AGEOD Forums

Hi! I'm playing as CP right now. Trying to figure out the disadvantages of field artillery units vs medium.

Medium artillery: 61 gold, 75 war supplies, 8 conscripts, 45 days to build, combat power 13, uses ammunition
Field artillery: 30 gold, 10 war supplies, 8 conscripts, 30 days to build, combat power 9, uses no ammunition

I can see that Medium artillery is about 50% stronger. But in terms of gold I can build 2 field arty for one medium arty and in terms of the extremely limited war supplies even 7,5 for one. Plus field arty doesn't consume ammunition and is quicker built.

So where's the point in building medium artillery, except maybe for your most precious, maximized super stack of doom army? Am I missing something here?

Thanks for reading & possible insight.

Lazytiger wrote:Hi! I'm playing as CP right now. Trying to figure out the disadvantages of field artillery units vs medium.

Medium artillery: 61 gold, 75 war supplies, 8 conscripts, 45 days to build, combat power 13, uses ammunition
Field artillery: 30 gold, 10 war supplies, 8 conscripts, 30 days to build, combat power 9, uses no ammunition

I can see that Medium artillery is about 50% stronger. But in terms of gold I can build 2 field arty for one medium arty and in terms of the extremely limited war supplies even 7,5 for one. Plus field arty doesn't consume ammunition and is quicker built.

So where's the point in building medium artillery, except maybe for your most precious, maximized super stack of doom army? Am I missing something here?

Thanks for reading & possible insight.

Medium artillery causes massive damage to the enemy, while light is only very useful when defending. As CP your best friends are medium and heavy artillery.

Check their stats side by side, Lazytiger. Sometimes the range of a bigger gun can be a battle decider. Please have a look on how combat works in AGEOD games. The battle starts at a huge range* (ie railway guns fire first) and then you come closer. If you have a larger artillery, you fire first.

*provided the weather is good

Kensai wrote:Check their stats side by side, Lazytiger. Sometimes the range of a bigger gun can be a battle decider. Please have a look on how combat works in AGEOD games. The battle starts at a huge range (ie railway guns fire first) and then you come closer. If you have a larger artillery, you fire first.

Yes, very good idea Kensai to show the link to him. And Lazytiger the medium artillery has twice the range of the light one and 4 times the rate of fire etc, there are many other values that are important. The combat power sum isn't that important.

Tanks guys, that was quick and clear! Didn't consider range & rate of fire.

So ist there a point in building extra field artillery at all? Those small guns come with infantry regiments anyway, right?

I don't bother with them. If ACW 2 was anything to go by I even tended to avoid the brigades that included them in favour of cavalry.

I build light arty only for faster corps that severly lack arty, like in colonies and exotic theatres.

They can be a real decisive factor in an army stack. If you fill out an army with ...uh, 4 corps, if I remember correctly (48 CP), that leaves 4 unused command points. Add 4 arty pieces, and you're at max CP usage and pretty much max power.

Medium Artillery is far better in this game. The range is higher (8+ vs 3+) and the ROF is much higher too (8+ vs 2+), and it has Penetration values, meaning it can bypass entrenchments. There is the limitation of ammunition, though, which can run out if the guns fire too much (and can be offset with Munitions units). Medium (and Heavy) Artillery is the key to successful offensives once the trenches set in. They are also the deciding factor the CP can bring against Russia (whose lack of WSU means they will have limited artillery to defend with).

Field artillery is better than no artillery, but it doesn't hold a candle to the larger pieces, and does little vs entrenchments. As mentioned, it is more useful on defense (since the attacker doesn't have an entrenchment bonus).

But as Austria defending in the ALPS, Field/Light Artillery is better to have than no artillery.
Similarly, for Russia, it is better than no artillery.

Shri wrote:But as Austria defending in the ALPS, Field/Light Artillery is better to have than no artillery.
Similarly, for Russia, it is better than no artillery.

Correct, field artillery is definitely better than no artillery at all. And the shorter the initial range (mountains, forests, etc), the better the field artillery is in comparison to medium/heavy.

Anyone know why RoF for Medium Artillery would be higher than Field Artillery? That seems to make little to no sense. A french 75mm gun would logically be faster than a 155mm howitzer...

This is a design decision: with this aspect, it will allow medium and heavy arty to pounder advancing troops under a shell barrage more efficiently. WAD

PhilThib wrote:This is a design decision: with this aspect, it will allow medium and heavy arty to pounder advancing troops under a shell barrage more efficiently. WAD

Okay :-) ...