Gun range < bow range?

[bbad89]

Not at all. That`s blinkered thinking. A game can use realism (unbalance to you guys) and make for an exciting strategic game, since everything has a counter if you think creatively.

If a Dev thinks outside of the box, he knows that he can keep things `unbalanced` and a smart player would find ways to make use of the archers in a different way.

When are you going to realize that this is NOT that game? You'd think that after all the Total War games that have been released, you would have realized that CA has never tried to make this as realistic as YOU want it to be. Maybe after the elephants and cavalry charges of Rome and how men would fly 40 feet in the air from them? Maybe after seeing that it takes 2 years to move a few people 30 miles in Medieval? Maybe after the infinite ammo cannons of Empire? Maybe after seeing men fly 30 feet into the air above a wall because the wall they were standing on fell down in damn near all of them? Stop crusading for something that is flat-out wrong for the game that is being made.

[Aaron Heinrich Sevenpifer]

We're talking about infantry so new to guns that it takes them until almost the end of the war to start using tactics like kneel fire and you guys expect they're going to be effective from 500 meters?

Bahahahaha... Go fire a 19th century gun for yourself and see what I'm talking about. You're not going to even hit a target at more than 100 meters unless you have been seriously drilled in its use. Then add to this the panic of being fired upon by the enemy or having the enemy charging straight at you.

They're effective at 500+ with a massive line of infantry....

Same with a Bow or musket. They are only accurate that far in crowds.

And no, I'm pretty sure a sharpshooter can hit something over 100 yards which is a football field.

[Aaron Heinrich Sevenpifer]

Muskets=/=Rifles

And this, Ronin there is a huge difference between smoothbores and Rifles.

[DarkArk]

there's no good reason to use a bow kachi over line infantry.

That's the point of the damn game!

the arcing of the arrows is useless.

Hardly. Allows archers to sit behind units and fire, and also they can sit on top of a castle and fire down without being on the walls like guns have to.

higher accuracy and reload

No, yumi has significantly better reload, and only 5 less accuracy. They also have better melee attack, ammunition, armor, and morale. They are also cheaper.

Paradox makes those kind of games

Men of War would be a far better example. I have a hard time calling EU anything historical.

I don't get why it annoys people so much.

Because it flies in the face of basic logic. The battlefields in TW games have generally held to the standards of their era. Yes there are the occasional fantasy units but on the whole you can expect that weapon systems will function the way they did historically. Making a medieval-era bow have longer range than a rifle is not however.

[♘Top Hat Zebra]

That's the point of the damn game!

Hardly. Allows archers to sit behind units and fire, and also they can sit on top of a castle and fire down without being on the walls like guns have to.

No, yumi has significantly better reload, and only 5 less accuracy. They also have better melee attack, ammunition, armor, and morale. They are also cheaper.

Men of War would be a far better example. I have a hard time calling EU anything historical.

Because it flies in the face of basic logic. The battlefields in TW games have generally held to the standards of their era. Yes there are the occasional fantasy units but on the whole you can expect that weapon systems will function the way they did historically. Making a medieval-era bow have longer range than a rifle is not however.

Multiplayer balance is ruining TW.

[The Based God]

Hell, I'm glad that bows have a better range. Seems fair to me, but what do I know. Anyways, It does give you a reason to use them. If they had lower range, equal to that of say matchlock kachi, wouldn't I just use matchlocks? I'm not looking for realism in this game to be honest. Balance is far more important, especially with the wide variety of units.

[♘Top Hat Zebra]

I like balance. I do.

But realism is more important, at least for important things like this.

[krisslanza]

I like balance. I do.

But realism is more important, at least for important things like this.

I just have to keep disagreeing with this. I don't think TW has ever tried to be realistic. At best, it just uses history for its backdrop, and then does whatever.

I mean, I don't see people throwing a fit over the range of Bow Monks or Bow Heroes in vanilla Shogun 2.

[♘Top Hat Zebra]

Yeah, but those were "Heroes".

I would be fine if the Samurai Hero had greater range than the riflemen.


But not every single samurai.

Sure, TW isn't all about realism. But it used to at least care a little.

Now it's just throwing it out the window and making up.

[DJFaust]

We're talking about infantry so new to guns that it takes them until almost the end of the war to start using tactics like kneel fire and you guys expect they're going to be effective from 500 meters?

Bahahahaha... Go fire a 19th century gun for yourself and see what I'm talking about. You're not going to even hit a target at more than 100 meters unless you have been seriously drilled in its use. Then add to this the panic of being fired upon by the enemy or having the enemy charging straight at you.

So, you are telling me that I can't hit a target at 100+ meters with my Kar98 - that is a shorter version of the G98 from 1898, aren't you?

I can't hit a target at 100+ with a Mosin-Nagant that was produced in 1891, can I?

I can't hit a target at 100+ meters with my Carabina Taurus CP 20" .44-40 Win that is a copy of Winchester Model 1873, can I?



Look at the late-game infantry... they are using BOLT-ACTION rifles! The game is in the second half of the XIX century. Probably the french marines, for example, are using the Chassepot or the Gras rifle and a regular soldier with this kind of rifle was able to shoot 10+ times per minute. 1 shot every 6 seconds... and we're not even talking about Mad Minute ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mad_minute ), that is the "supressive fire", when some soldiers could double or triple his rate of fire.

[Yarkis de Bodemloze]

We're talking about infantry so new to guns that it takes them until almost the end of the war to start using tactics like kneel fire and you guys expect they're going to be effective from 500 meters?

Bahahahaha... Go fire a 19th century gun for yourself and see what I'm talking about. You're not going to even hit a target at more than 100 meters unless you have been seriously drilled in its use. Then add to this the panic of being fired upon by the enemy or having the enemy charging straight at you.

We are not talking about napoleonic smoothboore muskets, we are talking about minnie rifles and breech loaders. Rifles at that time had an effective range between 300-600 meters. Tactics changed from formation shooting to skirmish lines with single fire. Breech loaders made it possible to load in prone position. Cavalry attacks against infantry with rifles was suicide. Also, artillery had to be positioned furher away from the rontline because of the much greater range of rifles.

[Aaron Heinrich Sevenpifer]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OmoFV...e_gdata_player


Watch that video. Not more to be said. CA promised us a modern Total war and thats what we should have got and its what I was expecting.

Not old line tactics but skirmish warfare.

[|Sith|Galvanized Iron]

You need to have a general idea of how you want to play out the battle before you enter the deployment fase (I like to think of variations of tactics in total war games when I'm in my bed at night, or when I'm on the bus, or on the toilet, or under the shower etc...), and then you need to think of several variations that could occur depending on the terrain during the deployment fase, next you need to stick to your plan no matter what, even if this means 20 minutes of doing absolutely nothing but mere waiting for your oponent to abandon his plans and charge you in frustration. I played online often in Rome total war, and I played an ocasional game in Empire to know that most people will give up their plan and charge in frustration if you just stand there and ocasionally parade 1 unit back and forth just to taunt him. (stopped playing online in general because of too much swearing and too much quiting by players, and my spouse tends to demand atanetion as soon as I try to play an online game)

No serious player would use that playstyle in Rome, it's boring and like all other static tactics, very easy to counter in a game like Rome that highly favours mobile armies of cavalry and archers. Don't tell me you where using Gauls for this

[the_mango55]

Sure, TW isn't all about realism. But it used to at least care a little.

Now it's just throwing it out the window and making up.

And when was that, exactly?

[Tepok]

The thing that is absurd, really, is that they don't have separate unit sheets for single and multiplayer. Let the balance exist in (ranked?) multiplayer, I don't care for my campaigns or friendly multiplayer. Stay quite realist for single, and balanced for multiplayer.

[leviath]

So, you are telling me that I can't hit a target at 100+ meters with my Kar98 - that is a shorter version of the G98 from 1898, aren't you?

I can't hit a target at 100+ with a Mosin-Nagant that was produced in 1891, can I?

I can't hit a target at 100+ meters with my Carabina Taurus CP 20" .44-40 Win that is a copy of Winchester Model 1873, can I?

Don't mistake the Kar98 and Mosin-Nagant vanilla with those used during WWII. Except for the name, everything is different.

[♘Top Hat Zebra]

And when was that, exactly?

How about back in M2TW, when at least bows didn't fire further than a rifle?

[krisslanza]

How about back in M2TW, when at least bows didn't fire further than a rifle?

Looking at the video linked a while ago...
Just because your rifle can fire <x> yards, doesn't mean they'll use it like that. The video presents a good reason - tactics hadn't changed to reflect the improvements in technology.

[Santeri]

People say gameplay > realism. Yeah, I agree that gameplay is more important but what I don't understood is why you can't build balance over the realism? Giving archers more range than rifles is not the only way to "balance" them. It has already been said there are also realistic ways to make archers effective like giving them better attack, reload rate, armor or morale. Also there are abilities like fire arrows and able to shoot while hidden.

[Dynamo11]

Humble Warrior is again taking it to extremes. If you don't play MP (like me) and want a more thoroughly realistic game then their are many mods to help you in this pursuit. I recommend All-in-One mod, Darthmod and the Sekigahara campaign.