Artillery in battle.

[Didz]

One of the little pleasures I get from the use of the TROM Mod is that the low trajectory of the guns makes their placement on the battlefield a challenge in itself. Poorly, placed artillery becomes useless using TROM, whilst well placed artillery is literally a battle winner.

Consequently, during the deployment stage of every battle it is the placement of the guns that takes up most of my time and which in turn dictates the placement of my infantry, and the infantry the placement of my cavalry.

In order to place the guns for maximum effect it is necessary quite literally to get down the their level. I lower the camera and to the lowerest angle I can get and peer out across the battlefield from any location which looks remotely suitable.

What I am looking for is something quite specific and also quite rare - The perfect battery position.

The perfect battery position is quite explicit, but quite difficult to find as it has a number of demanding criteria. In its most simplistic form it would be nothing more than a 'billard table', a completely flat and unobstructed piece of ground, but battlefields are rarely that accommodating.

So, what I am looking for is a relatively level stretch of ground, or at worse a stretch of ground which falls away gently in front of the battery with no obvious large obstructions (like woods/walls/houses) close to the gun line. Why I need to get down to eye level to check the likely candidates is that often the details of the ground are difficult to see from a high angle, what i am looking for are imperceptible rises and hillocks just in front of the gun line.

What must be avoided at all costs is the placing of your guns on ground which slopes or rises in front of its position. If you do this then either the batteries fire will bury itself into the slope and not reach the enemy, or it will richocet at a high angle and simply pass over their heads. The only way of being sure of this is to get down level with the battery and look, if you have a clear line of sight then so does the battery.

Of lesser, but still important significance is the placing of batteries on ground which falls away steeply before it. The guns of this period have every limited abilities to depress their barrells, and if the ground before them slopes too steeply away they simply will not be able to engage the enemy advancing on them and one ends up with an area of 'dead ground' in front of the battery where the enemy can gather and perhaps even engage to guns. This is actually a bigger problem in ETW than in real life simply because of the way CA has modelled cannister fire. In real life cannister expanded from the muzzle of the gun in a cone, which mean't that troops on a slope would still be hit by the balls which would otherwise have hit the ground close to the gun. But CA modelled cannister using the same trajectory as a ball and so it flies from the barrell in a low arc and then lands in an area fire effect around the target. Consequently, in ETW cannister can and does fly over the heads of troops deployed in dead ground and so its important not to place your guns at the top of steep slopes, or cliffs.

Finally, one needs to consider the area of effect that a battery in the position being assessed can impose.

Can it reach the key target area's you may want it to engage? (e.g. those pesky buildings the AI loves to garrison)

Is its line of sight, and thus fire, blocked by hills, woods, buildings in the middle distance, behind which the enemy might shelter?

Can your batteries support each other, preferably with enfilading fire?

Will the planned movements of your own troops mask the batteries fire?

Only once my batteries are placed, do I begin to think about the placement of my infantry, and their positions are not so much dictated by the terrain as they are by the locations of the batteries. Some will be placed to provide close support to the guns, whilst others will be deliberately placed so that they can operate against the enemy without masking the batteries fire.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

[A Swedish battery engages a Polish infantry brigade from a good battery position, note how the Swedish Infantry have refused their left flank to avoid masking the batteries fire.]

Once the infantry are in place the final troops to be deployed are the cavalry. These are placed to protect the flanks and gaps in the infantry line, but with the special requirement that whenever possible the area to their front (over which they are expected to charge) is free of obstructions.

Only once as many of these criteria as possible have been met do I press the 'Start' button.

My deployment process (step by Step)

1. Initial Deployment

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

The initial position of the Swedish Army showing the large sparsely wooded hill which is obscuring the field of fire. This hill is a major problem and must be avoided if my artillery are to be able to contribute fully to the forthcoming battle and so an alternative starting position must be found.

2. The Left Flank

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

The situation on the left does not provide much more benefit. The wooded ridge extends almost to the edge of the deployment zone and even beyond that point the ground is sloping upwards which will reduce the effect of my artillery fire.

3. The Right Flank

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

The right flank offers more potential. The wooded hill has receded and the low ridge offers a commanding view over a relatively uncluttered valley.

4. Initial Battery Positions.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Initially battery positions are selected as close to the crest of the ridge as the start lines will allow, and with the two batteries seperated so that they can provide each other with fire support whilst not being overrun by a single assault unit.

5. The Right Hand Battery.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

The view from the right hand battery is then checked in more detail to ensure its acceptable. Note, that whilst it has a clear line of sight to the enemy deployment zone opposite, the position is not ideal, there is substantial 'dead ground' to the batteries front. Ideally I would have liked to move the battery further forward onto the lip of the forward slope to eliminate this area but the start line prevents is and as the battery is 'fixed' I shall just have to live with any problems that arise.

6. The Left Hand Battery.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

The left hand battery has a similar problem though not quite as pronounced as the ridge is not as high at this point and the battery is close to the ridhe line. Nevertheless, I decided to move this battery even further to the left so that it had an even clearly view and less 'dead ground' to deal with.

7. Left Hand Battery Relocation

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

The revised location of the left hand battery, now to the left of tree and only just on the foot of the slope up the side of the ridge. The lower slope and giving the battery a better field of fire.

8. View from the new battery position.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

As you can see the field of fire from this battery is now virtually perfect with only the slightest element of 'dead ground' to its right front and an almost unobstructed line of fire to its left front. The only slight obstical being the fence which in ETW does block some shot.

9. The infantry are dropped into position.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

The infantry are now dropped into position as a battle line extending the full length of the ridge behind the gun positions. The three battalions on the extreme left will form any manoeuvring division as they are not required to support the guns.

10. The Right Flank Cavalry.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

The cavalry on the right flank are placed behind the infantry line as they could not be properly located due to the restrictions of the deployment box. As soon as the battle starts they will be moved to the area indicated so that they have clear ground to their front and will be able to threaten the flanks of any infantry attacking the right flank of the ridge.

11. The Left Flank Cavalry

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

The left flank cavalry, again not a very good position at the moment. The open ground to its front is obstructed by its own infantry and by the wooded enclosure to its left front but it can advance into the open ground and reform if needed. Much will depend on where the enemy appear.

12. Left Flank Refused.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

The enemy have chosen to deploy on the high ground in their centre and so their main strength threaten my left. To counter this I have withdrawn the three left-hand battalions into a refused position. This move has also given the left-hand battery a much wider field of fire to their left.

12. Revised Cavalry Position.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

The left flank cavalry have also been withdrawn to conform to the infantry movement and no have much more room to manoeuvre, either to attack any enemy attempting to debouch from the wooded enclosure or to move against the flanks of any troops attacking the infantry.

13. The Enemy Advance.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

The battle lines having been drawn the enemy now begin their initial advance on my left with four battalions in two lines. Both batteries open fire.

[JaM]

good review! but one thing - you dont need flat land only - even a possition that looks hopeless can be used - you dont need to place guns on top of the hill, even reverse slope is ok - sometimes i use such possitions with infantry down in the valley and guns behind them on the slope - this will not allow you to fire at enemy at long range, but when they reach a top of the hill behind which are your troops, you can fire at them from infantry and artilery - just few salvos and any enemy is routed or destroyed....


btw, most effective artilery fire is flanking fire - if your artilery is placed correctly, one cannonball can kill whole one rank of advancing infantry... this is easilly done with horse artilery units - they are perfect flankers...

[Aeon221]

I, on the other hand, find low trajectory artillery almost useless thanks to some quite frankly bizarre designs by the battle map makers. On what feels like nine maps out of ten, a giant hill sits in the midst of the field! This utterly eliminates fixed position artillery as a significant force, and also tends to render even mobile artillery rather useless because, after all, it takes them ages to work their way up a hill.

That's hardly the fault of the mod, but I would like to note that post download, other than a brief foray into low trajectory cannon, I've mostly stuck to the howitzers. The greater variety of shot and the lessened importance of the spotty terrain makes them an invaluable resource.

Plus, who doesn't like inflicting flaming doom upon their opponents? I sure do!

[JaM]

you see, and that hill in front is perfect as a obstacle for your enemies to set a fire trap...

[Didz]

you dont need to place guns on top of the hill, even reverse slope is ok -

I would be very surprised to find that is true, even CA haven't resorted to allowing artillery to fire through a hill yet. So placing ones guns on a reverse slope, or even a steep hill with 'dead ground' to their front will restrict their field of fire and thus their contribution to the battle.

That's hardly the fault of the mod, but I would like to note that post download, other than a brief foray into low trajectory cannon, I've mostly stuck to the howitzers.

Howitzers, are obviously less demanding in terms of battery placement, although I do sometimes think they seem more accurate when they can see their targets.

The only drawbacks with howitzers is that their range is limited at both ends of the spectrum. e.g. Their shells do not carry as far as long guns, and they cannot engage close range targets e.g. there is a minimum range due to the inability to depress the barrell (not quite historically accurate but true in ETW).

[Beastro]

I tend to mix my infantry and cannons together along flatter ground, especially when I can run them along a stone wall.

With it my infantry and directly support the arty while the arty can still use canister without being exposed or risking a salvo into the backs of my men. Some times is there's a infantrymen or two infront of a cannon they'll buy it but it's well worth the cost.

For sloped ridges I put the arty back on the crest and have my infantry further down but still close enough that the cannons can do a canister shot or two before it becomes a melee.

The only drawbacks with howitzers is that their range is limited at both ends of the spectrum. e.g. Their shells do not carry as far as long guns, and they cannot engage close range targets e.g. there is a minimum range due to the inability to depress the barrell (not quite historically accurate but true in ETW).

The damage they do more than makes up for it. I've had a single salvo from one battery slaughter half a regiment of infantry or even 2/3s of a cavalry regiment.

I loved them for both attacking and defending fortresses. Offensively they're good if you can get them close enough but safley behind a ridge while on the defence they're not as good as cannons but I generally don't allow the AI to get past the walls and it's fairly rare that they knock down a wall and do a suicide rush into the maw of canister.

[Aeon221]

you see, and that hill in front is perfect as a obstacle for your enemies to set a fire trap...

You of course meant to say

... and that hill in front is perfect for hiding the marching in circles of your bewildered enemy

I establish defilades, the AI mostly charges about like a moron. Removing the goofy "hill in the middle" maps, if possible, would allow them to make some use of their otherwise worthless artillery.

I mean, the ai is so stupid that it's hilarious. I've convinced it to fire cannister shot into its own troops through judicious use of pandours. It just isn't bright. But good map design and careful modding (for example, TROM's decision to make running less important for fatigue loss) can mitigate the idiocy.

You know, kind of like the FEAR devs did:

This is fairly cool, but the additional revelations made by Orkin were definite "gotcha" moments. Monolith fully integrated this system with the enemy's dialogue and game environments in an effort to create the illusion that the AI was smarter than it actually is. F.E.A.R. was widely lauded for the ability of its soldiers (both singly and in squads) to flank the player. In reality, the AI wasn't flanking at all -- it was moving from one cover area to another cover area. Because of the skill exhibited by the level designers, that next cover area was to the side of the player's location (or where the designers assumed the player would be), so when the AI moved to that location, it created a seamless illusion of the enemy flanking you.

http://www.gamespy.com/pc/fear/698080p1.html

[Didz]

I tend to mix my infantry and cannons together along flatter ground, especially when I can run them along a stone wall.

Interesting you should mention stone walls, because I started off doing precisely that then I noticed that some of the shot from my guns were not managing to clear the the wall at all, and that loaders were dithering around instead of climbing over the wall to reload the guns. If you check carefully you will notice that the gun muzzles are actually lower than the top of the wall, which means if you don't get the placement just right your not going to achieve anything.

So, I actually avoid walls now, or actually place my guns in front of them.

[Beastro]

Interesting you should mention stone walls, because I started off doing precisely that then I noticed that some of the shot from my guns were not managing to clear the the wall at all, and that loaders were dithering around instead of climbing over the wall to reload the guns.

I haven't noticed shot not clearing the wall while for the crew, I go to great lenths to make sure that there's enough clearance for the crew to reload and not get stuck on the other side of the wall.

[Didz]

I'm also very wary of placing artillery in a cornfield. Those little haystacks they place in cornfields are cannon proof and I actually had a howitzer blow itself up by firing an exploding shell into one just ahead of its muzzle.

So, I keep out of cornfields now.

[MichaelWittmann]

Nice trick but that's exactly why the russian army lost in Austerlitz. It's a rule, an Army, Ship, Tank etc who is inmobile it's an easy prey, you have all the advantage to surround your target and use their own weapons against them, example: i order my infantry to run over a position to simply get out of the range of the cannon so when it open fire the cannon will shoot their own men's, and you'll need to move your infantery and launch a forced cavalry charge to avoid this maneuver. I finish here cuz i not gonna tell you the secret part but you can figure out how it's gonna end.

[Iutland]

Didz
Why don't you place your line infantry and artillery in "tripple line with integrated artillery" group formation.
Placing infantry behind your artillery will either prevent the infantry from shooting or kill your own gunners.
If you have howitzers or morters they should be placed behind the main line and your cavalry should be placed to protect the flanks.
Any melee only infantry could be placed behind each battery to save it from a cavalry or infantry charge.

That "tripple line with integrated artillery" formation allows cannons and line infantry to make supporting fire for each other without shooting each other in the back.

Just an advice from a former Army Seargent.

iutland

[Didz]

Nice trick but that's exactly why the russian army lost in Austerlitz.

Thats an interesting view on the Battle of Auterlitz, but somewhat simplified I think. According to my knowledge of the battle the Russian Army attacked repeatedly and with great courage, along the entire front.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_...tz#Battlefield

On a similar note nothing I am suggesting precludes the artillery being moved, the only point I am making is that in choosing where to deploy it (or move it too) care needs to be taken that the ground is suitable for its use.

The one thing that artillery cannot do in this period is fire whilst moving therefore, analogies with tanks and ships really don't have much relevance, and using the TROM mod there is the added danger that the more accurate artillery of the enemy will find it very easy to take out your guns if they are limbered and moving in a compact formation from A to B under fire.

Why don't you place your line infantry and artillery in "tripple line with integrated artillery" group formation. Placing infantry behind your artillery will either prevent the infantry from shooting or kill your own gunners.

I don't allow my infantry to fire through anything to their front (unless they are on much higher ground) so the 'fire at will' button will be off on any units which are deployed behind the guns, or another infantry unit.

What actually happens when the enemy attack is one of two things.

a) If the enemy attack with infantry then the infantry line will step forward into the gaps between the batteries to bring them into line with the guns. This gives them a clear line of fire and provides the guns with a bit more protection from bayonet charges. This is done selectively so that batteries are not masked from firing across the battle line if the attack is going in elsewhere along its length. e.g. if the infantry would get in the way then they are held back behind the gun line.

b) If the enemy attack with cavalry the infantry behind the guns form square. The square formation causes the centre companies of the infantry to advance slightly which usually means that the front face of the square encompasses the guns and gunners and protects them. I've found if I don't do this the AI will gladly sacrifice a whole cavalry regiment to take out a single battery. Ideally, the gunners ought to abandon their guns and shelter in the square if attacked but I find that feature doesn't work in ETW so the square has to go to the gunners instead.

If you have howitzers or morters they should be placed behind the main line and your cavalry should be placed to protect the flanks.

Agreed, I've deliberately not mentioned the placement of howitzers as they can pretty much fire effectively from anyway.

Mortars have no place on the battlefield anyway, and I've edited them out of my game for reason of historical accuracy, along with a number of other fantasy units.

Any melee only infantry could be placed behind each battery to save it from a cavalry or infantry charge.

Yep! pretty much standard set-up for my Ottoman's etc.

That "tripple line with integrated artillery" formation allows cannons and line infantry to make supporting fire for each other without shooting each other in the back.

Yep! the only reason I don't use the standard formations is that I want more control over the placement of my guns.

[sage2]

Hey Didz,

Great writeup. What you are describing is called 'grazing' fire. I don't if that's the correct terminology for the period, but it was one of key factors of machinegun setup in the early 20th century -- a longer range 'plunging fire' creates a more limited 'beaten zone', and is not as effective. Of course, slopes can cause a very similar effect (though 20th century MGs don't have a problem with the ammunition rolling out when firing down hill...). Despite the surface differences, the doctrinal usage of 18th and 19th century direct fire artillery and early 20th century MGs is very similar.

Sage

[Iutland]

Hi Didz

Nice to hear you got everything covered, did not konw that from your first post. Yes I would like the opportunity as well to withdraw the men from the guns but again it is up to CA. I tried the "Faction Specific Music mod" where you can recruit drummers and I learned that the AI uses a lot of them and their morale etc. is very high. So in battle they were just launched like some "Fire and Forget Missile" against my cannon batteries and they wouldn't break so my gunners took some heavy beating :-(

In the beginning I always placed my troops individually but got tired of the time spent placing units and did not experience any difference in the outcome of the battle. Therefore I use the Group formations as standard now, but it is up to ones own preference.

Have a nice week-end!

Best regards
iutland

[Didz]

Yeah! its sad but I had to stop using Brigadier Grahams mod too, I'm currently using Hollowfaiths faction specific music packs but you can only have one installed at a time so the enemy plays the same music as you do.

Great writeup. What you are describing is called 'grazing' fire.

I think I'm right in saying that Mercer calls it 'ricochet fire' in his journal, the aim being to bounce your shot right through an enemy formation.

Mercer also mentions the problem of having a battery deployed at the top of a slope, and noted that during the French Cavalry attacks at Waterloo the dead ground 50 yards in front of his guns gave the French Cuirassiers a safe area in which to regroup where even his cannister fire could not reach them. All he could see of them was the tops of their plumes.

[sage2]

Mercer also mentions the problem of having a battery deployed at the top of a slope, and noted that during the French Cavalry attacks at Waterloo the dead ground 50 yards in front of his guns gave the French Cuirassiers a safe area in which to regroup where even his cannister fire could not reach them. All he could see of them was the tops of their plumes.

Sounds like a good exmaple of crest vs. military crest?

[Didz]

Sounds like a good exmaple of crest vs. military crest?

Well the slope in front of where his guns were positioned is actually convex in profile, so the 50 yards or so immediately in front of the road behind which his guns were sheltered is relatively shallow in profile and then the slope drops off quite steeply to the valley floor. So, much so in fact, that its difficult to climb it walking upright.

Both the French cavalry and infantry used the dead-ground resulting from this profile to organise and reform after their attacks. But the Allies could not deploy further forward without losing the shelter of the low embankment which the road runs along and which was protecting them from both the French Artillery bombardment and the enemy skirmish fire.

The infantry of course were even further back on the reverse slope which at that point is not very steep.