Gunpowder units accuracy in game

[Sitarus Originalus PM-30+]

I was thinking about how accurate gunpowder units were in history. the real advantage of gunpowder units was actually the time training took.. or how to say... it was much easier to teach someone to shoot with a gun as it was to train someone to be an archer (that usually took several years). So... first guns in history were not accurate much and it was more accurate to shoot with bows, but the true reason why guns become so popular was the time needed to train a large amount of units.
My question to you guys is - will that be considered in game or not? what do you think?
I think in game archers should be more accurate when shooting, but they should take more time to train... i know this doesnt sould right, but it would be more hisotrically accurate. Maybe it would be better to make some other differences between those 2 unit tipes...
...maybe you have a better idea. =)

[mark0701]

Sadly, i fear it will be like MTW in that the gunpowder units will be way overpowered.

They should have a huge morale impact on any nation that has not developed the units themselves, but should only do damage at very short range. They should also only be available in very small numbers to relfect the limited number of people who had the skill to make these weapons.

The cannons and firearms we saw in MTW belonged in the 17th Century, not the 13th!

[Imperator of Rome]

...Arquebushiers sucked in mtw,they had to line up right to the unit it was firing at and basically did little damage,crossbowmen were mucb better.

[God-Emperor of Mankind]

...Arquebushiers sucked in mtw,they had to line up right to the unit it was firing at and basically did little damage,crossbowmen were mucb better.

Yeah, very true.
I think it will be the same in MTW2, very inaccurate but causes fear.
Still one of my favorite units from MTW

[Sitarus Originalus PM-30+]

i have never play MTW and i dont know how things were in that game, but i hope MTW2 will be historical accurate as RTW was... or more =) i agree they should have big morale impact, becuase gunpowder units do have advantages afterall and guns were inovation and other nations who didnt have that technology should feel fear to them. but from the practical view guns werent as afficient weapon as bow was (at lest in that time) also material to make gun was rare, but again i must say it was much easier to learn to shoot with a gun as it was to learn to shoot with a bow - so it was easier to rase an army who can shoot into anemy from distance.

[suckah]

MTW gunpowder units overpowered, LOL, now that's a laugh.

[mark0701]

MTW gunpowder units overpowered, LOL, now that's a laugh.

I was including cannons in that.

Oh I also meant overpowered compared to their real life counterparts rather than compared to other units in the game.

[Sitarus Originalus PM-30+]

i cant wait to see demo... or game... (cant wait November), then more thing will make sence and we wont have to wonder so much =)

[Ahiga]

I doubt it (That they will be overpowered) - Consider how in RTW it was the star unit (the legionary) and center of the game which proved to be the most powerful. in MTWII it will likely be the full plate knight who is overpowered.

[iKossu]

the real advantage of gunpowder units was actually the time training took.. or how to say... it was much easier to teach someone to shoot with a gun as it was to train someone to be an archer

Actually, that was the case with crossbows and arbalests. Muskets main advantage was that it was terrifying weapon due to super nasty sound it made. Main disadvantages were very slow rate of fire, they tended to explode and extreme unaccuracy, especially with the early ones: accurate to some 25 meters?

[swabian]

accurate to some 25 meters?

that doesn't matter that much, if a bunch of 100 arqies fires in a bunch of x100 densely formated guys. it just turns out to be a statistical game. the main effect of guns were their efficency against armor, which was even higher than that of crossbows.

[Mikelus Trento]

I wonder just how "accurate" the archer units were? Wasn't their effectiveness based upon raining down the arrows en masse, vs the archers actually "aiming" for a specific target? Carpet bombing if you will, vs smart bombs.

[swabian]

the advantage of archers was the superior range and the curved trajectory of the arrows. they can shoot above the heads of fellas standing in front of them and arros coming from above are always nice, if the affected unit is busy and can't get the shields ready soon enough. but most importantly, they were still usable during bad weather, whil guns were not. i don't think that targeting played an important role. it was enough when the salvo covered the target area and this is possible without targeting individual soldiers.

[Mikelus Trento]

The other advantage was the much quicker reload time. Someone more knowledgeable than me I'm sure can recite how many volleys of arrows vs musket balls could be fired in a minute.

[Zhuge_Liang]

In MTW gunpowder units were terrible, usually killing about 2-4 men in a unit per volley.

Hopefully in M2TW the gunpowder units will have much more powerfull volleys at close range as the arquebus was actually very powerful indeed and could peirce poor to average quality armour. I'd rather see a good amount of the front rank being killed in a volley but much longer reload times. The idea was to soften an enemy before closing for hand to hand combat.

[mark0701]

In MTW gunpowder units were terrible, usually killing about 2-4 men in a unit per volley.

So somewhere between 3-6% were resulting in a kill (at about 50 yards in game probably).

That is better than the British army managed with 500 men firing in lines in the 19th Century!

[Boudicca]

In MTW 1 gunpowder units caused fear. And gunmen were very well able to hold their ground. So I would not that say that the "lack" of casualties made them worthless. If they were worthless, it was only due to the dumb AI which would not attack arbalesters shooting volleys at them.

[swabian]

The other advantage was the much quicker reload time. Someone more knowledgeable than me I'm sure can recite how many volleys of arrows vs musket balls could be fired in a minute.

this is true of course, but crossbows and musquets can only be fired in lines anyway, since their projectiles fly straight to the target. the point of guns and crbws is their efficiency against armor. an arrow can still be deflected by plate armor in some cases. warfare is allways a matter of economy as well as it is a matter of killing. some salvos of guns that kill expensive troops and armored horses more effectively than arrows allready make sense, even if bows kill statistically more enemies (which they did). and imagine a charging unit of knights, the first 'line' of which is suffering some casualties by bullets/bolts. the charge loses much of it's efficiency since the formation gets disturbed and some following knights might stumble over the fallen ones lying in their way. it is also much more difficult to hit a moved target (enemy unit) over a curved trajectory than over a straight trajectory.and last but mot least: the use of bows requires a lot more training than the use of crossbows and guns and since standing armies were not usual in the medieval, such weapons were popular because they made it possible to levy troops quickly, i.e. quality of equipment replaces quality of soldiers.

[iKossu]

mark0701, 19th century is a bit different than medieval times but I get your point. Still I agree with this, especially at point blank ranges (longer reload times in general of course):

I'd rather see a good amount of the front rank being killed in a volley but much longer reload times.

the use of bows requires a lot more training than the use of crossbows and guns

I knew that already. Crossbowmen had the reputation of a coward since they could kill heavy knights easily, and at quite long ranges too.

[Zhuge_Liang]

I tried various tactics in MTW with gunpowder units. I spread them 1 rank thin and 3 units worth deep allowing 3 quick volleys, but still even at close range with a dense mass of men charging at them they would only kill about 6 max.

Oh yeah, that was another problem with MTW, if you had them in a square or thick formation the ones at the back would just stand there waiting for the ones at the front to reload even though i think there was some animation where the ranks changed position.