How good where the 1815 cannons at hitting targets?
>>2003356
Extremely accurate
Pic related
French cannons use to have an high range (1000m range) but not with a good accurance in long range. In short range they were great
>>2003474
Did he walk it off?
>>2003506
In short range they used canister shot, hard to miss with that.
even with normal shots, that's hard to miss in short range ^^
>>2003534
Why would you use normal shot at short range when there is canister shot
And yes you can miss a target at 300m with a cannon if you use round shot, especially when they are moving horizontally to your position.
>>2003403
Thing that helps in total war is that the general doesnt have a huge marker above his head letting the enemy know that he is there.
There are loads of officers, aides-des-camps, messengerse, subordinate officers and others running around on horseback and finding an enemy general in all that mess is all about luck.
>>2003356
Napoleonic cannon were very good at there job, firing at a particular piece of ground. Sniping indiviual soldiers wasnt the thing cannons do, cannons fire at terrain where the enemy is currently in.
>>2003509
If soldiers can survive direct RPG hits, they can survive cannonballs
At distance it was all about bouncing solid shot through ranks of closely packed infantry. No need to aim at individual targets.
Like a pinball game from hell.
>>2003559
>yfw you first read about the Grand Batteries
>hundreds of artillery concentrated at one point and firing directly into densely packed masses of infantery
>>2003356
Depending on make, and crew they had the potential to be hilariously accurate
However the make they had for war and the crews they had for war available made for poor accuracy and thus battery en masse was key to victory. As napoleon perscribes.
>>2003356
Not great; about 70% of all Napoleonic era casualties were caused by musket fire.