Napoleonic Wargame Club

The Rhine Tavern

*   NWC   NWC Staff   NWC Rules   NWC (DoR) Records   About Us   Send Email Inquiry to NWC

*   La Grande Armée Quartier Général    La Grande Armée Officer Records    Join La Grande Armée

*   Allied Coalition   Allied Officers   Join Coalition

*   Coalition Armies:   Austro-Prussian-Swedish Army   Anglo Allied Army (AAA)   Imperial Russian Corps

 

Forums:    ACWGC    CCC     Home:    ACWGC    CCC
It is currently Wed Nov 25, 2020 3:13 pm

All times are UTC - 5 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 8 posts ] 

Are supply and foot artillery speeds too slow and unmaneuverable?
Poll ended at Sun Sep 09, 2018 1:04 am
Yes 20%  20%  [ 1 ]
No 80%  80%  [ 4 ]
Total votes : 5
Author Message
PostPosted: Sun Sep 02, 2018 12:51 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Aug 27, 2018 8:22 pm
Posts: 174
Though this is a general series issue I have I'll post it here. The reasoning is due to RBR's retrogression into higher supply and arty MP costs. Horse drawn vehicles are every bit as fast and manueverable as foot soldiers. Naturally, guns and caissons without foot artillerists can fly past the marching columns. My problem is specifically with RBR that some maps are set to 20m elevation levels while supply wagons and foot artillery require 4MPs to cross the slope. 20m over a 100m span is a mean rise of 9 degrees. 4MPs are 1/4 movement allowance and thus such a level slope is halving the horse team's speed.

I see supply wagons as 4 horse team carts weighing about 2 tons which can carry ten-thousands of charges and other campaign accessories not in model. Draught horses are very powerful and 4 of them would be able to easily pull their own combined weight (2.4t - 3.6t) in rough terrain at 5kph or contemporary quicktime marching speed. Quadrupeds are naturally more efficient at climbing slopes than we are as well.

I can understand lowering supply wagon speed due to it's in game efficiency at serving a 500m radius. If reduced supply movement is necessary than at least the foot artillery batteries should be as manueverable as the infantry battalions. The horses in artillery are pulling less weight per horse than the supply train animals. Anyhow, I realise it's set and done but, after a little discussion thought I'd spill it to the forum to see what others may think.

Image

Won't someone please think about the horses?


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Thu Sep 06, 2018 9:11 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri Oct 19, 2001 8:49 am
Posts: 1009
Location: USA
I have been playing these games PBEM since right before Eckmuhl came out (got my but handed to me in NiR). And only in the last 4 or so years have I actually gotten sort of decent---one reason is that I would always wait to retreat for too long. IMHO, two of the hardest things to master is when to pull out your guns and how to pace an attack that gets your guns in position to impact the fighting. I have not come anywhere near mastering these to skills..

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Thu Sep 06, 2018 9:28 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Aug 27, 2018 8:22 pm
Posts: 174
If the elevations were set to 100m at 45° than wagon ascent would be very slow and require manhandling. 50m elevations at 22.5° would halve wagon and foot speed and probably require 4MPs as it is set in this campaign. 25m elevations at 11.25° or 20m elevations at 9° should probably require 1MP (no descent costs). In most campaigns it seems the mapping and parameters are done irrespective of each other. Scenario PDTs are inserted from template instead of being detailed per scenario with different MP costs, present weapons, or weather lines. Just a little complaint of mine and also wanted to play with the bulletin board scripts.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Thu Sep 20, 2018 9:42 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed May 23, 2001 10:18 am
Posts: 5738
Location:
This section of the forum is for feedback on the materials the Scenario Designers provided for the games. If you see that a leader is missing from the scenario, no ammo for one side's artillery, units entering game unlimbered/line formation, that kind of thing, please let me know ...

This section should is NOT for "what I want to see in the series." It was meant to keep the main forum free of "Hey Bill, Napoleon is missing from this scenario."

Read through the forum threads to see what kinds of things we post here.

Wish lists are fine but the series aint gonna change. This is one of the series that is probably not going over to WDS at all. Enjoy it for what it is and I seriously hope that someone comes out with a better series eventually.

This is not a "JTS Tech Support" forum area.

Also: I will not be changing the values in the PDT files, OBs at this point. My "run" at the Nap Battles series is over and once I finish up the CEF game I will restrict myself to new game design in other fields. (I am about to take on a full time job eventually and I wont have time to dink around with the values in this series)

_________________
Bill Peters - Prussian civilian observer
Scenario Designer for John Tiller Software "Napoleonic Battles" and "Panzer Campigns" series games


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Thu Sep 20, 2018 11:25 am 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Fri Dec 06, 2013 10:55 am
Posts: 1128
Location: Bouches-de-l’Elbe
Clearly this topic should be shifted to the Rhine Tavern.

_________________
Général Christian Hecht
Commandant en Chef de la Grande Armée

Image


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Thu Sep 20, 2018 12:26 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Aug 27, 2018 8:22 pm
Posts: 174
I like reduced ranges for artillery in RBR. They're still too overpowered in their effects compared with musketry (musketry deserves more firepower). The reduced manueverablility of gun teams climbing shallow 4.5-9° slopes compared with foot soldiers just irks me. Didn't expect this title's or the series' movement parameters to be re-evaluated or anything. Move or delete thread as you wish mods.

Both of you gentlemen are kindly invited to leave my thread in this feedback section of an open forum. Otherwise, I seek satisfaction on the field of your choosing should you feel so bold. :P


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2018 10:20 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed May 23, 2001 10:18 am
Posts: 5738
Location:
Sorry - this forum is all about reporting issues with the scenarios or OB files or whatever. Its not for debating the merits of the values.

A lot of guys have come up with alternate PDT files of their own. Just copy the scenario, pdt files and come up with your own version if you like. OB files too if you want to change the values.

That is the beauty of these games: nothing is in concrete except things in the main program.

Please do not discuss this kind of thing here .. its defeating the purpose of the forum.

_________________
Bill Peters - Prussian civilian observer
Scenario Designer for John Tiller Software "Napoleonic Battles" and "Panzer Campigns" series games


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Wed Sep 26, 2018 11:24 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2001 10:57 am
Posts: 2160
Location: Canada
Moved this topic

_________________
Monsieur le Maréchal John Corbin
GrandeDuc de Piave et Comte de Beauvais
Retired


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 8 posts ] 

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 16 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to:  
POWERED_BY
Localized by Maël Soucaze © 2010 phpBB.fr