Mass Combat errata

[Ulzgoroth]

Since this has been dragged back up, I'll contribute to the heap again...Heavy AAA is identified as "towed high-velocity guns". Heavy AAA has WT 4 and zero movement. No ground unit has TS 4, so it's more of a can't-possibly-be-towed unit.

Heavy Artillery is similarly impossible to move, but it doesn't explicitly indicate that it should be transportable.

[DungeonCrawler]

Originally Posted by hal

I can see to a degree the reasoning, but then again, if you liken it to machine guns because of its "shotgun-like" capabilities using grape, etc - then one need only look at the higher tech values for machine guns to see that the Horse Artillery is different than the rest...

Heavy support weapons (machine guns) is listed as being (50) instead of just 50.

Game mechanics wise, it seems that artillery or support weapons with a high rate of fire - both can't go up against normal infantry with their full value, but instead, are treated as being items that only count for those special categories.

Actually, it's more in how they were used. Heavy machine guns actually came about in an era when rifles had the same range as the MGs and were already magazine fed, so they were fast firing by any standard short of fully-automatic weapons. MGs had small crews and couldn't stand in toe-to-toe combat because infantry of equivalent firepower could take some casualties and kill the crews...or just stay out of range and cut off the supply of further ammo. They had to be a part of a larger infantry force. (For examples of the failure of the independent rapid-firer doctrine, see the French use of their mitrailleuse before and during the Franco-Prussian War.)

Horse artillery did stand up to infantry of its era and blast them in direct, head-to-head fighting from just outside the effective range of the infantry. Of course, if nothing kept them from doing so, the infantry did--on occasion--catch the horse artillery and obliterate it. But more often, the horse artillery simply withdrew.

In those days, HMGs could have been used exactly the same way. But in the HMGs own era...well, a lot of other capabilities improved too. So even the best machineguns are used as part (or in support of) and infantry force. (Times when an MG might face infantry all on its own would seem to be far below the resolution of Mass Combat...miniatures rules or Squad Leader might demonstrate that. Still, the MG is supporting an overall infantry unit or is an organic part of the unit.)

Note that there isn't any more horse artillery because at the tech level of magazine rifles (or even breech-loading rifles with cartridges), they cease to be viable due to their short range and the vulnerability of the horses and crew to massed rifle fire. They weren't all that vulnerable to massed musket fire, unless they set up too close to the infantry or allowed the infantry to get too close before withdrawing.

[joelbf]

Originally Posted by hal

Just out of curiosity...

Horse Artillery is listed as an unbracketed TS value of 10. It is the only Artillery value in the land battles table for TL 0-5, that is unbracketed. I thought that the reason for the brackets was because units so designated could not fight in a head to head battle with ordinary troops.

It seems a touch odd, that Horse Artillery is listed as being a single gun with its crew, ammunition, horses, etc - can take on line infantry flat out, whereas light artillery with "Mounts" can't.

So what is the difference between using horses with field artillery, ammo boxes, etc, versus light artillery using horse mounts to transport it (which presumably uses the same set up as the Horse Artillery uses (trunnions etc).

Have you posted it as errata?