Ranged attacks on cavlry(no dragoons but different suggestion)

[Darkarbiter]

I believe curassiers had 2 pistols which they fired just b4 they hit the enemy. Therefore give cavlry (in particuler curassiers) 2 bullets and a short range but powerfull ranged attack and it will work well and be realistic and be balanced. No light infantry pwning cavlry. The main problem with ranged attacks on cavlry was ppl using them like HA. 2 bullets (or one powerfull shot) will not allow cavlry to be used like horse archers and will give them that extra edge to even up the fight just b4 they charge. This should only be given to elite cavlry though to make them worth the extra cost. Comments?

from cavlry preveiw
"The hussar was armed with pistols and curved sabre. Some had carbines. The hussars were the most flamboyantly dressed part of every army. Their brilliant uniforms exemplified the panache with which they lived and fought."
also from preveiw
mounted guard grenadiers:
"They rode big black horses and were armed with straight sabres, pistols and carbines."
guard cossacks:
"armed with pistols, swords, and an 8-foot long lance with a steel spearhead surmounting a steel ball to secure easy withdrawal of the point."
russian currasiers:
"Each man also carried a carbine and or a pair of pistols to guard the flanks when advancing to enemy lines."

[Lord Shand]

napoleonic cavalry never used firearms in pitched battles - u are thinkin of the cuirassiers of Marlbouroughs time ie 100 years earlier!

trust us the cavalry firing option has been discussed to its limits, and there is little historical basis or gameplay basis to include it

[mark0701]

A few units of French dragoons used pistols and carbines in a last resort attempt to break the squares at Waterloo, but by all accounts the fire was very ineffective and only managed to open a small gap in one sqaure (which was quickly closed resulting in the deaths of 4 dragoons caught in the square).

As Lord Shand states, such attempts were rarely made as they tended to be very ineffective. At Waterloo, individual riders would discharge pistols and carbines at a sqaure in an attempt to get the footsloggers to discharge their volley early which would give the cavalry a chance to charge unchecked. It was more a game of cat and mouse than a real attempt to inflict casualties.

Certainly not something to model into the game IMHO.

[[KHD]Tuncarl]

I seem to remember reading a bit about French Dragoons and that they would dismout to use their firearms. In game this would make a very small unit of infantry irregulars who would be pretty useless.

I could be wrong (I often am) but I guess Cavalry firearms were for use in scouting/foraging/skirmishes rather than pitched battles ?

[Adherbal]

I could be wrong (I often am) but I guess Cavalry firearms were for use in scouting/foraging/skirmishes rather than pitched battles ?

you are right. And if they fired pistol in battle it would be an individual thing, so something the whole unit would do. And this is better simulated by h2h combat then actualy adding a missile weapon.

I agree cavalry with firearms would add diversity, but it would decrease realism instead of increasing it.

[Darkarbiter]

Maybe someone will add it in a mod some day then...

[FliegerAD]

Wouldn't the 'prec'-attribute be appropriate for the simulation of pistols? The RTR 6.2 lance and bow-armed cavalry had this and they behaved like lancers only that they shot their bows before the charge (as long as they had ammo). I did not play it long, so I can't say how well it works. I remember some flaws, but I believe they were caused by too low charge distances.

I know you had this firearms+cavalry discussions a hundred times, I am asking as a fellow modder who is interested in your tests.

Your charge distances are too low as well btw, they still have the vanilla values. At least Prussian and British cavalry manuals and orders report clearly higher charge distances. I have not seen French or Russian manuals though.

[Mooncabbage]

I was arguing with a dude the other day, cause we where both watching the last samurai and that bridge scene always seems to be a bone of contention with people who think guns are magic, and somehow we got arguing about how he thought cavalry of the gunpowder age all used rifles/muskets with bayonets on the end, because he saw a redcoat with a bayonet on his musket. Neways I did some research, pimped him a picture of an 1800s hussar (he said it didn't count, since the hussars had been around since the 1400s or something it was obviously a pre-gunpowder hussar).

This is relavent because in my research for my utterly fruitless argument, I read that Dragoons where originally used as mounted infantry units, who would move as cavalry and fight as infantry. However later on they where used primarly as medium cavalry. I think to accurately depict a mounted infantry unit in a game would require mid-battle mounting/dismounting, which while almost certainly possible with access to the engine source, extremely unlikely as total war never has, nor is ever likely to have proper dismounting. Which is a shame.

So in the mean time, enjoy your Dragoons, Curassiers and other cavalry units in their Historically Accurate Contexts .

[Adherbal]

"prec" makes them charge after firing but only if you order them to fire, you can still walk them in range and let them fire at will. Not to mension the 360° firing angle still exists.

[lalalax3]

shooting cavalry is disgusting with the 360 degree turn when i took a crack at the issue, my opinion, is to keep it the way it is now, let cavalry be the CAVALRY