Page 1 of 1

Heavy Artillery as a Flanking Force!

Posted: Fri May 08, 2015 11:47 pm
by w_michael
I am playing a 30YW Skirmish as early Ottomans (I haven't found any way within the game to identify the two army lists after the game has started) against German Catholic. The AI decided that I would have a flanking force of one Balkan light horse regiment and one heavy artillery battery! I suggest that heavy and medium artillery not be permissible units for flanking forces.

P.S. The enemy just received a flanking force of a medium artillery battery!

Re: Heavy Artillery as a Flanking Force!

Posted: Sat May 09, 2015 6:39 am
by rbodleyscott
w_michael wrote:I am playing a 30YW Skirmish as early Ottomans (I haven't found any way within the game to identify the two army lists after the game has started) against German Catholic. The AI decided that I would have a flanking force of one Balkan light horse regiment and one heavy artillery battery! I suggest that heavy and medium artillery not be permissible units for flanking forces.

P.S. The enemy just received a flanking force of a medium artillery battery!
Was this in mountainous or wooded terrain? (Or at least terrain where there was nowhere for guns to play in their usual sort of position)

Re: Heavy Artillery as a Flanking Force!

Posted: Sat May 09, 2015 3:32 pm
by w_michael
rbodleyscott wrote:
w_michael wrote:I am playing a 30YW Skirmish as early Ottomans (I haven't found any way within the game to identify the two army lists after the game has started) against German Catholic. The AI decided that I would have a flanking force of one Balkan light horse regiment and one heavy artillery battery! I suggest that heavy and medium artillery not be permissible units for flanking forces.

P.S. The enemy just received a flanking force of a medium artillery battery!
Was this in mountainous or wooded terrain? (Or at least terrain where there was nowhere for guns to play in their usual sort of position)
I think that you are right. I use Pot Luck for terrain, and it is not stated once the scenario is started, but it must be mountainous since there are lots of mountain squares. There is a narrow, 3 square wide valley where the cavalry battle is taking place, since they (and artillery) cannot enter mountain squares. The infantry is fighting in the mountainous terrain. I was able to deploy my one medium artillery battery to sweep the leading edge of the mountains, and I would have done the same with the heavy battery if it had been available from the start.

I now understand why it happened, but it would be more realistic IMO (and practical) to have used one of my many cavalry regiments instead of the heavy artillery battery as a flanking force. If I didn't have a good forward position for the cannons, I would have put them in reserve in order to fire on any enemy units that were able to break through my front line. At a movement rate of 1 square per turn it will take forever to move the artillery into a firing position. I have a saved game if you want to see it.

By the way. This is a great game. I love it.

Re: Heavy Artillery as a Flanking Force!

Posted: Sat May 09, 2015 3:58 pm
by rbodleyscott
I now understand why it happened, but it would be more realistic IMO (and practical) to have used one of my many cavalry regiments instead of the heavy artillery battery as a flanking force.
True, if the "flank force" was coming as a tactical ploy. My justification for dealing with the artillery this way on mountainous terrain (or other terrain where there was nowhere for them to deploy) is that they have arrived late on the flank because they had to take a different road from the main army, which took a road that was impassable to the artillery.

It isn't meant to be useful, it is just (sometimes) preferable to them not arriving at all. (Or arriving on your baseline with a mountain between them and the enemy).
By the way. This is a great game. I love it.
Thank you for your kind words.

Re: Heavy Artillery as a Flanking Force!

Posted: Sat May 09, 2015 7:06 pm
by w_michael
That is a reasonable rationalisation. Thanks for taking the time to respond to my comments.