Cavalry vs Artillery

[Reisman17]

I feel that this mechanic just does not feel right at the moment. If I am able to get my cavalry within charge range on the enemies flanks or rear, when they make contact they should cause an instant rout and cause small casualties. What I see now is the cavalry make contact (maybe kill 1 or 2 enemies) and the artillery falls back and redeploys and starts shooting. In the meantime my cavalry just sits there. This just seems unrealistic. I would also like to see  some indication to show charge range by the way :-).  Cavalry should never be able to charge straight on - one shot of canister should break the cavalry and cause vast casualties as this would kill men and horses in large numbers and even shell would cause major problems (probably at least cause a fall back)  but if cavalry is able to get around the flanks and charge unprotected artillery (e.g. approx 50-100 men vs 250 cavalry charging at you from a unusual direction should be enough for the artillery to call it quits and try to run away and the cavalry should pursue until ordered otherwise). I also think the AI on artillery needs to be tweaked and should target the closest units within range. (e.g. if the cavalry tries to flank the artillery in full view (e.g. not behind hills or far enough away to be spotted) then the artillery should turn and face the threat and try to take them out. This would also give you the choice of keeping the artillery with your front line units or keep them in the rear but give them some protection. I know this was not a big deal historically from what I have read however it would make it more tactical for cavalry and artillery. Hope this makes sense. Let me know what you think.

 

Reisman17

[Jethro]

Excellent point.

 

I don't know if it's been mentioned elsewhere, But, what about spiking guns?  When my cav descends upon unprotected enemy cannon, it should be pretty one-sided and the guns should be captured, if practical, or spiked (destroyed), if not.

 

This is one of the deadliest cavalry capabilities during the time, I believe, and it was an artilleryman's worst nightmare.

 

Oddly, the enemy can somehow move their (presumably) unlimbered guns around while being stomped by a cav unit twice their size.  Seems like such an encounter would end in one of only a few ways.  The most likely result would be that enemy artillery would be spiked or captured and their personnel would be routed, especially if there are twice as many men on horses (with repeaters) than men on foot (with single-shot rifles).  And, since Napoleons weigh 1200 lbs, I doubt anyone would be capable (or desirous) of moving them 50 meters while under close assault by cavalry.  That's kinda crazy.

[David Fair]

Cavalry armed with repeaters?

The only two regiments in the Army of the Potomac with Spencer rifles were the 5th and 6th Michigan (which they used effectively on the East Cavalry field).

Many different ordnance records of Buford's units show that his men were armed with a mix of Sharps, Maynard, Burnsides, and other carbines.

[dm1985]

I agree with the points made above, I've used my cavalry before to hit the enemy's guns in the rear and it just doesn't have the desired effect. the cavalry kill off a few soldiers but the gun continues to fire or starts firing on the cavalry. When I try to have the cavalry charge, they move in but automatically fall back due to their "skirmish mode" they seem to stay constantly in. I have to try and move the cavalry as close as I can to the guns then hit the Hold button just to try and get them to stand and fight but it still doesn't work well. I'm new to this forum so I haven't read many old posts, and I'm sure there's been comparisons made to the old Sid Meyers civil war games, but they really had the cavalry mechanic right in that game. Basically, the cavalry acted as another infantry regiment but had the ability to mount up on horses which gave them greater mobility around the battlefield. They could be put in a "skirmish mode" or regular battle line depending on what you needed them for.

[David Fair]

Can any of you please identify any ACW battle where the enemy's cavalry managed to destroy the artillery?

In 0.83 I was able to take out all 36 guns of the AI's CSA guns with little or no damage to the Fictional Wonder Videttes. Hopefully this will be changed in future releases.

If it is history you are looking for there is no basis in fact for 150 cavalry troopers successfully charging and taking out a line of batteries.

If you have a reference for 150 cavalry troopers taking a single battery by charging I'd be interested.

Do I believe this could and might happen during the ACW. Yes.

Do I believe it happened often or was standard practice. No.

It is my understanding that the standard operational procedure was to dismount and take the battery from skirmish formation. This dramatically reduced cavalry losses (particularly horses) and put the guns at a significant disadvantage because it did not offer a concentrated target for double canister 10 yards.

Historically, I can cite dozens of ACW examples of guns escaping from both infantry and cavalry by withdrawing guns by section. In fact, The Guns of Gettysburg, cites dozens of examples of artillery withdrawing in the face of the enemy by section. Also note that Chancellorsville the artillery withdrawing by section was critical in slowing down the CSA offensive sufficiently to prevent a rout of the Union Army. Chancellorsville was a debacle for the Union; but one that could have been much worse if guns were so easily overrun.

One of the facts of the ACW is that guns were infrequently captured. Unlike the Napoleonic Wars the advances in gun and limber technology did a good job at keeping guns out of harm's way. Six Union batteries at Gettysburg were overrun. All but 4 of the guns were recovered by the Union.

The relationship of charging cavalry to artillery in UGG is pure fiction.

[Teutomatos]

Just an insert in the common conversation. Be careful to distinguish, Cavalry ( saber & 6 barrels gun ) from, Dragoon's operativ like dismount fire action, from ... Mounted Infantry.

 

 In the game, Cavalry is essentialy and almost exclusivly a scout unit. 

 Except may be for confederate on the last roll.

[GeorgeTheGreat]

Just an insert in the common conversation. Be careful to distinguish, Cavalry ( saber & 6 barrels gun ) from, Dragoon's operativ like dismount fire action, from ... Mounted Infantry.

 

 In the game, Cavalry is essentialy and almost exclusivly a scout unit. 

 Except may be for confederate on the last roll.

I feel there should be variation with cavalry with the union having better ranged cavalry and the confederacy having better melee cavalry. I feel there should be cavalry that ranged mainly and other that is mainly melee so there can be more tactics like having the ranged cavalry with hand held guns distracting an infantry or artillery force from behind inorder to give the melee cavalry a benefit when charging head on the now turned around enemy unit. There should also be 2 types of ranged cavalry  1.having cavalry rifles used to shoot over infantry to hit enemy units and 2. handgun cavalry that uses hit and run tactics pulling back after shooting then attacking again after reloading. the rifles should have longer range and reload times with the handguns having much shorter ranger and less reload time. Infantry should have bayonets to fend off melee cavalry attacks from the front. Artillery should have better accuracy against stationary cavalry then infantry because of there size but have a harder time hitting moving cavalry then hitting moving infantry based on there speed. If Howitzer Artillery is introduced then it should a direct fire ability so you can have it attack on any position on the map even if units are not seen or even there. melee cavalry should be able to decimate artillery if it fails to fire a grapeshot at it. The grapeshot should repel charges from moral loss.

[David Fair]

Hmmmm - Are you talking about the Lighting Mule Brigade?

 

That unit was in the western theater of the ACW - not part of the AoP.

 

George the Great - what ACW historical basis supports your preference?

By 1863 the cavalry was evenly matched - see East Cavalry Field.

 

Can you offer any examples in the AoP or ANV supporting your suggestions?

 

Implementing indirect fire in the ACW would be anachronistic.

 

You do realize this is a game about the ACW - right?