<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!-- generator="bbPress/1.1" -->
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
	<channel>
		<title>Honour Forums &#187; Tag: artillery - Recent Topics</title>
		<link>http://www.sammustafa.com/honour/forum/tags/artillery</link>
		<description>Discuss the Honour system.</description>
		<language>en-US</language>
		<pubDate>Tue, 07 Feb 2012 23:31:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<generator>http://bbpress.org/?v=1.1</generator>
		<textInput>
			<title><![CDATA[Search]]></title>
			<description><![CDATA[Search all topics from these forums.]]></description>
			<name>q</name>
			<link>http://www.sammustafa.com/honour/forum/search.php</link>
		</textInput>
		<atom:link href="http://www.sammustafa.com/honour/forum/rss/tags/artillery/topics" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />

		<item>
			<title>Biggreenbugeyedmonster on "Artillery on a hill"</title>
			<link>http://www.sammustafa.com/honour/forum/topic/artillery-on-a-hill#post-13056</link>
			<pubDate>Thu, 02 Feb 2012 15:28:55 +0000</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>Biggreenbugeyedmonster</dc:creator>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">13056@http://www.sammustafa.com/honour/forum/</guid>
			<description><p>Hi guys,</p>
<p>Artillery is deployed on a hill– there is much better observation, the shot will clear intervening terrain, and it is easier to observe the fall of the shot. But…</p>
<p>Page 45: Fire (Artillery)<br />
“If … the artillery unit is on the same elevation as its target…then the unit uses the full long range bracket. However, … if the shooter is on a different elevation from the point at which the ball first bounced (the beginning of the “long” range), then the unit uses the reduced long range bracket.”</p>
<p>So according to the letyter of the rules, artillery on a hill means that it has reduced range?</p>
<p>I am wondering if this is correct? i.e. that the text should actually read:<br />
“the artillery unit is on the same OR HIGHER elevation as its target, then the unit uses the full long range bracket. However, if the shooter is on A LOWER elevation from the point at which the ball first bounced, then the unit uses the reduced long range bracket.”</p>
<p>Cheers</p>
<p>Paul
</p></description>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Mycenius on "WSS Advice Appreciated: OOBs, Artillery, Grenadiers, Figures"</title>
			<link>http://www.sammustafa.com/honour/forum/topic/wss-advice-appreciated-oobs-artillery-grenadiers-figures#post-12439</link>
			<pubDate>Wed, 16 Nov 2011 19:00:09 +0000</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>Mycenius</dc:creator>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">12439@http://www.sammustafa.com/honour/forum/</guid>
			<description><p>Hi All,</p>
<p>I posted this to TMP but thought I’d toss it up here to see if anyone has any thoughts – with ‘Maurice’ announced as mentioned previously I am finally inspired to do my long hoped for WSS armies. John Churchill has always been a bit of a hero to me (and to a lesser extent Eugene of Savoy as well) – although my knowledge of the WSS and the battles is at a fairly general (or higher) level if you will. As such to help with designing and organising my new wargames armies (I have a large number of 28mm WF plastic figs, and plan on probably getting Front Rank personalities, guns, generals, etc, to round them out) I would appreciate any help, advice, pointers, for the following:</p>
<p><strong>1. Orders of Battle</strong><br />
Is there a good source somewhere for fairly detailed OOBs from the main battles? I am planning to build both an Anglo-Austrian Army and a French (possibly with Bavarian allies) Army – I am not going to try and do an exact Historical OOB of a specific battle, but a kind of generic Quasi-Imagi-Nation (aka Old School style) representative force of historical units – so want to try and identify which Regiments and such for each nation were present at the main battles/campaigns so I can pick out which units I want to model. As the standard armies (in Maurice) will only be about 7-9 Foot Units and 3-5 Cavalry I want to be able to try and pick a good variety to get a representative feel of unit types and uniforms &#38; nationalities for each side (I may of course eventually add extra units in future to expand them). So if there is an especially good source or ‘one-stop-shop’ for OOB info I’d be grateful for a heads up (I have ordered C. S. Grant’s 2 books on Wargaming WSS, and I do have the Ospreys on Blenheim &#38; Marlborough’s Army plus 2-3 general works on Marlborough &#38; his campaigns &#38; WSS, and am planning to order specific books on the battles/campaigns of Marlborough, Ramillies, Malplaquet, et al – e.g. Neil Litten on Ramillies) but I assume there may be some other recommended good OOB sources).</p>
<p><strong>2. Artillery</strong><br />
Could someone please give me a quick pointer on artillery – what was the typical common artillery present with British/Austrian and French armies during the WSS (ignoring early Battalion Guns – I’m talking the army level artillery). I want to order some Front Rank or similar Guns to do an artillery battery for each side and not sure what size ordnance would be the most common or usual for each army? I’m assuming probably 3pdr or 6pdr guns? Also were the army batteries all one calibre or a mix (e.g. could you model a battery of 4 model guns as, for example, 3 x 3pdr models and 1 x 6pdr or 12pdr and it’d be a roughly historical representation/ratio)? Also how were Howitzers used at this time – dispersed amongst the other guns or in a separate ‘battery’? As I understand the army level artillery tended to be just be grouped into a few 'ad-hoc' large 'batteries' for each battle usually...</p>
<p><strong>3. Grenadiers</strong><br />
Could someone clarify if all Nations did the converged Grenadiers (into composite battalions) thing at this stage, or was that something that originated later in the WAS/SYW period?</p>
<p><strong>4. Wargames Factory vs. Front Rank</strong><br />
Has anyone compared the WF Plastics with FR for size/compatibility? Are there any other alternative WSS manufacturers that might go well with WF other than FR that can be recommended?</p>
<p>Greatly appreciate any &#38; all feedback,</p>
<p>John<br />
<a href="http://wargaming.info/”">Wargaming.info</a>
</p></description>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Recce on "British Difficulties?"</title>
			<link>http://www.sammustafa.com/honour/forum/topic/british-difficulties#post-11198</link>
			<pubDate>Fri, 09 Sep 2011 17:13:22 +0000</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>Recce</dc:creator>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">11198@http://www.sammustafa.com/honour/forum/</guid>
			<description><p>I have yet to actually be able to play a game but I have been following the forums and have read through the rulebook a few times. I am currently painting up a 100 Days British army and I have seen a lot of posts about how the Brits struggle to win a lot of the time. Why is this? Have I already handicapped myself by choosing an army with design flaws?</p>
<p>The biggest issues that I see are the smaller artillery units and the lack of availability of good cavalry.
</p></description>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Mycenius on "I Tell You, My Artillery Caisson Is Contesting The Objective!!"</title>
			<link>http://www.sammustafa.com/honour/forum/topic/i-tell-you-my-artillery-caisson-is-contesting-the-objective#post-9873</link>
			<pubDate>Sun, 24 Apr 2011 16:27:04 +0000</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>Mycenius</dc:creator>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">9873@http://www.sammustafa.com/honour/forum/</guid>
			<description><p>Okay - you get the drift - I know it's been mentioned previously, and Cam &#38; I have discussed in person, and I've done it myself in our latest game - but <em>SHOULD</em> Limbered Artillery be allowed to count as contesting the Objective Marker? I'm inclined to say No, only deployed Artillery within 4BW counts for that purpose, otherwise it's a bit of smelly cheeze? Thoughts...?
</p></description>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>nigeldavid on "Artillery Units Changing Formation"</title>
			<link>http://www.sammustafa.com/honour/forum/topic/artillery-units-changing-formation-1#post-9817</link>
			<pubDate>Sun, 24 Apr 2011 02:46:13 +0000</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>nigeldavid</dc:creator>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">9817@http://www.sammustafa.com/honour/forum/</guid>
			<description><p>Sorry if this question has been answered previously.</p>
<p>Artillery changing to unlimbered (p. 26)</p>
<p>'The bases forming-up for the new formation .....may not form up forward of the chosen base.'</p>
<p>The question arose as to whether it was forward of the position before unlimbering or forward of the new facing of the first base deployed after pivoting.</p>
<p>For a Russian foot battery one interpretation puts the furthest base gun 6 BW from its starting point before movement and the other upto 11 BW away.</p>
<p>If the 2nd interpretation is correct a limbered Russian foot battery could move and unlimber in 1 turn, limber and move in its next, and have moved 18BW in 2 turns rather than 12BW if it moved normally.</p>
<p>3 moves could have the guns moved upto 29BW and deployed or 18 BW.</p>
<p>My opponent graciously deployed only 6BW away - but which interpretation is intended?
</p></description>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>paulus on "Artillery Duels"</title>
			<link>http://www.sammustafa.com/honour/forum/topic/artillery-duels#post-9579</link>
			<pubDate>Tue, 19 Apr 2011 11:08:20 +0000</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>paulus</dc:creator>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">9579@http://www.sammustafa.com/honour/forum/</guid>
			<description><p>Hi Guys have any of you had a game decided by Artillery duels? ....all of a sudden I'm witnessing the power of the Russian uber artillery:) ...</p>
<p>All replys answered ....cheers Paul:)
</p></description>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Mycenius on "1815 Brunswick Army List"</title>
			<link>http://www.sammustafa.com/honour/forum/topic/1815-brunswick-army-list#post-8952</link>
			<pubDate>Mon, 14 Mar 2011 03:53:26 +0000</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>Mycenius</dc:creator>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">8952@http://www.sammustafa.com/honour/forum/</guid>
			<description><p>Hi All,</p>
<p>Couple of quick questions please regarding the troop classification in the list on Page 121 of the rulebook for the Hundred Days period (with regard to the entire Brunswick Contingent rather than just the generic 'brigade' in the list):</p>
<p><strong>1. Brunswick "Elite" Infantry</strong><br />
Is this the Lieb and the AvanteGarde Battalions, or just one or the other, or the entire Light Brigade (i.e. AvanteGarde, Lieb, and 3 Light Battalions)? I'm assuming the 3 Light Battalions are intended to be categorised with the 3 Line Infantry as <em>Reliable/Amateur/SK2</em> but thought I'd better check?</p>
<p><strong>2. Brunswick Light Cavalry</strong><br />
The list entry is presumably representative of the Hussar Regiment. I am speculating the Uhlan Squadron (which was very large and I intend to field as a small Regiment in Lasalle, as it's close to the 300 threshold*) would be rated <em>Reliable/Experienced/Pursuit/Lance</em>? I presume the Hussars are Valiant due to numbers of Veterans from the Peninsula and such, and have therefore assumed the Uhlans lacked equivalent veteran experience (except perhaps officers) so would be Reliable?</p>
<p>* While the Uhlans are just 232 strong approx (assuming all had horses prior to Quatre Bras), the Hussars well exceed the criteria for a 'Large' Regiment with 690 or so effectives (again assuming all have horses pre-QB). Whether you take 68 from Hussars for the Uhlans, or add the 2 together (getting 922 or so) either way you come out with a Large &#38; a Small Cavalry Unit in Lasalle terms (i.e. a nominally 600+ and a 300 strong unit). Besides - who would field the Brunswickers without the Uhlans! And after all the Duke fell at their head leading a charge didn't he?!  ;-)
</p></description>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Mycenius on "Half-Batteries (small 4-Gun Units) of Artillery?"</title>
			<link>http://www.sammustafa.com/honour/forum/topic/half-batteries-small-4-gun-units-of-artillery#post-8948</link>
			<pubDate>Mon, 14 Mar 2011 00:43:12 +0000</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>Mycenius</dc:creator>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">8948@http://www.sammustafa.com/honour/forum/</guid>
			<description><p>Hi All - has there been any thought or discussion around how to model 'Half-Batteries' when needed. I don't mean as a regular event or for competitions but for Historical Refights or Friendlies - obvious example I'm thinking of is Ghigny &#38; Merlen's 2nd &#38; 3rd Dutch-Belgian Light Cavalry Brigades who each had a "Half-Battery" of 3 x 6pdr Guns &#38; 1 x Howitzer and in grand-scale games you can just model this as 1 'battery' but at Lasalle's level you'd actually want to potentially model those 4 guns in some games, especially if doing a 'what-if' or campaign type game (e.g. when Merlen's Brigade was present at Quatre Bras)?</p>
<p>So I'm trying to (a) think of what are the repercussions of modelling a 2-stand Artillery Battery - so far I can't really see anything obvious rules-wise that would be a genuine concern (or open Pandora's Box), and (b) see if has it been discussed previously here, anyone played something similar in an actual game and the result, and/or has Sam expressed any relevant comments (I've done a quick search of the archives and couldn't turn anything up)?
</p></description>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>steadythebuffs on "Artillery unlimbering after Falling Back"</title>
			<link>http://www.sammustafa.com/honour/forum/topic/artillery-unlimbering-after-falling-back#post-5587</link>
			<pubDate>Sat, 07 Aug 2010 07:35:44 +0000</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>steadythebuffs</dc:creator>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">5587@http://www.sammustafa.com/honour/forum/</guid>
			<description><p>Hi,</p>
<p>We have played two games of Lasalle now and have thoroughly enjoyed them. One query that has come up is that whilst artillery cannot limber and unlimber in the same activity phase they can limber as a result of the Fall Back reaction and unlimber in their subsequent Activity Phase. This doesn't seem right as this would mean that you are more flexible when facing an imminent threat from enemy troops. I know that in a previous thread this was raised but answered by stating that artillery cannot limber and unlimber in the same phase but these are two phases (reaction &#38; activity) and so it seems that they can do this. Wouldn't a solution be to say that an artillery battery cannot both limber and unlimber in the same TURN?</p>
<p>Thanks, Kevin.
</p></description>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>flamin camel on "Artillery Bouncethrough Fire question"</title>
			<link>http://www.sammustafa.com/honour/forum/topic/artillery-bouncethrough-fire-question#post-3619</link>
			<pubDate>Tue, 13 Apr 2010 15:23:28 +0000</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>flamin camel</dc:creator>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">3619@http://www.sammustafa.com/honour/forum/</guid>
			<description><p><font size="2">It clearly states in the errata that a unit that is not visible to the shooter may still be hit by bouncethrough fire (in the case that came up in a recent game it was a hill and the unit in question was completely out of sight of the battery), using reduced range.</p>
<p>That is fair enough as heavy cannon balls bouncing around the field could bounce over a hill.</p>
<p>My question is; when you are rolling to hit a unit that is out of sight behind a hill do you take cover modifiers into account? Hard +2 to hit, Soft +1 to hit?</p>
<p>Or would you use the rule on page 51? If any obstructing terrain covers <strong>more than half</strong> of the width of the fire zone, then it terminates the roundshot fire immediately. A unit at the edge of that terrain can still be hit (in cover), but the fire would penetrate no further.</p>
<p>If the rule on page 51 is correct then I am assuming that if the infantry is well behind the crest of the hill then the crest would immediately stop the roundshot.</p>
<p>By the way, the battery was at a the same elevation as the infantry, ground level, with the hill between the guns and the unit behind the hill, and the hill was taller than the infantry.</p>
<p>Thanks,</p>
<p>Jim</font>
</p></description>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>ajbartman on "Basing guns/limbers"</title>
			<link>http://www.sammustafa.com/honour/forum/topic/basing-gunslimbers#post-2642</link>
			<pubDate>Sun, 31 Jan 2010 08:54:21 +0000</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>ajbartman</dc:creator>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">2642@http://www.sammustafa.com/honour/forum/</guid>
			<description><p>What is the best way to base guns and limbers?  Do you have you guns loose on their main base so that you can use take them off and use with a limber or do you just have two guns, one based unlimber and one based with the limber?  I looking for some new ideas.</p>
<p>Thanks.
</p></description>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Nick the Lemming on "Artillery / Limbers basing"</title>
			<link>http://www.sammustafa.com/honour/forum/topic/artillery-limbers-basing#post-275</link>
			<pubDate>Fri, 16 Oct 2009 10:44:42 +0000</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>Nick the Lemming</dc:creator>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">275@http://www.sammustafa.com/honour/forum/</guid>
			<description><p>For 15mm, Infantry basing is recommended as being 40mm x 25mm, and cavalry the same. I notice that artillery basing should have the same width (40mm) as the above, but what is recommended for depth? 40mm again? What about limbers? </p>
<p>Are officers based too? If so, what size base is recommended for them?
</p></description>
		</item>

	</channel>
</rss>

