Adjusting Artillery

[Bavre]

ORIGINAL: stockwellpete

Yes, I am sure you are right for occasional circumstances. It sounds like what you are describing happened in early 1915. I still wonder whether artillery should at least have a chance to de-entrench from the start of the game. In my mod they are able to and doesn't seem to unbalance things much at all. If you look at the early war schedule of when artillery is introduced into the game . . .
.
.
.
So there is not actually that many artillery units in the first 6 months of the war and extra purchases of artillery units and Tech advances do not start kick in until mid 1915.

I am a bit unsure about that. On the one hand there is not much arty to go around early as you said and most players probably just save as many shells as they can, so their lvl 1 starts with a full stock. So the number of additional deentrenchments a lvl 0 deentrench ability would bring is bottomline relatively low.
However it comes in very early. Combining OldCrows shell economy with shrewd use only at a few early key locations might create quite a snowball effect. For example in a current game I fucked up a turn 2 Belgrade due to rng crazyness. 2-3 deentrenching shells would have totally turned that situation around with enormous benefits for the rest of the campaign.

And on the general topic: I too am hugely in favor of limiting shellproduction a bit. It would at the very least alleviate the situation somewhat.

[stockwellpete]

ORIGINAL: Bavre
And on the general topic: I too am hugely in favor of limiting shellproduction a bit. It would at the very least alleviate the situation somewhat.

In my mod I have roughly halved the total number of artillery units so they just represent heavy guns. Shells maximum is 5; range is 3 hexes so there can be counter battery fire; artillery can de-entrench from August 1914; and artillery is balanced on the Western Front between Germany and UK/France. There are a few other modifications too. It seems OK to me after just a couple of games against the AI. The only weakness of it is more of an aesthetic thing - there is relatively less artillery fire - about a third of what you would get in a vanilla game.

One idea I have about this weakness is to increase the maximum number of shells to 8, but reduce the likelihood of de-entrenchment caused by "prepared" Infantry Corps attacks from 100% to 50%, and remove it altogether for attacks by Infantry Corps that are not "prepared". I don't know if this is moddable at all, and I certainly don't know how to do it. Something like this would need a great deal of testing.

[stockwellpete]

What if only "prepared attacks" by infantry could de-entrench enemy infantry? What we might term "second wave attacks", or probing attacks, from units further away could not de-entrench enemy infantry? This would allow a greater number of shells for artillery in any adjustment that might be made in future.

[BillRunacre]

It's not editable I'm afraid, though the de-entrenchment represents a reduction in the quality of defensive position, and a unit that moves before attacking is, compared with a Prepared Attack, going to receive higher casualties.

One thing you could do would be to increase the defensive bonus of a Trench, and also increase the Prepared Attack Bonus. The effect of both changes together being to make unprepared attacks more costly.

[stockwellpete]

ORIGINAL: BillRunacre

It's not editable I'm afraid, though the de-entrenchment represents a reduction in the quality of defensive position, and a unit that moves before attacking is, compared with a Prepared Attack, going to receive higher casualties.

One thing you could do would be to increase the defensive bonus of a Trench, and also increase the Prepared Attack Bonus. The effect of both changes together being to make unprepared attacks more costly.

OK Bill. Thanks for that idea. I will try it out when I have finished my current game.

[stockwellpete]

I have just finished my first game against the AI using the new 1.04 version. I was playing as Central Powers on Veteran default level. No discernible change as far as the artillery was concerned. My German units were blasted out of their trenches by Entente artillery fire in 1916 just as before. This is not remotely historical. So the fix doesn't look like it is going to do much for the SP experience. What is happening in MP? Is the Logistics Tech/Artillery Shells change having more of an impact?

[BillRunacre]

The default setting at Veteran level automatically gives AI units 1 experience point, which, assuming that is the setting used, would give their artillery more power than is possible in PBEM.

[stockwellpete]

I am surprised that there has not been more feedback on the recent change to link Logistics Tech to Shell production. Has it made a big difference in MP? Is it a sufficient change, or do players feel that Artillery is still overpowered?

[Espejo]

Not so much difference at the moment. I still feel that there are is only one valid tech route...Artillery ...Artillery ...Artillery... You just cant fall behind in artillery tech. I really love this game aut it is in the end all around artillery. Is till feel that the LV1 Artillery feels right. Atillery 2 simply destroys even entrechned units essenatially adavances like tanks are just a toy. wors you can go alterantive tech ways like planes or naval as a priority as artillery is so devasting as soon as it hits lvl2

[Espejo]

Perhaps limit the numer of shells for heavy artillerys to just 3 and leave a higher number for lvl1 artillery. Just my thoughts

[stockwellpete]

ORIGINAL: Espejo

Not so much difference at the moment. I still feel that there are is only one valid tech route...Artillery ...Artillery ...Artillery... You just cant fall behind in artillery tech. I really love this game aut it is in the end all around artillery. Is till feel that the LV1 Artillery feels right. Atillery 2 simply destroys even entrechned units essenatially adavances like tanks are just a toy. wors you can go alterantive tech ways like planes or naval as a priority as artillery is so devasting as soon as it hits lvl2

Yes, I think you are right. IN SP artillery still seems too powerful. If you try to follow what Germany did on the Western Front and fight defensively there from late 1914 onwards, you still get blasted to death in 1916.

I think the linking of Logistics to Shell Production was a very good idea, but could you go a bit further with Tech linkages? When the UK rapidly increased shell production in 1915/16 they initially suffered from a very high proportion of dud shells. There were major weaknesses in the production process. So could Production Tech be linked to shells as well? And then there is the question of aircraft reconnaissance being crucial for artillery spotting, so could an aircraft Tech like Long Distance flying be similarly linked?

I actually disagree about artillery at the beginning of the war in the game. Given that artillery units are an abstracted way of representing a nation's fire power, then those units must also represent the heavier guns and howitzers. So I would have them able to de-entrench from the start. But I wouldn't have them automatically de-entrenching every shot, and I wouldn't have them both killing and de-entrenching every shot either. We need to remember for all the shells fired on the Western Front during the war, the trench lines only moved about 5 miles, apart from when the Germans retreated to the Hindenburg line, so it was a very "blunt instrument" as some historians have called it.

But what really puzzles me is that infantry units are able to de-entrench every turn of combat as well, even at the beginning of the war. Why is this? Yes, they did have field artillery integrated into their formations, and this sometimes would have included some of the bigger guns, but basically they were not able to destroy trench networks. The trajectory of most field artillery was fairly flat and they were mostly firing shrapnel shells, not high explosives. Only howitzers, or trench mortars would be able to get direct hits on trenches to "de-entrench". It was only as the war progressed that high explosive shells became increasingly used as the number of heavy guns increased. By then German defences had become very sophisticated (use of concrete, depth of shelters much increased etc) and German infantry doctrine had evolved so that not all their soldiers were in the front line trenches when the bombardments started anyway.

[BillRunacre]

De-entrenching represents a weakening of the defender's position, so it could for example be that their front line trenches have been stormed by a bayonet charge or bombing parties, overrun by tanks, or they have been pounded by artillery.

Artillery units are concentrations of guns, including a core of heavy guns, but at the start of the war most would be field artillery, as production of heavy guns (and their deployment from fortresses to the front lines) took time.

So their increased de-entrenchment abilities reflects their greater potential to damage enemy positions as the war progresses, as field artillery (despite remaining numerous) find themselves serving more and more alongside heavier guns and howitzers.

[stockwellpete]

ORIGINAL: BillRunacre

De-entrenching represents a weakening of the defender's position, so it could for example be that their front line trenches have been stormed by a bayonet charge or bombing parties, overrun by tanks, or they have been pounded by artillery.

Yes, understood. But the scale of the de-entrenchment is just too much, in my opinion. In the game it is like the whole defensive system has been obliterated. The hexes represent 30 square km's, don't they? So to reduce entrenchment to zero in a hex means that everything has gone in that area. By all means reduce it by 1 or 2, but not by 4 or 5. The problem for me is that in the real war the defenders very often had the advantage and therefore the attacker needed to fight "wearing down" battles (attritional warfare) a lot of the time. But, in the game, most of the advantages are with the attacker because they can just blast the living daylights out of one hex and then take it.

Artillery units are concentrations of guns, including a core of heavy guns, but at the start of the war most would be field artillery, as production of heavy guns (and their deployment from fortresses to the front lines) took time.

So their increased de-entrenchment abilities reflects their greater potential to damage enemy positions as the war progresses, as field artillery (despite remaining numerous) find themselves serving more and more alongside heavier guns and howitzers.

Yes, also understood. There are very few artillery units at the start of the war. The Germans have 1 unit in August 1914, which is fairly useless as it is. When does the second artillery unit appear? Is it in 1915? Which country has it? France maybe? So having the first units able to de-entrench (occasionally, not every shot) would not affect the balance too much.

I agree that there should be a gradual increase in their de-entrenchment power, but I am not convinced that the actual guns themselves were a lot more powerful in 1918 than they were in 1914. What changed was the proportion of heavier guns/howitzers produced; the number of shells produced and their eventual improvement in quality; and a real change in artillery doctrine including creeping barrages, flash spotting and more effective counter-battery fire.

So I think there is a case for just one level of Tech increase for Artillery Warfare (make it more expensive); a slowing down of Shell production (max 2 chits at any one time) and a further linkage to Techs (Production Technology definitely, Long Range Aircraft possibly).

[stockwellpete]

Just brainstorming now and I appreciate that some of these ideas might not be appropriate for a game that has been out for a year and has to match up with the two WWW2 games.

In terms of linking Tech to Artillery effectiveness, what if the maximum number of investment chits for Shell/Gas Production was restricted to just one from the start of the game, but could be increased to two if Production Technology Tech reached three? This would be a way of avoiding the issue of "dud" shells by saying that all the shells available to Artillery units would work properly. I would start with artillery getting a maximum of 3 shells, not 5, and then adding 1 for each level of Logistics Tech. Stocks of Artillery shells would be replenished at the default rate until Production Tech reached level 3. Then it would increase by 1 per turn.

Maximum travel distance for "operating moves" that begin and end on a railway line. A limit to the number of "operating" turns allowed by each power per turn (maybe highly industrialised countries like France and Germany can have 3, Turkey and Serbia, on the other hand, might have just 1. This could be increased by 1 if Industrial Tech reached level 4. Artillery units operated can only take a maximum of 3 shells with them.

[grenadier98]

I've modified my campaign so, that artillery starts with just a maximum of three shells + logistics level, which will finally result in eight shells with logistics level five. I've also reduced the number of chits assignable to one for Artillery Weapons and to two for Gas/Shell Production. The US still has her old values. In the end this will not help to remove the abillity to completly destroy the deepest trenchs of an enemy unit in one turn and reduce its morale and readiness down to almost no existence - a feat that the real artillery was not able to achieve to suh a degree. But I've no idea how reduce the artilleries ability of doing this and don't make it useless in the process... At leeast this will slow it down a little.
Maybe it would help to reduce the number of available artillies for the UK, France, Austria, Russia and the Ottomans to two and for Italy to one. As far as I know the German Army had allways more heavy artillery at the western front than the French and the UK together. In 1914 the French had almost no heavy artillery at all.

[Chernobyl]

grenadier did you consider nerfing Logistics tech also? As in increase the cost and lower the chit limit? Could make tech choices a bit more interesting.

[OldCrowBalthazor]

ORIGINAL: grenadier98

I've modified my campaign so, that artillery starts with just a maximum of three shells + logistics level, which will finally result in eight shells with logistics level five. I've also reduced the number of chits assignable to one for Artillery Weapons and to two for Gas/Shell Production. The US still has her old values. In the end this will not help to remove the abillity to completly destroy the deepest trenchs of an enemy unit in one turn and reduce its morale and readiness.

Yeah..some of us been looking at a 1 chit max on Artillery research. It kind of seems like a parallel move similar to WaW..where some potentially uber tech is restricted to 1 for pacing and tempo that needs to stretch over the course of the historical war, ( quite a few game turns and years!). I personally have gotten warm to this idea lately. I think why a lot of these Arty change idea's have been batted along from inception around Dec 2019 is to have both SP and particularly MP's go into 1918 a lot more frequently.

Its was the main underlying reason for PBEM matches to end by mid 1916 commonly in the earlier versions between two opponents that were fairly equal with knowledge of the game mechanics. I believe the recent patch with logistics tied to shell production is a plus...but your modification idea mirrors quite closely with others posted here. There's a lot good discussion and ideas here on the main forum and the Mod section.

Chernobyl's additional idea he just posted about increasing the cost of logistics and and lowering the chit limit also is intriguing. Logistics as you probably already know is super important when tied to HQ units and their supply..and so when players are investing in logistics for boosting shell units..they are also boosting facet of HQ's abilities.

Before the latest version linking logistics to shell limits, it was a rather neglected research with SC-WW1...the opposite of WaW or WiE. Now its regained its importance, a very welcome change imho. Kudo's for Bill and Hubert for the Logistics tied to Shell limit idea and implementation! [&o]

[Espejo]

Its not about the to just slow the artilery research. Otherwise everybody puts one 1 chit into it and we are done. I would like to be able to explore different technologies. Artilery has its place but then planes and tanks and naval etc . should have its place. I dont have a good solution how but at the moment its simply a no brainer to buy as many artilery pieces as soon as possible and research it as fast as you can.

[stockwellpete]

ORIGINAL: grenadier98

I've modified my campaign so, that artillery starts with just a maximum of three shells + logistics level, which will finally result in eight shells with logistics level five. I've also reduced the number of chits assignable to one for Artillery Weapons and to two for Gas/Shell Production. The US still has her old values. In the end this will not help to remove the abillity to completly destroy the deepest trenchs of an enemy unit in one turn and reduce its morale and readiness down to almost no existence - a feat that the real artillery was not able to achieve to suh a degree. But I've no idea how reduce the artilleries ability of doing this and don't make it useless in the process... At leeast this will slow it down a little.

Yes, I think these are very good changes and should be implemented in the game. What I am trying in my new mod is increasing the Defence value of Infantry Corps from 3 to 4 and removing their ability to De-entrench each attack. Instead these attacks cause a modest amount of Demoralisation. So now only Artillery can De-entrench. Not sure at all yet whether this will solve the problem of trenches being destroyed in the later game, but there must be a point where I will het the sweet spot.

Maybe it would help to reduce the number of available artillies for the UK, France, Austria, Russia and the Ottomans to two and for Italy to one. As far as I know the German Army had allways more heavy artillery at the western front than the French and the UK together. In 1914 the French had almost no heavy artillery at all.

Whatever numbers you come up with, I think there has to be a balance between Entente (UK/Fr) and Central Power (Ge) artillery on the Western Front. At Verdun the Germans had more guns deployed, at the Somme the British and French did, but in neither case was that superiority decisive. There needs to be a greater chance in the game for the Western Front to become stalemated, like in the real war, so that the decisive events between 1915 and 1917 happen elsewhere e.g. accelerating collapse of fighting ability of Austria-Hungary, Russia and Ottoman Turkey.

[grenadier98]

ORIGINAL: Chernobyl

grenadier did you consider nerfing Logistics tech also? As in increase the cost and lower the chit limit? Could make tech choices a bit more interesting.

That's a good idea. Haven't thought about it. Germany, France and the UK start with level 2 researched and the UK is allready on their way to the third level. So the "main artillery nations" have an advantage there, which is reasonable. Did you nerf Logistics? I wonder how this should be done exactly. Maybe just limit the amount of placabale chits and not touch the price, because this would be "unfair" to other nations?