Artillery Over Represented?

Was just idly thinking about this the other day and thought I'd toss it up here.

Obviously, NTW is scaled, i.e. one game soldier represents more than one 'real' soldier. In very general terms, one NTW figure seems to represent about four 'real' soldiers.

Yet, we have artillery batteries with one NTW cannon representing one real cannon. Not only does this increase the amount and effect of artillery by about a factor of 400%, but the frontages of artillery seems way out of proportion, i.e. a four to six gun battery has about the same frontage as a line battalion. This seems wildly in error.

I'm thinking that an artillery battery might better be represented by one to two pieces.

I'd be very interested to hear from some of you knowledgeable folks.

I'd say 7-8 cannons per 1000 in-game soldiers would be a good enough number.

Why can't you just imagine each cannon represents more than one, the same way you have with the soldiers?

For me, my perfect stack would be:

1x General
4x Cavalry
4x Artillery, best possible
1x Rocket when available (for the range)
10x Infantry

5 art is totall spam. Also ntw is totally unrealistic so forget about any kind of scale.

Originally Posted by Mikelus Trento

Why can't you just imagine each cannon represents more than one, the same way you have with the soldiers?

For me, my perfect stack would be:

1x General
4x Cavalry
4x Artillery, best possible
1x Rocket when available (for the range)
10x Infantry

That is a pretty nice stack, how well does it work out for you? For me my stacks usually look like this:

2-3x Generals
6x Cavalry
4x Artillery (I recruit the best I can but usually a mix 2 6lbs and 2 12lbs typically)
7x Infantry (Again the best I can but I usually mix it up 4 Line and 3 Light/Country specific units)

The reason I use 2-3 Generals cuz I can get at least one general who will pick up cav bonuses and I turn around and use that general with Cavalry/Artillery as raiders and/or Rebellion supressors armies. Works great for me in areas where my borders touch an enemy's so I can protect my resources and and crush the enemies.

I've always looked at ETW and NTW as 1:10 soldiers and 1:4 with cannon. By that ratio, a infantry/cavalry unit represents about 1 regiment/demi-brigade/brigade (2-3 battalions), and one battery represents a "battalion" (i.e. the divisional artillery of an British-style division, or about 1/2 - 1/3 of the corps artillery under a French system). 1 battery for every 4-6 inf/cav units seems to work out more or less realistically in the game.

I've always looked at ETW and NTW as 1:10 soldiers and 1:4 with cannon. By that ratio, a infantry/cavalry unit represents about 1 regiment/demi-brigade/brigade (2-3 battallions), and one battery represents a "battalion" (i.e. the divisional artillery of an British-style division, or about 1/2 - 1/3 of the corps artillery under a French system). 1 battery for every 4-6 inf/cav units seems to work out more or less realistically in the game.

Interesting. I'll need to look at that. I've been thinking of the infantry units as battalions, but your regiment/demi-brigade/brigade might be a very good idea.

I'm not a historian but at least I know that Artillery plays BIG to Very BIG role in many battles.

Originally Posted by MeenChawitTH

I'm not a historian but at least I know that Artillery plays BIG to Very BIG role in many battles.

This.

Artillery only works when it is MASSED. Napoleon realized this before everyone else did and used it effectively. That's why in the 1700s you see artillery being rather ineffective. When it is effective, like at Washington's siege of Boston, is when you MASS it.

Same in this game. One unit of artillery is practically worthless except to bait the other player's cavalry.

Originally Posted by Shellshock1918

This.

Artillery only works when it is MASSED. Napoleon realized this before everyone else did and used it effectively. That's why in the 1700s you see artillery being rather ineffective. When it is effective, like at Washington's siege of Boston, is when you MASS it.

Same in this game. One unit of artillery is practically worthless except to bait the other player's cavalry.

correct me if i am mistaken but other than the usage of massed cavalry did'nt Frederick the Great also have a good hand in the accurate and well placed usage of massed artillery??

Originally Posted by Shellshock1918

This.

Artillery only works when it is MASSED. Napoleon realized this before everyone else did and used it effectively. That's why in the 1700s you see artillery being rather ineffective. When it is effective, like at Washington's siege of Boston, is when you MASS it.

Same in this game. One unit of artillery is practically worthless except to bait the other player's cavalry.

Yes, like air support, or tanks, or heavy cavalry....... geeze I see a consistent theme here.
You have to wonder why it took so long for people to realise certain things. I guess as armchair historians we have the benefit of the interweb and countless information at our fingertips, but to look back at certain military doctrines it seems immediately obvious to the modern mind doesn't it.

In equal scale the number of artillery in NTW greatly outnumbered the ones in real life. The propotion is the dream of Napoleon. I think he said that a perfect army needs five cannons for each 1000 soldiers. But eventually he only managed four in the height of the Grande Armee in 1812.

correct 5 guns of every type for 1000 men (4, 8, 12 and 6 in howitzers)

The problem is that people thought that the arty in etw was underpowered, too much imprecise, and just a infantry killer (your own)

the problem is that CA listened to this.

I usually correct the amount of artillery to correspond with the ratio at the Battle of Austerlitz. And then just give them faster reload times to not totally break balance.

Hi Guys,

I'm late to this discussion but to the OP I'd say; I don't think the models/soldiers are scaled at all in the game. Like you, I would _prefer_ a scaled game, with 5:1 or even 10:1 ratio, but as it is, despite the in-game name of the units, I think we have companies and squadrons, not battalions and regiments. I think that a unit of 160 models is actually 160 men, in a single company, therefore a gun is a single gun, and an artillery unit of 4 guns is a half battery. Most muskets fire in-game at about 80 yards, which is about right for a 1:1 ground scale too (yes, they could fire further, but effective range of <100 yards is roughly right).

If I'm half right then the game presented to us is really a skirmish game, no where near a divisional or corps affair as you'd need to have to properly refight waterloo or borodino or whatever.

Cheers, Moo

Well I can certainly see your point, but given that units have flags I 'think' they are probably supposed to represent battalions. Pretending they are regiments lets us pretend they are about corps sized. And while having more than 20 units available would enable a much more realistically sized battle, I find 20 to be quite enough to keep me busy. Just imagine the AI required to have each battalion deploy six to ten companies from line to column multiplied by 1000 battalions. We are talking about a LOT more computer power. And I'm sure not going to move each of those companies.

I've read that in 1805 the Grand Army averaged 2 guns per 1000 soldiers. So if a 220 soldier NTW unit is scaled at 1:4 you get 880 men - not too far off for some infantry battalions close to full strength. If you take the 1:4 ratio, then a battery should be one to two NTW guns. And looking at frontages, that seems like a more reasonable representation to me. Artillery was quite expensive and the training much more extensive than for the infantry, so the number of guns in the vanilla NTW seems about twice as many as seems reasonable. I think.

Battles also lasted for hours or days and fighting was done at a much slower pace, so artillery had a better chance to be effective. With the 20-minute skirmishes we have in NTW, they *have* to be over-represented somehow, or they'd be close to useless.

Well, you can change the 20 minute setting to 60 minutes or no limit. I tend to use the 60 minute setting, but no limit is a possibility as I like to be able to maneuver my forces into a better position if possible. Also, one of the mods I use opens up the distance between the opposing forces and it take time to form against each other.

Bear in mind that artillery didn't become the major killer on the battlefield until WW1.

Well, prior to the late 18th century when the Austrian army did a lot of development on improving the actual guns and their associated limbers and cassions, artillery was not mobile to not very mobile. Quite small pieces, 3-pdrs etc, were regimental or battalion guns that were man-dragable. They were added to add to the amount of metal an infantry unit could throw and were commonly used to plus up infantry that wasn't especially good. Initially, Napoleon pulled these guns out of the infantry units, but as he killed off more and more of the well-trained, motivated troops he too found it necessary to put them back into the battalions.

The use of massed artillery was, of course, one of his basic techniques, but he certainly didn't invent it. Marlborough used massed guns to batter a hole in the opposing line during the early 18th century.

Actually, I think Napoleon's main claim to fame was his ability to use semi-trained French and/or semi-enthusiastic allied troops so successfully. Plus he fought a LOT of battles.