828: 28

If we then compare ammo consumption instead, then the 1824/1828 artillery require 2.3 or 6.8 times more rounds to produce a casualty compared to LG. Although I must admit I do not understand why Kriegsspiel allows so high ROF for 12pdrs. Can't find the original German version so cannot check if anything was left out in the translation. But eh, I'll stop rambling now 


CBR

[Hook]

I doubt my earlier tests really produced 160-170 casualties as the F2 map simply did not update properly, and might have added something from the canister even though the ammo counter did not show it.

If we compare the firepower from a 12pdr battery in Kriegsspiel for the 1500-2000 paces range band against an advancing infantry unit (we have to add one if not two salvoes in LG but I'll be nice and add just one)

LG: 144 casualties
1824: 83
1828: 28

You also have to make sure information is set to Precise instead of Vague.  Vague produces weird things sometimes.  For example, I'm looking directly at a howitzer model in 3D and the unit card says the battery has no howitzers.  Changing to Precise fixed that.  It's not a bug though.

Kriegsspiel's idea of what a battery consists of is different from what that one artillery battery is.  The tests from Holdit used a closer model on two runs and produced closer results.  I suspect a bug of some sort.  The problem isn't all artillery, but that one battery and probably others like it.  Try going after a 6*12pdr 2*HW and see if you get results consistent with the 1824 rules.

What command were you giving the infantry?  Was it a "move to" command, basically a forced march directly into the cannons, or was it an attack order?

What do you have to roll on the 3:2 dice to allow infantry to advance in canister range?  Is it one of the 3 spots, or one of the 2 spots?

Hook

[CBR]

Information is set to precise. It might have something to do with running it at 1:10 speed, at least I remember seeing fewer or delayed updates when running at higher speed in my earlier tests.

I just tried a mixed battery like you suggested and got same result of 4 hits per salvo. Did Holdit not test all 4 batteries at the same time? Then there might be LOS or elevation issues.

I have tried both attack and move command and I see no difference.

One thing though is that in the tests I did right now I see artillery fire a bit at a distance that must have been beyond 1500 meters. But the .ana file does not report the distance until it reaches below 1500 meters.

The dice gives artillery 60% chance of forcing a battalion back.

[Hook]

Information is set to precise. It might have something to do with running it at 1:10 speed, at least I remember seeing fewer or delayed updates when running at higher speed in my earlier tests.

I run everything at 20/60.  It wouldn't surprise me if the displayed statistics weren't updated quickly enough at 6/60, although the game engine would keep track properly.

I just tried a mixed battery like you suggested and got same result of 4 hits per salvo. Did Holdit not test all 4 batteries at the same time? Then there might be LOS or elevation issues.

That won't help me much, as I'm looking for specific casualties at specific ranges, not the number of casualties produced by one salvo.  With a mixed battery of guns and howitzers, it's going to be hard to figure out which guns did what, and calculate how many casualties one shot from one cannon would produce.

It's odd to see in the 7pdr Howitzers table "Rollschuss", "Full Charge" and "Smaller Charge (Shell)" as if the howitzers were firing roundshot.

I have tried both attack and move command and I see no difference.

Ok.  I wasn't sure if giving an attack unit order would produce different tactics and a different approach.

The dice gives artillery 60% chance of forcing a battalion back.

Wowsers... that means a 40% chance of being able to advance.  Here's what this really means:

If a unit advances on artillery, if it takes one turn of canister, it has a 40% chance of reaching the artillery.  Two in five will make it.

If it takes 2 turns of canister, it has (0.4*0.4) or a 16% chance of reaching the artillery.  One is six will make it.

If it takes 3 turns of canister, the chance is (0.4*0.4*0.4) or about a 6.5% chance of reaching the artillery.  One in 15 or 16 will make it.  Not a lot of chance there.

Hook