Topic: High Explosive Shells on Great Cannons?

[gOR]

Why is there no ability to fire a 'mortar type shell' out of a great cannon?

I don't see why not. It is no new technology and it could make the cannon an even more versatile option rather than just a 'big stuff' killer.

Rules wise we could perhaps make the great cannon cost 10 more points and instead of the bounce of a great cannon replace it with a 3 inch template. Note one does not have to fire high explosive but can also fire normal rounds (balls)

What do you think

Nessesity is the mother of Invention and we need more guns!

[CM Dante]

Why is there no ability to fire a 'mortar type shell' out of a great cannon?

Why is there no ability to fire a cannon type shell out of a mortar?
Because you could just take a cannon (or in your case, a mortar) instead and have the same thing. If you want mortar type shells, take a mortar and save yourself some points.

There are rules for grapshot from cannons but it has a very short range.

Nessesity is the mother of Invention and we need more guns!

Since when did we need more guns?

Cheers,

Dante

[Men-From-Farms]

And in "that" time cannonbolls didn´t explode... you used them to bounce into a tightly-packed unit, to spread carnage and panic.

The exploding thingy is not really a explosion, it is when the boll bounde and then get wrong degree to bounce more and smach into the ground and shatters + trows dirt all over the place.

THe explosive cannonbolls were invented much later. This is what I know, I can be wrong.

[gOR]

I was under the impression that the 'exploding' was done by packing a hollow cannonball with black powder and lighting a seperate fuse for the ball and then firing it out of the gun and allowing it to explode over or amongst the enemy infantry, or too soon!

[Gorbad Ironclaw]

Sounds remarkably like the mortar doesn't it?

As Dante said, if you could fire mortar rounds from the cannon, why would anyone ever use the mortar?

remember this is a game, it's not a simulator.

[General Helstrom]

Aye, that's the way early mortar shells worked. It does require the gun to be fired as soon as possible after the fuse is lit - and the loading procedure for a cannon (including ramming and such) would cause unnumbered problems for this sort of ammunition.

Courtesy of Wikipedia:

Explosive shells do not appear to have been in general use before the middle of the 16th century. About that time hollow balls of stone or cast iron were fired from mortars. The balls were nearly filled with gunpowder and the remaining space with a slow-burning composition. This method was fairly ineffective as the charge was not always ignited by the flash from the discharge of the gun, and moreover the amount of composition to burn a stipulated time could not easily be gauged.

The shell was, therefore, fitted with a hollow forged iron or copper plug, filled with slow-burning powder. It was impossible to ignite with certainty this primitive fuze simply by firing the gun; the fuze was consequently first ignited and the gun fired immediately afterwards. This entailed the use of a mortar or a very short piece, so that the fuze could be easily reached from the muzzle without unduly endangering the gunner. Cast-iron spherical common shell were in use up to 1871. For guns they were latterly fitted with a wooden disc called a sabot, attached by a copper rivet, intended to keep the fuze central when loading. They were also supposed to reduce the rebounding tendency of the shell as it travelled along the bore on discharge. Mortar shell were not fitted with sabots.

Cast iron held its own as the most convenient material for projectiles up to the end of the 19th century, steel supplanting it, first for projectiles intended for piercing armour, and afterwards for common shell for high-velocity guns where the shock of discharge has been found too severe for cast iron.




Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shell_%28projectile%29"