Artillery Testing

[treespider]

Started conducting my own tests as a result I discovered a tidbit about production which I will post in the War Room.

As to the framework of the test -

Grand campaign Scenario #1

Non Historical Start
Single Day turns
FOW - OFF

No Building
No Replacements

Chosen hex - Hong Kong
All units Combat Mode
Transferred Aircraft to Pakhoi
Transferred all ships to Pakhoi
No repair to Industry


Ran 10 straight days with 0, None, Nada Activity...just the Allied units in the hex.

Synopsis to follow shortly.

[Kwik E Mart]

why even have the bombard option? you either include independent artillery units in an attack or not. end of discussion...[8|]

[treespider]

For my own and your edification...


BaseLine Test
Hong Kong starts with has 3000 Resource points, 60 Resource centers, 106700 Fuel and 160 Heavy Industry(HI) Factories and 220 Light Industry factories.

Every few turns with Resource production the HI will produce 320 supply points and consume 3200 resource points and 320 fuel. The LI will do nothing without an outside influx of resource points.

Ran 9 turns

AT START - Hong Kong Base and the 6 units contain 18937 total supply. Hong Kong the base had 16620 supply and the units contain 2317 supply points.

Turn 1 Execution saw the units dump their At-Start excess supply into the Hong Kong Base

Turns 1, 3, 6, and 9 also saw the HI add 320 supply points to the base.

The units consumed 27 - 28 supply points per turn.

As a result by the end of the 9 turn cycle the Total Supply in Hong Kong increased from 18937 to 19968.

The resource level fluctuated with production but with no outside influence the resource level entered into a cycle....see this THREAD

Fuel levels decreased with the Industry production Cycle.

Chart of Total Supply

[treespider]

ORIGINAL: Kwik E Mart

why even have the bombard option? you either include independent artillery units in an attack or not. end of discussion...[8|]

Because as BigJ demonstrated - in an isolated base such as Hong Kong, Singapore, Bataan or any single hex island...the attackers bombardment attack will cause the defender to consume supply at an elevated rate... thus any siege will end sooner.[8|]

[Dili]

Very good

One question are the guns types same for all tests. I mean, heavier guns wouldn't make any difference in consumption and destruction?

[pompack]

ORIGINAL: Kwik E Mart

why even have the bombard option? you either include independent artillery units in an attack or not. end of discussion...[8|]

And Bombard is an excellent recon for exact (FOW excepted) AV counts on the defenders.

[treespider]

ORIGINAL: Dili

Very good

One question are the guns types same for all tests. I mean, heavier guns wouldn't make any difference in consumption and destruction?

I hope to have an answer for you by the end of the weekend.

[Kull]

ORIGINAL: pompack

My Conclusions:

While others may not agree [:)], I have come to the conclusion that the current artillery rules are very close to perfect [:D]

If you bombard moderate entrenchmemts in urban terrain, you mostly just burn up ammunition. As Kull stated elsewhere, if you use your artillery in conjunction with your infantry and engineers (anybody say "combined arms"?) you get a very substantial improvement in combat effectiveness over simple infantry assaults.

Furthermore, these results are comforting to me because even with quite heavy artillery support for an infantry assult it is certainly not a "Death Star". It still requires multiple days of assulting with infantry, engineers, and artillery to reduce urban fortifications.

What's really amazing is that I was simply opining about how artillery works in the "real world" (at least circa 1940s), and to see that it's actually modeled that way in game is simply astounding! Thanks very much for running those tests - they seem to prove that once again, the devs got it absolutely right! [&o]

[treespider]

For my own and your edification...


BaseLine Test #2 - Japanese Units in the hex
Hong Kong starts with has 3000 Resource points, 60 Resource centers, 106700 Fuel and 160 Heavy Industry(HI) Factories and 220 Light Industry factories.

Every few turns with Resource production the HI will produce 320 supply points and consume 3200 resource points and 320 fuel. The LI will do nothing without an outside influx of resource points.

Ran 9 turns. Started the Japanese stack adjacent to HK on the march with the execution of the At Start Turn.

AT START (Turn 0) - Hong Kong Base and the 6 units contain 18937 total supply. Hong Kong the base had 16620 supply and the units contain 2317 supply points.

Turn 1 Execution saw the units dump their At-Start excess supply into the Hong Kong Base

Turns 1 Execution saw the HI add 320 supply points to the base.

The units consumed 27 - 29 supply points per turn.

Turn 2 Execution saw the Japanese stack enter Hong Kong. As a result the 60 point resource center stopped producing resources. As such Hong Kong Industry no longer produced supply as the Resource points never advanced beyond the 1000 point level.

As a result by the end of the 9 turn cycle the Total Supply in Hong Kong only increased from 18937 to 19002. Howevr the increase was attributed to a one time input of 320 points from Industry on Turn 1.

One small interesting observation - in baseline Test #1 unit fatigue started at 0 and fluctuated from 1 & 2 after Turn 1 but most of the units were 2. In baseline Test #2 after the Japanese entered the hex the unit fatigue went to 3 and fluctuated between 2 & 3 with most units remaining at 3. Conclusion - the mere presence of an enemy stack in the hex is sufficent for a 1 point increase in fatigue.

Chart of Total Supply

[Kull]

ORIGINAL: Kwik E Mart

why even have the bombard option? you either include independent artillery units in an attack or not. end of discussion...[8|]

ORIGINAL: treespider

Because as BigJ demonstrated - in an isolated base such as Hong Kong, Singapore, Bataan or any single hex island...the attackers bombardment attack will cause the defender to consume supply at an elevated rate... thus any siege will end sooner.[8|]

ORIGINAL: pompack

And Bombard is an excellent recon for exact (FOW excepted) AV counts on the defenders.

Also (as the devs have stated elsewhere) artillery bombardments are modified by terrain. So while bombarding into a City Hex is not very effective, try doing the same thing in a Clear Hex. The difference should be significant.

[treespider]

Artillery Test #3 will consist of the Japanese 24 cm Artillery guns firing by themselves from the Japanese stack.

The Japanese have two Artillery units with eight and six 24cm guns respectively

They also have one unit with eight 15cm guns

They also have two units with twenty-four and twelve 75mm guns

and finally a unit with 36 x 81mm mortars.


I plan on running tests for each caliber firing separately and then one test for the group firing together.

[bklooste]

treespider any chance of doing a test with no large caliber but decent infantry ? The first and only inf test  had some art and fluked a pre attack fort reduction.

[Dili]

I hope to have an answer for you by the end of the weekend.

Thanks treespider

What's really amazing is that I was simply opining about how artillery works in the "real world" (at least circa 1940s), and to see that it's actually modeled that way in game is simply astounding!

Remember that Artillery was one of the bigger killers in typical mobile combat. Here the testing is only in a fortified scenario.

[FatR]

Thanks, pompack. This means hauling ART around still makes sense. Just using bombardment orders (except to gauge enemy's AV) doesn't.

[treespider]

ORIGINAL: bklooste

treespider any chance of doing a test with no large caliber but decent infantry ? The first and only inf test  had some art and fluked a pre attack fort reduction.

Eventually...

[pompack]

ORIGINAL: FatR

Thanks, pompack. This means hauling ART around still makes sense. Just using bombardment orders (except to gauge enemy's AV) doesn't.

And don't forget the effect of artillery on troops in the open. I am looking forward to Treespider's open field test. My hat is off to him for these tests because now I realize just how much work running and documenting these test can be [:)]

[Dili]

And then the main objective should be to make Artillery effects comparable to air bombing and naval bombardment. It would not make sense to have aerial bombardments with much more causalities for same or less explosive delivered.

[Shark7]

ORIGINAL: Dili

And then the main objective should be to make Artillery effects comparable to air bombing and naval bombardment. It would not make sense to have aerial bombardments with much more causalities for same or less explosive delivered.

Or simply have it affect morale, disruption and fatigue. Won't go into detail here, but in the Artillery Pointless thread, I posted an example of what I'd like to see. I do not want the death star back, but I do think it should affect the units morale and combat effectiveness, with resistance based on the unit's experience.

[Sardaukar]

ORIGINAL: Shark7

Or simply have it affect morale, disruption and fatigue. Won't go into detail here, but in the Artillery Pointless thread, I posted an example of what I'd like to see. I do not want the death star back, but I do think it should affect the units morale and combat effectiveness, with resistance based on the unit's experience.

Historically, main use of artillery when used offensively was indeed disrupt and demoralize defender. Defensively artillery was often very deadly against advancing enemy.

[Kwik E Mart]

ORIGINAL: Sardaukar

ORIGINAL: Shark7

Or simply have it affect morale, disruption and fatigue. Won't go into detail here, but in the Artillery Pointless thread, I posted an example of what I'd like to see. I do not want the death star back, but I do think it should affect the units morale and combat effectiveness, with resistance based on the unit's experience.

Historically, main use of artillery when used offensively was indeed disrupt and demoralize defender. Defensively artillery was often very deadly against advancing enemy.

i might also add it was to slow the defenders' building of forts, airfields, ports etc. at least that would seem to be the reason for japanese bombardment of henderson field area during guad (if you consider one shell per night "bombardment")