Huzzah and Hecklers

[Logi]

Right now, we're missing the modified rules for "Army Unit" and "Fortifications, Siege Artillery, and Coastal Defense".

You may ask, 'Why are we waiting for those two rules to be posted? Why can't you post it Logi?". Well the answer would be that it's army related and relies on Rating/Artillery stats and other factors of the old system. These stats no longer exist in N6, hence they have to be reworked. I'm not privy to these details of the rework, so I'm waiting for Snip to post those.

Once we have those, we can start simming diplomatic interactions. Me and Snip will perform some board shuffling, etc. once the time comes. I'll also make a post as Japan attempting to contact the UK once it is time, so once you see that post, it's a signal to go ahead.


Also, if you find an issue in the posted rules, in the "N6 Rules" sub-board, post your complaints etc. in this thread! If you haven't found an error, also post here confirming that you agree with the rules!

[snip]

What I think the agreed consensus was follows. This applies to cost and tech levels, as I don't think we made any changes to that sans the below. Most of what we were working with related to the combat power of each unit, which is something that is not effected by prices.

Army units are 1/2 the N3 cost and are also 1/2 size. (Division as opposed to Corp)
Forts and CD are all the same costs as N3.
Siege Arty was never brought up, so I assume that it is still under N3 rules as well.

[Logi]

The problem is that even if the costs don't change, the rating/artillery is now meaningless. Unless you propose we leave it rating-less. That would be a bit strange.

If it makes a difference to you, you have my personal go-ahead for posting those modified rules.

[Darman]

What I think the agreed consensus was follows. This applies to cost and tech levels, as I don't think we made any changes to that sans the below. Most of what we were working with related to the combat power of each unit, which is something that is not effected by prices.

Army units are 1/2 the N3 cost and are also 1/2 size. (Division as opposed to Corp)
Forts and CD are all the same costs as N3.
Siege Arty was never brought up, so I assume that it is still under N3 rules as well.

Siege Arty and Fortresses I've been pondering and I want to see the results of our combat simulation before commenting on them. 

Siege Arty I see as only having a limited impact directly on the battlefield but during engagements against entrenched or fortified positions they add something to the overall combat power of the unit they are attached to, in addition to the minimal combat power they themselves possess. 
Fortresses I had something similar in mind.  However, I'd like very much to see how our current combat sim works before I go adjusting other factors. 

[The Rock Doctor]

I think Borys used some siege artillery in the Iberian/Austrian war on Ottomania.  If memory serves, I simply added its artillery factor to the rest of the attacking forces.

Given the niche nature of the unit, I don't think we'd be missing much by leaving it out of the rule set this time around.

[Darman]

I think Borys used some siege artillery in the Iberian/Austrian war on Ottomania.  If memory serves, I simply added its artillery factor to the rest of the attacking forces.

Given the niche nature of the unit, I don't think we'd be missing much by leaving it out of the rule set this time around.

I was figuring a minimum combat power and a bonus against fortifications.  We're working on a simulation of field combat rules for right now and then we'll move on to other aspects. 

[Kaiser Kirk]

Fortresses to us seem a bit ineffectual, but usually they capitulated at some point. Worse, we recall WWII and the fall of Eben Emanual to paratroopers, the end run around the Maginot line by Panzers, and the giant German siege guns that cracked Sevastapol. Top off the entire "roof" bit that aerial bombardment brought and to modern views they loose their panache.

One of the things to remember is that fortresses were both fairly common and fairly important- even as late as Hitler's Atlantic wall and the Japanese islands. Heck, the centerpeice of the battle of Verdun were the fortresses, and how they performed had great influence on the later Maginot line. Heck our firebases in Vietnam, places like Kehsahn, Hue, the forts in the Swiss Alps, the Iran-Iraq war's battalion firebases, forts continue in modern times.

The key thing siege artillery does is it allows you to reduce a fortress rather than storming it (basically ineffectual at this time) or starving it out.  I've read that prior to the advent of the horseless carriage, roughly 9.4" (9.2"?) was the largest horsedrawn - which later changed when some howitzers came out, but they were shortranged and subject to counter battery fire. 

This means a fortress commanding a railcenter, critical bridges, defending a road hub, whatever - is a serious problem if you don't have siege artillery.  When you have the artillery, the fort still plays a role in that it slows you down weeks/months. If you don't have it, you need to screen that fortress with troops and arrange an alternative supply route- disrupting any advance. Worse, they often served as depots, which means if an enemy force reinforces the fortress, they can springboard into your rear areas.

So, how would this effect game play?
Kinda force the attacker into a choice - Wait for the siege artillery to come up and do it's work (costing time)?, or screen and move on, hoping your supply lines are good enough and you don't wind up retreating past a hostile fort.  The size and relative era of the siege unit compared to the Fort would matter, and a siege unit older than the fort would be ineffectual.