nwg

It is very tricky to get the balance absolutely right, i haven't deployed 4 units of howys but i have 3, and you are right that is to many, you suggest that i unit is about right, i would agree with that, they certainly make for a more entertaining battlefield. though at the price with 3 guns i don't see to many taking them into the field, would raising them to 4 make a difference not to sure it would at that price.

Yes, its quite tricky. How to find a place whereby folks want to use howitzers but don't want to buy them in numbers that would supplant cannon. Not sure we'll even find that place balance wise. The original idea for CB3.0 of having 5 howitzer guns / battery was to make them seem attractive enough to buy even though you may only buy 1 unit. Trouble was that they were too cheap (I think) and even though their accuracy is rubbish when you've got a whole heap of them they tend to be effective enough.

I guess in the end if I had to make a choice I'd be happier to see howitzers only occasionally fielded than the other way around with hardly any cannon used.

Lets see how things go for this campaign round.

M.

Great thats settled GP, we may have a while to wait to face each other, but we have plenty to keep us busy in the mean time, with our present games.
I will look forward to it

Yes mate thats fair enough, after all its always what actually happens in the games that is the deciding factor.
Now if i was playing GP this round of games Howitzers would most definitely be making an appearance

I admit to being confused here with the howitzers, there used to be 5 guns per unit ?.....now there are three - and they are more expemsive !. Is that right ?.

I'm sure there's something wrong here if the above is right, should they not have stayed at 5 per unit and gone UP in price OR reduced to three guns per unt and gone DOWN in price OR stayed the same price ?.

Reducing the number of guns AND making them more expensive appears to be wrong, now we're back to the normal version, where no one will buy howitzers again - which we had got away from.

A lot of stuff moved in price with the shift from v3.1 to v3.2, this is the result of moving the weight of primary firing for infantry - as everything is relational almost everything changes, most artillery except 6lb (for no reason I can explain, perhaps rounding error?) changed in price and generally the price went up.

After investigating the howitzer issue from v3.0 it appears that there was an flaw in the calculations that didn't properly make allowance for the large area of effect that howitzers have, so, they were previously far too cheap.

Cannon -are- hard to use because of the terrain and their rather straight line of fire. Howitzers are easy to use in comparison, but have crap accuracy....you make your choice I guess based upon the map and the tactics that suit you best. I'd rather err in favour of the cannon as they should most definitely be the favoured weapon if it comes down to a choice between the two.

After this round of campaigns we should chat about this again. For a few florins more I'm sure we'd be able to add a fourth gun to howitzer batteries if we all felt they had dropped into ineffectiveness due to the small number of pieces that can be presented on the field (unit limit and such).

M.

I don't think that will help any......so far as I can see howitzers (per gun) are nearly twice as much as before......they used to be 5 for about 1000 florins, now 3 for about 1100, they were about 200 per gun, now almost 400 per gun....adding in a fourth gun and putting the price up again is not going to help - me anyway !.

I'll be amazed to see howitzers on the field any more - maybe now and then on howitzer friendly maps, but not often.....even if we do see them they won't be doing the user any good, I'd not worry about someone using them against me, in fact I'd prefer them to.

I agree, they were being used to much before, but the price change is to much, you go from having to many howitzers being used - to none again.

If I were you I'd change this quickly, before we get involved in these up coming battles, as it's clear they will not be used, and one of the best things about CB was that you could use howitzers - now were back to the lobby version again - very, very, very dis-appointing - for me at least.

I've done some very crude and basic howitzwer and cannon testing v the AI.......using many Infantry and Howitzer/Cannons and getting them to fire right though the game.

The results may not be worth very much but they are of some interest I'd say.

Howitzers : about 30 kills per GUN.

Cannons : about 45 kills per GUN.

This would suggest to me that the cannons should be about 50% more expensive on a "kill rate" basis....but of course that is not how units in ntw2 are priced, but it does show that the cannons are far bigger killers IF your able to keep them in action - which is of course harder to do than with howitzers which are easier to protect.

In CB v3.2 it looks to me like howitzers (PER GUN) are more expensive than cannon......with howitzers being about nearly 400 per gun and cannons about 300...these are rough round numbers but give an idea of the inbalance we now find ourselves with.

On this basis I would reduce the howitzer cost's by about 20%, going from 1150 to 1000.....this allows a price for "ease of use and easier protection".

Now you have a really tricky choice which to take, as they are both about the same vaule for money.......which is a big part of the idea behind CB.

I hope this makes sense, but if your still sure all is ok, I will of course accept the way things are, but it does seem a pity to me to take howitzers out of the game again, after bringing them back into it.

One last thing, even when there were to many howitzers being used they did not win the game !.
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
EDIT : all the above have been confirmed with a THIRD test, the howitzers look like there causing loads of deaths, but the numbers are only about 30 per GUN if firing all though the game and using ALL the ammo......90 killed for 1150 florins is not a good deal - i o m that is.

Sure, and this hopefully guarantees a place in everyone's army for at least a few cannon.




Very different weapons though. Cannon don't have an area of effect. Is it worth 100f /gun for an easy to use long range and quite disruptive/deadly weapon (though not perfect I know)? Only the Generals themselves will know.




Everything in the costings is relative and rules based. I can't do what you are suggesting easily without placing the 'bug' back into the system Forget about how cheap Howitzers used to be, that was due to a mathematical error that I didn't pick up until I started working on CB32.




If the enemy army and the terrain was equally favourable to howitzers and cannon I'd like to think that Generals would mostly choose cannon as these historically made up the bulk of every armies artillery park.

For those instances where an enemy is known to 'clump up' or if the map is particularly bad for cannon the howitzers are still a valid choice and players who choose not to use them might get a surprise.

Howitzers in CB32 have 59 ammo per gun, 12lb divisional cannon combined batteries have 39. Howies have 12lb range, more ammo and cost slightly less.

We shouldn't be too tempted to try and measure them against 12lb guns as we may try to measure say 6lb cannon against 12lb cannon - very different beasts. I'm hopeful that most Generals will find a use for these guys at some stage unlike the NTW2 howitzers which were very limited indeed (accuracy and range both quite bad).




I'm hopeful we will see a -lot- less howitzers fielded, by and large, than in CB30. Don't forget that all position type batteries (and howitzers too) got an increase in gunners, this makes them more expensive than they used to be and was done at the communities request. In the end I had to agree that for gameplay reasons there was a valid complaint about this in previous CB versions. No costings in CB are adjusted in isolation though (errors aside) and if you add something or adjust the weight of something then pricing has to change.




True enough, but cannon just were not being purchased ...it was a problem.




Interesting isn't it? The difference is only 2 guns / battery of badly performing weapons but the perception of effectiveness is compeltely changed. I've got to say though, I'm a lot happier with the proportions of the units now. A really reasonable artillery lineup for a Corps in CB would look like:

- 1x position (6 guns),
- 1x divisional (4 guns),
- 1x howitzer (3 guns)

A lucky corps with a -lot- of artillery might choose to add another divisional combined unit (4 guns) but this would be extraordinary from an historical perspective.

I'll be happy to conduct a summation of events after this current round of campaigns when we've all had a chance to see how things work. My inclination at this stage would be to add another gun model at the appropriate increase in cost - these howitzer batteries are now Corps level assets after all - not regimental or brigade pieces as they were assumed to be previously and although smaller in model guns they should be treated the same as the Position Batteries.

Regards, M.

Yes, I agree, that looks to be reasonable...the howitzers may be worth taking "just in case" where there is a REALLY BIG target that the howitzers can shoot at.......then it may be of some real use.

I'd still like to see them cheaper, and I'll have a little bet now, that we don't see many of them in the wiki battles that are about to start soon.

Like any artillery you should be able to use them to force your enemy to do something. You should be able to sit your howitzers behind a terrain feature and pot away at the enemy batteries in relative safety....thereby causing your enemy to do something (move, stop firing, etc). So, although the outright kills may be smaller then before I think the unique attributes of the howitzer are still probably useful.




I wouldn't bet against you on this issue, but its probably as it should be. As we can't have mixed cannon / howitzer batteries due to engine limitations I'd say that -perhaps- one howitzer battery for every three cannon batteries would be about right....if folks don't buy more then 3 artillery batteries then the howitzers will be missed out. But this is good I think. Armies with 3 or 4 howitzer batteries and no cannon batteries at all belong in the late 1800's and early 1900's not 1812.

As far as price is concerned, don't forget that melee focused nations should be going into battle with a lot of support from both cavalry and artillery as they are simply -not- going to win the musket firefight. In general (though not always) these nations have cheaper troops available and will usually have trouble spending all their florins before the unit slots run out.. these are the guys who will be buying heavy cavalry brigades and plenty of heavy artillery (I'm thinking Ottoman and Russians mainly, but Spanish also perhaps Sweden as well though they are not really a melee nation)

Regards, M.

I'd like to see one howitzer per 20 units, but that will not be happening, judged by what myself and Dougie have seen already.....it's a load of cash to spend only to make a lot of noise !.

I really think you have got this wrong M.....you have come up with something brillent, but have now overdone the howitzers change, sure, 3 or 4 of them was plain wrong, but none is just as wrong.

There has to be a price / stat change that tempts people to take one rather than none.....after all about 20-25% of all guns were howitzers on these battlefields, we will be playing again like the normal lobby games with none.

Folks who have a tactical plan to use howitzers will continue to use them I suspect. Folks who are expecting big kills from their artillery were never going to buy them, even previous to the change. The 25% howitzer component of most historical batteries were present for a reason....almost 100 years later there were essentially no cannon left at all, all gun batteries where by then howitzer/guns, capable of firing at 0 degrees elevation or at steep angles as the situation required.

The balancing act is this (as I see it), we're discussing now the probability of a General choosing to buy 1 howitzer battery from the four possible unit slots that folks reserve for artillery units. Seldom are more then 4 units of arty purchased because it leaves an army short on infantry (this is a good thing in my books).

But simply choosing to purchase 4 units of artillery should not of itself dictate that your fourth unit be howitzer, a valid choice would be cannon as well. Specific maps or specific type of enemy tactic (or expected tactic) will lean a commander one way or the other as far as his choice to buy 1 or possibly more units of howitzer.

In my view the balance should never be equal - the commander should not be saying to himself "which will I buy, howie or cannon....it doesn't matter either way" - it -should- matter as these weapons are different and not strickly interchangeable, the choice should be based upon the expected battlefield situation.

This would not pose the same issue if we could mix cannon and howitzer, but as it is I can't really see how I can encourage or not the purchase of a single howitzer battery (and more than 1x should be exceedingly rare) via florins alone. If Howitzers are determined to be under performing at 3 guns but we know that they over perform at 5 guns, simply due to the number of shell issued, then a very likely response will be to make the batteries over strength by adding an additional gun to the unit and adding cost to do it. Making them cheaper is not the answer in my opinion because if the question is 'do they perform' and the answer is no then folks won't buy them no matter how cheap they are....because ultimately they take up an extremely valuable unit slot.

Better to have a good performing unit at a cost commensurate with their performance but high enough to discourage 'spamming' the unit. Having said that, the balance could be readjusted by both reducing the number of gunners and the ammunition of the unit, however I think this reduces their functionality still further and feel pretty certain that some extra cost along with an extra gun model would be a better choice if we're sure they really have no field value at the end of this cycle of campaigns.

I'd like to see someone take 4x howitzer to the field and pound their enemy with them in CB32...I think you will again see the effectiveness of the CB30 howitzers but (thank goodness) this time around the maths error has been corrected and you will have to pay serious florins to do it.

Regards, M.

I did that in my test game v the AI and won't be doing it for "real" as I know the result. 4600 florins spent and 320 kills at best.....in a game with Dougie last night I got 801 kills with a 6 gun 12pdr unit that cost 1750 florins.......

It's clear your happy with things as they are, and it might be better to leave it like this, rather than issue another release, but I'm sure if you try buying howitzers in our games, you won't be doing it more than the first or second game.

Even on the most howitzer "friendly" map they really won't do anything........but no harm done, we are used to no howitzers in the standard game, so it won't be hard to get used to it again in CB.

I think we've covered this pretty well now, we will see in the wiki battles what happens - or not !.
..........................................................................................................
ps-4 unit slots for artillery seems a bit high to me. I had two in a game with Dougie last night, and that seems fine to me, but it's good to have the option of taking more.....and no doubt I'll have 3 or 4 now and then - as the map and situation warrent it.

Hey we are ganging up on you M,
I will go along with Gunner here as it seems very very unlikely that i will be taking howeys into the field in the current games, cost to much for to little effect.
I have been playing around with CB army's and i can see the absolute max of arty i deploy being 3, 4 looks a no no, that is actually fine with me as again i agree with Gunner that 4 out of 20 slots being arty is to many.