<blockquote id="quote"><font size="3" face="book antiqua" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Bill Peters</i>
<br />(...)
I am not for capturing guns and turning them on the other side. Just would get too gamey for me. Recrewing French Guard batteries with Old Guard is fine though.
(...)<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
Fore sure, capturing guns and recrewing it with any units available in the area (militia! (?)) wouldn't make any sense! Imagine a battery recrewed by a bunch of Polish Lancers... would it then be turned into a horse battery? That would be gamey, indeed!! Therefore, the need of a new type of unit (artillerist) would enevitably go along with the possibility of recrewing ennemy artillery units to turn them around, especially since it is the crew that makes the quality of an artillery battery, not just the cannons.
In the same order of idea, just being able to destroy cannons at distance by musket fire looks kind of unrealistic to me, just like it didn't make sense that (in the BG system) an artillery unit would route and run away in the forest with crew AND guns!!
In my opinion, the "short" solution would be to totally (even if temporary) uncrew artillery that would lose melée (limbered or not) and to gradually uncrew it if it took casualty from musket (or riffle) fire. The "long" solution would be to incorporate to the engine this new "artillerist" type of unit (...or to let engineers)perform the task of recrewing the gun batteries. In both cases, the issue of auto-limbering or not in order to save the guns would at least be partially resolved, wouldn't it?[^]
[url="mailto:pyguinard@hotmail.com"]Lt Pierre-Yves Guinard[/url],
6e Division, II Corp
AdN