Artillery Analysis

[Dixicrat]

Long overdue for an update.

The attached spreadsheet will hopefully be a useful tool in evaluating AACW ordnance for your own purposes. It contains information for both USA and CSA artillery.

If you read the first version of the spreadsheet, then you'll notice that the primary difference between this version and that one is that I've added a column for "power", a column for actual base hit % during assault, and a few more columns of info from the database (protection, total hits, etc.)

For you "gearheads", modders and tinkerers out there, you can poke around and change various values of the columns headed with bold white text and a darker background, to see how changing them effects the "power" value that you see on units, in the game. Just make sure that you create a backup copy, before you do so.

I've consolidated the summary in version 1.0 with the summary in "Artillery Analysis 2.0", while leaving out most of the theoretical stuff from 2.0. This revision that I'm calling 1.1 is primarily intended for newcomers.
Here's an updated summary of my analysis.

• There are essentially two ranges of engagement for AACW artillery: Long and Short. Long range engagements are those where the initial range is 5 or greater. Short range engagements are those in which the initial range of engagement is 4 or less.
  
  • Because Long Range engagements can only occur in clear terrain, and even then only during clear weather, it follows that long range engagements are comparatively rare.
  • With the exception of the Gatling Gun, all artillery has a range of 5 or more.
• Smooth-bore Field Artillery weapons tend to have three things in common: they're less costly, their defensive values are notably higher than their offensive values, and they're short ranged. To me, this suggests that their primary utility is in Point Defense roles, where possible.
• The "Napoleon" 12 lbr is the best weapon for defense against Assaults.
• The weapon with the highest cohesion damage is the 20 lb Parrott, in both armies.
• A 12 lbr paired with a 20 lb Parrott create a very effective battery for damaging cohesion at all Field Artillery ranges.
• Siege Artillery has little value as an element of a battery engaged in any operations other than siege, because it has a ROF of 1, it has the lowest ranged and cohesion damage of any ordnance, and its discipline (6) and hits (6) are also the lowest of any ordnance in the game.
• All ordnace has a Police value of zero. Thus, no artillery can increase military control in a region, or take an objective.
• All artillery gain experience at the same rate. Furthermore, that rate is half the rate of Regular Infantry.
• Fort Batteries don't have horses, and consequently move with glacial slowness. If and when Fort Batteries move, it must be by rail or naval transport.
• The only ordnance which can share (and receive) supply with/from other units is the Federal Gatling Gun.
• All ordnance which is "out of supply" has the same hit penalty, except for Gatling Guns. Federal Gatling Guns don't take hits for being out of supply.
• The "out of supply" movement penalty for all ordnance except Gatling Guns is 35%. GG suffer only 25%.
• The combat penalty for all ordnance units out of supply is 75%.
• 6 pounders aren't as worthless as they seem.
  
  
  • They are the cheapest artillery to use, when building forts.
  • They can be used to fortify entrenchments, enabling higher entrenchment levels, until you have "something better" to replace them with.
  • Three Federal six pounders have the same siege bonus (+2) as three 12 lbrs, three 10 lb Parrotts, or any combination of the two, given competent command. (This is not true for CSA 6 pounders.)
• Confederate Horse Artillery must be massed in multi-unit batteries to have any hope of meaningful effect. Consequently, all HA should work in pairs, at minimum. The same is true for six pounders of both sides.
• There is only one Confederate field artillery unit which has enough power to have a siege bonus, by itself: the Columbiad. For the USA, there are three: Rodmans, 20 lb Parrotts, and (surprisingly) Horse Artillery.

[W.Barksdale]

Good analysis! I just really wish that 12 lbnapoleans didn't upgrade themselves into 20 lb rifles.

[marecone]

Very nice. Thanx

[Banks6060]

Good analysis! I just really wish that 12 lbnapoleans didn't upgrade themselves into 20 lb rifles.

I find this rather frustrating actually. I think it's a little silly too. Everything about this game is so authentic, but I cannot find a justifiable explination for why this is allowed. Once a 12pdr....always a 12pdr. In my book. They still have very effective defensive fire numbers...and a decent range.

[Dixicrat]

...Everything about this game is so authentic, but I cannot find a justifiable explanation for why this is allowed. They still have very effective defensive fire numbers...and a decent range.

I agree with you except for the comment about the range. I haven't yet begun to learn about modding (I'm still struggling with the basics), but it seems reasonable to me that preventing the "upgrade" should be a fairly simple mod. Or am I a contender for "Olympic Conclusion Jumping", again...?

[Jabberwock]

That would be a very simple mod. It would make a good first attempt for me to use the csv splitter. I'll try to knock it out tonight.

[tagwyn]

Thanks!! Now go back to AM's arms!!! t

[marecone]

I find this rather frustrating actually. I think it's a little silly too. Everything about this game is so authentic, but I cannot find a justifiable explination for why this is allowed. Once a 12pdr....always a 12pdr. In my book. They still have very effective defensive fire numbers...and a decent range.

I second this

[Gray_Lensman]

deleted

[Jabberwock]

Here you go ... just install to the game root folder.

[marecone]

Here you go ... just install to the game root folder.

And what will happen? No upgrades or something else?
Thanks

[Jabberwock]

No upgrades for 12lbrs. I left the upgrades for 6lbrs.

[Aphrodite Mae]

J, you are just so sweet! How kind of you to do this mod for us mere mortals!
You, sir, deserve to be covered with smooches!
(In appropriate and socially acceptable places, of course, and done in a lady-like manner.)

Stay sweet!

[Dixicrat]

...The only negative to the 20 lbers (compared to the 12 lbers) is a slightly reduced defensive fire stat. Offensive Fire, Initiative and Range are all greater in the 20 lbers vs the 12 lbers.

Certainly, but the 12 lbr has a decided advantage while being assaulted: it inflicts major cohesion damage, and inflicts four hits. IMHO, there is nothing better for holding the line when the enemy is up close and personal.

That being said, there is much that I have yet to learn, and I may be laboring under some false assumptions here. Constructive criticism is welcome.

BTW: thanks, Grey, for all of the coolness that you've bestowed upon the game and forums.

[Eugene Carr]

I think historically the proportion of Napoleons in both the Eastern armies rose as the war went on. Hunt was particularly keen on reducing the number of rifles in their favour.

incidently there are also events in the Various Events DB which upgrade artillery.

[Coregonas]

Perhaps a more "logic" upgrade could be (a bit less tricky)

6lbs -> 12lbs
10lbs -> 20lbs

Im not proposing this based on REAL ordnance & tech upgrades, and so on...

Its just based on the GAME Artillery STATS...

All 12 lbs stats are a bit better than 6lbs

All 20 lbs stats are a bit better than 10 lbs

And, this way, we could really design some kind of "tactics" around building our divisions with SHORT / LONG range Artillery.

[Coffee Sergeant]

Perhaps a more "logic" upgrade could be (a bit less tricky)

6lbs -> 12lbs
10lbs -> 20lbs

Im not proposing this based on REAL ordnance & tech upgrades, and so on...

Its just based on the GAME Artillery STATS...

All 12 lbs stats are a bit better than 6lbs

All 20 lbs stats are a bit better than 10 lbs

And, this way, we could really design some kind of "tactics" around building our divisions with SHORT / LONG range Artillery.

Well thats an interesting suggestion. I see a slight problem with those big brigades that have attached 6 lbs, which you pretty much have to build because their aren't enough infantry only brigades and you don't want tons of cavalry. When the 6lb upgrades to a 12 that brigade would only be good on the defensive, which favors the CSA.

[Coregonas]

Well thats an interesting suggestion. I see a slight problem with those big brigades that have attached 6 lbs, which you pretty much have to build because their aren't enough infantry only brigades and you don't want tons of cavalry. When the 6lb upgrades to a 12 that brigade would only be good on the defensive, which favors the CSA.

Well a 10 lbs is also good on defensive, it has a longer range..

And remember USA artillery are 50% stronger than CSA, representing 6 guns vs 4.

(BUT with the same manpower... I ll propose USA artillery should cost 3 conscripts , or CSA 1:thumbsup

[Coffee Sergeant]

Well a 10 lbs is also good on defensive, it has a longer range..

And remember USA artillery are 50% stronger than CSA, representing 6 guns vs 4.

(BUT with the same manpower... I ll propose USA artillery should cost 3 conscripts , or CSA 1:thumbsup

My point was the 10 lbs are better than the 12 lb for offensive purposes. If you have lots of 12 lbs, but few 10lbs the offensive capability is more limited. The artillery advantage is one of the Union advantages early/mid game. If we go with 6lb->12lb, a way to balance this out might be to make more infantry-only brigades available to the Union earlier, or make more brigades that have have 10lb instead of 6lb. Unless you feel the game as it is already favors the Union side too heavily.

[Banks6060]

No upgrades for 12lbrs. I left the upgrades for 6lbrs.

Hey, you wanna download this for our game dude?

[Jabberwock]

Hey, you wanna download this for our game dude?

Not at all. It goes completely counter to my artillery strategy. I didn't create it for personal use.

[Dixicrat]

Hey, you wanna download this for our game dude?

Not at all. It goes completely counter to my artillery strategy. I didn't create it for personal use.

This gave me cause for thought. Why would one of the world's strongest AACW players eschew what I considered to be an excellent mod? I decided to review my analysis.

My original analysis was sound enough, but it didn't go far enough. 12 lbrs are unquestionably the superior weapons to defend with, during assaults. However, a 20 lbr is a far better weapon to have for general purposes.

Put differently: which is better... a weapon which is going to decimate the enemy when it comes down to melee, or a weapon that can contribute to routing the enemy before they ever get close? Personally, I'll take the latter.

[Gray_Lensman]

deleted

[Jabberwock]

My original analysis was sound enough, but it didn't go far enough. 12 lbrs are unquestionably the superior weapons to defend with, during assaults. However, a 20 lbr is a far better weapon to have for general purposes.

I suspect he was directly replying to Banks question of whether to download it into a game they had already started, which would affect his strategy for that particular game.

Gray is correct.

My doctrine is to take advantage of every gamey rule in every gamey way I can. Banks knows this. I'm unapologetic about it, my opponents tend to become stronger advocates for realistic solutions, as in this case. In our game, I've bought bunches of 6lb and 12 lb guns, and I am using them along the coast as tripwire amphibious defenses, backed up by a few reaction divs. Once they upgrade, they will get sent to the main armies, and more cheap guns bought to replace them. That's why I won't use my own mod.

Dixicrat, I think your analysis is excellent. My only serious questioning is over the value of assault vs. the value of range. The battle module of the engine does not consider artillery to be high value targets, and there is no rule for counter-battery fire. I also believe that accuracy at long range may be slightly too high. Therefore, range is a key characteristic. The amount of punishment that can be unleashed at long range is much more important than what can be unleashed at short range, IMO. If you are using artillery's assault values, that probably means that most of the higher value targets (infantry regiments, according to the engine) are damaged or destroyed, and you've already lost the battle. I could be wrong about that, but for now, it's my opinion.

I'd like to see you take the analysis one step further. The CSA and USA entries are slightly different for the same types of artillery, mainly due to the 6 gun vs 4 gun batteries, but there are other differences. It's definitely a thought provoking piece of work. Job well done.

[Jabberwock]

Perhaps a more "logic" upgrade could be (a bit less tricky)

6lbs -> 12lbs
10lbs -> 20lbs

I like the 6lb to 12lb idea. Bronze guns were much better suited for recasting, and it was a historical priority for both sides to replace the 6lbers with better guns.

I'm working on a 3-inch ordnance rifle model based on Clovis and Jagger's excellent work. When 10lb rifles were replaced, it was generally with these guns (once they were available). I don't think too many 10lbs were recast as artillery. Probably most were sold as scrap and converted to railroad rails. The south couldn't manufacture the 3-inch rifles, so they placed a high value on capturing them. That can be abstracted as either no upgrade, or a much reduced chance.

[Coregonas]

I believe allowing for free upgrades represent not only changing exactly all the guns, but also other improvements... such as reorganization of guns between armies, fire training, changes in powder, ammo types, an so on...

exactly as I feel it represents the upgrading from militia to line infantry... Militia recruiting -> calling every man to bring his own weapon from home, so it explains the no WS cost.

I want to say also ordnance (in special CSA) was really a total caos without serious OOBs, surely lot of 4-5 guns batteries were in fact made with guns all of them different! And there were a lot more types of artillery pieces than the ones represented...

All this can justify the upgrading of both kind of units.

The 6lbs to 12lbs just seem less tricky to me, total values are more "equal", and allows for some kind of "tactics" into using bronze or iron pieces for different purposes, if some one even cares...

[aryaman]

I would like to know, is there any real advantage in placing artillery units seprately within Corps, instead of within divisions?In term of combat power, it is clear that the 4 command points are better used for a division of around 500 CP than four batteries that can´t be more than 150 CP...

[Jabberwock]

I've never played a non-1861 PBEM, but in non-1861 scenarios, the starting situation normally gives extra artillery and CPs. There is more command than there is manpower. This becomes even more the situation for the union moving forward (with their extra $ and WS, they can afford extra artillery much faster than men).

In a '61 PBEM game, I suppose it depends on promotion policy. If there are more corps available than divisions to fill them, then loose artillery makes sense.

The corps reserve artillery will automatically fire at the biggest target that any one of the divisions engages. That can be handy.

[Pdubya64]

Gray is correct.

My doctrine is to take advantage of every gamey rule in every gamey way I can. Banks knows this. I'm unapologetic about it, my opponents tend to become stronger advocates for realistic solutions, as in this case. In our game, I've bought bunches of 6lb and 12 lb guns, and I am using them along the coast as tripwire amphibious defenses, backed up by a few reaction divs. Once they upgrade, they will get sent to the main armies, and more cheap guns bought to replace them. That's why I won't use my own mod.

*wiping the tears from my eyes*

Jabs, you absolutely slayed me with this one! Thanks for the exquisite entertainment my friend... I bet you typed it with a straight face too!!

[Dixicrat]

...My only serious questioning is over the value of assault vs. the value of range. The battle module of the engine does not consider artillery to be high value targets, and there is no rule for counter-battery fire. I also believe that accuracy at long range may be slightly too high. Therefore, range is a key characteristic. The amount of punishment that can be unleashed at long range is much more important than what can be unleashed at short range, IMO.

(Emphasis mine) I completely agree with you, Jabberwock.

...I'd like to see you take the analysis one step further. The CSA and USA entries are slightly different for the same types of artillery, mainly due to the 6 gun vs 4 gun batteries, but there are other differences....

[color="Gray"]I've revised the spreadsheet per your request to include Union ordnance, as well. I've also added a simple "hit probability calculator" as new feature on a second sheet. Eventually, I'm going to integrate all of this material into a programmed spreadsheet that will (hopefully) be fun to use for analyzing assorted combinations of ordnance in a variety of ways.

I haven't had time to do the analysis on Union Ordnance yet; I'll probably post my commentary on that either late tonight, or sometime this weekend.[/color]

I've discovered some errors in the attachment I'd provided, and so I've removed it until the errors are corrected.

And thanks for your kind words, Jabberwock! They mean more than you know.