I tend to agree with Manstein that artillery attrition probably needs to be slightly remodeled.
The way I see it:
- Cannon should not be lost at all during movement unless there is noone left to pull them. The only exceptions would be movement through very rough terrain (jungles and swamps) and during wild retreats.
- When an army is in a province that cannot support it, cavalry should take the worst losses, followed by infantry. Artillery should remain unaffected until no more infantry or cavalry remains. It can be argued that the trained gunners also die, but this does not mean that the expensive cannon are abandoned, just that the effectiveness of the artillery is greatly reduced.
- The attrition during sieges should be moderate. This is true attrition, i.e. the pieces are worn out through use.
- The attrition during assaults should be heavier than during sieges to represent the more intense firing. However, since assaults are quick affairs you should have a lower total cannon loss than from a siege.
- Field battles should have about the same attrition rate as assaults, with a higher random factor. Lost field battles should often (but not always) result in enormous losses of cannon.
-It would be nice if the winner of a battle could capture some of the enemy's pieces.
IMO a scheme like this would be both more realistic and more playable than the present 'lose half your cannon in the assault and the other half to starvation' model.
But, I could be wrong...
/Doomie
The way I see it:
- Cannon should not be lost at all during movement unless there is noone left to pull them. The only exceptions would be movement through very rough terrain (jungles and swamps) and during wild retreats.
- When an army is in a province that cannot support it, cavalry should take the worst losses, followed by infantry. Artillery should remain unaffected until no more infantry or cavalry remains. It can be argued that the trained gunners also die, but this does not mean that the expensive cannon are abandoned, just that the effectiveness of the artillery is greatly reduced.
- The attrition during sieges should be moderate. This is true attrition, i.e. the pieces are worn out through use.
- The attrition during assaults should be heavier than during sieges to represent the more intense firing. However, since assaults are quick affairs you should have a lower total cannon loss than from a siege.
- Field battles should have about the same attrition rate as assaults, with a higher random factor. Lost field battles should often (but not always) result in enormous losses of cannon.
-It would be nice if the winner of a battle could capture some of the enemy's pieces.
IMO a scheme like this would be both more realistic and more playable than the present 'lose half your cannon in the assault and the other half to starvation' model.
But, I could be wrong...
/Doomie
