I have never said nor intimated that the Gribeauval System was 'the best thing ever invented.' To say that is to ignore what has been said. You have done that with clear evidence that your ideas on artillery are incorrect. Further, you have contributed nothing in the discussion except for negative comments that do nothing to further either historic inquiry or discussion/debate.
You're very good with comments on 'red herrings' and 'misinterpreting' what others may or may not have said, but you appear to refuse to listen to anything that is offered that is counter to what you believe about the French in general and Napoleon and Gribeuaval in particular.
The study of history is not an election or a popularity contest and the most popular opinion is not the ones that 'wins.' If you think it is, then you're not as competent in historical study that I believe you to be. The point is to present your argument logically and with supporting evidence. The magnitude of error on this forum regarding artillery systems is quite large from not understanding how canister works, to naming artillery systems that did not exist, to getting hung up on the number of wheel sizes. What is overlooked is what was accomplished by any number of 'makers of systems' and what that enabled that particular army to accomplish. No military or technical system is perfect nor is it unbeatable. However, some during various periods are milestones in military development. That fact you're gleefully overlooking.
The only thing you've done is be accusatory and maintain an anti-French bias which is amazing to me. In short, you haven't shown any expertise in understanding artillery and perhaps you should pay attention for awhile instead of being merely the 'great naysayer.'
Finally, I really don't appreciate being misquoted, especially by someone that I have great respect for. You should know better.
And Safely in my Bubble,