nwg

The beta for CB 3.2.1 has been released to the testing team. This thread is for comment to and from the testers and those interested onlookers.

I don't expect the beta test to take too long, probably around about a week, then it will be released for general community use.

The big ticket changes for this version are:

1) 8/9/12lb Cannon lose canister and gain shell instead
2) Howitzer, licorne and rockets become the longest ranged weapons in the game, but with horrible accuracy.
3) Howitzers and licornes gain canister as their secondary fire ability
4) New 2 Squadron light cavalry unit for all factions
5) Battalion sized infantry units removed
6) Pricing modified across all factions in an attempt to smooth out the changes introduced in CB3.2

Full list of changes here: http://corps-battles.wikispaces.com/Additional+changes

Comments welcome.

Regards, Moopere

All the changes look good to me, I give it a test as soon as I can and report back. Please see my PM re-the install instructions.

Just a reminder about what a beta is for those that don't know.

"Beta" testing is usually a version of a software product that is almost ready for release but requires a larger testing audience in order to crush remaining bugs.

So it is with CB321 - Its taken quite some time and a lot of keyboard work to get CB321 to where it is now, a beta...there is a strong likelihood of keystroke error or other problems so I need the testing team to report anything at all 'odd' that they see.

For everyone else who is patiently waiting for the final release, don't worry, it won't be long. 7 days is usually long enough to get in a few dozen games (MP and SP) and the final bugs can usually be found in this time. Try not to be tempted to use the beta game as the real 'live' product as things will almost certainly be changed between now and the final release.

Regards, M.

All working ok here in SP, not seen anything "wrong" yet....looks ok so far but playing against AI really has little point, even to try and test things, the daft mad rush (like a lot of lobby games !) gives no time to see how things are working, so I think a few MP games are required.

I can play a couple of games each day this week except Friday.

Best time for me is 2pm-6pm, but I might be able to make 11am with a bit of advance notice.

G24, I just read your invitation at Napbc, thank you.

I note wednesday at 2pm uk time.

I will be there GP.

Very quick test today with g24 v Gp in MP worked fine, but Dougie was unable to get his v3.2.1 working - diff mod message !.......o m g !.

Some early observation from SP mode.

Small cavalry units are often Lancers, but not always, depends on the faction, I would have preferred all to be NOT Lancer type Cavalry, but only a small thing - not really important.

The "new" Generals appear to better, beating the small new Cavalry unit !.....The AI General might be a little more trouble than before - not a bad thing.

Howitzers seem to be even worse than before (I thought we all agreed they had to be improved ?????). It's very early I know, but I'd not expect to ever see them being picked, having hardly any kills at all in the few SP test games I've had so far. That will please GP !. I will need some proper games to see if these were "bad luck" results or if they really are this bad !. If they are as bad as they seem, I'd not buy them for even half the cost. Lets hope these are not normal results, and they are better than they appear to be so far.

Cost changes all look good, so far as I can tell, a bit more variation in Militia now - which is better.

Not tried the British rockets yet, but I don't expect they are not going to do anything much - if better or worse than before. Not an important item really, one way or the other, as long as they are no worse than before it should be fine.

Not sure about the artillery changes yet, I will have to look at them in more detail later, this no cannister, but shell thing, has me a bit confused for the moment - I need to see what they do and don't do in a proper game, costs look ok.

Moopere, one thing bother me since my very first game implying howitzers.

This thing is: "where is the pleasure to use those engines spiting shell like howitzers and now all artillery?"

Indeed, they kill randomly, without any skill. I consider that as in cardgame your opponent withdraws some of your cards, as in a boardgame your opponent pickups some of your pieces, ... you see what I mean.

Probably because I dislike games founded on pure hazard, those manners indispose me? A confirmation?

A pinch of hazard is the salt of live but too salt could petrified. Confer Sodome and Gomorrah story .

Joke apart, I doubt shell was so devastating and at a so long range during the Napoleon era. As far as I remember, french books refer like anecdotally the use of shell.

I am very curious how LG will manage those engines.

I decided to tell that after some CB3.2.1 games but after all I see no reason to delay.

I know I have the habit to often think differently as many other gents, I only wished to give my opinion .

Best regards, gp.

Thanks for the observations. This is exactly what we need, a good discussion on perception of the changes and a jolly good natter about what seems to work and what doesn't appear to work.

I'll respond to Gunners specific points below, but don't take this response the wrong way, I'd encourage all the testers to put up their thoughts on the changes:



I hear you. I'd hoped that the small cavalry unit might end up as hussar, but it was made fairly clear during the discussion on this that end price was very important. As it is most cost 350f which is probably a little more then we'd hoped. Some factions have a sword armed but cheap cavalry unit but others don't. The choice then is for these factions to use their cheapest sword armed unit, but this might push the small units price up over 400f.




Yes, its quite noticeable eh? The General Unit is equivalent to a Hussar unit now (only smaller). Not sure if this is really a good thing or a bad thing...perhaps it doesn't matter either way. Watch out for the AI general poaching your artillery now though.




Statistically speaking they are better, as good as they were in CB30. during internal testing here my impression was that perhaps they are in fact too good and I worry about this. Need to get reports from all the testers however.




Interesting, exactly the sort of feedback I need to - keep it coming in.

The dedicated howitzers have longer range then even the 12lb cannon, this is a design feature not a bug (at this stage) to provide a leg up mainly for those factions who don't have a 12lb cannon. Having said that though, at their maximum range the inherent error in the fall of the shell is going to be huge so I can see why the impression might be that they are fairly useless.

At medium range I think you are likely to see a better effect. The big cannon with their shell option have the same accuracy statistics as the howitzers so fire up a few of these bad boys and let me know what you think. At maximum range with a 6 gun position + 4 gun howitzer battery pounding the enemy positions I have found shell quite devastating.




As I say, I worry that shell is too accurate myself, particularly at medium and close range. But its sometimes hard to use howitzers at their maximum effect against AI. Very interested in some MP results.




Yes, I'm reasonably happy with the 'smoothing' of the costings.




Along with howitzers, rockets also benefit from better accuracy. They are now as accurate as howitzers were previously (so, still pretty bad). Additionally, along with Russian licornes they benefit from having the longest range of any of the field assets in the game. Of course at maximum range their ability to hit anything with pinpoint accuracy is pretty laughable.

Nevertheless I put in a bit of effort on the rocket troops to make them at least viable even if they won't be chosen often. Their ammunition has been tweaked to more reasonable levels, the crew has been reduced to reduce cost, range up, accuracy up and number of carriages increased to 6. Given these changes their cost is pretty attractive. Under the right conditions they are likely to prove quite distracting to an enemy general coming under fire I think.




Yes, its got me scratching my chin also. I'm quite used to pulling up in the front line at maximum range with a big battery of 12's and pounding away, then switching naturally to canister as the enemy closes. I can't do this now. As the enemy closes I have to switch to canister with my howitzers or bring in an additional battery of 6lb. This is confusing and non intuitive...however....at the same time I'm finding that at maximum range I'm using shell from my position 12lb batteries, then, as the range closes to medium I'll switch to roundshot and try to pick off my enemies artillery as it advances. This -does- feel about right, so I guess it might work out.

Its an interesting dynamic now and a hard choice. The familiar rock-paper-scissors game we're used to just got a bit more subtle.

Best regards and thanks again for your first impressions.

Moopere

Well, fully 30% or more of artillery batteries of the period were usually howitzer so these guns were obvious really getting used. You see mention of shell as a unique form of round generally around citations of counter battery fire, fire on buildings and against other more fixed positions, like entrenchments, etc. Certainly there are several citations in english books which refer to the unique British Shrapnel shell which was apparently much hated by all who were at the receiving end.

They don't actually kill randomly, but I certainly won't argue with you that there doesn't appear to be a random element to the fall of the shot. Nevertheless, the shell's tend to fall in a specified roughly circular range of the battlefield.

Howitzers could fire canister, this is a certainty, Russian licornes could fire canister, shell -and- roundshot, and in many ways were the ancestors of the more modern gun/howitzers that started to appear near the end of the century in conflicts like the Boer War.

Howitzers are required, in my view, because some maps make standard cannon ineffective and also some enemy deployment choices make roundshot fire a bit ineffective as well. Indeed, this is probably why shell was invented and used. However, like you, I am keen to not have shell over represented on the field. It should be there but it should not, in our period of interest, supplant roundshot.

In NTW2 because we are limited to a maximum of two types of ammunition per artillery battery some experimentation has been tried for CB321. It seemed a reasonable proposition that the larger calibre guns were generally used for long range support rather than close actions. Not always the case I know, but generally speaking this seems to have been true. I was also coming to the conclusion that the historically indicated but extremely long range of 12lb canister was unbalancing the game.

The related problem appearing was that as players became comfortable with CB the generally preferred army lineup was starting to solidify....and this was starting to look more like 1, 2 or 3 artillery batteries rather then 3, 4 or 5, so the challenge for me was to try and find a way to represent canister, roundshot + shell all at once.

In the beta of CB321 I've tried to create a dichotomy of sorts:

- Choosing howitzers means that at long range you can try and force your opponents hand. If he chooses to do nothing then he will suffer sustained casualties even though though casualties will be somewhat spread due to shell inaccuracy. Any army on the move will usually suffer few casualties due to shell. Traditionally in NTW2 when the forces close the howitzers are of little to no value. In CB321 they re-emerge as a potentially useful 4lb like canister asset for very close action support.

- Conversely, choosing large calibre cannon gives you the ease of use of howitzer shell at long range but also the advantage of precise shot. Long range roundshot will remain the favourite I suspect for removing enemy artillery from the game.

- The small cannon are the bridge between the two. the precise shot advantage of roundshot with a nasty canister ability as well. The perfect weapon for close action support.

My hope is that if players are choosing 3 units of artillery that they will find compelling reasons to seriously think about choosing 1x 6 gun battery, 1x Howitzer battery + 1x 6lb battery rather than the standard now which is usually -all- 12lb assets.

But...

I am quite sensitive to the notion that shell should not become the favoured shot type. By and large I'm hoping that we -do- see some shell, but that the majority of the shot fired will be roundshot or canister.

As with Gunners comments, thanks very much for your point of view. Keep them coming. CB321 is not yet set in stone. I'm providing some of my thinking by way of responses to your comments, but I'm not presupposing that the Beta of CB321 is necessarily the only way to go.

Best regards, Moopere

Hello Gents,
Sadly with my download problems (hopefully now sorted out) and i still a few health issues after my op, i have been unable to join any test games as yet.
Looking at the above comments on arty in CB321, for me the overall balance of the use and deployment giving us something as close as possible to a historical feel to things looks very good to me, off course i need to get out there to comment further.

I have been looking at the new pricing and got one hell of a shock
Now you guys may think that my recent experiences against Gunners Prussians in our campaign may be clouding my judgement and causing me to overreact.
I have thought about this and concluded that this is not the case and that i have a serious concern regarding the balance in CB321.
OK gents the point at last.
Pruss Silesian Schuetzen down from 600 to 475fl
British Rifles down from 650-525fl
To a much lesser extent i would also suggest that French Volts at 525fl are under priced.

These units are ELITES and should be priced accordingly we have all used and faced these units and understand the devastating effect they can have in a musket duel.
The Pruss SS here are the extreme example in my point.
They are no costing only 25fl more than Pruss line infantry, this will mean you can afford to deploy 6, 7 or even 8 of these units having little or no effect on the quality of the rest of your army.
For me this Will turn Prussia into a super CB power similar to what France is in NTW.
Forces being deployed with this number of elite riflemen are also being far from the historical army's we all desire.
You may say with the multiple choices on your army's composition then would we really see these numbers of riflemen in the field ??
Well Gunner24 is the man to ask, he has recently deployed the maximum of these units he can afford to devastating effect, i am very interested to hear his views on this.
I would challenge anybody to take on Gunner with 5 or 6 units of the SS and come out on top
Strangely i notice than Pruss guarde Jaeger remain at the much more suitable in my opinion 625fl.
Moving on to Brit rifles they are now unbelievably costing 125fl less than Brit line.
How can ELITES cost less than line units
OK gents i fully understand the weakness of these units when facing cav and mêlée troops, but i maintain my point, when these units are well protected which is a lot easier in CB than in NTW, they are awesome and even 2 units can be a game winner.
We have seen 1 unit rack up some 600+ kills on more than a few occasions, imagine half an army of these killers.

WOW i glad i got that of my chest I'm of to have a nap I'm exhausted

I am confused !.....in yet another SP game I see the howitzers doing no damage, they are getting about 40 odd kills per battle, compared to 200+ for cannons and rockets.

Brit trial result, kills :
Howitzer - 45
Rockets - 210
6pdr - 163
9pdr - 204

This was not a full "time" battle as the silly AI loses so quickly, but if the battle had lasted longer then the "stats" for all four would have gone up as all had ammo left, that would still leave the howitzers doing little damage compared to the other forms of artillery.

Something looks wrong, there is no point in spending any cash on Howitzers if this is a "normal" kind of result, and it has been in all my SP games so far.....I will try in MP against GP this afternoon, but don't see why that will give a different result.

How many kills does this compare to in standard CB32? Somewhat less I'd assume




Its possibly because the AI keeps its troops moving all the time which is definitely the way to reduce howitzer casualties. My guess is that against more stationary targets the number will increase a lot. The other thing to remember is that kills in MP games will also possibly increase due to the howitzers new canister ability.

Cheers, M.

Wow, Dougie, you are right, I missed this, also the Bruns Rifles as well....I wonder if Moopere has a "fault" in the spreadsheet ?.

The Britis Rifles can not be that much less than the Line troops, they do rout when cavalry even wave their swords in thier direction, but they are so powerfull shooting wise, they need to cost more. On the other hand if you only get Rifles (and no line) I don't think you can win a battle, as they do break on contact a lot of the time.

Also the Howitzers at 1400 florins are NEVER ever gonna get used, not ever, they need to be half that cost - at most !.

EDIT : Generally I only have TWO units of Rifles, two Highlander and two FG - if I can afford them......I don't re-call taking more than two Rifles, as they break when hit with any kind of h2h fighting.