Just finished running some artillery tests as Drew suggested
Set up with 3 union two-gun sections, all A quality, set to max range, 4-12lb Nap, 2-6lb'ers.
Attacking with a 400 man D quality confederate infantry unit, starting movement at 7 hexes distance in woods, making 6 hexes of movement through clear level terrain to reach the battery, attacking infantry did not offensive fire.
All units starting with 0 fatigue and only quality fire modifier rule used, auto defense fire, Corinth 1.01a.
Made 16 runs at the guns,
3 times the infantry become disordered due to fire and each were at range 1,
none went disordered due to melee defense fire,
13 times the guns were lost in melee and the attacker suffered light fatigue
There was quite a range of losses per "run" and also how many times the sections fired per "run", from 1 to 6.
Artillery fired 50% of the time melee was initiated.
Average attacking infantry losses were 22.18 ranging from 7 to 52 per run (including melee defense fire)
Average attacking infantry melee losses were 5, defending artillery melee losses were 34.9
Did the same test adding 400 union C quality infantry stacked with the battery....
Some changes were seen with the range of losses per "run" and how many times the infantry/artillery fired per "run", from 1 to 4,
Infantry/guns fired 80% of the time melee was initiated.
Made 16 runs at the guns,
4 times the infantry become disrupted due to fire and 3 were at range 1 due to melee defense fire,
1 was at range 5 due to the loss of 1 man,
3 times the guns were lost in melee and the attacker suffered heavy or max fatigue.
Average attacking infantry losses were 21.8 ranging from 1 to 66 per run (including melee defense fire)
Average attacking infantry melee losses were 70.5, defending artillery/infantry melee losses were 39.
These tests were done with only one attacking unit, I want to try them again with two 400 man attackers and see how many guns are lost even with the infantry supported batteries.(I'm suspecting most if not all will be lost)
After making these tests I would concur with Col. Whitehead's statement;
<font color="blue">"Based on this the problem in the game system isn't with the fire tables but with the melee. Melee is really a simplification in these games. It doesn't represent hand to hand fighting but casualties due to fire at less than 25 yards and the resulting loss of nerve of one side or the other. Artillery should really be using its canister factors in melee not the ramrod factor."</font id="blue">
Also did a couple of runs using "phased" turns and the results are looking dramatically different, greater attacker losses and disruption, need to run more to make a comparison.
<font color="blue"><b>Brig.Gen. R.A.Weir</b></font id="blue">
<font color="yellow">-- CALVERT LINE --</font id="yellow">
<b>First--III--AoA CSA</b>