Company Man's Guide to ETW Foot - Now with Videos!

[fluffstalker]

Well thats why I didnt criticize the other parts - I left em alone because they dont need any criticism, not that they sailed over my head or anything. Ive read and enjoyed the rest of the guide, and watched the videos, all. I found enfilade and defialde to be helpful, musket firing drill to be helpful if a bit impractical, the terms of organization and how to group your army helpful, how to cover each others back and repel charges helpful, jesus man, raise one issue and Im accused of missing the whole point of the guide?

I never dismissed your guide In fact I mentioned that I do like it, Im simply looking at a few of the tactics that dont really play out as nicely as you did in the video. Thats all. No more, no less. Its not an obsession to point out the one thing that I had issue with: perhaps because Im pointing it out in isolation it seems Im obsessed with it but really I was just looking to get your strategic input, instead of a vague answer like "you missed the point, so Im not going to argue any of the points".

Ill agree that a lot of open games are pretty sad- but not all of us have nice large groups of friends online to clan with, and the few friends I do have arent always online at the same time, or wer're having numerous connection issues etc.. Im more of a casual gamer- usualy I just pop in and join an avaliable game, Ill be happy to even get in due to numerous bugs in mp. So, while there are certainly irritating kids out there who spam mortars, putting me in that category because I criticized your tactics, or for whatever other reason, is a bit low.

[MyKingforahorse]

Even in MP the tactics are sound, its just about knowing when to use them

Even if the other player mortar spams.

[coman]

because I criticized your tactics, or for whatever other reason, is a bit low.

You didn't criticize the tactics; you took one element of it and held it up and said "see this won't work, blah blah blah". It was neither constructive, or helpful. You just found your one thing to poke at. Lame dialog and weak criticism. Forgive me for easily dismissing you.

[fluffstalker]

Very well then, coman, I guess we'll agree to disagree, though Im more geniunely confused than I am irritated. yes indeed I found my one thing to poke at, so I poked at it. And...so? Either you can respond and perhaps rebuff me, disabuse me of my 'blah blah blah' notions, perhaps strengthen your guide? Or you can do what your doing, ie, acting suprised like I criticized anything at all - perhaps it seemed unhelpful because I was pointing out impracticalities, if thats the criteria for being unhelpful, I guess Im guilty as charged. :/. Like I said, im confused at the terse and short replies, I was hoping to discuss this civilly with you.

[coman]

Removed because I'm an asshat.

[coman]

Taking a break for a few days until there is another patch.

Sorry to end the conversation on a bad note, fluff. My apologies.

[fluffstalker]

Very well then, I apologize coman.

I took the rules of your guide too literally, my mistake. I was not trying to crow, merely to point out what I saw there, but I think we missed each others boats on this one, as I often have to deal with zerg mp to play mp at all, so my mentality, like your bad mood, is likewised..biased.

I still disagree over your insinuations that my criticism were typical lulz style spam attacks, but I guess since I was aiming from a very competetive standpoint and comparing units in unrealistic vacuums and situations, thats my mistake, and I apologize for that too.

Lets leave it at that shall we.

[Condottiere SOG]

if your computer can handle it. you can make regiments to actual size(14-1700men). It is a lot more fun than playing with less than standard sizes.

[notger]

Coman, what would be the benefit of advanding in column, except for historical accuracy?

As I see it, you give the opponent the chance to secure some spots on your flanks, if you expand too late. And if you expand too early, you could have advanced in line. It seems a lot of micro to me.

Btw: I really liked your guide. (Don't want to get a bad start like fluff got. )

[coman]

As I see it, you give the opponent the chance to secure some spots on your flanks, if you expand too late. And if you expand too early, you could have advanced in line. It seems a lot of micro to me.

I find it easier to move the formation in column, smaller, more compact, easier to expand out into formation. I don't even understand your point, the answer is obvious. Don't let them get on your flank while in column... Approach from the outside, then deploy before the enemy either gets to you or not.

Easy, simple, dur. Peel the outside line companies off - select a battalion, drag and group it and put it into a line on the side. Hit square. Do whatever. Letting the enemy get to you in a vulnerable state isn't the tactics fault, but the commander.

I *personally* find it smarter and easier to build a formation that maps to the local terrain once I've reached my destination than it is to march someplace with a formation that may or may not make sense where I arrive. Just because you've got your favorite "shape" for your troops may mean it's a BAD one when you get where you're going.

Pay close attention to terrain, line of sight concealment and cover. Fences, stone walls, etc.

[Mooncabbage]

Their are actually mobility benefits for maneuvering in column, if you've ever tried to deploy your units in awkward positions you may have noticed the way terrain makes a mess of your nice units, bending them around corners and things, but the fact is that when maneuvering in column they follow these contours and curves without messing up their formation, where a line unit has to reform when it comes to such an obstacle.

Wanna wanna new guide

[Gabriel Anton]

Their are actually mobility benefits for maneuvering in column, if you've ever tried to deploy your units in awkward positions you may have noticed the way terrain makes a mess of your nice units, bending them around corners and things, but the fact is that when maneuvering in column they follow these contours and curves without messing up their formation, where a line unit has to reform when it comes to such an obstacle.

Wanna wanna new guide

I played a guy in a MP battle who started off with his units moving around in columns

then I opened up with my artillery

was good times

[AlphaDelta]

I played a guy in a MP battle who started off with his units moving around in columns

then I opened up with my artillery

was good times

This is why column is such a bad idea. I watched the videos and while there may or may not be some historical sense, there is little common sense. Lining up 2 companies in line behind each other, with another company behind in column! It's doing nothing but inviting attack and friendly fire. The Artillery of a competent commander would have pasted up your army a treat and you would have been out-flanked and sent packing in seconds.

Cheers

[coman]

I played a guy in a MP battle who started off with his units moving around in columns

then I opened up with my artillery

was good times

I played a guy in MP with 12 artillery units and 8 heavy infantry units.

I flanked his infantry with cheap light horse, slaughtered the artillery, then had fun eating his heavy infantry for lunch. About 45 times.

[Gabriel Anton]

This is why column is such a bad idea. I watched the videos and while there may or may not be some historical sense, there is little common sense. Lining up 2 companies in line behind each other, with another company behind in column! It's doing nothing but inviting attack and friendly fire. The Artillery of a competent commander would have pasted up your army a treat and you would have been out-flanked and sent packing in seconds.

Cheers

Pretty much

I suspect they enjoy the 'RP' aspect of it, 'shrug' as long as there is no in game modifier that ties fatigue to Rank depth, thats all the use for it

[An Uncommon Flatulence]

Enough with the sniping at each other I need help with light infantry. Gah it's part 4 it's gonna take till judgement day.

[coman]

*chuckle*

People are sometimes so dense it isn't even funny.

Makes me wonder if there's such thing as "reading comprehension" in schools any longer nor whether people have any concept of guidelines or outlined principles of conduct in warfare.

Blah blah blah. The principle is that you work in groups with reserve and support. The morons that like to take one point, one criticism and hang their little post-hat on it are just plain thick.

[Gabriel Anton]

dense
The morons
are just plain thick.

awwwwwwwwwww look everyone, The little guy is getting mad .How cute

chin up, this pic will make you feel better

[Matsky]

Awesome!!! +Rep for this guide mate, it's bookmarked and will be used extensively I can guarantee you!

I haven't got any tactical questions yet (they will come, believe me) but something more of an organisational matter (I think I was a Battalion Clerk in a past life...).

I'm naming all of my units according to your system so I know where I'm at, and I love keeping them organised. But I'm not sure how the Grenadiers fits into the Regiment structure (I know you're covering them later, but this isn't a tactical question). I've got my armies looking like (Royal Scots being the Regiment name I chose and the numbers equaling Company Number / Battalion Number):

1st/1st, Royal Scots - Line Infantry
2nd/1st, Royal Scots - Line Infantry
3rd/1st, Royal Scots - Line Infantry
1st/2nd, Royal Scots - Line Infantry
2nd/2nd, Royal Scots - Line Infantry
3rd/2nd, Royal Scots - Line Infantry
1st/3rd, Royal Scots - Line Infantry
2nd/3rd, Royal Scots - Line Infantry
3rd/3rd, Royal Scots - Line Infantry

Where do the 4 units (two Companies, by your system) of Grenadiers fit into this? Do I create a 4th Battalion like:

1st/4th, Royal Scots - Grenadiers
1st/4th, Royal Scots - Grenadiers
2nd/4th, Royal Scots - Grenadiers
2bd/4th, Royal Scots - Grenadiers

Or do I simply replace two of the 3rd Companies of a Battalion with two units of Grenadiers?

Also, is there a better, more realistic way to name the units than what I'm doing? Do Company Numbers go 1-3 and restart for each Battalion, or continue as 1-9 through the whole Regiment? Is there a better way to abbreviate the name (unfortunately there's not enough room to put the whole lot like 1st Company, 1st Battalion, Royal Scots Regiment)?

Sorry if my questions are a bit pedantic and shifting from the tactical element of your guide, but I hope you're able to help me.

Thanks again!

[coman]

awwwwwwwwwww look everyone, The little guy is getting mad .How cute

I'm so grateful you care.