Page 5 of 9 FirstFirst 123456789 LastLast
Results 81 to 100 of 180

Thread: Russia - Information & Discussion

  1. #81

    Default Re: Russia - Gameplay Discussion

    Quote Originally Posted by Swerg View Post
    I think that IS somewhat compensated for by Russia lacking decent cavalry, infantry, and their huge reload times. They can really only get 2-3 shots in before you close with them. True, those 2-3 shots are devastating, but is that any worse than the Prussian machinegunners?
    Lacking decent cavalry? They have excellent cavalry. You just have to know how to use it.

  2. #82

    Default Re: Russia - Gameplay Discussion

    Quote Originally Posted by Lucan View Post
    Lacking decent cavalry? They have excellent cavalry. You just have to know how to use it.
    Quote Originally Posted by OP
    Russia's state cavalry has proven several times that it cannot keep up with its neighbours. Its horses are too light and the army's morale too low to compete with either the Swedes or the Poles.
    >_>

    I was just going by the OP. I'm an infantry general, so I personally think the purpose of cavalry is chasing down routers and looking pretty.

  3. #83
    Decanus
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Moscow, Russia
    Posts
    526

    Default Re: Russia - Gameplay Discussion

    in fact russian state cavalry after 'Westernization of the Cavalry' reforms is quite decent. It is dragoons and horse grenadiers who are in some way weak. But cuirassiers, hussars and carabineers are as good as others (taking into account russian unit size)

  4. #84

    Default Re: Russia - Gameplay Discussion

    Gotto love the carabineers or Karabinery, they are exellent if you ask me, i also often put them behind infantry and guns so close that they will fire over their head with rarely causing friendly fire, gotto watch the terrain when doing this tho.

  5. #85

    Default Re: Russia - Gameplay Discussion

    Quote Originally Posted by Swerg View Post
    >_>

    I was just going by the OP. I'm an infantry general, so I personally think the purpose of cavalry is chasing down routers and looking pretty.
    That would explain it. Nothing wrong with that.

  6. #86

    Default Re: Russia - Gameplay Discussion

    What was Russia's force like in the early C19, when they were fighting Napoleon? I am just interested for contrast to the start of the C18 and interesed in how CA will do it in Napoleon Total War.

    EDIT: I was also wondering what this secret howitzer was all about - is it actually historically accurate, or just amazingly awesome?
    Last edited by Wazzock; November 05, 2009 at 04:16 PM.

  7. #87

    Default Re: Russia - Gameplay Discussion

    Quote Originally Posted by Wazzock View Post
    What was Russia's force like in the early C19, when they were fighting Napoleon? I am just interested for contrast to the start of the C18 and interesed in how CA will do it in Napoleon Total War.

    EDIT: I was also wondering what this secret howitzer was all about - is it actually historically accurate, or just amazingly awesome?
    As for the howitzer, both.

  8. #88
    Erunion Telcontar's Avatar Senator
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Surrey B.C, Canada!
    Posts
    1,204

    Default Re: Russia - Gameplay Discussion

    Yes, the howitzer existed. Yes, it was and is amazingly awesome.

    +Rep for anyone who can translate! (The above)
    Auta i lóme! Aurë entuluva!

  9. #89

    Default Re: Russia - Gameplay Discussion

    Quote Originally Posted by Swerg View Post
    >_>

    I was just going by the OP. I'm an infantry general, so I personally think the purpose of cavalry is chasing down routers and looking pretty.
    Agreed. I rarely use mcuh cavalry, and it's usually Light Dragoons or such to counter enemy cavalry.

    I could write a novel about Shuvalov's secret howitzer, and they are my favorite unit. Just tried them out in (yet another) test game, using solely Shuvalov's against Great Britain's finest guard units as well as line infantry. Shuvalovs won. I love how the mod reskins Russian uniforms to make them historically accurate rather than assuming Russian soldiers marched through the frozen tundra in high socks and little coats. Makes Russia look very unique too.

    I'm thinking of starting a campaign as Russia- how are they? Hard? Easy? Big? Small?

  10. #90

    Default Re: Russia - Gameplay Discussion

    Well, Russia plays like this:

    - You don't have access to the ocean you need to either cut through Sweden to get St. Petersburg, or hit the Crimean Kharnate for their port.
    - All your provinces suck, and barely give you any income. Your main income will be trade.
    - Your starting state military sucks. A lot. Research reforms as quick as possible, otherwise you'll have to rely on cossacks, who are alright, but fight in an irregular fashion.
    - Your south-eastern regions will be hard to hold - both Dagestan and Georgia will piss you off, to no end.

    As a consequence it's difficult to start, and difficult to play. You control huge, vulnerable regions with an inefficient military. However, if you survive, research and build up, you'll be able to increase your weak economy and rule the world.

  11. #91
    Praepositus
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    athens
    Posts
    5,840

    Default Re: Russia - Gameplay Discussion

    In my campaign as netherlands Russia had become a huge spinach monster from eastern europe to afganistan .

  12. #92

    Default Re: Russia - Gameplay Discussion

    I think you have done great work with this mod. But I find it sad that you have taken account only first half of 18th century recarding Russia. I find this amusing Russians are once more regarded as zerglings with endless man power to spent. You have not really taken account of Russian armies that operated in Seven Year's War. Were those somekind incompentent zergling armies? When in fact they defeated oh those incrediple prussians under the Frederik the Great at Battle of Kunersdorf. His greatest defeat and taking also Berlin. Underestimating of them led Frederik to his greatest defeat. If you are familiar this period of time you know that Tsaritsa Elizaveta's great devotion to reduce Frederik from king into mere Prince-Elector. Only thing that actually prevented this was untimely death of Tsaritsa and Prussophile Peter III. Who pulled russian forces out of Prussia and made immediatly peace with Frederik. Know also Miracle of the House of Brandenburg.

    I am not saying here that Russians should be somekind uber demi-gods smiting their foes. But I ask that you could make visible big difference of first half and second half of 18th century armies of Russia. Later armies should still have under medicore accuracy and reloading skill. But over high melee and bit above medicore moral. As was russian emphaziz on "cold steel" at that time. Morale representing the standing power that had gradually grown into russian armies in 18th century. Manifesting itself in Seven Year's War, Surorov campaings and later 19th century. If this feel overpowered you nip little russian artillery power. Also penalties on russian navy should be fine. Even with Peter's innovations russian navy never was powerfull as England, France, Spain, Portugal or Dutch. It was enough for taking on swedes and Turks thou. Naval infantry performed some intresting operations in Napoleonic wars taking Corfu, storming Naples and later marching into Rome, But thats later periods already.


    Last edited by Aleksei Raukov; November 17, 2009 at 02:46 PM.

  13. #93

    Default Re: Russia - Gameplay Discussion

    Thanks for mod anyway its nice and best ETW mod atm. Sorry for rant.

    Forgot from first post. Please reduce Russian unit sizes atlest later units. Russian unit sizes were mostly same as other european nations. Against enemies like Sweden they ofc tented to outnumber them. But in general Russias population was not bigger than French for example at that time.
    Last edited by Aleksei Raukov; November 17, 2009 at 02:53 PM.

  14. #94
    Erunion Telcontar's Avatar Senator
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Surrey B.C, Canada!
    Posts
    1,204

    Default Re: Russia - Gameplay Discussion

    Thanks for the post Aleksai!
    It is unlikely that we will change the Russians too much in the near future (at least not until after 2.2). Keep in mind that we have to make every faction unique and feel very different, so things like a nation being stereotyped to how they acted in a specific (if broad) portion of the 18th century will happen in the name of gameplay.
    Right now we have the Eastern Three; Poland, Russia and Sweden, each of which has an emphasis. Poland's emphasis is on Cavalry and mid-range confrontation, Russia's emphasis is on artillery and long-range confrontation whilst Sweden emphasizes Infantry and short-range fighting.

    +Rep for anyone who can translate! (The above)
    Auta i lóme! Aurë entuluva!

  15. #95

    Default Re: Russia - Gameplay Discussion

    Quote Originally Posted by Aleksei Raukov View Post
    I think you have done great work with this mod. But I find it sad that you have taken account only first half of 18th century recarding Russia. I find this amusing Russians are once more regarded as zerglings with endless man power to spent. You have not really taken account of Russian armies that operated in Seven Year's War. Were those somekind incompentent zergling armies? When in fact they defeated oh those incrediple prussians under the Frederik the Great at Battle of Kunersdorf. His greatest defeat and taking also Berlin. Underestimating of them led Frederik to his greatest defeat. If you are familiar this period of time you know that Tsaritsa Elizaveta's great devotion to reduce Frederik from king into mere Prince-Elector. Only thing that actually prevented this was untimely death of Tsaritsa and Prussophile Peter III. Who pulled russian forces out of Prussia and made immediatly peace with Frederik. Know also Miracle of the House of Brandenburg.

    I am not saying here that Russians should be somekind uber demi-gods smiting their foes. But I ask that you could make visible big difference of first half and second half of 18th century armies of Russia. Later armies should still have under medicore accuracy and reloading skill. But over high melee and bit above medicore moral. As was russian emphaziz on "cold steel" at that time. Morale representing the standing power that had gradually grown into russian armies in 18th century. Manifesting itself in Seven Year's War, Surorov campaings and later 19th century. If this feel overpowered you nip little russian artillery power. Also penalties on russian navy should be fine. Even with Peter's innovations russian navy never was powerfull as England, France, Spain, Portugal or Dutch. It was enough for taking on swedes and Turks thou. Naval infantry performed some intresting operations in Napoleonic wars taking Corfu, storming Naples and later marching into Rome, But thats later periods already.



    I agree that the Russia needs better infantry by the time of the seven years war, but comparing them to the Prussians in 1759 aint exactly fair. The Prussians were hardly at their best having lost half of their 5500 officers, many irreplacable generals who were heroes to the troops, dont know how many ten's of thousend troops lost but about 100 men of each regiment was all that was left of the veterans at the end of the war, all the forced marching, exausted battle weary troops who seems to have to take on enemy fortified postions in almost every battle if im not misstaken. The Prussians almost allways attacks and the enemy knows it, same thing at Kunersdorf, the Russians had all round defence even tho they outnumbered the Prussians with their Austrian allies with about 10.000 more troops, as Napoleon would put it: fighting siting on their ass. Austrian style i call it, probably relying a good deal on their guns and deadly canister altough the Russian soldier was a brave fierce opponent.

    But if we're gonna compare troops and put them in the game to represent their abilities it should be what they were really capable off and not what 3 years of war fighting against immense odds did to the quality of the Prussian army and then base the Russian ability of, of their current weekend state.

  16. #96
    Praepositus
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    athens
    Posts
    5,840

    Default Re: Russia - Gameplay Discussion

    They represent russian with biger units in order to represent the catholic recruitment that existed in Russia while in other countries were profesionals it nt historical correct but it is a a kind settlement .

    Also first russians armies suffered logistic support problems especially when faced ottomans in the first years and i think this is also represented in morale .

  17. #97

    Default Re: Russia - Gameplay Discussion

    The russian army was still very tough from the second half of the XVIIIth century to the napoleonic era.

    They were considered to be very stuborn and able to take considerable punishment before breaking on a battlefield.
    (Leading to the french napoleonic story that say that you need two bullets to stop a russian, one to kill him, the other to make him stop)
    They were also considered to be disciplined and support long and hard marchs.
    That made them strong opponents.
    Last edited by Keyser; November 18, 2009 at 03:00 AM.

  18. #98
    Praepositus
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    athens
    Posts
    5,840

    Default Re: Russia - Gameplay Discussion

    Quote Originally Posted by Keyser View Post
    The russian army was still very tough from the second half of the XVIIIth century to the napoleonic era.

    They were considered to be very stuborn and able to take considerable punishment before breaking on a battlefield.
    (Leading to the french napoleonic story that say that you need two bullets to stop a russian, one to kill him, the other to make him stop)
    They were also considered to be disciplined and support long and hard marchs.
    That made them strong opponents.
    1700 starts the game

  19. #99

    Default Re: Russia - Gameplay Discussion

    Quote Originally Posted by jo the greek View Post
    1700 starts the game

    Changes should be made for mid game tho, and im sure they will be.

  20. #100

    Default Re: Russia - Gameplay Discussion

    Quote Originally Posted by jo the greek View Post
    1700 starts the game
    Yes... And it ends in 1792, so, what's the point again ?

    I will say, so... Either you choose a system where all factions have the same stats (boring, i guess), a system where the actions and decisions of the player change the stats of the units according to tech, drill, recruitment (possibly not doable at the moment) or you play on national stereotypes.
    IS has chosen the last one, it's great.
    I understand why IS choose to represent the russian like they are from a gameplay point of view, or why people argue that the russian in the early 1700's didn't had good infantry.

    But, I don't see why people shouldn't point that it wasn't the case for the whole century... Now, will the IS team choose to represent that change ?
    I don't know.
    That could unbalance the setting...
    And it could be frustrating for people whose army may historically have experienced a fall in efficiency.
    Last edited by Keyser; November 19, 2009 at 01:26 PM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •