<blockquote id="quote"><font size="3" face="book antiqua" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by WillieD13</i>
<br />In the scenarios/OBs that I have created, I have broken the howitzers out of the batteries as individual guns (or pairs depending on nationality, and battery makeup), and have had no problems with this division. I have not broken the batteries into sections except for a couple specific cases, generally where there were historically divided and not co-located, although I see no reason it could not be done.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
Hi William
I too, prefer to break down to sections, or half-companies - especially in smaller scenarios. Am I right in thinking that you are breaking out only the howitzer(s) as a section of one or two guns and leaving the remaining 4 or 6 guns as a battery? If so, there is a problem with this, especially in a limited ammunition game. [As an aside, I work on ammunition levels at about 12 rounds / battery / day of a battle, to keep the effect of artillery on the battle down to historical levels]. The problem stems from the common ammunition pool, in that both the 2 gun howitzer section and the residual 4 gun battery draw on the same stock. Given that, and the superior fire power of the 4 gun battery, the wise player never fires the howitzer section, using its share of the pool for the 4 gun battery as this will be more effective use of the shot.
This is also why, unless you are tyring to engineer a difference in performance between the opposing armies, it is important for all batteries on both sides to be broken down to comparable levels.
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="3" face="book antiqua" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">In regards to the "problems" have been bringing up -
Adjustments to the PDT are not needed, since as has been pointed out, it is based on firing strength, and this is already incorporated into the PDT. Breaking it into sections is not a lot different than a battery taking casualties and being reduced in strength. It doesn't matter if the battery started as 6 guns and is now down to 2, or started out with 2 in the first place, 2 guns is 2 guns. Yes, I do understand that 2 x 3 gun batteries do not have the same effect as 1 x 6 gun battery, but the other side of that is you now get 2 "die rolls" instead of 1, thus doubling your chances of getting a hit.
Most guns, once you get beyond a range of around 6 or so have a 1 in the column anyway, the only difference is the number of 1's there are (i.e. the range), and the strength of the battery. Again, 2 guns is 2 guns.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
Quite right. As long as both sides have their batteries broken down to comparable levels. If not, one side with a 6 gun battery can hit targets behind a hedge at long range (1 in the fire table), whereas the other, with 2-gun sections, can not, hit this target no matter how many sections fire.
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="3" face="book antiqua" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Ammo supply is a matter of just taking the extra guns into account and increasing the ammo in the scenario setup.
As for split batteries making more units to move,.... come on now, what kind of aguement is that. What do you do in a larger scenario, or when you break out skirmishers, you have more units there too.
The ZOC consideration (aside for that general debate in itself) is moot. Again, it is no different than having 2 reduced strength batteries in the same hex pointing in 2 directions.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
Agree on all counts
Interested in trying out one of your scenarios on a fellow advocate of gun sections ?
Regards
Mark
VII Corps
NWC
Login
FAQ
