Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[frostgiant]

well in WW1, the distance between trenches could be anywhere from 30 meters to 614 meters, soo it might be better to plan for long distance, and try to bring in armoured infantry on anything smaller.

what about shooting at other artillery? I think that the superheavys would shine there. they can be shot back at by anything less then peer. and I don't think artillery crews can get armor so that's taken out of the equation.. and aren't artillery dice attack only? so would that mean they take casualties equal to militia? just one cannon every 10 militia men?

[Stirk]

well in WW1, the distance between trenches could be anywhere from 30 meters to 614 meters, soo it might be better to plan for long distance, and try to bring in armoured infantry on anything smaller.

what about shooting at other artillery? I think that the superheavys would shine there. they can be shot back at by anything less then peer. and I don't think artillery crews can get armor so that's taken out of the equation.. and aren't artillery dice attack only? so would that mean they take casualties equal to militia? just one cannon every 10 militia men?

>Points to the bottom part of the analysis I just posted.

Basically by my half-asleep reckoning, 1 gun has 10 HP. It doesn't seem to effect them to lose 9 guys, aside from moral loss.

TLDR version: I think we should get some more artillery.

[Baffler]

According to my numbers, artillery doesn't do nearly as much damage as infantry if both are deployed properly, and its inability to defend itself directly or to effectively remove itself from danger means it's pretty well dependent on infantry to protect it. It's all a moot point though, since we don't know how people end up engaging each other at closer or longer ranges yet.

Also it seems entrenching requires a unit to stand still for a day, and it'll presumably have to do it all again if it ever moves. Artillery is already slow, depending on how often artillery needs to be moved (probably a function of how mobile infantry units are in combat) entrenching them could be a kick from inconvenient to devastating.

[Stirk]

According to my numbers, artillery doesn't do nearly as much damage as infantry if both are deployed properly, and its inability to defend itself directly or to effectively remove itself from danger means it's pretty well dependent on infantry to protect it. It's all a moot point though, since we don't know how people end up engaging each other at closer or longer ranges yet.

Also it seems entrenching requires a unit to stand still for a day, and it'll presumably have to do it all again if it ever moves. Artillery is already slow, depending on how often artillery needs to be moved (probably a function of how mobile infantry units are in combat) entrenching them could be a kick from inconvenient to devastating.

According to my numbers, they deal fine. What I crunched suggested they will be able to take on the point value I assigned them  in points. An entrenched LA artillery should be able to equal 7.5 militiamen per gun. Its a good deal less if it is out in the open v out in the open, but the only situation that would come up if we were retreating. Which is bad, but its not like having a bunch of infantry hugging it would help much anyway. Artillery is certainly less mobile, but it ain't like we are using it to take trenches.

The "Free shot" only applies to the Mass Charge action. What numbers are you running that suggests infantry can deal more damage unit per unit than arty?

*EDIT*
I also screwed up my math way back during my suggestion. We should probably just use Baffler's this round because I am too tired to fix it .

*Open field LA v militia at 100 m*
> Assuming arty can't cautiously advance, and therefore always take 1/2 dice in damage. The militiamen are assumed to be moving cautiously, thus getting 1/3 dice in damage.
>> Each LA has a value of 7.5, each militiamen has a value of 1. Since artillery can't defend, the Militiamen get effectively double the attacks further doubling their damage to 1 dice/dice.
>>> Final: LA's have ~2.5 attack power compared to the Militiamen's one.

Thus LAs in the worst situation should be equal to 2.5 militiamen.
Entrenched militiamen are only worth 2 militiamen, so LAs in an open field are better equipped to deal with open field combat then militiamen are (aside from their not being nearly as many, of course.)

[Aigre Excalibur]

January 1914

Captain AbstractTraitorHero joins the Officer Corps.

The most votes seems to be on the Baffler Plan, which is focusing on full recruitment efforts and a production Schedule.

For January:

36 Battalions Regular Infantry
9 Battalions Armored Regular Infantry
375 Light Artillery Pieces
125 Heavy Artillery Pieces

Resources Available 1 February 2014

Available military volunteers: 50,000
Political Points: 5
Steel stockpile: 2,960 Metric Tons
Production: 2,500 Metric Tons


In Training:
36,000 Regulars, Available 1 April 1914
9,000 Armoured Regulars, Available 1 April 1914
375 Light Guns (15 Batteries) Available 1 April 1914
125 Heavy guns (15 Batteries) Available 1 April 1914

[Stirk]

Alright, so we already had some steel to start with. We can probably kick up the production of artillery if we want.

Since they are (weirdly) putting effort into steel making, we can assume they are going heavy on the artillery. Maybe we should have a really big gun to counter it after all?

[frostgiant]

I will support any plan to make a superheavy artillery gun to pop other artillery clusters.

Other than that... dump our PP in infantry and mass recruit?

[Stirk]

I will support any plan to make a superheavy artillery gun to pop other artillery clusters.

Other than that... dump our PP in infantry and mass recruit?

A variant on the Baffler Plan probably. For example we could dump some of the recruits for more artillery.

12 Regiments of Regulars (36,000 men)
-Infantry Equipment: 360 tons of steel
3 Regiments of Regulars (9,000 men) 8900
-Infantry Equipment: 90 tons of steel 89
-Trench Armor: 90 tons of steel 89
15 Light Artillery Batteries (3,750 men)
-Artillery Guns: 750 tons of steel
5 Heavy Artillery Batteries (1,500 men)
-Artillery Guns: 750 tons of steel
1 Super Heavy Artillery Gun (100 men)
-1500 tons of steel

total: 3538 steel (1922 left over)

We could have one just to test it. Its not like we are going to use all our metal anyway. A couple more artillery wouldn't hurt, considering we will get ~100,000 militia later anyway.

[Aigre Excalibur]

The conscripts come in batches of 1000. 250 if things get super desperate that they start running around without battalion hqs

And your steel production comes in only at the end of the month.

[Stirk]

Well that's is what I get for writing a plan past 1 am.

Under the Baffler plan, we make ~500 a turn and should be able to implement the SBG in ~2 turns in a modified form that makes sense, even if we increase the lesser artillery.

[Baffler]

That works. Truthfully it didn't even occur to me that extra steel not used in one month would carry over to the next. How's this?

Spoiler: LeBafflier Plan: Modèle Deux (click to show/hide)

The new final count is 48 Regular Infantry, 12 Regular Infantry w/ Armor, 28 Militia w/ Armor, 88 Light Artillery Batteries, 34 Heavy Artillery Batteries, and 1 Supergun. I also noticed that I tallied the production totals wrong, that's fixed here, which explains why we have more artillery now while having spent the same amount.

12 Regiments of Regulars (36,000 men)
-Infantry Equipment: 360 tons of steel
3 Regiments of Regulars (9,000 men)
-Infantry Equipment: 90 tons of steel
-Trench Armor: 90 tons of steel
15 Light Artillery Batteries (3,750 men)
-Artillery Guns: 750 tons of steel
5 Heavy Artillery Batteries (1,500 men)
-Artillery Guns: 750 tons of steel

Spent: 50,000 men, 2040 tons of steel
Total Surplus: 0 men, 460 tons of steel

12 Regiments of Regulars (36,000 men)
-Infantry Equipment: 360 tons of steel
3 Regiments of Regulars (9,000 men)
-Infantry Equipment: 90 tons of steel
-Trench Armor: 90 tons of steel
15 Light Artillery Batteries (3,750 men)
-Artillery Guns: 750 tons of steel
5 Heavy Artillery Batteries (1,500 men)
-Artillery Guns: 750 tons of steel

Spent: 50,000 men, 2040 tons of steel
Total Surplus: 0 men, 920 tons of steel

12 Regiments of Regulars (36,000 men)
-Infantry Equipment: 360 tons of steel
3 Regiments of Regulars (9,000 men)
-Infantry Equipment: 90 tons of steel
-Trench Armor: 90 tons of steel
15 Light Artillery Batteries (3,750 men)
-Artillery Guns: 750 tons of steel
5 Heavy Artillery Batteries (1,500 men)
-Artillery Guns: 750 tons of steel

Spent: 50,000 men, 2040 tons of steel
Total Surplus: 0 men, 1,380 tons of steel

12 Regiments of Regulars (36,000 men)
-Infantry Equipment: 360 tons of steel
3 Regiments of Regulars (9,000 men)
-Infantry Equipment: 90 tons of steel
-Trench Armor: 90 tons of steel
15 Light Artillery Batteries (3,750 men)
-Artillery Guns: 750 tons of steel
5 Heavy Artillery Batteries (1,500 men)
-Artillery Guns: 750 tons of steel

Total: 50,000 men, 2040 tons of steel
Surplus: 0 men, 1,840 tons of steel

14 Regiments of Militia (42,000 men)
-Infantry Equipment: 420 tons of steel
-Trench Armor: 420 tons of steel
14 Light Artillery Batteries: 3,500 men)
-Artillery Guns: 700 tons of steel
8 Heavy Artillery Batteries (2,500 men)
-Artillery Guns: 1,200 tons of steel
1 Superheavy Guns (100 men)
-Artillery Gun: 1,500 steel

Spent: 48,600 men, 4,240 tons of steel
Total Surplus: 1,400 men, 100 tons of steel

14 Regiments of Militia (42,000 men)
-Infantry Equipment: 420 tons of steel
-Trench Armor: 420 tons of steel
14 Light Artillery Batteries: 3,500 men)
-Artillery Guns: 750 tons of steel
6 Heavy Artillery Batteries (1,750 men)
-Artillery Guns: 900 tons of steel

Spent: 4,7250 men, 2,490 tons of steel
Total Surplus: 4,150 men, 110 tons of steel

We have a surplus of 4,150 men and 110 tons of steel under this plan, and I'm not really sure what to do with it. That's enough steel for another two light artillery batteries, but not enough for another heavy. We could also use it to make trench armor for more of the regulars, but we could only do that if we're allowed to manufacture the armor on turn 6 and equip existing infantry units with it. Or, we could also squeeze in another infantry regiment (with any armament, but it would have to be militia since the manpower isn't available until turn 6) plus an accompanying light artillery battery. Or we could just keep them as reserves.

[frostgiant]

I can go for that, It has the superheavy.
A good core of regular infantry and heavy regulars. A good amount of Light and heavy artillery batteries.

I like this outline.
+1 for baffles

[Stirk]

Hm. We could cut out some of our armor if we wanted to send those guys armed and ready. Armoring *all* the militiamen seems excessive given that it will kill their mobility, cut it for at least half of them and we should be able to outfit the soldiers however we want.

[Baffler]

My thinking is that they need the increased survivability more than they need the speed, since militia likely won't be doing much other than holding the line anyway.

Still, GM, is it possible to manufacture trench armor for infantry after they've been trained?

[Stirk]

My thinking is that they need the increased survivability more than they need the speed, since militia likely won't be doing much other than holding the line anyway.

Still, GM, is it possible to manufacture trench armor for infantry after they've been trained?

Survivability is certainly important, but so is mobility. We will probably end up with a mostly-militia army a couple of months into the actual fighting (due to their month/power and cost/metal efficiency). We will need mobility to advance, to respond effectively to any breaches, and the historically problematic "Walk around the trenches and laugh at the French" strategy.

To put it in another way, an unarmored militia can go from the edge of an artillery piece's range to the artillery piece in one turn. An armored militia can make it 80% of the way, unless they sacrifice their own soldiers for speed. I am not saying to remove *all* their armor, but if you remove 4000 militiamen's armor we can add another 4000 militiamen. 8000 mobile militiamen are worth more than 4000 armored ones.

Speaking of which we should probably start to think about troop placement. They got 30,000 to our 50,000 last month, if they continue as is we would outnumber them by ~100,000 by the start of the war. We could be at an advantage. The game generally favors the defenders, so pressing forward regardless of the consequences isn't a great idea, but we should use our advantage. Other things to consider: Spread thin or considerate our forces?