Any practical reason to use low caliber guns?

[yutowap33]

Any practical reason to use low caliber guns, for arti or tanks? I feel that going for anything bellow 60mm is a waste.

[jimwinsor]

More ammo expenditure, and probably fuel as well if mounted on a vehicle.

[zgrssd]

For arti the rule is:
- bigger guns need a lot of ammo.
- the damage per shot is mostly fixed. However artillery with a lot of firepower is given additional attacks instead.
- the callibre is cut by 3, if ranged attack is used. And in defensive combat, Artillery adds a lot of Breakthrough protection thansk to shooting that often

For Tank/AT gun HV guns the rule is:
- Always get the biggest callibre. The last thing you want to do is ruin your hard attack, because you did not pack enough callibre
- pick the biggest tank to have the option for a big gun and heavy armor

For Howitzers:
- Actually 60mm is good enough for most cases.
- Improved Combat armor equals 60mm Armor, Battledress 80 and improved Battledress 100mm. So any Howitzer callibre beyond 100mm is propably wasted, unless the actuall enemy HP justify going bigger
- against infantry, 200 mm armor is also way enough
- I prefer using light tanks for anti-infantry

[newageofpower]

ORIGINAL: zgrssd

- against infantry, 200 mm armor is also way enough

Heavy Guided RPGs will punch through 200mm... But yes, 200mm is very safe in the early game.

[redrum68]

Not really. In the vast majority of cases, its best to pick the largest gun you can unless you really have a wide front where you need cheaper units.

[yutowap33]

My thought exactly. Sure in theory, lower caliber means lower ammo usage, and used to field it for early advantage and field testing. But in practice they are only good against low armor minors, which you can easily swarm without it, and if you need to wage war early against major you'd waste a lot more on upgrades/replacements.

ORIGINAL: zgrssd
..

As always very informative post [&o]

[newageofpower]

ORIGINAL: yutowap33
if you need to wage war early against major you'd waste a lot more on upgrades

Think of it as "economized field testing"; if you've got a decent technician sitting in the Model Design seat you want your model line to be experiencing as much combat as possible.

[BlueTemplar]

But then if you have a very good Technician, wouldn't you tend to give him more BP anyway, resulting in more designs... making the effect of field testing maybe less important ?

As for more cheap weak units vs less powerful units - doesn't it take quite a lot of (sub?)units for a hex to become overstacked ? So I doubt that overkill on calibre/plating is helpful (depending on how fast the opponent is likely to upgrade his own calibre/plating, and how much you're lacking recruits & food...). Obsolete vehicles can also have a second life at fighting minors.

[zgrssd]

ORIGINAL: BlueTemplar

But then if you have a very good Technician, wouldn't you tend to give him more BP anyway, resulting in more designs... making the effect of field testing maybe less important ?

The structural design roll is fixed after the first model in the line.
The base design is rolled once, then only increased via field testing.
All further design scores are rolled once per design pass - based on the structural and base design scores - and the better from the current or new roll is taken.

Unless you had exceptionally bad rolls on the subscores, Field testing is the only way for a Design to improove.

That all being said, the values for field testing are:
"- You’ll earn 1 Field Testing points for a Subunit of the Model placing a hit on an enemy.
- You’ll earn 5 Field Testing points for a Subunit of the Model being hit by an enemy." - 5.12.4. fIeld testInG

As artillery is in the backline it is very unlikely to be hit - ever - except by enemy artillery and breakthroughs. Meanwhile a lot of attacks give a good chance to hit and prevent breakthroughs.
A "suicide move" attack with only artillery might be a viable to way to get some field testing for resources by having the units be slaughtered, but it seems cheaper to "do unto others" instead.

[BlueTemplar]

Well, no, it's not the only way, since your Technician might be able to roll better design scores, whether on an upgrade or a new design ! (Though does the Technician score helps getting better rolls, or just more "design BPs" therefore more rolls ?)

So it's more like if you have a *bad* (and/or unhappy) technician that you'll want to mostly rely on field testing, and only rarely make new designs / design upgrades ?

[AgentFransis]

Field testing is the only way to get a good unit. Just doing designs over and over without field testing will only produce trivial improvements unless some of the rolls are exceptionally low.

The technician skill only reduces design time.

[BlueTemplar]

I guess that there's a limit to how high you can roll without field testing (which "only" directly increases Base Design, right?)? How high and how unlikely is it ?

Also, the increasing BP cost of new designs (or even just design upgrades) makes for diminishing returns...

[yutowap33]

ORIGINAL: zgrssd
The structural design roll is fixed after the first model in the line.

Indeed. Unless playing on easy, between improving my line troops and fixing bad roll models, there is no time to play with low caliber arti or tanks, so I always start with 60mm arti and light tanks. And it is only later in the game that the decision becomes more nuanced.

[zgrssd]

ORIGINAL: BlueTemplar

I guess that there's a limit to how high you can roll without field testing (which "only" directly increases Base Design, right?)? How high and how unlikely is it ?

Also, the increasing BP cost of new designs (or even just design upgrades) makes for diminishing returns...

I repeat:
Strutural Design is rolled once. Never increases or decreases for that entire design line. You want it as high as possible on the first model of a line. The only way to get a better value is to start model line from scratch.

Base Design is rolled once. And increases only via Field Experience. I high start roll is nice, but a low roll is easily fixed by field experience.

All the other design scores are either:
- a new roll being based on Structural and new Bases Design
- the previous roll, if it is higher
So they only trend upwards. The maximum/range of each roll is limited by Structural and Base Design, but it never goes down.

[Soar_Slitherine]

ORIGINAL: zgrssd
Base Design is rolled once. And increases only via Field Experience. I high start roll is nice, but a low roll is easily fixed by field experience.

Actually, the base design is also rerolled with new iterations of a model. It will increase even with 0 field testing if the new roll is better.

[Nagabaron]

I wish Artillery could gain more experience being in the back. There should be a minor mechanic to distribute experience to back-line units from the front. Losing Artillery subunits means you were smashed like a Soviet Corps in 1941.

[DTurtle]

ORIGINAL: AgentFransis

Field testing is the only way to get a good unit. Just doing designs over and over without field testing will only produce trivial improvements unless some of the rolls are exceptionally low.

This is almost true. You need high field testing ONCE per model line (the earlier the better). Every iteration of a model does increase the maximum base design by 10. So there is always some room for improvement. But if you get your base design up to 120 or so with the first two iterations, you do not really need that much field testing any more for the next few iterations as the base design score can only go up a little bit after that.

ORIGINAL: Soar_Slitherine
Actually, the base design is also rerolled with new iterations of a model. It will increase even with 0 field testing if the new roll is better.

Huh, never noticed that. However that reroll can only be between 70 and 100. So you will usually not really see that have any effect.

[zgrssd]

I did just write a suggestion to make small callibre guns have a purpose:
fb.asp?m=4952524

[BlueTemplar]

I assumed that smaller calibre foot arty would be less expensive - how come nobody in this discussion has pointed out that smaller calibre is MORE expensive, when counting in attack power * shots / production cost, while costing the same for power * shots / ammo... and this is without even considering the calibre itself (which might be the most important stat) ?!?

(See the link above for the calculations.)

[Mina]

Artillery has a maximum hard/soft attack value kind of thing going on, where more firepower just means more shots per turn.

I've made a 300mm, 105mm, and 40mm howitzer with identical model design rolls and they all have the same soft attack values. They only differ in that the 300mm Model has 8 attacks per round, the 105mm has 4 per round, and the 40mm has 2.

Things get weird when it comes to other calibres though, it's hard to predict how it'll scale attack values and attacks per round from a given firepower value.

At any rate: The values for a model's design rolls are determined at the time you start the design, and will remain the same for a given unit type. So you can save before giving your model council an order, make your design, end turn, and then reload your save after checking out your new design and doing it again. That way, you can figure out the perfect calibre choice for your current tech level and such to get the most efficient result.

Or just choose 300mm all the time. That'll get you the most attacks per round and near-highest attack values.