AGEOD Forums

Dixicrat's Artillery Analysis got me thinking about artillery frontage. I plugged some numbers into the formula provided by PhilThib (Combat_Units_Quota / Movement Cost) Interesting results ...

Clear/Prairie/Desert
Clear: 45
Mud: 22
Snow: 25
Frozen: 25
Blizzard: 22

Wood
Clear: 30
Mud: 22
Snow: 25
Frozen: 22
Blizzard: 15

Forest
Clear: 8
Mud: 16
Snow: 16
Frozen: 16
Blizzard: 10

Wilderness
Clear: 8
Mud: 6
Snow: 4
Frozen: 4
Blizzard: 4

Hills
Clear: 10
Mud: 8
Snow: 8
Frozen: 8
Blizzard: 5

Mountain
Clear: 6
Mud: 5
Snow: 5
Frozen: 5
Blizzard: 4

Swamp/Marsh
Clear: 7
Mud: 6
Snow: 7
Frozen: 10
Blizzard: 6

Fort
Clear: 15
Mud: 10
Snow: 11
Frozen: 11
Blizzard: 10

City
Clear: 20
Mud: 12
Snow: 14
Frozen: 14
Blizzard: 12

It would appear that four batteries is a minimum number, and only applies to wilderness and mountains during the winter. So apparently we've all been fighting this war with what Dixicrat would call Mountain Divisions. In Clear, Prairie, Desert, and Wood terrain - frontage is virtually unlimited, since only 17 combat elements can fit into a division. This would explain why I didn't get steamrollered with my all-artillery division experiment last year before we all heard about frontage and the four battery limit.

Am I applying the formula incorrectly, or are the numbers just too high?

If this holds true, my suggested optimal divisions would look like this:

Attack
1 Leader
1 Elite regiment
1 SS regiment
1 Cavalry regiment
1 Marines regiment
13 Rifled artillery batteries

Assault
1 Leader
1 Elite regiment
1 SS regiment
2 Cavalry regiments
1 Infantry regiment
12 Rifled artillery batteries

Defense
1 Leader
1 Elite regiment
1 SS regiment
1 Cavalry regiment
14 Smoothbore artillery batteries

Mountain (also Forest/Hills/Swamp)
1 Leader
1 Elite regiment
1 SS regiment
2 Cavalry regiments
8 Infantry regiments
5 Smoothbore artillery batteries

I'll try something like this against Athena, and report back ...

Jabberwock wrote:If this holds true, my suggested optimal divisions would look like this:

Attack
1 Leader
1 Elite regiment
1 SS regiment
1 Cavalry regiment
1 Marines regiment
13 Rifled artillery batteries

Assault
1 Leader
1 Elite regiment
1 SS regiment
2 Cavalry regiments
1 Infantry regiment
12 Rifled artillery batteries

Defense
1 Leader
1 Elite regiment
1 SS regiment
1 Cavalry regiment
14 Smoothbore artillery batteries

Mountain (also Forest/Hills/Swamp)
1 Leader
1 Elite regiment
1 SS regiment
2 Cavalry regiments
8 Infantry regiments
5 Smoothbore artillery batteries

I'll try something like this against Athena, and report back ...

Hmmm... they look pretty historical !
Hope your calculations are wrong
There is enough batteries around on the reinforcements screen to make an army with so many guns??

Regards!

arsan wrote:There is enough batteries around on the reinforcements screen to make an army with so many guns??

Only if you buy lots of smoothbores and wait for the upgrades!

Perhaps those numbers are somewhat high, but I ve always felt a lot of units start the battle in the very first rounds.

I believed a lot of time ago only a division started the fight, then it changed to another... but i found this is not true... Nearly All units fire in the battle since the very beggining -> That´s the reason I concluded a 2-1 ratio is overpowered, and the supposed defensive advantages diluted.

The frontage is for all the elements involved, so if a couple corps involved with 8 divisions, limits are 8 x 4 -> 32 artillery.

Once a big big quantity of units involved the 2-1 ratio starts to get normal again.

It is clear the game favours the "quantity" of elements versus any other thing, until thie BIG numbers of elements arise (i.e 6-10 divisions).

So as artillery costs just 2 conscripts (the most limiting resource) it is better to have more artillery involved, in a proportion, for relatively small commands. However, money is then the limiting factor especially for the south. -> So print as a mad is a must.

And... an assault can capture your new artillery divisions.

Coregonas wrote:Perhaps those numbers are somewhat high, but I ve always felt a lot of units start the battle in the very first rounds.

I believed a lot of time ago only a division started the fight, then it changed to another... but i found this is not true... Nearly All units fire in the battle since the very beggining -> That´s the reason I concluded a 2-1 ratio is overpowered, and the supposed defensive advantages diluted.

The frontage is for all the elements involved, so if a couple corps involved with 8 divisions, limits are 8 x 4 -> 32 artillery.

Once a big big quantity of units involved the 2-1 ratio starts to get normal again.

It is clear the game favours the "quantity" of elements versus any other thing, until thie BIG numbers of elements arise (i.e 6-10 divisions).

So as artillery costs just 2 conscripts (the most limiting resource) it is better to have more artillery involved, in a proportion, for relatively small commands. However, money is then the limiting factor especially for the south. -> So print as a mad is a must.

Ok, thanks for the explanation. That's very helpful.

Coregonas wrote:And... an assault can capture your new artillery divisions.

Hence my use of the word "steamrollered". I'd hate to be in one of the units trying to get up close and personal with that much artillery. I'd want a big army around me to absorb the punishment.

I would suspect those divisions to pack a large initial punch. But it seems the casualties are taken first form the infantry units, then from the cavalry, and finally from the artillery (I often end up with divisions that only contain the artillery units after a disastrous battle). That being the case I think that against a "regular" division, you would have to break them before they come into contact, or risk having the infantry killed and the artillery captured.

Coregonas wrote:The frontage is for all the elements involved, so if a couple corps involved with 8 divisions, limits are 8 x 4 -> 32 artillery.

Jabber ... Strangely I quote myself... to avoid erroneus analysis...

as I ve done an AFFIRMATION I dont know if its true or not...

It is just a "feeling".

I suppose those "frontage values" you ve calculated, are based on an "average" artillery unit ( i.e. a 100% move value.)

Using the same values... approximately, how many infantry elements (average 100% move value) in proportion can fight?

4 x those numbers?

So, you're saying that the optimal division has 12 artillery elements? There's something wrong about that.

I mean, what if it is the only div that engages? I'm assuming that once things move into the close-combat phase there would be serious problems.

But this...

Clear: 45

That's scary. I would just load down the HQ with art since it seems to avoid combat for the most part.

I would just load down the HQ with art since it seems to avoid combat for the most part.

That's the realistic thing to do, anyway. Usually the bulk of artillary reported to the Corp/Army command during the time period, according to my understanding. I usually load up my divisions with infantry and calvalry, and stick a bunch of artillary "independant" within the Corp.

Coregonas wrote:I suppose those "frontage values" you ve calculated, are based on an "average" artillery unit ( i.e. a 100% move value.)

Using the same values... approximately, how many infantry elements (average 100% move value) in proportion can fight?

4 x those numbers?

There is no average unit as far as frontage is concerned. The calculation is based on movement cost. All artillery use wheeled movement.

Here are the numbers for standard infantry (Heavy Foot):

Clear/Prairie/Desert
Clear: 45
Mud: 26
Snow: 26
Frozen: 26
Blizzard: 22

Wood
Clear: 36
Mud: 26
Snow: 30
Frozen: 30
Blizzard: 18

Forest
Clear: 21
Mud: 18
Snow: 18
Frozen: 21
Blizzard: 13

Wilderness
Clear: 9
Mud: 9
Snow: 6
Frozen: 6
Blizzard: 4

Hills
Clear: 13
Mud: 8
Snow: 10
Frozen: 10
Blizzard: 5

Mountain
Clear: 8
Mud: 6
Snow: 5
Frozen: 5
Blizzard: 4

Swamp/Marsh
Clear: 10
Mud: 7
Snow: 10
Frozen: 10
Blizzard: 7

Fort
Clear: 15
Mud: 11
Snow: 11
Frozen: 11
Blizzard: 10

City
Clear: 20
Mud: 14
Snow: 14
Frozen: 14
Blizzard: 12

Slightly higher in some cases, but not 4x as much. Maybe 55% infantry, 40% Artillery, 10% Cavalry is a good guideline?

Before hearing the 4 arty limit, I used to build divisions with 8-9 arty, and i recall in a PBEm that they proved to be brittle indeed, my opponent pointing the cause at the excess of arty. After that I changed to the standard 4 arty or even less and they work pretty well.

aryaman wrote:Before hearing the 4 arty limit, I used to build divisions with 8-9 arty, and i recall in a PBEm that they proved to be brittle indeed, my opponent pointing the cause at the excess of arty. After that I changed to the standard 4 arty or even less and they work pretty well.

Preliminary testing points that way, but I've only been able to check it a couple times so far with some Union buffoons for leaders.

aryaman wrote:Before hearing the 4 arty limit, I used to build divisions with 8-9 arty, and i recall in a PBEm that they proved to be brittle indeed, my opponent pointing the cause at the excess of arty. After that I changed to the standard 4 arty or even less and they work pretty well.

I don't want to tip my hand too soon, but I'll soon be presenting a publication on artillery, which will be a PDF document. In it, this and similar issues will be covered at some length.

In a nutshell, the reason that divisions with a disproportionate amount of artillery are so brittle is because artillery units are support units... and support units have a low hit capacity. For example, most artillery units can take 8 hits before destruction; but line of battle infantry units can take 20 hits. You can easily see whether a unit is a support unit or not by examining its "unit details box".

I'm wondering whether the presence of road/rail or trails would affect frontage, Jabberwock.

As I understand it, your calculations are based upon a unit's movement rate in various terrains. However, in the AACW manual it is stated that for units moving through regions with "trails", movement rate "will never be greater than 150% of the movement rate for clear terrain"; and that for movement through regions with road or rail, movement rate "will never be greater than 100% of the movement rate for clear terrain".

This causes me to wonder whether the transportation network is a factor in frontage calculation, or whether frontage is determined by base terrain only. It seems to me that this is of particular significance for difficult terrain. Any thoughts?

Interesting? I wonder how this will effect the latest combat changes......

Dixicrat wrote:I don't want to tip my hand too soon, but I'll soon be presenting a publication on artillery, which will be a PDF document. In it, this and similar issues will be covered at some length.

In a nutshell, the reason that divisions with a disproportionate amount of artillery are so brittle is because artillery units are support units... and support units have a low hit capacity. For example, most artillery units can take 8 hits before destruction; but line of battle infantry units can take 20 hits. You can easily see whether a unit is a support unit or not by examining its "unit details box".

I notice that the artillery has less chance of taking hits, however. Sometimes you can have an entire division severely mauled or even wiped out and the arty is nearly untouched.

I've done quite extensive testing with artillery since patch 1.12 and the new combat model. With 1.12 units take fewer hits and break more easily.

As I didn't do such tests before 1.12 I can't say if this was relevant before or not. Altough my guts (if brains and guts disagree, guts is usually right) tell me the following was true before too, altoug not so heavily.

Anyway, to win and cause maximal damage in 1.12, make up to half of your divisions (rifled) artillery. At least half has to be infantry. Toss in a sharp-shooter. Thus, according to my three solitaire tests (each side on offensive stance) a Division with 8 rifled artillery, 8 infantry and 1 sharpshooter is the deadliest division (as testing opponents I used the "conventional" division, "cavalry heavy" division, artillery division (12 art, 5 inf).

There are relatively few hits distributed in 1.12. Thus you need to start hitting early on. Rifled artillery has long range. Sharpshooters allow a bonus to iniative. The few hits your opponent will score will be soaked up by the infantry meat-shield, while your artillery forces enemy infantry elements to rout. When the assault range is reached, your infantry will kill the weakened opponents, or go directly for their support troops (presumably your long range massed artillery forced enogh routs to leave their support troops face alone your infantry); especially the "artillery divisions" suffered massive losses (most likely all their 5 infantry elements had routed, so whatever infantry my side got through the barrage were like ferrets in a barrel full of mice).



I need to do further testing to see if the same statistics hold true at corps and army level too. But with the wide frontage available, I do not expect to see any difference at least in situations where there are five or less divisions present (more than five divisions see the frontage stuffed in most territory, so things most likely change then somehow).

Dixicrat wrote:I'm wondering whether the presence of road/rail or trails would affect frontage, Jabberwock.

As I understand it, your calculations are based upon a unit's movement rate in various terrains. However, in the AACW manual it is stated that for units moving through regions with "trails", movement rate "will never be greater than 150% of the movement rate for clear terrain"; and that for movement through regions with road or rail, movement rate "will never be greater than 100% of the movement rate for clear terrain".

This causes me to wonder whether the transportation network is a factor in frontage calculation, or whether frontage is determined by base terrain only. It seems to me that this is of particular significance for difficult terrain. Any thoughts?

Good question, I had to check the code. This is the 'base day cost' used, drawn from the terrain matrix, and it does not take into account the road network, or the added cost for being under commanded etc.

Seems then -> 45 infantry & 45 artillery can start shooting since the FIRST ROUND in a battle in clear terrain.

I believe this is not a normal thing in a battle in the era. Gettysburg started in the very initial hours as a fight between a couple USA cavalry units versus a couple CSA brigades. Once several hours passed, then complete divisions started to fight. In game terms, the first turn could be a battle between 2-4 elements versus 5-10?

I launch an idea here, although 1.12 seems better now, perhaps it can help.

If Frontage could be reduced to a 1/8 (as an example, also 1/4, 1/3 or other values) in the first round, then 1/4 in the second, and so onuntil a full frontage could be achieved in the 6th round. ROE file should be changed accordingly.

----------

Also, can some one confirm if the exact RATIO of move of an individual element does affect? (i.e. early CSA cav has a 130% move ratio, while late CSA cav has a 120%)

Gettysburg prolly was a situation where two small corps met initially, and lots and lots of troops started to march to the sound of guns

deleted

Oh I´m sure this MOVE ratio does not makes to fire better... but my question is if it allow more elements to fire at once, i.e if it changes total frontage.

Total frontage is calculated based on MOVE values.
An example:
ARTILLERY frontage VALUES
Clear/Prairie/Desert
Clear: 45
Mud: 22
Snow: 25
Frozen: 25
Blizzard: 22

If an hypothetical "ALL" Naval guns force (50% MOVE RATIO) is firing, then frontage changes to 50% of previous?
Clear/Prairie/Desert
Clear: 23
Mud: 11
Snow: 13
Frozen: 13
Blizzard: 11

No, MR is not taken into account here. Frontage cost is deduced from the base days needed to travel into a region, because, for a given unit, 95% of the time you see a very strong correlation between how it is easy for her to move into a region and how easy it is to use or deploy the said unit. For example irregulars in wood, artillery in swamps, etc.

So the rule of 4 arts/div in still valid or not at the end ?

There is no hard-coded limitation of four, per division. My husband, Dixicrat, has come to the conclusion that the optimal number of artillery pieces in a division is between five and seven. Not all agree; some have good reasons for other numbers. For example, see posts by Aryaman, Jabberwock, and Jarkko for alternative ideas.

Havely