Matrix Games Forums

War in the West Manual previewThe fight for Armageddon begins! The Matrix Holiday sales are starting today! Warhammer - Weapons of WarFlashpoint Campaigns: Red Storm gets huge update and a Steam release!Battle Academy 2 opens up a new front!Flashpoint Campaigns Featured on weekly Streaming SessionFrontline: The Longest Day - New Screenshots!Deal of the Week: Hannibal Rome and CarthageFlashpoint Campaigns: Red Storm gets Players Edition!
Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Quick Battle - Charging Artillery?

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [American Civil War] >> Forge of Freedom: The American Civil War 1861-1865 >> Forge of Freedom - Support >> Quick Battle - Charging Artillery? Page: [1]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Quick Battle - Charging Artillery? - 12/16/2006 1:06:19 PM   
jsaurman

 

Posts: 129
Joined: 6/28/2000
From: Alexandria, VA
Status: offline
When playing a quick battle, how can artillery "Charge"? That seems rather silly to me. Wouldn't it be better to have artillery limited to the max of "Attack"?
Also, on the quick battle, I'd remove the sidebar graphic that says "Attacker" and "Defender" as they don't really mean anything. If one side was truly a defender and 100% on the defensive, they wouldn't be charging anyone, now would they? Well, until the other guys broke and ran, I guess.

JIM
Post #: 1
RE: Quick Battle - Charging Artillery? - 12/16/2006 1:47:18 PM   
elmo3

 

Posts: 4887
Joined: 1/22/2002
Status: offline
Artillery in the Charge column does seem odd. Not sure what the designers had in mind there. The manual says units in that column are "...attacking recklessly".

In game terms that attacker and defender mean something specific. The attacker is the side that does not control the province where the battle takes place. Pretty sure the defender also gets a combat advantage although I'd have to read the manual again to tell you how much.

It's possible for the defender to attack in any given battle, if they lost an important objective for instance. It was probably rare for the defender to ever be 100% on defense except maybe in sieges.


< Message edited by elmo3 -- 12/16/2006 2:08:11 PM >

(in reply to jsaurman)
Post #: 2
RE: Quick Battle - Charging Artillery? - 12/16/2006 2:28:50 PM   
marecone


Posts: 469
Joined: 7/31/2006
From: Croatia, Europe
Status: offline
Although I consider FoF best civil war game EVER it does have some bad stuff in it. Quick combat is one. I hate it and I play it only when I am not sure if my division from other province will join the fight. Then I go with quick battle and ask for reinforcements.
Why can't we play turn after turn in quick combat? Like chess. Move those units and such.

No hard feelings guys


_____________________________

"I have never, on the field of battle, sent you where I was unwilling to go myself; nor would I now advise you to a course which I felt myself unwilling to pursue."

Nathan Bedford Forrest

(in reply to elmo3)
Post #: 3
RE: Quick Battle - Charging Artillery? - 12/16/2006 5:45:05 PM   
Gil R.


Posts: 10075
Joined: 4/1/2005
Status: offline
Well, the idea of artillery "charging" is an abstraction that means it's moving into a more aggressive mode, but to enlighten those who think that artillery couldn't charge, here's the bio of the Palmetto Battalion from the in-game text:

"The South Carolina 3rd Battalion Light Artillery, known as the “Palmetto Battalion,” was organized in 1862 by Capt. Hugh R. Garden, who, along with some future members of this unit, had fought at First Manassas the year before. The battalion was assigned to the Army of Northern Virginia, and its first major action took place at Antietam, where they helped to keep Federal forces from crossing “Burnside’s” Bridge for several hours. Another memorable moment in the unit’s history occurred at Gettysburg, where the guns of the Palmetto Battalion formed part of the line supporting Pickett’s Charge – and one of the guns, a 12-pounder field howitzer commanded by Lt. William A. McQueen, was among the five guns moved forward in support of the charge, at one point outdistancing the infantry."

(in reply to marecone)
Post #: 4
RE: Quick Battle - Charging Artillery? - 12/16/2006 9:39:34 PM   
jsaurman

 

Posts: 129
Joined: 6/28/2000
From: Alexandria, VA
Status: offline
Okay, but that is an abberation.   A 12-pounder is very small compared to some of the artillery in the game.   I don't think most of them were man portable.   If you set yourself up in an area too far forward, and enemy started charging towards you, I think you just ran away.   I don't even think artillerymen were even issued anything but pistols, were they?

(in reply to Gil R.)
Post #: 5
RE: Quick Battle - Charging Artillery? - 12/16/2006 11:20:25 PM   
Gil R.


Posts: 10075
Joined: 4/1/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: jsaurman

Okay, but that is an abberation. A 12-pounder is very small compared to some of the artillery in the game. I don't think most of them were man portable. If you set yourself up in an area too far forward, and enemy started charging towards you, I think you just ran away. I don't even think artillerymen were even issued anything but pistols, were they?


Sure. In fact, I've been thinking that if there's not already code to this effect we might want to make it so that the heavier guns in quick combat can't move into the "charge" position. Eric's call, since he knows the calculations behind QC.

(in reply to jsaurman)
Post #: 6
RE: Quick Battle - Charging Artillery? - 12/17/2006 7:02:53 AM   
Malagant

 

Posts: 188
Joined: 3/13/2004
Status: offline
Who said anything about man-portable?

There were many occassions where artillery was sent forward to support a charge. Of course there was risk involved, and that risk is reflected in the dangers of being in the Charge column.

If you don't want to charge your artillery, then don't. Leave it alone for the rest of us that enjoy seeing the huge casualty numbers they can cause ;)

If you want to make it so the don't move themselves in to the Charge column while looking for a target, I guess that's reasonable...but I think it works well as is.


quote:

ORIGINAL: jsaurman

Okay, but that is an abberation.   A 12-pounder is very small compared to some of the artillery in the game.   I don't think most of them were man portable.   If you set yourself up in an area too far forward, and enemy started charging towards you, I think you just ran away.   I don't even think artillerymen were even issued anything but pistols, were they?



_____________________________

"La Garde meurt, elle ne se rend pas!"

(in reply to jsaurman)
Post #: 7
RE: Quick Battle - Charging Artillery? - 12/17/2006 1:40:28 PM   
elmo3

 

Posts: 4887
Joined: 1/22/2002
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Malagant

...

There were many occassions where artillery was sent forward to support a charge.

...



Please cite "many" more examples given that the game defines Charge as "attacking recklessly". That is different than moving forward to "support a charge" as you said above. Supporting a charge is putting arty in the Attack column IMO.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Gil R.

...In fact, I've been thinking that if there's not already code to this effect we might want to make it so that the heavier guns in quick combat can't move into the "charge" position...


FWIW I agree with this idea.

< Message edited by elmo3 -- 12/17/2006 1:50:34 PM >

(in reply to Malagant)
Post #: 8
RE: Quick Battle - Charging Artillery? - 12/17/2006 8:56:25 PM   
ericbabe


Posts: 10684
Joined: 3/23/2005
Status: offline
It's the "charge" zone -- it just means that artillery are being used aggressively, shoved up close to the enemy rather than tucked back.  We'd have written "charge and also aggressive artillery" on the grid, but it wouldn't fit in the 80 pixel wide column.



_____________________________


(in reply to elmo3)
Post #: 9
RE: Quick Battle - Charging Artillery? - 12/18/2006 6:45:26 AM   
Malagant

 

Posts: 188
Joined: 3/13/2004
Status: offline
quote:

Please cite "many" more examples given that the game defines Charge as "attacking recklessly". That is different than moving forward to "support a charge" as you said above. Supporting a charge is putting arty in the Attack column IMO.


My first answer would be: Any time artillery were ordered to maintain position in face of a charge instead of withdrawing.

My second would be: Any time artillery were ordered to move within and unlimber within musket range.

Both happened often enough that I'm sure you can find some examples yourself.

My third answer would be: Pelham's Artillery at Fredricksburg

quote:

But it was at Fredericksburg that the zenith of John Pelham's renown was reached. The martial king of the proudest nation in all the tides of time might well envy--if the shades in Valhalla are given that privilege--the story that crowned the "boy artillerist" in that stupendous fight and dreadful revelry of death. All was quiet in the Confederate army at Fredericksburg on the morning of the thirteenth of December, 1862. The flower of the South's young manhood was there on the heights in double lines behind bristling bayonets and grimmer guns. Every soldier knew there was to be a fearful fight before the sun sank behind the western wood. The Federal army had crossed the Rappahannock and was forming line of battle under cover of the river bank. Jackson, Stuart and Lee rode down the Confederate lines to the extreme right, followed by waves of cheers, where the Stuart horse artillery was parked. Stuart called to Pelham and said something. Then Pelham turned and galloped to his guns. Immediately he dashed down the heights followed by one gun. It was the "Napoleon detachment," of Mobile Frenchmen. Onward they rushed far down the foot of the heights where the road forks. There they halted, unlimbered and prepared for action. The mist that overspread the field cleared away and the men from the South saw moving toward them steadily, swiftly, with measured tread, a long, compact blue line. On swept the fierce men in blue, their bayonets glistening in the streams of sunshine that stole through the fog. There was a flash, a boom, the earth shook--Pelham's Napoleon had bellowed. Then there was a shrill, hideous, indescribable shriek of a shell as it swirled in the air and went crashing through the charging lines of blue. The surging mass recoiled, halted, hesitated, then with a demoniacal yell, pressed forward toward the single gun. The yell ceased and for a moment there was a ghastly hush, and then, there came thundering through the chilly, December air from across the Rappahannock boom on boom. From southeast to east, from east to northeast. Then from the north came huge shells whirling death in their arms. Pelham had drawn upon himself the concentrated fire of half a dozen batteries--twenty four guns. Yet his gun continued to roar, and roaring never failed to slaughter. No other gun on the Confederate side had yet opened, but the lone war-dog howled on. And in the half lull between the boom of the cannon there floated above the noise a sound that seemed strange on that day of multitudinous terrors--the Napoleon detachment singing the Marseillaise as they fought their gun. Like infernal imps of Tophet they flitted about in the smoke of battle. Two armies looked on while the Mobile Frenchmen wrote history with blood. Arms, legs, heads were whirled off and the ground around torn as by Titan plows. No other Confederate gun had opened, but the fierce Federals could not pass the bellowing Napoleon. Time wore on. Still the gun roared and the sound of its roaring thundered through the air in breaths of battle to the ears of General Robert E. Lee, as he viewed the red revel from the heights. "It is glorious," he exclaimed, "to see such courage in one so young." And in his report of the battle he spoke of no one but Pelham below the rank of major-general, terming him "the gallant Pelham."
Once, twice, three times, Pelham drove back the Federal columns and delayed the battle an hour. When his ammunition was spent he retired, in obedience to a peremptory order, and was assigned to the command of all the artillery on the Confederate right.



_____________________________

"La Garde meurt, elle ne se rend pas!"

(in reply to elmo3)
Post #: 10
Page:   [1]
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [American Civil War] >> Forge of Freedom: The American Civil War 1861-1865 >> Forge of Freedom - Support >> Quick Battle - Charging Artillery? Page: [1]
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.085