Artillery

[hazelbark]

Repeating an earlier statement I find in game terms its a mistake to point guns at mounted. Sure you don't get the -POA. But you have a target that is very mobile and putting Medium guns over that way encourages them to be a target of attacks by the mounted. So now you need to defend the guns.

I suspect players who point them and deploy them to flanks either have to mass their own army there or probalby lose them in higher proportion. Madaxeman of course has very nervous gunners having been over run lots of times.

Compared to if you put them in the center they get a lot more shots as the enemy is slower and unable to get in the way. Also you have your hordes of foot to help shield them.

[Niceas]

Point taken. I'll have a look at some other battles and see what pops up.

I certainly agree from just a cursory look at illustrations from the period, artillery always seems to be shooting at infantry.

Come to think of it, neither Walhausen or Cruso show cavalrymen engaging artillery, although they do have images of cavalry fighting other cavalry and cavalry fighting infantry. Hmmmmm.....

[footslogger]

Putting artillery facing a flank and shooting at cavalry has been pretty effective in our games, and it doesn't seem very realistic.

[marshalney2000]

Must agree re artillery against cavalry effectiveness. I have a regular opponent who has a bit of a heavy artillery fetish at the moment. I have now started setting up my cavalry behind the infantry or terrain until I see where his guns are then react accordingly.
Not very historical and results in narrow deployment but beats the alternative. Especially the case when I win the initiative and could lose a base before it is even my turn to move.
John

[Niceas]

Ok, the only battle I have found where the artillery is Neiuport in 1600, but there the Dutch artillery is opposite the Spanish artillery. That is from the diagram of the battle that is in Hexham.

Elsewhere the artillery always seems to be in the center of each side. (And in front of everything else).

A discourse upon the use of artillery is included in "The Third Part of the Principles of the Art Militarie" by Henry Hexham. (published 1640):

How and in what manner a Generall of the Ordnance ought to plant his canon in a day ov Battle, whereby he maye annoy most an enemy.

Extracted out of the second treatise of Don Diego Ussano his fifth dialogue betweene the Generall of the Ordnance, and a Captaine as followeth.

Generall. Sir, I would faine know of yow, how Ordnance ought to be placed in a day of battle, which might gaule an Enemie most?

Capitane. I make noe question, but your Lordship having had experience in the warres of Savoy, Hungarie, can tell better than I am able to speak, and if I should use a teadious discourse, it might then seeme that the Schaller should presume to teach his master.

Generall. Howsoever in such a case I would willingly take the advice of an old experienced Souldier, and especially of such a one, who hath served in these parts. As for mee, I dare not boast of any great experience, having had enough to doe to look unto my owne affaires, neither have I had much leisure to informe my self well about Artillerie. But now being I am to receive that charge upon mee, I pray yow tell me, as a man who hath bin beaten there unto, and hath had longe experience in the warres, how they do use to plant Ordnance in these quarters.

Capt. Sir, there hath bin but a few battles fought in these parts, and to speake truely, I am not able to satisfie yow touching this point. Neverthelesse, I
will tell yow what I have scene in two, wherein I was present. In the one the Ordnance was planted in the head of the Battalions, and in the other between them, two by two and three by three up on the flancks, and wings of the Musketiers, & blinded with the wings of the Cavallerie. But as to mee, I am of the opinion that it best to plant some peeces in the front of the Armie, which may play upon the Enemies troupes on all sides: seeking out alwaies for this effect, some places of avantage to place them in, that yow maye not be in daunger of loosing your peeces. And though you cannot get such an advantage, yet your peeces being the head of your battle, will be of less service, because when yow are to come to the Chock, and joyning of Battles, they maye in some wise annoy your owne men, which I saw in one of these Battles abovesaid.

Generall. Therefore I think it were fitter they should be placed upon both the Flancks, and in the Reere of the Battalions, by leave a free place of Armes, which maye give noe offence to our own men.

Capt. I can hardly beleeve (Illustrious Sir) that that would be soo expedient, for an Enemie, perceiving that the Front is left bare without Ordnance, he would take the more courage to fall on, and come up to the charge: Therefore, I hold it more fitting, that the Artillerie, as yow may see in the Figur S. maye be divided some here some there, both before the Front and upon the Flancks, placed some 50 or 100 paces from one another, & then their will be no danger, when the Ennemie shall come up to the Chock, to encounter yow, or offend our owne men, expecially when the are fastned to them by drawing roapes, and yron rings, that upon an instant they may be removed & turned for the advantage of our own troupes, and give fire as fast as they can charge & discharge among the Enemies troupes, which is a matter of great momet for the obataining of a Victrorie. But it happens very seldome, that such convenient places can be found, for the planting of Ordnance in a Battle, as were to be wished, for often times one shalbe driven of neceissity, to make choise of such places, as the ground will afford, by reason of Woods, Hills, Marrish grounds, ans such like disadvantagions places, as yow maye meet withall, and for which one can give noe certaine rule, but that the Generall by his wisedome, and discretion, maye make choise of the best advantages, which may annoy the Ennemie most, and give the least offence to his own men, either by dazeling them by the Sunne, the arising of Dust, and which way the wind drives the smoak, both of Ordnance & small shott, which though litle in themselves, yet may prove to his men great impediments, and disadvantages. But leaving these things, wee will now returne againe to our former discourse, becuase your Lordship is of the opinion, that the Ordnance ought rather to be planted upon the Wings and Flancks of the Battalions, then otherwaise, which I dare not approve of, in regard that when the Troops are to encounter with the Ennemie, and come up to the Charge, our owne men maye be more annoyed by our wne Ordnance, (which maye breede a confusion) then the Ennemies, when as the Wings of our horse, which are upon the Flanks shall come up to charge the Ennemie: so that then our owne peeces migth pussle them greatly, whenas they are to plae for the Flanks, besides the Mischiefe, which might happen amounge our wone men. Therefore, one ought to be very carefull, & circumspect in planting them. And thois si that, which out of my own experience I am able to say upon this question. Wherefore I do advise, every Captaine of the Ordnance, and Master Gunners, to use some light field peeces and some small drakes which upon every occasion may be removed from one place to another and couragiously advanced, to the places of most advantage, which might offend the Ennemie.

Generall. Sir, the resasons you use, have given mee good satisfaction, but I pray you resolve me of one thing more, that is, how a Generall of the Ordnance ought ot carrie himself in the day of battle.

Capt. In such a time, the Generall is to show most his wisedome, discretion, & experience, which chiefly consists herein, that he and his Lieutenants keep their traine together in good order, to have a vigilent eye upon all accidnts, that may fall out, & make choice of such ground, for the palnting of his Ordnance, as the Generall of the Armie & he shall think best, to see that all things be in a readiness, the Ordnance will placed, and that the Master Gunner, Gentlemen of the Ordnance & Canonier do their best endevour, & acquit themselves like men,. I it partly also his charge, to see, that the whole Armie be well provided with powder, bullets and match, because the Amunition marches under his traine. He is to be neere the Generall of the Armie upon all occasions, to recieve his directions, and Commands, & to see them executed speedely, and to know of him after what form: he will make his Battle, that he may plant his Ordnance accordingly, & so to find out hils and heights, to play over his owne men, & offend the Ennemie most. And when an Ennemie shal present himself and come up to the charge, to draw and plant his Ordnance, as neer their horses as possible maye be, so thinder them from breaking in upon the divisions of foote takeing along with him Saylour, & Pionniers, to help draw up the Ordnance ans sufficient gards to defend them, and this is that, which in so great a buysnesse is the charge, and dutie of the Generall of Ordnance, and which maye be required of him.

Generall. Captaine, this discourse hath pleased me well, and given me good contentement, and I am glad, that I mett with yow upon this occasion. Adieu.

[alasdair2204]

Personally I started with no artillery and if it worked I would much rather have all mounted (like my tatar) but I found when playing with an all mounted army against 17th Century P & S I quite rightly get pushed of the table so I bought my artillerry to punch a whole in infantry and generally they destroy one unit over a couple of hours which allows my cavalry to attempt to pour through. Personally I find that though I take a shot in the first go sometimes from heavy guns generally with mounted its easy enough to go past their shooting area (normally by steaming straight forward) and generally if people have guns unless they are very careful I see them as a target. More recently their have been armies with more mounted and I have shot into the flanks (Dave Allen was a case who unfortunately was on the end of my good dice and his 1's at warfare) So generally I find the rules ok on this issue, that said as a mounted fanatic if someone changes the rules to make it harder to shoot me with artillery you won't see me complaining.

cheers

Alasdair

[hazelbark]

if someone changes the rules to make it harder to shoot me with artillery you won't see me complaining.

Maybe we should begin here. What rule changes will ahve you complaining?

[AndyClaxton]

Alasdair would start complaining if you told him that 50% of his army had to be foot troops.

[alasdair2204]

Alasdair would start complaining if you told him that 50% of his army had to be foot troops.

Hi Andy

Surely 20% is to much

cheers

Alasdair

[timmy1]

I think that all ranking comps should be set up for 900 point armies with no mounted troops... that might work.

[jefritrout]

As someone who plays Colonial Portuguese, Scots Jacobites and Tupi, I agree 100% - No mounted troops.

[alasdair2204]

As someone who plays Colonial Portuguese, Scots Jacobites and Tupi, I agree 100% - No mounted troops.

Starting to feel picked on to many threads with anti Alasdair lists and ideas, I play with off the wall armies as well they just happen to be all mounted ie Tartars and Dagestan to name but two

cheers

Alasdair

[jefritrout]

As a fellow who also plays off the wall armies - see above - mine happen to be all foot. Therefore a comment about fighting with no mounted appeals to me. There is nothing anti anybody in my comments. Run the off the wall armies. At Cold Wars it seemed to me that of the first 6 places, there were 5 TYW armies and one "different" army.

[timmy1]

However I would like to make clear that there is loads of Anti-Alasdair in my comments...

[hazelbark]

As a fellow who also plays off the wall armies - see above - mine happen to be all foot. Therefore a comment about fighting with no mounted appeals to me. There is nothing anti anybody in my comments. Run the off the wall armies. At Cold Wars it seemed to me that of the first 6 places, there were 5 TYW armies and one "different" army.

Well lets control the bragging as "off the wall" apparently meant of Tupi and portuguese figures playing as a scots jacobite what not.

[jefritrout]

Dan, I said a couple of post earlier, Colonial Portuguese, SCOTS JACOBITES, and Tupi. I certainly included the Scots Jacobites in my comments. And it does stand that 5 of 6 of the top armies at Cold Wars were TYW armies. Also, I had the published Colonial Portuguese on the top table in the final round at Historicon last year.