Is it just me, or do archers no longer gain a range bonus on a hill?

[Empirion0]

I don't know if the range of archers is intended in Shogun 2 or not. I, myself, know nothing about Kyudo or Kyujutsu so I can't confirm anything, but one thing I do notice is that archers always will shoot with an angle. Even when it is like point-blank range. In previous titles like Rome and Medieval, archers will shoot linearly if the enemy is right in their face.

So maybe the way Japanese bows are made and they way their archers are trained explains why there are no ranged(distance) bonus on a hill? Might worth looking into.

[SonOfCrusader76]

I think you're right - I put my archers on a high hill, from where they could hit the enemy before in previous TW games, but they can't hit them now. That's a little disappointing. If it ain't broke, don't fix it, CA - there was nothing wrong with how height and archers worked before.

Fix it in the patch, maybe?

[romanlegion13th]

i had this same problem its a bit of a letdown
i was on a hill inf infront archers in 2ed line and there archers started shooting my inf and mine was out of range wtf
we need a mod to fix this

[Ragss]

Glad to see I'm not the only one disappointed by this.

[Ferdiad]

Newtonian physics says your wrong, there was a thread on the TW forums where this guy showed that the hill effect has been wrong all along, I just have to find it now.

[Blackthorne]

Newtonian physics says your wrong, there was a thread on the TW forums where this guy showed that the hill effect has been wrong all along, I just have to find it now.

Hi folks, sorry that my first post on this forum is to contradict someone but this is completely wrong.

Newtonian mechanics states that the length of time a projectile spends in the air is reliant only on two things, the height of the projectile at launch and the vertical component of it's velocity at launch (ie how fast it's travelling in the upwards direction). The range of the projectile is given by the horizontal component of its velocity multiplied by the length of time it spends in the air. Incidentally the optimum angle for a long range shot turns out to be forty five degrees.

Short version: So the range is reliant on the height of the unit and units on a hill should get a range bonus.

Anyway the game is ace but if archers at higher elevation don't get a range bonus then this is deffinitly a problem.

[Gaidin]

Hi folks, sorry that my first post on this forum is to contradict someone but this is completely wrong.

Newtonian mechanics states that the length of time a projectile spends in the air is reliant only on two things, the height of the projectile at launch and the vertical component of it's velocity at launch (ie how fast it's travelling in the upwards direction). The range of the projectile is given by the horizontal component of its velocity multiplied by the length of time it spends in the air. Incidentally the optimum angle for a long range shot turns out to be forty five degrees.

Short version: So the range is reliant on the height of the unit and units on a hill should get a range bonus.

Anyway the game is ace but if archers at higher elevation don't get a range bonus then this is deffinitly a problem.

I say again. I can't remember the thread it was in, but the bottom line is that an elevation of 20+ feet gives a negligible range boost so they didn't waste processing power on it.

Aha. Here we go. Pwned by Newtonian Physics.

[Blackthorne]

I say again. I can't remember the thread it was in, but the bottom line is that an elevation of 20+ feet gives a negligible range boost so they didn't waste processing power on it.

Aha. Here we go. Pwned by Newtonian Physics.

Fair point, I've read that thread and it seems kosher. But the fact still is that the range of a projectile is increased by launching it from a higher elevation.

I will admit that with an arrow the velocity is low enough that the difference might be negligable though.

So anyway, the laws of physics remain intact therefore I'm happy .

[Mr Frost]

I say again. I can't remember the thread it was in, but the bottom line is that an elevation of 20+ feet gives a negligible range boost so they didn't waste processing power on it.

Aha. Here we go. Pwned by Newtonian Physics.

To begin with , Farinhirs' physics model is painfully simplistic , but it is His assumtions that are so wrong as to make His claim {that archers shouldn't have a range increase when on elevated terrain} so patently false .





Firstly , even the distance increase of 18 feet {nearly 6 meters} from the paltry 20 feet {just over 6 meters and there is plenty of terrain in STW2 offering a far greater hight advantage !} is plenty to ensure that if the enemy archers can hit your spearmen then your own archers standing less than 6 meters behind your spearmen can hit those enemy archers .


Secondly , He is either ignorant of or ignoring the fact that it cuts both ways ... at maximum range {45% angle of launch} the projectile will hit the side of that hill well below your feet because your feet happen to be several meters above the spot the projectile would have encountered had you been on flat ground .
If He aims higher in an attempt to compensate He will naturally shorten His range so He is S.O.L. .

The range advantage in real life an archer on higher ground has plus the range disadvantage his opponent will have adds up to a significant difference .

Lots of battlefields in the game have accessable terrain notably higher than 20 feet that should give the holder a significant range advantage by real world physics .


Thirdly , the range limit of the guns in the game is due to the inherently poor accuracy of those types of primate firearms , not their velocity etc .
I'm wondering if He knows anything about such weapons . Hitting even someone in an entire regiment at more than 100 meters with a 16th century smoothbore arquebus is pretty much a matter of dumb luck and was concidered a waste of ammunition .

Being higher doesn't make your gun magically more accurate , infact a height differential actually complicates a shot {ask any experienced hunter or combat soldier} given you are adding yet another variable into what is already pretty complex trigonometry to mentally calculate whillst facing a large number of angry soldiers that dearly wish to kill you in a probably painful fashion and unlike an archer , you cannot easily observe your fall of shot to correct your aim {indeed , after the first volley of those guns you would be lucky to see anything unless a very strong wind was blowing the smoke away} .

Increasing the accurate range {which is what the low range they have represents ... a mere fraction of how far they can throw a bullet} of those smoothbore arquebus when on a hill is assinine to say the least .



Basically , He is flat out wrong !
The games' archers should have a realistic range increase when higher {and penalty when lower or if the engine can't handle the latter , then double the former} and guns should not .



WTF are schools teaching kids these days ? It's as though logic and research are dirty words now .

[Gaidin]

To begin with , Farinhirs' physics model is painfully simplistic , but it is His assumtions that are so wrong as to make His claim {that archers shouldn't have a range increase when on elevated terrain} so patently false .





Firstly , even the distance increase of 18 feet {nearly 6 meters} from the paltry 20 feet {just over 6 meters and there is plenty of terrain in STW2 offering a far greater hight advantage !} is plenty to ensure that if the enemy archers can hit your spearmen then your own archers standing less than 6 meters behind your spearmen can hit those enemy archers .


Secondly , He is either ignorant of or ignoring the fact that it cuts both ways ... at maximum range {45% angle of launch} the projectile will hit the side of that hill well below your feet because your feet happen to be several meters above the spot the projectile would have encountered had you been on flat ground .
If He aims higher in an attempt to compensate He will naturally shorten His range so He is S.O.L. .

The range advantage in real life an archer on higher ground has plus the range disadvantage his opponent will have adds up to a significant difference .

Lots of battlefields in the game have accessable terrain notably higher than 20 feet that should give the holder a significant range advantage by real world physics .


Thirdly , the range limit of the guns in the game is due to the inherently poor accuracy of those types of primate firearms , not their velocity etc .
I'm wondering if He knows anything about such weapons . Hitting even someone in an entire regiment at more than 100 meters with a 16th century smoothbore arquebus is pretty much a matter of dumb luck and was concidered a waste of ammunition .

Being higher doesn't make your gun magically more accurate , infact a height differential actually complicates a shot {ask any experienced hunter or combat soldier} given you are adding yet another variable into what is already pretty complex trigonometry to mentally calculate whillst facing a large number of angry soldiers that dearly wish to kill you in a probably painful fashion and unlike an archer , you cannot easily observe your fall of shot to correct your aim {indeed , after the first volley of those guns you would be lucky to see anything unless a very strong wind was blowing the smoke away} .

Increasing the accurate range {which is what the low range they have represents ... a mere fraction of how far they can throw a bullet} of those smoothbore arquebus when on a hill is assinine to say the least .



Basically , He is flat out wrong !
The games' archers should have a realistic range increase when higher {and penalty when lower or if the engine can't handle the latter , then double the former} and guns should not .



WTF are schools teaching kids these days ? It's as though logic and research are dirty words now .

Games don't use painfully detailed physics models. Fact of life. Once you accept and understand this, things will be a lot easier for you to grasp. Things like why the simple model he used is legit, as well as why it justifies not using height as a factor.

[dieterweber35]

Yep, this thread is wrong. According to physics, being on a hill is pretty much no different.

[Shugo560]

i think there is no elevation bonus at all, i was playing as the shimazu and i set 2 ashigaru archers against 3 and the enemy was on the top part of the hill and i was on bottom and i massacred them easily, mabye there is a low hill adavtage cause i noticed the small slopes downward the hill act as cover for the bottom troops

[SonOfOdin]

Yep, this thread is wrong. According to physics, being on a hill is pretty much no different.

Right, try peeing uphill, and then try peeing downhill.
Take that physics!!

[Modestus]

[Ragss]

I'd love to see that thread explaining the physics. Hard for me to believe right now.

[Auditor]

You can try to explain it in any sophisticated way but the truth is that no elevation bonus is a huge fail and a devastating disappointment. Hope that this is patched and fast.

[DarkArk]

You can try to explain it in any sophisticated way but the truth

No, the truth is that there is no significant difference being at a higher elevation. That "sophisticated way" is scientific empirical thought, what reality is made of. I thought people liked having realism in their games?

[Auditor]

No, the truth is that there is no significant difference being at a higher elevation. That "sophisticated way" is scientific empirical thought, what reality is made of. I thought people liked having realism in their games?
[/SIZE][/FONT]

When using bow at a flat ground, maximum range is obtained by using angel of 45 degrees.
Search Wikipedia for "range of projectile".
Now if you shoot bow from lower ground, you have 2 choices:
1. Adjust angle to higher degrees (let's say 60%) which will definitely hurt you maximum range.
2. Shoot at 45 degrees which will make you arrows fall to the ground sooner because of higher terrain in front of you.
If you shoot bow from higher ground, you can maintain 45 degrees angle and you will gain additional range because your arrow will travel further from elevated terrain, much like in ski jumping.
Conclusion: units at lower ground should have maximum range penalties and units at higher ground should get bonuses. Currently none of the above are present in game which is a HUGE FAIL.
So please stop fool yourself – instead demand from CA to give us back this important strategic and real life feature.

[Actus Reus]

When using bow at a flat ground, maximum range is obtained by using angel of 45 degrees.
Search Wikipedia for "range of projectile".
Now if you shoot bow from lower ground, you have 2 choices:
1. Adjust angle to higher degrees (let's say 60%) which will definitely hurt you maximum range.
2. Shoot at 45 degrees which will make you arrows fall to the ground sooner because of higher terrain in front of you.
If you shoot bow from higher ground, you can maintain 45 degrees angle and you will gain additional range because your arrow will travel further from elevated terrain, much like in ski jumping.
Conclusion: units at lower ground should have maximum range penalties and units at higher ground should get bonuses. Currently none of the above are present in game which is a HUGE FAIL.
So please stop fool yourself – instead demand from CA to give us back this important strategic and real life feature.

I think this explains the physics behind elevated projectiles, please do not ignore this.

I find the speed of the battles so fast I barely noticed no height advantage for archers, however now I have and its most disappointing.

This IS basic game-play and I really hope a fix is included with the first patch.

[Ragss]

Haha yeah, I just want someone to explain it to me.