archers leading targets

[hoom]

In all the TW series, a constant (& one of the biggest) issue has been that the archer units fire at the enemy where they stand at the time of firing.
With moving units, especially fast units, this means that most missiles fired at the unit will miss completely.

I note that in the latest movie the archers still are shooting over the heads of the approaching barbarians.

Now, I don't know when the art of leading the target was invented but I expect it was way back when humans were first using thrown weapons to hunt with (or even further back by the first predator) so its fair to assume that Romans knew how to lead their target.

What I am asking is "could you guys please make RTW so that the archers will lead their targets?"

It doesn't need to be perfect leading infact it specifically shouldn't be.

The down side being that you can't 'duck under' enemy missiles by just charging.
Well, thats really the upside too isn't it? cos 'ducking under' is the problem.

[Big King Sanctaphrax]

Agreed. But to counter it, there should be a penalty to hit a fast moving target.

[SgtAndrew]

Yeah, there definitely needs to be leading for ranged weapons. It's pretty annoying how ineffective archers and crossbowmen are in MTW, and it would suck if we had the same thing in RTW.

[jones21]

i agree with Big King if the unit is fast like cav there should be a penalty.

[hoom]

Yeah, I'll agree to leading accuracy penalty for fast targets http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif
Its the sort of thing I was meaning with
Quote[/b] ]It doesn't need to be perfect

Though it seems to me that it should be an 'accuracy' penalty rather than a 'leading accuracy' penalty if you understand what I mean.

[Balamir]

Yeh I noticed that too on the last RTW movie, the bows were just being shot BEHIND the barbarians and it looked ridiculous. If they could arrange something as leading targets, i would really appreciate it. That would increase the effectiveness of archers, and that is important because archers in MTW are already not good at shooting still targets... http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/rolleyes.gif

[Latro]

I agree with arrse. Just have the shots fall not where the target unit WAS but where it IS and apply a bonus or penalty hit percentage according to the unit's movement factor; Standing, moving, moving fast.

[hoom]

No, it needs to be a calculated lead not just have them hit all the time.

Leading is where you guess where the target will be when the arrow arrives & aim there.

It should be possible to charge with horses then stop straight after the archers fire & have the arrows fall short because the archers guessed that the horses would continue on going fast & aimed well ahead.

Actually its probably harder to write an intentionally inaccurate leading algorythm than it is to write an accurate one...

[Latro]

Quote[/b] ]It should be possible to charge with horses then stop straight after the archers fire & have the arrows fall short because the archers guessed that the horses would continue on going fast & aimed well ahead.

That would be silly, IMHO. O.K. arrows aren't as fast as bullets but I hardly think you would have the time to stop a charge dead in it's tracks to time it with an archer volley.

[econ21]

I wonder if the direction of movement should be relevant? If someone is charging straight at you, and your morale holds up, it might not be too hard to hit him (at least with a direct fire weapon like a gun or crossbow). If they are charging across your field of view, it might be rather difficult. In modern conflict environments with very lethal shooting, I think this is the basis of small unit tactics calling for zig-zagging and indirect approaches to targets.

[Latro]

That is the idea behind firing by volley.
Instead of everyone taking potshots at hard to hit targets, you lay down a barrage over a general area. Although you are sure that most will miss, the chances of the target 'straying' into one of the missiles is increased.

[Jacque Schtrapp]

If they do actually make your desired change you will all be right back in here screaming that your troops are being slaughtered by archers before you can engage the enemy. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/rolleyes.gif http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

[Sockeye]

I fervently hope some form of leading of targets is done.

[Balamir]

Quote[/b] (Jacque Schtrapp @ June 04 2003,11:14)]If they do actually make your desired change you will all be right back in here screaming that your troops are being slaughtered by archers before you can engage the enemy. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/rolleyes.gif http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif
There is 2 reasons I wont do that:

1) Because it will be more realistic than archers shooting but nothing happening.

2) Because I will be the side that is going to slaughter the enemy http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

Cheers

[econ21]

Making arrows lead does not necessarily imply increase their overall power. To compensate, you could reduce their general lethality. I wonder if sometimes stationary targets might be more resilient to archer fire - if armoured with large shields, I can imagine them being able to take cover fairly effectively. Moving troops might be less able to protect themselves. The benefits of moving under fire was probably more to get out of fire (by closing or evading) than to dodge arrows.

[hoom]

Quote[/b] ]I wonder if the direction of movement should be relevant? Indeed, direction + speed (= velocity) of the target is what you need to guess in order to aim in a way that allows the intercept to happen.
Generally it is harder to lead a target that is moving at 90 degrees to you.
Mind you, in Xwing:Alliance, I actually find it harder to hit a target moving in a straight line particularly if it is towards or away from me...