Tracer fire

After watching a the gameplay vids it seems tracer fire is back in. does any one know if there will be an option to toggle it? or if not is it a pretty easy thing to fix in a mod. it looks like the troops are in a spitting contest with each other

after playing without tracers I found myself not being able to control over the battlefield because I couldn't understand who shoots at whom. So I am for the tracers

Originally Posted by HellFell

after playing without tracers I found myself not being able to control over the battlefield because I couldn't understand who shoots at whom. So I am for the tracers

This. In this instance gameplay triumphs over realism.

Easy to fix

Probably not toggled, though that's based on assumptions from ETW, which they might have improved upon

While, obviously, the tracers aren't realistic, it is a gameplay feature to simply help the player discern not only who/which unit, is targeting whom, but often times whom the player's own soldiers are targeting.

what is tracer fire? can someone explain to me?

Originally Posted by Nicolaos

what is tracer fire? can someone explain to me?

Tracer fire is an ammunition type used by most militaries to make firearm round illuminate over their trail allowing the shooters to 'trace' their bullets' trajectories.

Tracer ammunition was not introduced until the early twentieth century. Prior to that, shooters rellied on seeing their bullets impact to know 'where' their rounds were going.

Normal, standard issue ammunition does not produce a 'tracer' effect.

oh i see thanks.
i dont have a problem with that, but it would also be cool to see the soldiers fall and not to see where the bullets come from

Originally Posted by Nicolaos

oh i see thanks.
i dont have a problem with that, but it would also be cool to see the soldiers fall and not to see where the bullets come from

There are mods that remove tracer fire for ETW so I'm sure there will be for NTW .
I did remove them at first but as said they do come in handy ...

I actually kind of like the tracers, while unrealistic I find it makes me sure of where my shots are going and that they are in fact hitting the enemy and not just going into the side of a wall or into ranks of my own men.

Originally Posted by Isaristh

I actually kind of like the tracers, while unrealistic I find it makes me sure of where my shots are going and that they are in fact hitting the enemy and not just going into the side of a wall or into ranks of my own men.

Yes, exactly. I believe that 'tracers' are, in gameplay terms, needed. But perhaps CA could make them an option?

Originally Posted by Thoragoros

Yes, exactly. I believe that 'tracers' are, in gameplay terms, needed. But perhaps CA could make them an option?

Nothing wrong with that either. In fact a whole mess of things should be optional, like blood for instance.

Originally Posted by Isaristh

Nothing wrong with that either. In fact a whole mess of things should be optional, like blood for instance.

You can`t beat options. I can never understand when a game comes out that`s crying `options` yet the Devs decide to force their own preferences down our throat like we`re all clones or something. The best games have always been the ones that provide a lot of options. I still think Unreal Tournament, the very first one, is one of the best shooters out there cos it gives you an option for EVERYTHING easily laid out. later UTs gradually took away more and more options until you can`t even drive a vehicle in 1st person any more (ut3) - I mean, WTF?!

But good strategy games are crying out for multiple options.

As to tracers I have had absolutely no problem without them. I actually like it when I see near hits of artillery explosions near my marching men and I have to scour the area ahead to see where its coming from. It also adds a little `fog of war` which i like.

Originally Posted by Humble Warrior

As to tracers I have had absolutely no problem without them. I actually like it when I see near hits of artillery explosions near my marching men and I have to scour the area ahead to see where its coming from. It also adds a little `fog of war` which i like.

This. After having played without tracers once, I don't think I can ever go back. There's something about the unpredictable fountains of dirt from artillery, and the peels of musket smoke followed by the distant collapsing of men that makes me feel like I'm actually there.

Originally Posted by Humble Warrior

You can`t beat options. I can never understand when a game comes out that`s crying `options` yet the Devs decide to force their own preferences down our throat like we`re all clones or something. The best games have always been the ones that provide a lot of options. I still think Unreal Tournament, the very first one, is one of the best shooters out there cos it gives you an option for EVERYTHING easily laid out. later UTs gradually took away more and more options until you can`t even drive a vehicle in 1st person any more (ut3) - I mean, WTF?!

But good strategy games are crying out for multiple options.

As to tracers I have had absolutely no problem without them. I actually like it when I see near hits of artillery explosions near my marching men and I have to scour the area ahead to see where its coming from. It also adds a little `fog of war` which i like.

Absolutely agree.
Options have been forgotten. Don't know still why? They make a game more flexible for many audiences and let a game to last longer.
In MP we should have some options to choose frome (free money, restricted camera, no flags, no tracers, realistic speed...) to let the host decide which level of realism to select.

This would has been the real step forward respect Empire, showing that they'd care about the community whether casual or gorgnards. We always forget that a napoleonic battlefield was pretty messed up, lots of mistakes were made due to visual limitations. We should be able to recreate that atmosphere to a high degree. People don't like that...fine they toggle off the option, people appreciate a deep FOW...simple like swallowing one's breakfast they toggle in the option box.

Well, actually, even making blood an option would mean that ETW would have had to have been rated for blood, which CA said they did not want to do, they wanted to keep the rating in the T zone.

Originally Posted by Thoragoros

Well, actually, even making blood an option would mean that ETW would have had to have been rated for blood, which CA said they did not want to do, they wanted to keep the rating in the T zone.

and blood is worse than "sexual themes"?

Originally Posted by Isaristh

and blood is worse than "sexual themes"?

It depends on the sexual theme. In this case, it was simply an obscure flag (no offense to the Irish guys) that probably won't be seen in game. The blood will definitely be seen in game.

Also, its a matter of combination. Perhaps having the blood in addition to the sexual themes might push the rating over the M factor, and remember, CA doesn't know what the rating will be until its too late.

So, for the sake of keeping down the rating, they played it safe.

Completely understandable.

Originally Posted by Thoragoros

It depends on the sexual theme. In this case, it was simply an obscure flag (no offense to the Irish guys) that probably won't be seen in game. The blood will definitely be seen in game.
.

It is NOTHING to do with that flag! That was made by Sir Caesar for a reskin, the sexual themes refers to traits, buildings and ancillaries.
Isaristh has a lot to answer for with the number of people believing him over that flag reason

Yes, I too prefer not having tracers, but I was just saying, essentially, that I understand where CA is coming from on this one.