NTW: Kaunitz Project

[Dave Strider]

Alright, the mod is working!

Anyone up for a multiplayer game?

EDIT: Okay, we have a problem!

Artillery doesn't fire!


In a custom battle, I deployed 2 batteries...it took them NINE tries to fire. As in, the fuse was lit, the crew bent down and covered their ears, and the cannon didn't fire...then they did it again...and again...NINE times. And then a single salvo was fired.

[Dave Strider]

Alright, the mod is working!

Anyone up for a multiplayer game?

EDIT: Okay, we have a problem!

Artillery doesn't fire!


In a custom battle, I deployed 2 batteries...it took them NINE tries to fire. As in, the fuse was lit, the crew bent down and covered their ears, and the cannon didn't fire...then they did it again...and again...NINE times. And then a single salvo was fired.

This issue is resolved. It appears it was because of targeted fire. Firing at will remedies this. May wanna throw that in there if you haven't already

[mAIOR]

What's your steam ID Tovarish? If you leave it here, whenever one is online we can schedule a match



Cheers...

[Dave Strider]

col_jackson is my steam account. My profile name is Tovarisht Chyernov.

[Biggus Splenus]

This issue is resolved. It appears it was because of targeted fire. Firing at will remedies this. May wanna throw that in there if you haven't already

Thats probably because there were hills in the way of your targeted fire, or something like that. If the unit lights the fuse, but the gun doesn't fire, that means that there is something in your way

[Dave Strider]

It was Grassy Flatlands

And it appears my internet is too bad to play MP battles.

Literally, I tried for about an hour and a half straight to get a battle with Maior working.

[Biggus Splenus]

Try Hamachi, and connect to him with that. My internet isn't that good either, but with Hamachi I can actually connect to people

[Biggus Splenus]

My 2nd out of 3 previews on Prussia

First this time is Kaunitz's UI cards in the mod:


Second, is the new flag texture and mesh for Prussia

See how it is based on the 1st Infantry Regiment, just like the uniforms (MATCHING!!! ) and how it is now Square, instead of rectangle, and that it is also regimental size (flag mesh courtesy of Primergy)

New grass (a slightly edited version of the Hedge Knights)

I only wanted this because it makes the battlefield look much better, plus it come at no cost of performance

Fourth, the final version of the Chasseurs

Apart from the officer, which is just a line officer at the moment because I'm trying to get a source on what they looked like.
From the previous version you guys saw, this has had the tricorn lace removed, an olive green cockade added, and I also took the contrast down on the uniform, which looks better

Last, is all of the other units from Megasalexadros' work
Dragoons


Cuirassiers


Artillery Crew


General's Staff

The General and a single bodyguard from the 13th Cuirassiers

A close up on the general himself

GUESS WHO

THATS IT FOR NOW!

All what I have left to do now is the localisation file (finalizing that), the saddle cloth for the cuirassiers and the dragoons, and retexture the artillery, then that is absolutely everything done for Prussia

I hope everyone enjoyed this preview

[bloody bill]

Excellent work, very very wonderful.+++rep

[Kaunitz]

Awesome, Splenyi, awesome! I need to spread some rep before I can rep you again. So we can soon start with the French, or are you exhausted now? The chasseurs look great as well! I think we could simply get rid of the officer alltogether. Critique on a very, very high level: There are only two things that are not "entirely" perfect for me concerning the models:

1) the tricorns. I think that Megasalexandros and Menzel have taken the 19th century uniform plates as their primary source for it. The tricorns look too much like the tricorn-bicorn mixes that were commonly worn 20 years after the seven year war. True, soldiers had a variance in wearing their hats, but during the Seven years war, the two "back tips" of the tricorn were usually bent a bit upward as well or else the back tips must be much "smaller", hardly showing the "upside" of the brim at all (hard to describe...). I've annoyed and bombarded (with pictures of tricorns ) Wangrin so much that he has created a great tricorn model for his French, whose brims are bent correctly:



2) I'm a fan of a realistically worn-out look of soldiers. Therefore I'd like the uniforms of the soldiers be a bit more faded by the sun, resulting in a lighter greenish-blue for the prussians (see the contemporary artwork in the first post). Of course there was variance in the level of sun-bleaching, so we'd still "also" see the darker blues. It doesn't really matter though. I guess that most people are a fan of clean uniforms anyway.

About the moustache: no way! We can ask Menzel in the Preussens Gloria thread about it, but I think that moustaches "à la polonaise" were required for most regiments. Like the pipe, they're part of the appearance of the soldier during mid 18th century (except for the British). However, I think that a few French regiments also didn't have them (need to ask wangrin), but this seems to have been rather an exception.

Anecdote:
Feldmarschall Daun responding to colonel Thiennes’ offer to let the De-Ligne-Dragoons charge during the battle of Kolín (1757): „Mais vous ne ferez pas grand cause avec vos blanc-becs!“ (“But you won’t achieve much with your greenhorns ("without beards")!)
Thiennes: “Blanc-becs, montrez que vous savez mordre sans avoir de barbe, montrez que pour mordre il ne faut que les dents et pas de barbe!”

(“Greenhorns, show how you can bite, even though you have no beards! Show that it just takes teeth to bite, but not beards!”)

The best moustaches, however, were those worn in Hungary and the habsburg border area. In any case, the hungarian and grenzer ottoman-like fashion was perhaps the most important influence of 18th century military fashion (especially the hussar-outfits, but also the tschako). The Hungarians and the habsburg border-troops had a very fearsome reputation, even more so than other freecorps/light troops (though some prussian lights also managed to make themselves very unpopular). Perhaps the Pandours of the Freiherr von Trenck (who pillaged Upper Austria and Bavaria during the War of the Austrian Succession) had a big share in shaping these stereotypes. But the "exoticness" certainly played a part in it as well.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

(Fieldmarshal Nadasdy)

(probably from the war of austrian succession? - showing a habsburg grenadier and a pandour)

Other nice examples (war of Austrian Succession):

http://www.royalcollection.org.uk/collection/406858

http://www.royalcollection.org.uk/collection/403392

http://www.royalcollection.org.uk/collection/406844

In fact there seem to have been different styles of moustaches. The "long" ones of the Grenzer troops look quite differently from the "short" ones ( I guess that this is the "à la polonaise"-style?):


Or in the hardcore version:



In contrast to that, the "hungarian-inspired", or I might even say "ottoman-inspired" moustache went "downwards", not "upwards"

You can also see the typical hungarian bunches of hair, dangling besides the ears. They were commonly worn by ordinary hatmen of hungarian regiments.

PS: The whole morier collection, with its ill-fitting uniforms and strangely looking and pipe-puffing soldiers is a dream!

http://www.royalcollection.org.uk/search?search=morier

I mean look at the invalid in the middle: http://www.royalcollection.org.uk/collection/405589 Awesome!

Concerning the cavalry mechanics, it seems as if we have to do even more research on how cavalry engagements worked historically, which is a difficult undertaking because detailed first hand accounts are lacking (at least Nafziger says so). I guess it might just have been too chaotic for any individual to get the "big" picture of a an engagement. I'm usually a fan of the idea that cavalry battles were pretty short, unpredictable, with few casualties, and totally dependent on morale (i.e. not on equipment). The situation (chaos versus order, speed versus formation, surprise) is what matters. Perhaps I can cobble together some information this weekend as a base for discussion. A double-squadron of battle cavalry with low cohesion attacked in the rear should definitively break. I will look at that. Thanks for pointing it out! It must be related to the low morale of light cav or their smaller size, which are the only differences between heavy and light cav in this mod (apart from different speed).

Regarding the "zone fire" of artillery: Phew, you're always trying to make the game more abstract, mAIOR, departing from the basic tactical units (squadrons) and now suggesting to "abstract" artillery fire. I can understand you suggestion because it's the only way to stress the "grand tactical" aspect in 1vs1 games. Right now, I guess (haven't tested it) that the grand tactical aspect only really sets in in 2vs2+ games. However, I think that by abstracting, you'll loose the realism factor on the smaller level that's also part of the concept of this mod. Once we depart from the basic units, it will be very hard to balance things. Take NTWIII, for example, which uses all kinds of unit sizes and different scales. I don't think it is possible to balance such a mix in any "realistic" way. Honestly, I'd rather stick to the managable small scale abstraction - a gun model should shoot individual cannon balls, not exert an abstract effect over a zone. This would be something for a mod that is based on an even larger scale, operating perhaps with infantry brigades and cavalry regiments as basic units.

PS: When do you have time for a game, mAIOR?

The idea to increase the size of artillery units and spread them out much more, so that a single artillery unit can represent a gun line that you can "mix" into your infantry line doesn't really work, because all guns can only ever have a single target (even on auto-fire). We'd need each individual gun search its own target.

@ Comrade Chernov:

Certainly the line of fire of your artillery has been blocked. Remember that I've tried everything to give artillery a realistically flat and direct trajectory. It's still not perfect, allowing for some rather strange shots, but it's better than vanilla. Even slight elevations should prevent your artillery from firing. You need to search good artillery positions.

[Biggus Splenus]

I will be able to fade the colour of the coats a bit, would you be able to show me a good example of the exact colour you want?

And about the tricorns, I cannot do anything about it. I am but a humble 2D artist. and have no skill with 3D art (like models)

As for the French: I would be glad to start on them ASAP just drop me a pm for the models that you would like included (if you could also name what the regiments are, that would help me with saddle cloths and flags )

BTW - are you happy with the loc changes I sent you earlier?

[mAIOR]

Concerning the cavalry mechanics, it seems as if we have to do even more research on how cavalry engagements worked historically, which is a difficult undertaking because detailed first hand accounts are lacking (at least Nafziger says so). I guess it might just have been too chaotic for any individual to get the "big" picture of a an engagement. I'm usually a fan of the idea that cavalry battles were pretty short, unpredictable, with few casualties, and totally dependent on morale (i.e. not on equipment). The situation (chaos versus order, speed versus formation, surprise) is what matters. Perhaps I can cobble together some information this weekend as a base for discussion. A double-squadron of battle cavalry with low cohesion attacked in the rear should definitively break. I will look at that. Thanks for pointing it out! It must be related to the low morale of light cav or their smaller size, which are the only differences between heavy and light cav in this mod (apart from different speed).

I find the accounts of the of the cavalry clashes at the battle of Leipzig fascinating.
interesting reads:
http://napoleonistyka.atspace.com/Le...vs_cuirassiers
http://napoleonistyka.atspace.com/Le...counterattacks
http://napoleonistyka.atspace.com/Le...cavalry_battle

Especially the last one. I know it is a bit latter in time but it shows that cavalry clashes are more of a morale thing. They mention casualties were low however there were lot's of routing and rallying. for example the Polish first charge was broken because they mistook the Cuirassers for dragoons since they had their great coats covering their armour. As soon as their lances glanced of the armour they broke and rallied. without casualties probably just by finding out who their enemy was. Then they reformed and charged again and again and again. It also mentions that the dragoons of the old guard, after being pushed back for the third time, took some time rallying but then charged again. This was after three defeats! In terms of time spent fighting, the author mentions that "The melee was short, a thing typical for the cavalry combat." so I guess that cavalry vs cavalry should be much more morale based. How is it in napoleon? Does cavalry come back after more routs? In ETW the main flaw was that cavalry permanently routed after two routs. During the course of leiptzig the Old guard dragoons disengaged and rallied at least 5 times.

Regarding the "zone fire" of artillery: Phew, you're always trying to make the game more abstract, mAIOR, departing from the basic tactical units (squadrons) and now suggesting to "abstract" artillery fire. I can understand you suggestion because it's the only way to stress the "grand tactical" aspect in 1vs1 games. Right now, I guess (haven't tested it) that the grand tactical aspect only really sets in in 2vs2+ games. However, I think that by abstracting, you'll loose the realism factor on the smaller level that's also part of the concept of this mod. Once we depart from the basic units, it will be very hard to balance things. Take NTWIII, for example, which uses all kinds of unit sizes and different scales. I don't think it is possible to balance such a mix in any "realistic" way. Honestly, I'd rather stick to the managable small scale abstraction - a gun model should shoot individual cannon balls, not exert an abstract effect over a zone. This would be something for a mod that is based on an even larger scale, operating perhaps with infantry brigades and cavalry regiments as basic units.

I was thinking more on a solution to your problem of giving extra guns wouldn't solve anything since artillery doesn't work as it should. My idea for a divisional battery would be to have a many gun battery which would fire on area rather than on a single battalion. As it is, artillery fire area is too small. Playing with double squadrons, you basically have two infantry brigades. Now, each 2 gun battery serves as a brigade battery. You're just lacking the divisional battery. The divisional battery should be used as long range support and the brigade batteries more of a close/medium range thing. Just like when you have single cavalry squadrons and you can bring an infantry brigade. Proper artillery support would be 2 or 3 regimental guns for close range support and a brigade battery either 6 or 12 pounder to be placed further back. Or brought a bit forward to pour some deadly devastating fire. From the information I gathered, this seems to be the best representation of artillery. For mp games we could even have a corps artillery either for squadron sized cavalry 4vs4 or for the larger cavalry sizes, from 2vs2 onwards (4 brigade division).

Sadly this engine doesn't do for brigade level basic units...
Last night after working (around 2 AM gmt) I looked at army compositions and the grand tactical aspect with this scale already shows. You can bring easily 9/10 infantry battalions which allows for two brigades. One to keep the enemy in check and other to flank and concentrate on part of the enemy line.
The picture bellow gives an example of what I mean (officer for the attacker not represented):



What we have here is the attacker (black) holding the enemy line in place with a 5 battalion brigade while his second brigade is executing a flanking manoeuvre (distance between brigades is not very accurate) having the defender simple double line deployment of one brigade in front and second in reserve. this allows the attacker center to extend the line if needed and keep the defending troops in check. Both sides have their brigade batteries in their line for some closer range support and the divisional batteries supporting from the back. In this case, the attacker's divisional battery would be harassing the defender's line from the beginning. the high dispersion among shells would mean that instead of one battalion getting the full brunt of the battery (quite unrealistic and not practical at all in a rl situation) the fire gets dispersed between 3 or 4 battalions. It also means that the attacker flanking movement if unseen would create havock among the defenders since they'd be facing fresh troops on their flanks or focused in a very small area. This kind of formation also gives the attacker enough flexibility (should the daring defender try and make an attack of their own) to support his main brigade with it's flanking one. Now obviously this is just an example of an highly idealised situation but the point stands that with this many battalions, trying to force the defender's line with some local concentration of firepower and cavalry is very much possible.
Formations become a necessity to minimise micro-managing to a manageable level. Basically simple commands like move forward, hold the line and whatnot, are given brigade wise while when action develops, single battalions are used to balance things out like plugging holes in the line, extend the line, move in column to the enemy flank (even though columns don't get any bonuses they're still faster to deploy due to the reduced front and compactness of the formation) etc.

PS: When do you have time for a game, mAIOR?

Probably not today

The idea to increase the size of artillery units and spread them out much more, so that a single artillery unit can represent a gun line that you can "mix" into your infantry line doesn't really work, because all guns can only ever have a single target (even on auto-fire). We'd need each individual gun search its own target.

Again, not what I was aiming for. I think the scale is fine as is and what I'm aiming for is explained above.

Anyway, these are my ideas for what I'd like to see. Some

Cheers...

[Dave Strider]

@ Comrade Chernov:

Certainly the line of fire of your artillery has been blocked. Remember that I've tried everything to give artillery a realistically flat and direct trajectory. It's still not perfect, allowing for some rather strange shots, but it's better than vanilla. Even slight elevations should prevent your artillery from firing. You need to search good artillery positions.

The strange part was this battle was on Grassy Flatlands, and my guns were in front

In any event, perhaps Hamachi would work, I'll have to ask Bloody Bill if he wants to help me test it

[Megasalexandros]

Great WORK and rep to all of you guys!

Kaunitz i've seen what you've wrote about the tricorns, i can assure you especially for the tricorns that i did everything i possibly could giving the contradicting some times, sources that i had together with the collaboration of Menzel in a later stage when everything was almost done, to get the tricorns of both infantry and Prussian regiments correctly, for eg the French that are depicted in the NPI mod, had indeed such tricorns and my sources which included french depicted their tricorns different to the Prussian tricorns, the same goes for the Austrians which have at the time of the Seven years war and according to my sources a more similar to the french model tricorn, but the Prussians that i've made were done according to a variety of sources, Osprey was the only source that i had that depicted the tricorns of the Prussians somewhat different but i choose not to make the tricorns according to Osprey because most of my other sources agreed on the shape that i choose.
As for the Cuirassiers for eg , Menzel gave a photograph of the ACTUAL uniform that the cuirassiers of Frederick wore, dating (the photograph) back to 1912, and i made the tricorn according to that picture .
I could be wrong, about the infantry tricorns ,but i did what i thought was the most correct shape

As for the moustache, both the pigtail and the moustache were within the standards of the Prussian army i think, iam certain about the pigtail not certain about the moustache but almost all the sources that i had agreed, i could have added a second face type (not that empire many times doesnt use a second face type even when you have it,in my own pc most of the times you have one face type) but i skipped the addition of a second face type because the equipment parts that i gave to the model took alot of texture space and i couldnt add a second face, i should re arrange the textures, shrink them and the change the uvmap of the model, but that wont be at all easy cause i will then have to change all the textures of all the regiments

[bloody bill]

Goodluck with the mod gent. I really hope it all turns out.

[Dave Strider]

It worked! And the battle was exciting.

[Fabricus]

I like the faded look. I would love to see the Prussians have the more faded look. Awesome lookings units btw. Can't wait to have 'em.

Ed. @MegasAlexandros:

Those are the most badass looking hussars ever to ride the 3d realm. +rep.

[Dave Strider]

Here's the official battle report.

Battle of Dresden
Belligerents:
Austria
France


Strength:
Austria: 7 Battalions of Fusiliers; 2 Battalions of Grenadiers; 3 Platoons of Grenzers; 2 Batteries of 12-pounder Artillery; 2 Squadrons of Hungarian Hussars; 2 Squadrons of Cuirassiers

1,560 Men, 4 Guns


France: 6 Battalions of National Guard; 2 Battalions of Old Guard; 2 Platoons of Chasseurs; 2 Batteries of 12-pounder Artillery; 3 Squadrons of Cuirassiers; 2 Squadrons of Dragoons

1,440 Men, 4 Guns


The battle map was Dresden. Pre-agreed rules were: Max 2 Arty, Max 3 Cuirassiers, Max 1 Gren/4 Line units, battle is to be fought on the right-hand side of the map, where the river is relatively in a straight line.


I had planned to lay a trap for Zeitek. I deployed 5 Line and 1 Grenadier battalions in a C-shaped line on the crest of a low ridge, with my 3 units of Grenzers in front, hiding in a lightly-forested cover near a small gathering of brick houses. My plan was to harass his crossing and pressure him into hasty action, lest his men take a morale penalty for being under fire. My true plan was to disguise the movement of 3 Battalions of Infantry - 2 Fusiliers and 1 Grenadier - to my extreme left, to a fold in the ground from which they were invisible. Along with the majority of my cavalry stationed there - 2 Hussars, 1 Cuirassiers - these men were to launch themselves upon Zeitek's flank at the critical moment and hopefully roll his line up.

I took great care to try to lead him on. When my Grenzers engaged his numerically-inferior Chasseurs, I brought up a Battalion of Fusiliers, and a Battalion of Grenadiers, from the C-shaped line, to extend my line further to my right (his left) and outflank the enemy skirmishers. From there, he brought up 4 Battalions of National Guard to counter my moves, as well as deploying his Artillery at a nearly point-blank range. He attempted to fire canister at my men as his troops deployed behind his guns, but because my men were on higher ground, his guns did not fire - he experienced the same problem as I did earlier in this thread. My 3 massed Cavalry squadrons attacked and routed his Skirmishers, as well as 2 Infantry Battalions and a Cuirassier Squadron, but were ultimately repulsed by heavy enemy reserve fire and a ferocious melee with his other Cuirassiers.

Meanwhile, I brought forward my remaining 4 Battalions in my line, challenging his move, as well as launching a decoy cavalry strike with my one free squadron of Cuirassiers, stationed on my right(his left) flank. They crashed into a unit of National Guard, and very nearly routed it, but he brought forward a squadron of Dragoons, which, combined with the National Guard, overwhelmed my horsemen, and they were sent streaming back. With my right flank now open, and not yet fully in line, Zeitek surged his dragoons and cuirassiers forward, and within 30 seconds, the 5 Battalions making up my right flank and center are routing. The only reason more did not flee is due to the actions of my artillery, posted on the slope of a hill some ways back, whose continuous and accurate fire did heavy damage to his Cavalry and two Battalions of Infantry, checking his advance and allowing me to pull back my few-remaining men into a defensive position.

4 of my 5 Routing Battalions reformed, and made a new line closer to the guns. He sent a Squadron of Dragoons and 3 Battalions of Infantry at my new line, while he threw 6 Battalions at my flanking-force, which was by now a smaller army of its own, fighting for its' life, with only 4 battalions of Infantry and a platoon of Grenzers to its name.

My guns poured shell after shell into his dragoons, routing them permanently, and then turned their gaze upon his Infantry. They did heavy damage - 35 men lost out of 140 for one unit alone - and routed one of the Battalions. His line hit my new one, and a second battle began...and that was the moment his game crashed.


We never finished the battle, but casualties were about 80-90 men for me and probably closer to 90 or 100 for him. The battle was very fun, and he said I wasn't bad for a first battle.

Attached pic of deployments, for reference. (Zeitek made the map, I drew the arrows )

[Biggus Splenus]

While Kaunitz gets ready to tell me what French units to include, I will be touching-up the Prussians.

I have done the Cuirassier saddle cloth now (will post picture soon) and all I have to do is the Dragoons saddle cloth (which, after looking through all the regiments, Kaunitz gave me the regiment with the hardest saddle cloth to create, THANKS A LOT )

After that, if I have time before Kaunitz gives me the French info, I might be able to give the Prussian textures a faded look, which I think is a great idea Kaunitz gave us, because I think it looks more realistic.

EDIT: I have a problem. I cannot create the Dragoons saddle cloth without a better picture of the escutcheon http://www.kronoskaf.com/syw/index.p...form_Plate.jpg (the thing on the lower right corner of the saddle cloth)

If someone could get me a good picture of this, it would help me out a lot

[Biggus Splenus]

I have been attemping to re-colour Megasalexadros' textures to something that fits the KP theme by trying to make the textures look faded.

Here is what I have come up with:



The standard bearer on the right has the original texture, so you can compare it. Kaunitz seemed very happy with the resault, I hope you guys are too

I have also re-coloured the saber handle to look less bright and glossy (the standard bearer also has the original in the picture, so compare)

Anyway, here is the cuirassiers saddle cloth, as promised:



I am no artist, so it is not perfect, but I did what was within my skills (here is a plate on what it actually is http://www.kronoskaf.com/syw/index.p...form_Plate.jpg)

This saddle cloth is also used by the General and his staff

I also noticed an error in Megasalexadros' 8th Cuirassier texture. He had given them a totally wrong sabretache, basing it on the saddle cloths design instead, but I correct it (image below)



No offence to Megasalexandros' though. HE is an artist, not me

Are there any request or suggestions for the textures or visuals of them mod?