Recommendations for future versions.

[tomsin]

I don't think prussians were so poor targeting.

look for the results of Friedrich the Great inquiry into his soldiers' accuracy. They wasted tremendous number of shots for each enemy killed. That was result of training speed over accuracy and a musket with bullet windage about 2 mm.

they had only 3 kinds of cavalry: dragoons, cuirassiers and hussars.

that's Friedrich the Great's time. Before him they had other types too, and after him they adopted uhlans for example.

british regiments of guard dragoons weren't elite cavalry - in the first half of XVIII century government renamed regiments of horse to "guard dragoons"

Regiments of horse were renamed to dragoons, but regiments of horseguards were renamed into dragoon guards (except 1st regiment of horseguards). Later dragoon guards became to be called simply dragoons, while former dragoons became light dragoons to avoid mistakes.

[sage2]

Okay -- let me play with this. It won't be in 1.24, however (since that's uploading right now).

I spent a ton of time testing alternate fire evolutions for guards and grenadiers today, and could not get mass fire or volley fire to work correctly for them. I need to research this more to see what I was doing wrong.

[JaM]

check what i found:

Britain was the wealthiest country in the world with relatively small army. They could afford high ratio of practice rounds per soldier in life fire training:
1. British 'Rifles' - 60 rounds and 60 blanks per man
2. Prussian jägers and Schützen - 60 rounds per man (in 1811-1812)
3. British light infantry - 50 rounds and 60 blanks
4. Prussian fusiliers (light infantry in line regiments) - 30 rounds
5. British line infantry - 30 rounds
6. Austrian line infantry - 10 rounds (in 1809)
7. Austrian line infantry - 6 rounds (in 1805)
8. Russian infantry - 6 and less rounds

[anvil8]

that's Friedrich the Great's time. Before him they had other types too, and after him they adopted uhlans for example.

In 1805 Prussia had: 13 cuirassier regiments, 14 dragoon regiments, 9 hussar regiments, 1 'Towarzysze' regiment - actually uhlans Not too much uhlans they had... But I don't wanna argue about that I like uhlans in my Prussian kingdom

As for dragoons it seems as if you know better but I will check it unless I lost my book.

PS I found sth like that:

"The heaviest English cavalry is far from possessing the uniformity
and the firm seat of the French and Austrian cuirassiers;
and their light-horse is still more inferior in intelligence
and activity to the Hungarian hussar and the Cossack.
They have no idea of the artifices of partisan warfare,
and they know little how to charge en masse. When the fray
commences, you see them equally vulnerable and offensive,
cutting instead of thrusting, and chopping with more fury
than effect." - general Foy

PS 2 http://www.napolun.com/mirror/napole...a.atspace.com/ this could be very helpful source.

[tomsin]

In 1805 Prussia had: 13 cuirassier regiments, 14 dragoon regiments, 9 hussar regiments, 1 'Towarzysze' regiment - actually uhlans Not too much uhlans they had... But I don't wanna argue about that I like uhlans in my Prussian kingdom

As for dragoons it seems as if you know better but I will check it unless I lost my book.

PS I found sth like that:
"The heaviest English cavalry is far from possessing the uniformity
and the firm seat of the French and Austrian cuirassiers;
and their light-horse is still more inferior in intelligence
and activity to the Hungarian hussar and the Cossack.
They have no idea of the artifices of partisan warfare,
and they know little how to charge en masse. When the fray
commences, you see them equally vulnerable and offensive,
cutting instead of thrusting, and chopping with more fury
than effect." - general Foy

Well, lets leave Napoleonic epoch for another games
And even for Napoleonic era I saw many non-English generals who praised british cavalry. Some of them said that British and Russian cavalry were the best the allies had aganst Napoleon. That's all just personal opinions, I think.

[anvil8]

Some intriguing thoughts:
- in my opinion Pandours should have ability „paths seldom trod” so that they could create mixed army with hussars which will be hardly spotted on campaign's map .
- British guard dragoons are available too early – GB is the only country which can recruit heavy cavalry with military barrack. Other countries have to achieve level 4 with their military building to recruit heavy cavalry.
- In Vienna in military barrack and academy only unit of cavalry which is available are dragoons. Why? Where are carabineers?
- In Poland – Lwów – Pandours are available in minor government’s buildings, but they aren’t in military buildings.
- How can I restore white background on campaign’s map?
- Potsdam Grenadiers should be far more better – according to Simon Millar, Rossbach and Leuthen 1757, Osprey Publishing, Frederic II transformed Potsdam Grenadiers (actually it was only one regiment – Infantry Regiment no. 6) into Grenadier Garde Battalion and they fought perfectly well in all campaigns. Frederic the Great retired all giants from regiment of Potsdam Grenadiers.
- It would be nice to see in your mod Infantry Regiment No. 15 “Garde” – this unit captured church in battle of Leuthen and they were most prestigious infantry regiment in whole Frederic’s army.
- Also Imperial Regiment Rot-Wurzburg which defended church in Leuthen could be add to mod – they deserved it!
- I don't understand why you named Cossack Infantry and Cavalry "Irregular" Obviously they were irregular, but they were named cossacks.
- I can agree as for poor accuracy prussian infantry but still they should have better reloding skill, at least 35.
PS Sorry for my english, I have hope you are capable of understanding me
PS 2 Tomsin, you should read about dragoons guard in “King George’s Army 1740-1793” – part 3 . According to this volume in 1746 3 regiments of horse were converted into guard dragoons. In 1748 British army consisted of 3 regiments of dragoons guard, 4 regiments of horse and 14 regiments of dragoons except 3 regiments of household cavalry – 2 regiments of horse guards and 1 regiment of horse grenadiers. Later Household cavalry formed Lifeguards

[tomsin]

- I don't understand why you named Cossack Infantry and Cavalry "Irregular" Obviously they were irregular, but they were named cossacks.

In 18th century cossacks, steppnyaks and asiatic nomads were used together in units and in a similar way. ETW is not a game to make more detailed distinctions like separating regiments of 100% cossacks, regiments of 100% bashkirs and mixed regiments. Even Chuguevski cossacks had some kamluks, bashkirs and other asiatic people in their ranks.

2 Tomsin, you should read about dragoons guard in “King George’s Army 1740-1793” – part 3 .

actually, I have read this book and many other books before I came to a conclusion of how to make British cavalry in the mod. I try to avoid "one book opinions" whenever possible

- It would be nice to see in your mod Infantry Regiment No. 15 “Garde” – this unit captured church in battle of Leuthen and they were most prestigious infantry regiment in whole Frederic’s army.
- Also Imperial Regiment Rot-Wurzburg which defended church in Leuthen could be add to mod – they deserved it!

You can freely rename regiments during a game, it doesn't require making a separate units with limits of 1 regiment. Or we would be lost under thousands of such units as they are numerous like zerglings

[sage2]

Pandours: other irregular light infantry types don't have this ability. This is relatively rare, actually. Let me think about adding it a little more widely to these units types.

Brit dragoons: done for next version.

PG are better than regular grenadiers already. They have a very good offense, at a small cost of lower defense. This was based on some discussions we had here about how to represent them.

Vienna Carabineers: these are available with Carbines and a military academy. Double check...

Pandours recruitability: this is correct. This is the case for many types of irrgular infantry. This is true in Vanilla, and like how this works. A most militarized local government gives you a path towards regular vs. irregular troops. It's a bit of a conceit, but works well in game play terms.

Regiment no. 15: we're not really modeling individual regiments, with a very few exceptions. Doing so opens the door to too much unit variety, and really confusing recruitment.

Cossacks: there was a discussion on this back in the old thread. This is because the old Cossack units have been repurposed to cover areas such as Georgia where the terminology 'Cossack' is incorrect.

Some intriguing thoughts:
- in my opinion Pandours should have ability „paths seldom trod” so that they could create mixed army with hussars which will be hardly spotted on campaign's map .
- British guard dragoons are available too early – GB is the only country which can recruit heavy cavalry with military barrack. Other countries have to achieve level 4 with their military building to recruit heavy cavalry.
- In Vienna in military barrack and academy only unit of cavalry which is available are dragoons. Why? Where are carabineers?
- In Poland – Lwów – Pandours are available in minor government’s buildings, but they aren’t in military buildings.
- How can I restore white background on campaign’s map?
- Potsdam Grenadiers should be far more better – according to Simon Millar, Rossbach and Leuthen 1757, Osprey Publishing, Frederic II transformed Potsdam Grenadiers (actually it was only one regiment – Infantry Regiment no. 6) into Grenadier Garde Battalion and they fought perfectly well in all campaigns. Frederic the Great retired all giants from regiment of Potsdam Grenadiers.
- It would be nice to see in your mod Infantry Regiment No. 15 “Garde” – this unit captured church in battle of Leuthen and they were most prestigious infantry regiment in whole Frederic’s army.
- Also Imperial Regiment Rot-Wurzburg which defended church in Leuthen could be add to mod – they deserved it!
- I don't understand why you named Cossack Infantry and Cavalry "Irregular" Obviously they were irregular, but they were named cossacks.
- I can agree as for poor accuracy prussian infantry but still they should have better reloding skill, at least 35.
PS Sorry for my english, I have hope you are capable of understanding me
PS 2 Tomsin, you should read about dragoons guard in “King George’s Army 1740-1793” – part 3 . According to this volume in 1746 3 regiments of horse were converted into guard dragoons. In 1748 British army consisted of 3 regiments of dragoons guard, 4 regiments of horse and 14 regiments of dragoons except 3 regiments of household cavalry – 2 regiments of horse guards and 1 regiment of horse grenadiers. Later Household cavalry formed Lifeguards

[anvil8]

So... I have nothing to add At the moment

[Beastro]

Regiment no. 15: we're not really modeling individual regiments, with a very few exceptions. Doing so opens the door to too much unit variety, and really confusing recruitment.

I've also heard that you can only have something like 25-30 types of units be recruited in city, and any more will get cut off the list.

Is this correct, I didn't really pay attention to the post, I think it was back when I played IS.

[sage2]

I've also heard that you can only have something like 25-30 types of units be recruited in city, and any more will get cut off the list.

Is this correct, I didn't really pay attention to the post, I think it was back when I played IS.

That's correct. CA didn't model in a way to scroll if there are more than max (which I think is around 30, as you note).

[Johan217]

Also Imperial Regiment Rot-Wurzburg which defended church in Leuthen could be add to mod – they deserved it!

Believe me, I've been thinking about "Imperial troops". The thing is, however, that the Imperial territories are not represented in the game, instead we get Bavaria, Saxony, etc. and these already have their own units.

As Sage says, we're not adding units on a regimental basis. Doing so would mean that you could only really recruit one of each unit to be realistic, so you (and the AI) end up with loads of different units that are basically just the same.

I'm also looking into a system for faction-specific regiment names, but no luck so far.

[Johan217]

Here's something I would really like to see added... only I don't know how to.

Ambassador. Gentlemen would get a trait "Good/Bad Ambassador" when they spend a few turns inside another nation's capital. The trait would slowly increase your reputation with that nation.

I think it would add a fun roleplaying element, and it would make your excess gentlemen actually useful for something. Think of it as Benjamin Franklin on his tour in France

Likewise, you could have a trait for rakes that slightly increases popular unrest when they are inside a foreign city. Maturin on a secret mission

Since agents are now limited and the bonuses would be minor, I think this would not upset any balance.

[tomsin]

. Maturin on a secret mission

With captain Obri, disguised as a bear

[ibigscarymonster]

Here's something I would really like to see added... only I don't know how to.

Ambassador. Gentlemen would get a trait "Good/Bad Ambassador" when they spend a few turns inside another nation's capital. The trait would slowly increase your reputation with that nation.

I think it would add a fun roleplaying element, and it would make your excess gentlemen actually useful for something. Think of it as Benjamin Franklin on his tour in France

Likewise, you could have a trait for rakes that slightly increases popular unrest when they are inside a foreign city. Maturin on a secret mission

Since agents are now limited and the bonuses would be minor, I think this would not upset any balance.

That's a really cool idea as an ambassador was a huge part of the 18th Century. A good ambassador could bribe courts, influence monarchs, spread lies and disinformation. In an age when most leaders would never meet in person and instructions from monarchs might take months to arrive having a good Ambassador was a critical piece of foreign policy.

Here is my crazy idea for the day
I was thinking that the Ottoman's and Mughal's (if they ever become playable in the campaign) should have the option to recruit 'Colonial' troops in Europe. they are both big enough that well run they theoretically could have established land holdings in Central or Western Europe.
Say that the Ottoman's destroy Austria and push into Germany, let them recruit European Colonial troops in the same way European nations can recruit colonial troops in their overseas territories. The Colonial troops are inferior to regular line infantry but would fill a recruitment void. I know the Ottoman's had Janissary troops but i see them more as unique to the Balkans and many were hereditary positions. I don't think they would accept newly conquered Europeans into their ranks.
Anyways, this more of an 'idea' than a recommendation it's a purely a 'what if' scenario since it never happened but with a human player leading the Ottoman's or Mughals it's not an impossibility.

[Johan217]

That's a really cool idea as an ambassador was a huge part of the 18th Century. A good ambassador could bribe courts, influence monarchs, spread lies and disinformation. In an age when most leaders would never meet in person and instructions from monarchs might take months to arrive having a good Ambassador was a critical piece of foreign policy.

Of course it's a cool idea
I don't know if it is possible yet to edit the character traits. It seems I can only open the files in a hexeditor, which is a bit over my head at the moment.

Here is my crazy idea for the day
I was thinking that the Ottoman's and Mughal's (if they ever become playable in the campaign) should have the option to recruit 'Colonial' troops in Europe. they are both big enough that well run they theoretically could have established land holdings in Central or Western Europe.
Say that the Ottoman's destroy Austria and push into Germany, let them recruit European Colonial troops in the same way European nations can recruit colonial troops in their overseas territories. The Colonial troops are inferior to regular line infantry but would fill a recruitment void. I know the Ottoman's had Janissary troops but i see them more as unique to the Balkans and many were hereditary positions. I don't think they would accept newly conquered Europeans into their ranks.
Anyways, this more of an 'idea' than a recommendation it's a purely a 'what if' scenario since it never happened but with a human player leading the Ottoman's or Mughals it's not an impossibility.

Interesting... For now we have a few auxiliary units for the Ottomans (in Balkans and Caucasus). I'm also planning to add 2 more Janissary units: Sekbans (Anatolia and Southeastern Europe) and Cairo.
I could add a generic "European auxiliaries" for them, some kind of irregular or militia type unit. It's indeed a "what if", but it is realistic I think, and a good thing for game balance.

[ibigscarymonster]

It's too bad we can't create an entirely new unit based on the Gentleman and call it the Ambassador. You get one at the beginning of the game and you can send it to a country you want to positively impact relations with or sabotage. Give it abilities instead of steal technology or duel that are more like "cause discontent", "bribe minister", "seduce Monarch's daughter"...
CA you fail me with your lack of creativity!

European Auxillary sounds good but I prefer to call them CSTSUBFMA (Christian Slave Troops Used to Soak Up Bullets in Front of Main Army)

I'm so bored at work today...

[Hounf of Culan]

I think you guys should make a screenshots sticky or something, something to showcase the features of TROM. Screenshots/videos are always the best way to get new people interested, just pictures of the new AOR units and stuff like that would be good.

[Johan217]

I think you guys should make a screenshots sticky or something, something to showcase the features of TROM. Screenshots/videos are always the best way to get new people interested, just pictures of the new AOR units and stuff like that would be good.

There are a few here: http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?t=260123

But you're right, we should.

[JaM]

sage2: btw, the last column in naval unit table are the hit points for the ship. Hull strenght is a structural resistance to damage.