Reserves?

[unmerged(221873)]

I like the game, in fact so far I like it a lot. Very playable at release, fun in MP and SP. It's definitely not as deep as V2 or CK2, but it doesn't have to be. There are many wargaming elements that I (being an old wargamer) like.

Now my question is about the optimal buildup of the reserves. I notice that AI puts artillery in reserve division(s) of the armies it builds. but why so? From what I know of Nappy era warfare, reserves should be formed by fast-reacting cavalry and some hard hitting medium to-high quality infantry, and that's it. I've never heard of arty being used as reserve as it moves too slow to react to fliud dynamics of the battle.

Am I missing something? I take care to manually fine tune armies to have arty anywhere except in reserve division, am I doing something wrong?

 

[Conch]

I like the game, in fact so far I like it a lot. Very playable at release, fun in MP and SP. It's definitely not as deep as V2 or CK2, but it doesn't have to be. There are many wargaming elements that I (being an old wargamer) like.

Now my question is about the optimal buildup of the reserves. I notice that AI puts artillery in reserve division(s) of the armies it builds. but why so? From what I know of Nappy era warfare, reserves should be formed by fast-reacting cavalry and some hard hitting medium to-high quality infantry, and that's it. I've never heard of arty being used as reserve as it moves too slow to react to fliud dynamics of the battle.

Am I missing something? I take care to manually fine tune armies to have arty anywhere except in reserve division, am I doing something wrong?

Mounted artillery was used as reserves. Indeed the first one who used mounted artillery as a mobile, high fire-power reserve was Frederick the Great. Nappy learned alot of good ol' Freddy.

I use cavalry, guards and mounted artillery as reserves. So if things go wrong on a certain flank, the guard can stabilise it and with support of mobile artillery and cavalry, turn the tide.

 

[unmerged(221873)]

Yes, horse arty in reserve - that's obvious. I should have said my post is about old school non-horse arty - why put those in reserves? :ninja:

 

[BodyBag]

Yes, horse arty in reserve - that's obvious. I should have said my post is about old school non-horse arty - why put those in reserves? :ninja:

Many Napoleonic battles took most of a day to decide,- some even several days. They were not as fast-paced as you think.

Battle-commanders knew, that a reserve of fresh artillery could be vital to make the enemy break, or react to a new threat at a crucial point,- so yes, artillery was also in reserve. It was actually often some of the heavier divisonal artillery that was held back, while the horse-artillery was supposed to harass the enemy by fire from closer range.

 

[unmerged(346511)]

The AI puts artilley in the reserves for the same reason I do:
Artillery is crap and takes up frontage. Its only good for sieges. Truly the defense of an artilley unit is so low they get annihilated before the general can put them back into the reserves.

 

[unmerged(489573)]

The AI puts artilley in the reserves for the same reason I do:
Artillery is crap and takes up frontage. Its only good for sieges. Truly the defense of an artilley unit is so low they get annihilated before the general can put them back into the reserves.

Really ? Have you had success in battles with little or no arty in the front line? Genuine question because in Total War games Artillery rules

 

[Conch]

with the right tactics arty is devastating
I always use it with up the guard, deals so much casualties to the enemy flank

 

[unmerged(676133)]

I agree with you W1ndy, artillery is vital for battle success, allways keep light cavalry near may help. But the trigger point is its offensive capacity which can disrupt ennemy formations. Its defensive capacity must not be taken in consideration, a good location on the battlefield with appropriate units to eventually defend them and here we go. The total war school is very good to learn artillery utility.

 

[Alomoes]

I have noticed that while the artillery is devastating, it gets annihilated. I've had several armies without any artillery because of this, I noticed this in a siege. Apparently they were destroyed. So in conclusion, artillery is very vulnerable, but does a lot of damage. Might be worthwhile to have in the front, but you'll need to replace it every often.

You :ninja: me. :angry:

 

[unmerged(676133)]

Its vulnerability depends on its location and on the units which are assigned to defend it

 

[unmerged(676133)]

On the other hand, my ideal reserve corps should be:
-elite infantry units to stabilise a wavering part of the battle front or to seize un eventual opportunity to pierce.
-horse artillery for the same reasons and for their flexibility
-light cavalry
-One regiment of heavy cavalry

 

[Secret Master]

Artillery is absolutely vital for success IF you are using certain tactics and army compositions.

First of all, I think artillery in the reserve is a waste. The very first phase of every combat is the bombard phase, during which artillery excels. Artillery sitting in reserve don't take part, so they're wasting their time back there.

Second, some really nice tactics (like Up the Guard) have requirements with artillery. Setting up a flank with guards, artillery, and some light infantry can really blast a defender to pieces. The artillery bombards in the first phase, then the guards press on through during the main event.

However, I also think that the more mobile you want a stack, the less need for artillery there is. Smaller cavalry forces either need horse guns (which are faster than regular artillery) or none at all (for even more speed). A bunch of hussars will get slowed down by artillery and fancy supply trains. So, in that sense, artillery really is only useful for the main army or smaller siege forces (if you even use that kind of force).

 

[unmerged(20547)]

Mounted artillery was used as reserves. Indeed the first one who used mounted artillery as a mobile, high fire-power reserve was Frederick the Great. Nappy learned alot of good ol' Freddy.

No. Not really. The first use of horse artillery was by the Russians. The Prussians were constantly surprised at how quick they managed to bring artillery to bear at crucial points. When the Prussians found out about horse artillery they were quick to implement it, and it then spread to the other armies. It also wasn't used exclusively as a reserve arm. It was usually attached to cavalry or light units to provide support to these quicker moving units.

 

[unmerged(346511)]

Guys... your anecdotes are nice but artillery is utter crap. Two of you talked of "Up the Guard". Yeah, that tactic is total OP but it has nothing to do with artillery. You need either 15% artillery, cavalry or light infantry to enable it.

Up the guard is strong because the battle events give Guards +400% attack (which is mildly put just game-breaking), not your artillery. Click at the link in my sig and you will see, that:

- Artillery DOES a good amount of damage, but damage is calculated by number of troops * unit attack, so your 1200 artillery with attack 1.5 still do A LOT LESS DAMAGE than 2400 infantry with attack 1.0
- Artillery takes up 3 times the frontage of infantry.
- Up the guard can give a Guard unit an attack value of 4.8 with 2400 men, the phases are (if anyone is interested)
-- Phase 1: artillery & light infantry +20% attack -10% defense
-- Phase 2: Infantry +50% attack -25% defense
-- Phase 3: Cavalry +50% attack -25% defense
-- Phase 4: Guards +400% attack -75% defense
Again you see artillery gets the smallest bonus. And a guard at -75% usually still has more defense than artillery.

I mean sure, before you disband it, put the arillery in a flank with a guard unit, so it "has a nice defender" as you put it, but i wouldn't waste any frontage on those slow pieces.

Is there a way to see how much units were killed by a single unit of me after a battle?

 

[oilers41]

Up the gaurd give a +110% bonus to artillery attack and a 90% bonus to defense during the bombard phase it further has the ability to trigger the massed bombardment combat event in the bombard phase giving an additional +100% attack. Also, the attack value for artillery is 15 in the bombard phase, 33% higher than infantry in the combat phase. Granted the bombard phase only lasts for 5 hours on average so the damage may be a bit lessened becasue of this. While its true that the up the guard tactic can trigger a massive boost to guards it can also trigger a pretty powerful boost for artillery as well. Also, without artillery, your army is dealing zero damage while in the bombard phase. I havent done any comparisons of an army with artillery to one without but your above argument is ignoring the entire bombard phase and youre citing one event while ignoring another.

Also, artillery has the line backrow = yes

Does anyone know if this is treated the same way as artillery is treated in EU 3? If so that would really increase the benefit of artillery

 

[unmerged(346511)]

And what are the chances that "Massed Bombardment" even triggers in the first 5 hours of a battle?

Its just my personal experience that artillery is a waste of space. In battles where frontage matters i can put 7200 infantry on the same space as 1200 artillery. In battles where frontage doesn't matter, artillery comes in handy because its impossible to put 108.000 men in one flank (frontage 50). The attrition would kill you.

But who does field that big armies? I surely didn't so far.

In the small stacks i move around in enemy lands every man counts and 'backrow = yes' only means the 5 enemy brigades divide their fire only among my 4 brigades cause the artillery sits back and cant get hit.

To really test this we should set up a multiplayer game with 2 big powers and fight equal armies with and without artillery.

PS: also i really don't get why the uberguard units allow so far superior combat maneuvers, too. The maneuvers should depend on the general and not one of his units.

 

[unmerged(281782)]

There is also another thing worth considering when thinking about adding artillery to the mix. As Briken stated somewhere, generals decide whether to attempt to end bombard phase based on situation. While people are talking about 5 hours, every battle I've fought had bombard phase last for one hour only, due to my forces lacking any artillery.