Can you explain...

**Orda Khan** · 11-25-2006, 11:55

deleted

**Stig** · 11-25-2006, 16:01

erhh no, everything works as CA wanted it to work

**Shahed** · 11-25-2006, 16:12

Rofl

**Puzz3D** · 11-25-2006, 16:30

I think Palamedes is asking for specific "Can you explain" threads for each aspect of unit behavior that seems incorrect.

**ELITEofWARMANGINGERYBREADMEN88** · 11-25-2006, 17:10

Originally Posted by Stig

erhh no, everything works as CA wanted it to work

lol amen..

I like to know why the Musketeers and handgunners and them are overpowered..

**Monarch** · 11-25-2006, 20:28

Originally Posted by Stig

erhh no, everything works as CA wanted it to work

Lol, if they bring out one single patch then that'll prove you wrong. It's not a perfect game, and obviously thats what CA would want.

Anyway, I don't think I have to bring up the musketeers again? And cavalry stopping before impact during a charge?

Oh and Warman, Muketeers yes, they're overpowered. But handgunners hit nothing, they kill hardly anything. sure if they get round your flanks then you'll probably route..but tbh in those days if you had a big bloodthirsty knight one side of you, and a load of guys shooting a very loud and unknown weapon at your back...I think you'd be forgiven for running away.

Handgunners are fine, Musketeers need accuracy decreasing. And range lowering a little I feel.

Edit: Oh and I actually have a question...in medieval times did xbowmen such as pavise xbowmen actually have the same range as the finest British longbow unit? In M2 they do, this seems odd to me, but I'm wondering if that was the case historically or not...

**ELITEofWARMANGINGERYBREADMEN88** · 11-25-2006, 21:23

Handgunners seem powerfull to me, from the front and the flanks. That was just one of my thoughts Monarch, though I could be wrong obviously..

**Orda Khan** · 11-25-2006, 22:03

Originally Posted by Puzz3D

I think Palamedes is asking for specific "Can you explain" threads for each aspect of unit behavior that seems incorrect.

I am fully aware of that. All the more reason to post them all neatly in one thread don't you agree?

.......Orda

**Kalle** · 11-26-2006, 00:47

Monarch makes it clear we are not yet ready to say what it is we want changed, individuals have their taste of course but therer is no consensus on what is needed and there should be some sort of consensus before things are throwed into a patch.

Examples:

Warman says;

I like to know why the Musketeers and handgunners and them are overpowered..

Monarch says;

handgunners hit nothing, they kill hardly anything

Some say;

Cav is to strong

Others say;

cavalry stopping before impact during a charge

Kalle

**CBR** · 11-26-2006, 03:10

Originally Posted by Monarch

Edit: Oh and I actually have a question...in medieval times did xbowmen such as pavise xbowmen actually have the same range as the finest British longbow unit? In M2 they do, this seems odd to me, but I'm wondering if that was the case historically or not...

Nothing wrong with that really. Bows shooting heavy war arrows dont have that long range (200-250 meters perhaps) and that was within the range medium strength crossbows had with heavy bolts. For the real super heavy crossbows of 1200+ pound draw weight their range would be 400+ meters with heavy bolts.

CBR

**Kronos** · 11-28-2006, 03:38

Well the best british longbowmen could hit 300 metres on a good day (thats the longbows from the mary rose anyway) however that was from the 1500's well past their best days, and i'd dare say in their prime around the time of Agincourt they could get upto 400 metres with a fair bit of accuracy using 180lb bows, but so little is known as none of the bows from that era survived. U've got to remember tho that ppl were alot stronger in those days due to their harsh lifestyle and the English longbowmen practised from a very early age (there was a law that the only sport allowed on a sunday was archery lol). But from records it was alot more powerful than any other ranged weapon of the time which I don't feel is fully reflected in mtw2.

I agree that musketeers are too powerful (especially spanish and portuguese because of their low price) but handgunners are pretty much bang on what they should be. I'd like the top end archers/xbowmen to be more effective tho as it's not realistic from a historical point, and makes rushing too good a tactic in some eras from a gameplay point of view.

As has been said many times before cav needs to be tweaked a little, maybe a little less powerful charge but sorting out the charge bug will balance it out, as atm if they stop then they don't do any damage, but if u get a clear charge u can destroy half a unit of heavy inf. I do very much like the fact that cav is as powerful as it is because it is historically accurate, unlike rtw 1.2 where they dominated the battlefield when they clearly shouldn't of done so.

Well thats just my 2 cents:

**YellowMelon** · 11-28-2006, 05:23

I already talked to Palamedes regarding cavalry's odd behaviour. They seem to be distracted by butterflies and wonder off into the field frolicking. The speed at which they move varies from charge to charge and sometimes they wont even charge at all. Pala says CA is working on making cavalry more consistent.