"Artillery - The God of War" Topic

I recently fielded a unit of giant crossbows in an Ancients' game. They were intended to stop opposing elephants. In reality, they did nothing.
TMP link

Over many periods of wargaming, I find artillery balance hard to achieve – It either does too much or too little.

Artillery on the tabletop: what role do you want it to play?

Across different periods and rule sets, artillery often looks impressive but behaves very differently from game to game, period to period. In some rules it dominates the table; in others it's more of a supporting or psychological arm.

I'm less interested in historical tables of firepower and more in tabletop effect.

In your games, do you prefer artillery to function primarily as:
• A decisive arm that can break formations
• A supporting arm that shapes infantry combat
• Area denial / positional pressure
• A morale or command-disruption tool

Have you encountered any rules or house tweaks that really improved how artillery "felt" in play—regardless of period or scale?

I'm interested to hear experiences from Ancients through to Horse & Musket, through to WW2 & Modern.

I've read that the problem with artillery in wargames (platoon/company level) is that it can end a game if it hits its target.
I like the way Bolt Action portrays off-board arty. It can arrive when you want (roll that 6) but usually there is some delay.

One thing been thinking recently is ammunition. Often read a battery would run out of on hand suppy and retire. Some seemingly quick fired so they could retire.
Did a scenario once fire was limited on one side, worked well as battery commander had to chose when to burn ip his limited supply.

Too dependent on period and level. As examples, I think of 16th and 17th Century artillery as largely attritional in field battles. Artillery can't win them, but it can compel an out gunned army to attack. In the 18th and 19th centuries, they can often hold their own frontage against infantry--until the infantry become rifle-armed skirmishers. In the world wars, you need bad communications or limted ammunition or the infantry can be reduced to spotters.

How I employ the artillery in my games pretty much depends on the situation, and I'm talking 19th century here.
Defensively, I would use it to bloody opposing units before they close to boost the odds of winning a fight, or mass the guns to fire counter battery.
I would try to mass the guns again on the offensive in counter battery or to hammer a particular unit prior to attacking it.
The root word of battery is batter.
Rules wise, most that I've played seem to have the balance right. If anything, the effects might be a little less than what they should be.

I think most of us are hitting the same problem from different angles: artillery is decisive historically, but has challenges in modelling at tabletop level.

At platoon/company scale, a single good hit can end a game, which is why many rules blunt artillery or push it off-table. Bolt Action's delay system works because the firepower is there, but uncertainty replaces precision.

The ammunition point is key. Historically, guns often didn't die — they fell silent. Limited ammo or orders to conserve fire force real decisions about when to shoot, not just what to shoot. In scenario play, that works very well. I've also used weather to limit shooting _ SYW games where early morning fog disallowed medium & long range shooting for X turns.

Period matters too. 18th–19th century guns can dominate ground until skirmishers appear; in the world wars, without friction, artillery becomes overwhelming. Many rules model firepower but not the constraints. I might guess Bob's satisfying rules control the numbers of guns/batteries to stop it becoming the all-powerful "god"?

IMO, used properly, artillery should shape the fight — disorder, pin, and tilt the odds — rather than simply erase units.

I understand RP's caveat that issues change with periods but I think the issue is still how to "unleash the beast" carefully.

I think it depends on what you want to do. If you want an accurate military simulation then in some periods artillery is the queen of the battlefield and that's the end of it. If you want a 'balanced toy soldier game' then write rules that give you balance either by e.g. limiting ammunition for powerful artillery or imposing communication issues for indirect fire or just plain making artillery less effective than it really was. Senarmont's artillery 'charge' at Friedland shows that even as early as 1800 massed artillery can be devastating so the other alternative is scenarios where there just isn't that much of it.

Choice of scenario matters at least as much as rules sometimes. In a World Wars setting, pursuit/delay situations have less artillery ready to fire ammo stocked and zeroed in. Attacker/defender situations usually mean artillery is more important--unless someone's bacly overstretched or low on ammo.

Even in the 20th Century artillery needn't dominate a game--but it will if you aren't careful.

Scenarios are certainly a mechanism you can use to tweak the performance of artillery – think scenario "special rules".

For example, in the Napoleonic rule set, "Valour and Fortitude", artillery is rather weak & ineffectual. Apart from habitually doubling the frontage (ie using two gun models rather than the stipulated one), I sometimes allow "Grand Batteries". Four gun models wide (increases field of fire) and double the killing ability.

I have found that you should probably limit this to one GB a side in an average sized game to stop artillery becoming an unstoppable "god".

@ Mark. What you write is very correct. Personally, I've only very rarely created "accurate battle simulation" which have some merit but are a little boring as the outcome is pre-determined by history.

BTW I like putting field artillery on table whether this is f=accurate or not.

url=https://postimg.cc/D85DpwVS]

‌

theminiaturespage.com‌

‌"TMP link

theminiaturespage.com

‌"TMP link

I have known of wargamers who put the artillery in another room to get the scale distance right.

Ha! That's classic.

One of the hardest parts of writing our own rules was Artillery in the period 1940 to 2010.
We recognized artillery in many WW2 rule sets was just dreadful. So we went back to original sources. The US manuals on artillery state that in general artillery is used to Suppress and fix in place the enemy, not generally to kill it. We then looked at the amounts and damage it did. We were stunned with how many rounds were needed to impart an area and how few rounds were available in say a self-propelled gun.
So armed with that most rules seemed replicating artillery effect utterly. Many do not have an effective and credible way of reflecting suppression and avoid the need to plan artillery, allowing it to appear semi randomly if called, probably as this makes it useless and easy to plan, as no plan is likely to work as the delay is not credible. Pre-planned artillery is available in very few games as they do not cater for many real world scenarios. Limiting artillery by "purchased "guns does not suitability ration artillery so again it fails horribly.
So how should artillery work in the game, like it should in the real world? Mainly to suppress and fix in place or cause much damage as in counter battery but using massive amounts of ammunition in a relatively small area. In the Ukraine war the mercenaries were moaning they were not allowed the 300 shells required to eliminate a tank!
No of course someone will note artillery killed more than other arms. This is correct but because it cased lots of casualties a very small percentage every day and many in many vulnerable areas, not in battlefield conditions.

pzivh43 The US mauals indicate about 8 155mm round to supress a platoon dug in, Typically an SP gun would carry 40 rounds. The manual itself indicates minimal damage to well dug in troops so whatever game you are reflecting looks to be massively overplaying artillery fire depending on position.

1 155mm round required to suppress troops in the open but then the troops hit the ground so then need 2 rounds to suppress again. This is definitely not a full wipe out.

Ukraine's artillery operations and tactics:
This information is from Westerners who are fighting there and from interviewing some while I was in Ukraine:

Artillery and Mortars: Depending on the ammo supply, they can be used for harassing fire, supporting assaults, or targets of opportunity identified by FO drone operators. Typically, a fire mission is fewer than 10 rounds, ideally 3-5.

Automatic Grenade Launchers: Mostly indirect suppressive fire.

Assaulting Russian Trench lines in Ukraine:
Normally, a team of 10-20 guys is dropped off at the nearest tree line, from a few hundred meters to a kilometer from the objective, usually another tree line. Each guy will have up to 15 loaded mags and at least 6 grenades. Some will also be carrying ammo cans of loose ammo for reloading. They'll normally have a drone operator in over watch who is also acting as the FO coordinating the artillery. Ideally, they have a medic too.

Artillery, usually 155mm or 120mm mortars, starts suppressing the objective while the team starts crossing the open space that is almost completely flat. It could take up to 15 minutes to get to the objective, depending on the terrain and how quickly they can move while carrying extra gear, grenades, and ammo. If detected, the Russians will attempt to hit you with 82mm and 120mm mortar fire. However, sometimes you can jam their comms to prevent it.

When about 200m from the objective, the artillery stops, and the mortars and indirect AGL start hitting the objective. Hopefully, it is coordinated because once the arty fire stops, the defenders will come out and start shooting at you. This is all designed to keep the defenders in their holes. When in an underground position, you need almost a direct hit from a 155mm HE round to collapse it.

Depending on how good the mortar team is and how well you know them depends on when the 82mm mortars are lifted. If you've worked with them before, the fire will lift when you get 25m from the objective.

When the team gets 50m-100m from the objective, they start suppressive small arms fire while firing on the move, even if you don't see a target, you shoot. Once at the trench line, they start clearing it and tossing grenades into any bunker or hole.

Clearing trenches is all about grenades and firing while advancing, and the drone FO can help direct the throws and ID targets, too. If the mortars have enough ammo, they can conduct a "rolling barrage" in front of the team while they advance along the trench line.

The overall artillery effectiveness is determined by how much ammo they have, how good the crew and FO are.

While advancing, don't get suppressed as the Russian 82mm and 120mm mortar Time of Flight and response is about 20-60 seconds.

Sometimes, an assault team will get into an APC and make a mad rush to the objective and assault directly into the objective. Chosen Company in Ukraine is a bunch of mostly Westerners who specialize in assaults. Needless to say, they have a fairly high causality rate.

Check it out: link

I agree with UshCha on the effectiveness. However, with troops in the open, it can be quite different as the Ukraine war is rewriting the manuals. A friend of mine, a former Marine SigInt Operator, was in Bakhmut for one year on the front line as a drone FO Spec Ops Team Leader under GUR.

Defending Bakhmut: He'd be in a building observing and operating the drone. When the Russians (mostly Wagner at the time) would conduct an assault across open ground that was already registered by the local artillery and mortar batteries, it would take 3-5 rounds of accurate 155mm fire, normally from an M777, to stop the assault by killing all of them.

They'd send 3-5 assaults over the same terrain every day. He said when a 155mm HE round hits a guy, he disappears into a pink mist. Accurate 155mm HE will stop APCs, too.

Ukraine Artillery fire coordination: The drone will send a live feed to the FO, who will send it up to a Starlink, which goes to the local battery commander's cell phone. The commander will designate the gun (normally only one) to take the fire mission.

If they have a live feed, they can direct their own fire in real time, and the FO can sit back and watch "Drone TV". Of course, that's the ideal. Sometimes they don't have ammo, or the target is not a priority, or the artillery fire is inaccurate for a number of reasons. Sometimes the comms are out, or the FO must direct the fire.

Russian Assembly Areas: The Russians will designate a trenchline/treeline or building for the assault members to infiltrate in small groups of 2-5 guys. If this is observed by the drone FO operator, he'll observe it for a few days and wait until there are 30-50 guys inside. Then he'll call in priority artillery fire on the building. It takes only 2-3 rounds to collapse the building.

He said you have to develop a good relationship with the Ukie artillery crews to get them to trust you because every time they fire could be their last. You can't shoot & scoot with towed heavy artillery.

Here it is in his own words, while accompanied by a NYT reporter in Dec 2022: link

FYI: The article says that they didn't find any targets; that's what the NYT editor wanted printed. Actually, his team killed over 150 Russians and knocked out about a dozen artillery systems.

Wolfhag

Photo below shows my experience in a nutshell.

In theory, ancient artillery has a clear battlefield role: long-range fire, disruption, and—most famously—anti-elephant work. In practice, on the tabletop it usually fails to justify its points.

The problems are structural rather than rules-specific:

• Static and slow – once deployed, artillery rarely redeploys in time to influence the battle. Opponents simply manoeuvre around it.
• Easily neutralised – skirmishers screen valuable targets, soak up shots, or force poor target choices.
• Narrow target set – elephants are the one matchup where artillery should shine, but outside that, results are underwhelming.
• Opportunity cost – the points and table space could almost always buy more flexible troops.

What tends to happen (as pictured): the bolt-throwers look great, fire a few desultory bolts and then spend the rest of the game watching cavalry and infantry fight somewhere else.

That raises the real design question for me:
What role do we actually want ancient artillery to play on the tabletop?

– Decisive elephant counter?
– Area denial rather than damage?
– Psychological threat rather than killer?

Because when rules try to make it too lethal, it becomes ahistorical and game-breaking. But when they tone it down, artillery becomes decorative.

theminiaturespage.com

‌"TMP link

Re: "Artillery – The God of War

ochoin,
"Artillery on the tabletop: what role do you want it to play?"

Whether we want it to be or not, artillery, especially sustained artillery is a morale problem. This is why the ancients referred to it in reference to their gods. The god of the artillery that the Greeks suddenly had to deal with on the Troad was Apollo and his plague-bearing arrows which pinned down the army on the beaches of the Hellespont for nine days. The significance was inestimable. Firstly, it bought about a crisis of confidence in the Greeks which lead to growing calls to go home. In turn this prompted the kind of soul-searching and contemplations on patriotism and mortality in individuals that lead to men's souls bringing forth the gods. Sudden death from the skies gives every man a choice: to either become a coward, or accept their end is random and use that freedom to die a hero as Hector says, for a greater cause:

"…And for our country 'tis a bliss to die. The gallant man, though slain in fight he be, Yet leaves his nation safe, his children free"

In one sense, great battles were seen as part of the overall plan of Zeus, at another, the playing out of fundamental stirrings of the human psyche manifest in individuals:

"Sing, goddess, the anger of Peleus' son Achilleus
and its devastation, which put pains thousandfold upon the Achaians,
hurled in their multitudes to the house of Hades strong souls
of heroes, but gave their bodies to be the delicate feasting
of dogs, of all birds, and the will of Zeus was accomplished".

Isn't this one of the appeals of wargaming: that even knowing we cannot attack or be a Zeus, Priam or Napoleon, the very machinations of gods, princes and politicians that produced the battle also gave you or I the ability to affect such conflagrations, on the turn of a warrior's decision?

Ailill on campaign put it well when he summoned Fergus to play a board game in the Irish "Tain":

Now sit down,"Ailill said, "and we will play fidchell. You are very welcome
You play fidchell and buanbach
with a king and queen
ruling the game
their eager armies
in iron companies
all around them
not even if you win
can you take my place
I know all
about queens and women.

This was Ailill the great King, knowing he couldn't directly confront his best warrior Fergus for sleeping with his wife. And it's his wife who points out that battles turn on individuals:

Don't forget what still remains,
With the gentle boy-troop all might change.

Thus it is with Apollo's artillery. It was part of the great game of Zeus who needed to reduce the population of earth, especially the proliferation of demi-gods. As such it became a battle between the heroes of humanity and an all-controlling sub-set of divinity which had become monstrous. So, the machinations of the gods that resulted in the abduction of Helen, perhaps produced the lusts within Agamemnon that lead him to keep Chryseis and which made her dishonoured father appeal to Apollo for the retribution which produced the storm of arrows. And it's this basis within simple human motivations which enabled some Greeks to achieve "Ἀρετή" – their full potential – in the face of death – "Out of the strong came forth sweetness" as we read in Judges 14:14.

Any play of any game should be a complex combination of what is in the box and what each player brings to the table. So it is that the largely theoretical but huge impact of death from the skies on a wargame tabletop should be seen as a prompt that turns men, like Gilgamesh, into

"He who saw the Deep, the country's foundation,
who knew the proper ways, was wise in all matters"

and an opportunity for surviving individuals to affect the battle, not just for heroes to emerge from the devastation but for choices that draw forth the true character of the gamer.

The above post should be in the Foreword of every rule set for Ancients.

Superb.

ochoin,
Sorry for my completely off-topic post. I didn't think you specifically meant ancients.

In "Hail Caesar," the abstract time scale means the game does not assign a fixed real-world duration (such as 10 or 30 minutes) to a single game turn. Instead, time represents the varying pace of ancient command and control.

I expect that pertains to artillery too.

If you wanted to model ancient artillery more historically, figure the rate of fire over a time period. Scorpions had a ROF 3-4 shots/minute.

Repeating Ballistra up to 11/minute.

They were accurate enough to "snipe" and hit a man out to about 200 yards.

So if you were using them in a field battle (not siege) you could determine how long it would take the enemy to get into contact with you to see how many shots each one would get off with one or more causalities caused by each shot.

Your question:
In your games, do you prefer artillery to function primarily as:
• A decisive arm that can break formations
• A supporting arm that shapes infantry combat
• Area denial / positional pressure
• A morale or command-disruption tool

I think the answer depends on whether the scenario is a specific historical battle or not. So you could outline in the scenario that the player should use his artillery for one of the functions you listed, and model it that way.

If you did some research into battles, ancient artillery was both effective and not effective; you could get a better idea of how to work something out.

You could also use ChatGBT to do the research for you and give suggestions for rules that would align with Hail Caesar.

Wolfhag

@ Wolfhag – no need for apologies my friend – the topic was posted on "General"to include all periods & I enjoyed reading your expert earlier post – though it was beyond my knowledge base.

The above post is equally knowledgeable & raises some good points & suggestions.

Thanks

I'll be glad to help you out with any AI work. I've completed some courses, and I'm using ChatGBT to help develop some of my game concepts.

Wolfhag

Unlike some, I am not opposed to AI.I think it may well prove to be a useful tool for the hobby. I'll see if I can get some joy with your suggestions.

ChatGPT response:
I understand your request. I've researched ancient large crossbows and related mechanical bolt-firing devices (both portable repeating crossbows and large mounted siege "crossbows" such as ballistae and bed crossbows), focusing on historical use in battles, their effectiveness, rate of fire, and ranges. Then I'll propose three rule suggestions you can integrate into popular ancient warfare tabletop or RPG systems. I'll use for "Hail Caesar" rules and check boardgame geek website along with ancients youtube videos.

Example Use Cases in Gameplay

A defending unit on fortifications uses Burst Fire from repeating crossbows to suppress attacking infantry with a hail of bolts before reloading.

A player deploys a Mounted Siege Crossbow to cover a chokepoint; setup takes time, but its long range deters advancing formations.

On open field scenarios, heavy ballistae can interdict cavalry at long range, but require dedicated crew protection due to slow firing and setup.

Here's a Hail Caesar–specific integration of your ancient large crossbow research, based on the official rules overview, summary sources from fans and reviewers, and the fact that units such as Scorpion bolt throwers are already present in the rulebook and starter sets.
Source: Warlord games

More Hail Caesar Rules That Matter for Ranged Artillery
1. Command and Control

Hail Caesar uses a command roll system: each division commander attempts to issue orders by rolling 2d6 at or under their Leadership value to generate 1–3 movement points for units under command. Orders must be declared before rolling.
Source: Tales of the Brummie Dwarf

2. Ranged Attacks (Short vs Long Range)

Units have Short Range and Long Range missile stats. These govern missile fire before melee. Artillery such as Scorpions and Onagers (light/medium artillery) have distinct profiles in the army lists and rely on these stats for shooting.
Source: Spawning Pool files

3. Artillery Integration

The core rules treat artillery as part of the unit roster; missile fire is resolved similarly to other missile types but with their own range bands and dice. Scorpion bolt throwers (representing smaller crossbow-like siege machines) appear in starter armies.
Source: Warlord games

B. Proposed Rule Additions / Modifications for Ancient Large Crossbows

These three suggestions are designed to integrate historical large crossbow characteristics (e.g., ballistae and Chinese large crossbows) into Hail Caesar without disrupting its core mechanics:

1. Separate Heavy Artillery Category (Hail Caesar Enhancement Rule)

Purpose: Distinguish large bolt-firing machines (ballistae/bed crossbows) from standard artillery and small bolt throwers.

Rule Implementation:

Artillery Classes:

Standard Artillery (e.g., Scorpions, Onagers): Short and Long Range weapon as usual.

Heavy Bolt Artillery (historic large ballista/bed crossbow analogues):

Range Band Increase: Instead of standard Long Range, treat their maximum effective range as +25% (rounded) beyond normal Long Range.

Penetration Bonus: Against Heavy Infantry, they may ignore one level of armour save (or take -1 to morale) when firing at Long Range.

Crew Vulnerability: If attacked in base contact, the crew suffers automatic Short Range casualties at half dice value (rounded down).

Rationale: Shows battlefield role of large crossbows with better penetration and range but with vulnerability when crewed and static.

2. Reload/Rate of Fire Modifiers (Command Phase Integration)

Purpose: Model the slower rate of fire of massive ancient crossbows compared to lighter weapons.

Rule Implementation:

Reload Step Requirement:

Heavy Bolt Artillery requires a Reload Action (one full turn) for every two fires.

Resolve firing on Turn N and mark the unit as "Reloading." It may not fire on Turn N+1.

Standard artillery does not have this penalty.

Command Interaction: The Reload Action does not require a command roll but does consume the unit's firing opportunity for that turn.

Rationale: Historically, large multi-bow crossbows and ballistae—while powerful—were slower to reset and load compared to lighter siege weapons. This rule introduces a tactical decision point between firepower and rate of fire.

3. Artillery Deployment and Position Effects (Terrain and Setup)

Purpose: Emphasize that large crossbows are less mobile and are affected by terrain and setup time.

Rule Implementation:

Deployment Action: Placed as part of pre-game setup or requires one full turn Setup Action in play before first fire (similar to siege rules already introduced in 2nd Edition).

Terrain Penalty:

If positioned in rough terrain (woods/hills), impose –1 to Long Range missile rolls due to difficulty aiming from uneven ground.

Flat/open terrain confers no penalty and may grant +1 to range checks (not damage/penetration).

Rationale: Reflects historical limitations of field-emplaced siege machinery or civil engineering of bolt throwers.

C. Example Unit Profile Additions (Stat Block Concepts)

To show how these rules fit into the Hail Caesar schema (which uses dice for missile/hand combat):

Unit Type Short Range Long Range Reload Rule Notes
Scorpion (standard) 1 2 None Quick fire, low reload
Heavy Bolt Artillery 0 3 Reload after 2 fire actions – Crew vulnerable to close melee, static, high effect at range
Onager 1 1 None Stone shot, less accurate but high chaos

Interpretation: Technically, "Long Range" is where big crossbows shine in this profile, but the Reload Rule assures they don't dominate every turn.

D. Integration Notes for Hail Caesar Gameplay

Command Rolls Still Apply: Heavy artillery must still be ordered via the normal command system to fire or reposition. A failed command roll could delay deployment or firing, increasing tension in play.
Source: Tales of the Brummie Dwarf

Divisions with Artillery: Balance artillery hits against potential enemy cavalry charges; heavy bolt artillery's reload/crew vulnerability adds nuance to positioning.

Historical Flavor Options: You may condense historical variations into optional "Artillery Special Rules" like Precision Bolt (–1 to hit but +1 morale impact versus heavy troops) or Hail of Bolts (multiple shorter range hits with reduced damage).

E. Optional Narrative/Special Rule Ideas

These fit into the Hail Caesar supplement culture (where units often have Special Rules):

Crossbow Volley Drill: At Short Range (50% of Long Range), Heavy Bolt Artillery may choose an Area Suppression roll: roll 2d6 for hits instead of 1d6 at the cost of one Reload Action.

Mechanical Breakdown: On a natural "1" on the command roll to fire, the Heavy Bolt Artillery suffers a delay and must pass a Skill/Mechanics test (e.g., leadership roll) to avoid losing its next fire opportunity.

Closing Integration Guidance

To implement these in Hail Caesar effectively:

Treat your large crossbow units as artillery sub-types with clearly defined mechanical effects.

Embed reload and terrain effects into the existing command system without breaking the game's pacing.

Playtest with small engagements first to fine-tune ranges and dice modifiers relative to your chosen miniature scale.

I hope this helps as I've never read the rules or played the game. It took me about one minute to do this.
I'm not an ancients expert, so I don't know if it got everything right. The entries with no source are probably suggestions it generated.

Wolfhag

OK – count me "impressed".

B1,2 and 3 are IMO, all workable & valid. And yes, this is in "Hail Caesar" speak.

I like the Optional rules also. They may be useful as "Special Rules" for certain scenarios.

As indicated, some play testing is necessary.

Many thanks, Wolfhag, for the trouble you went to.

Glad to help out. I like messing around with it.

I did one for improvements for Bolt Action: TMP link

I'm using it right now to help rewrite my game rules which is a big improvement.

There is no technical understanding of AI needed. The "art" is writing a specific prompt that describes exactly what you want, direct to specific sites where you want it to look and give it details on the output and formatting.

If you asked, "What is the best miniature ancient game?" it would just tell you which ones have won awards.

It's also great for taking an idea for a game and rapid prototyping the rules and game system. It normally will give you ideas and suggestions, too.

Wolfhag

When it comes to ancient [i.e pre gunpowder] artillery I have to ask myself a simple question 'If it was any use how come so few armies had it. The technology is not beyond the realms of the armies that didn't use it so I have to suspect that it was pretty ineffectual in battlefield situations. If asked why I'd suggest rate of fire was poor. The big users I'm aware of are the Romans and Chinese, both of whom had lots of fixed fortifications to defend, which I suspect is where most of it was used.