Why no British grenadiers... a discussion.

[Caius Britannicus]

I've been playing mp alot with my friend. He loves the british (I prefer the russians, god I love those pavlovs), but he and I both agree they suck in close combat. This is of course a balance to the fact that the british are more competent at shooting. And so my friend and I were arguing wether a grenadier unit would imbalance the game in favor of the british (or in his case wether it would bring the british to a level playing field) because as it stands he feels that the british are useless if they must assault a position that is at level or higher ground. Here is what we discussed so far:

(18:25:47) (@caius) which is why they didn't put it in (refering to a british grenadier unit which he modded in and I agreed to also mod in so he could use them)
(18:25:48) (we51ey2) your pavlovs were winning vs the lines (refering to a battle in which I crashed into his lines with 3 russian grenadiers and 2 pavlov grenadiers against his 2 line units and modded grenadier)

(18:25:52) (@caius) for balance reasons
(18:26:04) (@caius) the brits don't need a cc unit
(18:26:10) (@caius) their not suppose to get into cc situations
(18:26:21) (we51ey2) but how do u attack
(18:26:22) (we51ey2) u dont
(18:26:29) (@caius) you don't
(18:26:40) (we51ey2) there weaker than french ones in cc (referring to his british grenadiers)
(18:27:02) (we51ey2) the only reason they beat the pavlovs is the volley at the last minute before u hit them
(18:27:08) (we51ey2) and then a volley from the lines 2
(18:27:20) (StalinsGhost) simple...on the attack, you use superior range to lure the enemy out of their emplacements, onto your line
(18:27:43) (we51ey2) but that doesnt work, seeing how british lines same as everyone elses
(18:27:51) (we51ey2) and british lights have same range
(18:28:12) (we51ey2) they same range and attack as french and russian
(18:28:17) (we51ey2) they all have 10 missile
(18:28:20) (we51ey2) 9 sori
(18:28:24) (we51ey2) 9 missile 10 melee
(18:28:36) (@caius) they are more accurate
(18:28:54) (we51ey2) still in an attacking situation thats doesnt help
(18:29:05) (we51ey2) u still have to get close and defenders have the high ground
(18:29:28) (@caius) I think a british grenadier imbalances the game
(18:29:35) (StalinsGhost) agreed
(18:29:50) (we51ey2) hmm, but without it imbalances
(18:29:57) (@caius) I don't think so
(18:30:02) (we51ey2) u cannot attack without a cc unit
(18:30:10) (we51ey2) shooting uphill never works
(18:30:15) (StalinsGhost) hmm
(18:30:17) (we51ey2) u take to many casualties
(18:30:19) (@caius) then maneuver so you arne't shooting up hill
(18:30:34) (@caius) use more rifles to open up weaker holes
(18:30:40) (@caius) and only the cannons can hit the rifles
(18:31:08) (we51ey2) and what about the jaegars and chassuers
(18:31:13) (we51ey2) they can hit the rifles
(18:31:24) (@caius) only if they close with the rifles
(18:31:36) (@caius) so that means you can draw them away from protection
(18:31:51) (we51ey2) thats never works though, when do u, chase lights
(18:32:03) (@caius) a british assault is obviously not meant to be a head on charge
(18:32:11) (we51ey2) its not meant to happen
(18:32:15) (@caius) but a skirmish to pull the enemy into a more favourable position
(18:32:30) (@caius) where your more accurate line can weaken them even more
(18:32:30) (we51ey2) but that cant work in mp in a game
(18:32:37) (@caius) why not
(18:32:38) (we51ey2) the enemy doesnt get intimidated
(18:32:51) (we51ey2) if i fire at u with lights, and ur lights in range of me
(18:32:59) (we51ey2) u dont move your line out to deal with it
(18:33:11) (@caius) then pull your lights back
(18:33:20) (we51ey2) if i keep my line in the open ready to draw u out they get pounded with cannons
(18:33:20) (@caius) and use some rifles
(18:33:51) (we51ey2) u saw what happened to sg yesterday
(18:34:04) (we51ey2) his lines got smashed by cannon and howitzer
(18:34:14) (we51ey2) and u was never going to come off that hill
(18:34:22) (we51ey2) no matter how many rifles he had

So I was wondering what peoples thoughts were on a british grenadier? I'm still of the mind that if my friend (we5ely2) uses different tactics that he can assault with the british forces without grenadiers. Meanwhile with grenadiers and the british superiority in marksmenship its a real task to defeat the british in CC.

[Semper_Crecis]

What I want to know is why don't the Highlanders steamroll everybody in melee?

[Fondor_Yards]

Considering I never go into CC unless they only have 1-3 units left and I have 6-7...I don't find it a big loss. As the British I can simply shoot everyone else to hell before they can meele. All their units have higher ranged attack then their counterparts in the French/Russian armies. Plus rifles have much more range then any other infantry, so sniping at them is easy if they don't want to leave a small hill. I personaly think the British are a tad too strong in this version, they should be made weaker and the russians stronger in the next patch.

[The Black Reaper]

caius the reason the British suck in melee is because they are mostly based on accuracy... instead of charging your men into the pavlovs or russian musketeers keep the british men back and firing on the enemy and if you have cav charge the flank.... with this your british line or KGL wont have to engage in melee combat in which they suck at compared to the Russians..

also if you have trouble attacking a higher positioned enemy split your men into to groups... one group to be a decoy with your artillery to pound the higher position and another group to flank the enemy position

[Caius Britannicus]

caius the reason the British suck in melee is because they are mostly based on accuracy... instead of charging your men into the pavlovs or russian musketeers keep the british men back and firing on the enemy and if you have cav charge the flank.... with this your british line or KGL wont have to engage in melee combat in which they suck at compared to the Russians..

also if you have trouble attacking a higher positioned enemy split your men into to groups... one group to be a decoy with your artillery to pound the higher position and another group to flank the enemy position

IT should be noted I know all this. I play as the russians and find that the british are more than my equals with their added range and accuracy.

[The Black Reaper]

so wat you're asking is if it would unbalance the game if british grenadiers were added???? i think it would since it would make the british overpowered to have accurate musketmen and then letting them have a good melee unit

[Caius Britannicus]

so wat you're asking is if it would unbalance the game if british grenadiers were added???? i think it would since it would make the british overpowered to have accurate musketmen and then letting them have a good melee unit

Yes, I'm looking for a discussion on the gameplay balance of the game regarding the addition of grenadiers to the british line up. And I totally agree with your assessment. My friend seems to be coming over to my side as well. We recently had a battle in which we played as the british against french troops on the hold the line map. We steam rolled the french on that map without even being forced into a general melee battle. Before I was under the impression that the factions were balance, but after that battle I do think the english are a bit over powered as is.

[Canterbury]

I'm curious, is this a debate about game play balance [having different army's with different strengths and weaknesses, meaning each have a different character, though none are stronger than the other] or historical realism? If it's the latter than there's a problem, because the British had the best infantry across the range of abilities in the Napoleonic era, the best firepower, the best morale, the best melee ability. There's no historical example of the British infantry being beaten in melee when facing anything like comparable odds. On the contrary, as they showed at Salamanca and the siege of Badajoz in the Peninsular War, and at Hougoumont in the Battle of Waterloo, they were distinctly better than the French, and the French themselves repeatedly beat the Russians in close combat situations [Austerlitz, Friedland and Borodino], so they weren't inferior themselves. The idea the Russians were the best with the bayonet is a myth. They just weren't as incompentent with it as they were at manouevring and shooting, where they were slow and clumsy. I can understand the urge to level the playing field for the sake of the game, but you'd be better served by manipulating the unit size and cost, making the British infantry smaller and more expensive, consistent with their battalion based tactics and professional status, and up the other end, the Russians larger and cheaper, consistent with their regimental/conscript method, than by reinventing historical reality to suit the game. Changing unit size is very underrated but extremely effective method of balancing the game, and the best way of dealing with super units. In RTR I always play Romans and have reduced the size of the cohort from 40 to 20. This makes the Gauls, the Germans etc very hard to deal with in battles, as you are always in danger of being overwhelmed, and the likes of the Parthians extremely difficult because of the missile casualties they're capable of inflicting. Because NTW doesn't work off a campaign map and because units are equally vulnerable to missile fire you wouldn't need to go as far as that, but making British infantry units half the size as comparable Russian units and 50-100% more expensive while retaining their historical superiority across the board would seem to be the best method. Manufacturing units like "grenadiers" [which occured on only one or two occasions when the grenadier company's from the line battlions were amalgamated to give the CinC an elite battalion] rather misses the point and is almost completely non-historical. Unless of course if you made all British infantry "grenadiers", which means there would only a word in the way of the facts. But then maybe that's what its advocates have been trying to get to all the time...

[The Black Reaper]

well not really because it also depends on the ability of the other general if they can use the abilties of the french to the fullest. which are accuracy and melee... (they are balanced and not the best at both) ive beaten a British general with a balanced french army (usual set up 5 fusiliers, 3-4 chasseurs 2 grenadiers, 1 gen, 3 12 pounders, and 2 light cav) [GG] Remi (a clan mate of mine) made very fine moves which routed 2 of my line infantry, but while shooting he didnt commit soon enough on the attack and he absorbed to much artillery fire and fire from my lights, so probably the problem isnt the balance ment but probably your opponents took to much artillery fire or fire from your light infantry and didnt commit to the melee or the close range shooting for which the french are good at

[Mooncabbage]

Perhaps the solution is to make superiour british units more expensive? From my research, Britain had one of the smallest land armies, but one of the biggest military budgets. So it makes sense for a british army to have a smaller, more elite force relative to say, the russians. But I do think the british need some sort of grenadier, if only to round out their forces. The thing about a smaller more elite force (in every game i've played) where all other things are equal, is that you can bring more force to bear on a particular spot, but you have less room to make mistakes. Perhaps this is the direction the british army needs to move in?

Personally I just assumed that the british highlanders where supposed to replace the grenadiers, but I never really compared stats... Perhaps if a grenadier unit where added, it could be what the KGL Line are to the British Line and KGL Lights are to British Lights (ie. higher morale)

[Caius Britannicus]

Personally I just assumed that the british highlanders where supposed to replace the grenadiers, but I never really compared stats... Perhaps if a grenadier unit where added, it could be what the KGL Line are to the British Line and KGL Lights are to British Lights (ie. higher morale)

I was under that impression. The highlanders are indeed great a melee and would would make a quality shock troop but for their terrible moral. Even against weaken and wavering lines if your not careful they will rout on you.

[Adherbal]

it's the latter than there's a problem, because the British had the best infantry across the range of abilities in the Napoleonic era, the best firepower, the best morale, the best melee ability. There's no historical example of the British infantry being beaten in melee when facing anything like comparable odds. On the contrary, as they showed at Salamanca and the siege of Badajoz in the Peninsular War, and at Hougoumont in the Battle of Waterloo, they were distinctly better than the French, and the French themselves repeatedly beat the Russians in close combat situations [Austerlitz, Friedland and Borodino], so they weren't inferior themselves.

wow, I can't tell you are british yourself. If the brits faced the french army before their disasterous russian campaign they would've been massacred. At the Peninsula they only faced second rate french units and incompetent generals. The mod isn't based on british propaganda.

[spad]

yep british are the best ...euh not really they are like the other when 8000 of them were killed or captured at the corogna against only 650 french killed or wounded. all army had their victory and defeat british like the rest of the world

[Raguel]

Think he forgot to add that the British won at waterloo and that the Dutch-Belgians, Hannoverians and all the other troops were cowards and of very little use to Welly Plus the Prussians only came after the Brits had the French already beaten

As to the balance. Well I won't mind the brits getting a hth unit as it all depends on the person using the army anyway. Just make them like 700 each and everyone will be happy. I don't have any problems with the brits and last night we slaughtered them with me using a cav division and Dury having most of his infantry already dead. It all depends on how you play.

cheers

[Mooncabbage]

I think he means roughly 1 to 1 odds, which is probably true . And even if the mod isn't based on british propaganda, it should still be balanced. And I say the lack of a grenadier unit is unbalancing. It doesn't have to be a good one, and it's not like the brits have a stack of guard units anyway, french guard units would still easily slaughter just about anything in a straight up melee, and that's all you really need. If anything, the french are overpowered atm, but I think it's fair to say that the solution lies in bumping up the brits and especially the russians.

The other thing I would say is that requiring brits to remain at range to win, and the french to close in combat to win, will probably remove a lot of tactical flexibility, since both sides have clear and opposing goals. Rather each side should have an advantage at particular things, but not so decisive as to make the tactic untennable for the opposing team. If that makes any sense at all.

[Mooncabbage]

Heh, I'm not asking for the old guard or anything

I just think a basic grenadier unit would lose some of the tactical cheese

[spad]

but grenadier unit didin't exist in british army
each line batallion had a coy of grenadier and a coy of light
the foot guards became the british grenadier after waterloo
the grenadier in british army are not an independant regiment
for the french it is the same in the line unit, each line battalion had a voltigeur and a grenadier coy
but in the guard the regiment are only chasseur or grenadier that's the difference

[Mooncabbage]

It doesn't have to be an independant regiment to be a unit in NTW2. Brits had grenadiers, of that I am sure (I'm not sure where I read it though).

I was just talking in terms of gameplay balance before, french guard units being supreme at attacking and breaking lines.

Wtf is a coy?

[spad]

a coy is a compagny
each british line batallion had 10 coy (8 line, 1grenadier, 1light) almost 1000 men
yes they can tput a grenadier unit for the game but for the shock take the highlander they are great for that
and it seem to be that the moders want to be realist so no super unit which didn't exist.
british fought with fire, french and russian with charge.

[Mooncabbage]

Highlanders suck, they're the weakest of all the grenadiers, and they have low morale. There is no reason a grenadier unit couldn't exist for 50-100 more florins than the highlander unit.