Types of Artillery Round and their use

[CBR]

That won't help me much, as I'm looking for specific casualties at specific ranges, not the number of casualties produced by one salvo.  With a mixed battery of guns and howitzers, it's going to be hard to figure out which guns did what, and calculate how many casualties one shot from one cannon would produce.

There was no difference. Distance were the same, casualties per salvo/minute were the same (16) and a total of 8 salvoes(minutes) of fire.

I just checked 8pdrs. Three batteries of 8x8pdrs, 8x8pdrs+2hw and 6x8pdrs+2hw. Strangely enough the 8x8pdr+2hw were the same as the smaller batteries. They all fired 10 minutes of 12 casualties each and started firing at a little less than 1400 meters and stopped firing at around 960-980 meters.

It seems as if howitzers merely count as an ordinary guns. Odd.

If a unit advances on artillery, if it takes one turn of canister, it has a 40% chance of reaching the artillery.  Two in five will make it.

If it takes 2 turns of canister, it has (0.4*0.4) or a 16% chance of reaching the artillery.  One is six will make it.

If it takes 3 turns of canister, the chance is (0.4*0.4*0.4) or about a 6.5% chance of reaching the artillery.  One in 15 or 16 will make it.  Not a lot of chance there.

Yes. Of course that is for one battalion. A failed check means it is forced to pull back 250 paces so it does not rout as seen in LG. Now throw in 3 or 4 battalions and it is no longer that difficult for infantry to close in for an attack. Also the artillery can only do it as long as its not under canister fire. So an attacker can cancel out the effect by using artillery in support.

It's odd to see in the 7pdr Howitzers table "Rollschuss", "Full Charge" and "Smaller Charge (Shell)" as if the howitzers were firing roundshot.

AFAIK Rollschuss were used with the shells.


CBR

[Hook]

There was no difference. Distance were the same, casualties per salvo/minute were the same (16) and a total of 8 salvoes(minutes) of fire.

Fill in this form:

Range: ___-___ meters
Total Losses: ___
Incremental losses: ___

Range: ___-___ meters
Total Losses: ___
Incremental losses: ___

I'm not interested in the number of casualties per shot, and in any case the casualties per shot will be much higher for a battery defending itself against a frontal assault than for all shots fired during a battle.

Yes. Of course that is for one battalion. A failed check means it is forced to pull back 250 paces so it does not rout as seen in LG. Now throw in 3 or 4 battalions and it is no longer that difficult for infantry to close in for an attack. Also the artillery can only do it as long as its not under canister fire. So an attacker can cancel out the effect by using artillery in support.

You have just given the way to successfully attack a battery.  Same concept in both games, different implementation.

It cannot be assumed that the troops will remain still for long under effective canister fire or low elevation range fire without either going forwards or back. There can be very few exceptions to this.

If, therefore, a half battery is firing against 1 battalion or two squadrons in canister range, under conditions which will give good effect, and without itself coming under canister fire from an enemy battery, Die 2 is rolled after each move to the advantage of the battery to decide whether they troops can remain in position or retire.

The smallest individual infantry unit in HWLG is the regiment.  This would appear to cause problems because the Kriegsspiel rules talk about battalions.  But those rules also talk about half batteries.  In any given turn with the situation we're modeling, there will be two half batteries firing against two battalions, and one  battalion not being fired upon until the original target battalions have retired.  So the level of abstraction between the two games is not that different.

JMM is modeling things in HWLG that would be impossible in Kriegsspiel, or would have to be abstracted into the rules somehow.  Visibility for the artillery, for example, or fatigue, or morale.  Things that would affect the rates of fire and possibly the number of casualties.  JMM even models the fact that artillery won't hit the target with the first shot.  

Hook

[Hook]

Ok, I finally set up the test myself.  Dobl, the Bavarian FussBatterie with 6*12pdr and 2*HW on one side, Albychev, the 1920 man Russian line infantry regiment on the other.  Everyone else moved to the far edges of the map.

The first thing I noticed was that there was no flat ground for the infantry to attack across.  I set the units up in the northern part of the map with the infantry on higher ground and they'd advance downhill.  The artillery was on flat ground.  This may have affected the opening range if the artillery couldn't get a good line of sight until the infantry was closer.

I commanded both sides.  I gave the artillery unlimber orders and the infantry orders to attack the artillery.  The infantry advanced a bit, then formed line, then later reformed into a disordered formation of some kind, with cohesion 80 by that time, to advance on the artillery.

I didn't try to measure distances on the map, which is problematical at best. I used the numbers from the tracking files.

The artillery opened fire at 928 meters.  The infantry advanced to 617 meters before they had the status "Unit: flight", which shortly changed to Rout.  At this point they were down from 1920 men to 1793.

Range: 928-617 meters
Total Losses: 127
Incremental losses: 127

This corresponds to one turn of Elevation fire for 62 casualties, one turn of Large Canister fire for 141 casualties.  Somewhat under the 203 casualties expected from the Kriegsspiel rules.

Breaking it down further we have:

Range: 928-759 meters (Elevation)
Total Losses: 56
Incremental losses: 56

Slightly under the 62 expected.

Range: 759-617 meters (Large Canister)
Total Losses: 127
Incremental losses: 71

Somewhat under the 141 expected but over the 65 minimum for Large Canister.

Conclusion:  casualties are within Kriegsspiel limits.

Note:  edited because I was reading the wrong ranges from the table.

I don't think it's going to be possible to do a frontal assault on an artillery battery with a single infantry regiment.  Add another regiment or two, suppress the artillery with counterbattery fire, get the corps or army commander involved, whatever.

Hook

[CBR]

As long as a Line regiment takes losses every minute it will break at slightly above 5.5% so both battery types will end up producing similar casualties before a rout. In the tests I did that meant from 120 to 128 casualties against a 2055 man regiment.

I'm not interested in the number of casualties per shot, and in any case the casualties per shot will be much higher for a battery defending itself against a frontal assault than for all shots fired during a battle.

Maybe you should be interested:

8x12pdr battery:
At nearly 1500 meters
At nearly 500 meters
Against 2 battalion regiment
Against 4 battalion regiment (should be a two line target)
Firing into the flank of a regiment
Firing uphill or downhill

All these scenarios produce the same rate of 4 hits (16 casualties) every minute.

[Hook]

All these scenarios produce the same rate of 4 hits (16 casualties) every minute.

That one's interesting.  Thanks.

I did see as few as 4 casualties per minute and as high as 21, and a couple of 18s, but mostly it was 16 casualties per minute.  The in-game display rounded the number to the nearest 5 most of the time.

I also saw a number of misses.  These would lower the average of casualties per shots fired and are not recorded in the file, far as I know.

Having looked closer at the numbers, I'm beginning to doubt the model was intended to be scrutinized this closely.  At some point, things break down.  People are relying on an artificial test involving only two units, and although the final outcome is about what you'd predict from all the parameters used, the mechanism isn't as elegant as it could be.  It's a bit like gazing at soulful eyes through a microscope.

If there's still a problem, it seems to be that the infantry advances very slowly, about 40 meters per minute (a 26 inch step, 60 per minute,  pas de deux pieds at pas ordinaire).  This means it takes more shots from the artillery.  With each shot their ability to continue to advance goes down.  Eventually they retreat, then rout.  It may be that their morale drops too fast.

It is still possible to attack a corps supported by artillery and win. Given the 1 vs 1 tests you'd think it would be impossible.  I'm more interested in why it's still possible than why a 1 vs 1 is not.

Hook

[CBR]

In the few bigger tests I have done, I have seen 3 regiment attacks both succeed and fail. When checking out the .kia file one can see how the canister bug is actually causing a lot of trouble for the battery: The battle I just tried it spent 9 minutes firing on the first routing regiment although there were two other regiments getting closer.

So at least that one bug might be part of the reason as to why it is possible.

edit: and yes, movement rate does seem rather slow.

[Cameronian]

Would it therefore be fair to say that the only difference between a British "Shrapnel" round and a French or Austrian "Shell" is that the former includes musket balls packed inside for additional anti-personnel effect, whereas the latter does not?

Well not really. Shell comprised a THICK cast iron outer crust containing a large charge of black powder. When the fuze ignited the charge exploded, because the crust was thick and the explosion therefore 'contained' the blast was considerable. Damage/casualties were caused by blast, fire (buildings) and shell fragments.
The ferocity of the explosion was such that only howitzers would fire shell (short, stubby, extra thick barrels) normal cannon would suffer a burst barrel if the shell ignited prematurely, a howitzer wouldn't
(pressure > exponentially as the round travels up the barrel, the > in pressure makes a 'blow in' of the fuze or an opening crack in the crust more likely and thus > the risk of a premature explosion).

Spherical case (Shrapnel) comprised a THIN outer crust packed with balls with a relatively SMALL charge in the middle. The round would be fuzed to burst in front of an enemy column, the charge would be sufficient only to burst the thin crust and scatter the balls, the 'killing momentum' of the balls were a function of the propellant charge ie they were already travelling at a lethal velocity. Spherical case could burst in the barrel of a normal gun without bursting it (thin crust) but it wouldn't be popular with infantry standing to its front!

[Hook]

Great seeing you again, Cameronian!

Is my memory correct that you were in the British horse artillery?

Hook

[Cameronian]

'Royal' Horse Artillery, old boy, 'Royal' Horse Artillery!

  Great to hear from you after all this time Hooky, I'm guessing that if you're involved then the arty logistics will be nicely modelled.

Cam