Teppos

[R'as al Ghul]

Hello,

I thought we could collect our knowledge about Teppo units in this thread.
Recently, CBR held a little lecture on how to use them correctly which was very revealing.

The teppo units are used regularly in Multiplayer, 4-5 units are standard and form the skirmish line.
One can go without and replace them with Samurai Archers but it can be considered costly to have your
SamArchers shot by 100 or 200 Koku cheaper Teppos.

What was news to me and others is the fact that Teppos can be used to fire one volley from all soldiers.
The normal use is to deploy them in three ranks to get (almost) constant revolving fire. When deployed in three ranks, only the first rank fires. That's one third of the fire power.

If "Fire at will" is switched off and the unit is deployed in two ranks, you can manually fire a powerful two-rank volley. While 1/3 of the unit's firepower is suffice to reduce the morale of units crossing the nomansland, the full volley can rout units instantly due to the high number of kills and the morale penalty from being hit by a gunpowder unit.



R'as

[R'as al Ghul]

After watching two replays I've noticed that my teppo line is often shot to pieces by the enemy. One of those replays has a flat terrain and the other only minimal height advantage.
Is there a special tactic to cause more casualties by, say aiming one enemy unit with two own units? I'd imagine that by shooting at one enemy unit with two of yours that the enemy's unit would loose soldiers faster while there's another enemy unit in the line that's not being shot at at all. So I've a hard time understanding why my line was reduced to about a third while the enemy's line was quite healthy.

R'as

[Puzz3D]

After watching two replays I've noticed that my teppo line is often shot to pieces by the enemy. One of those replays has a flat terrain and the other only minimal height advantage. Is there a special tactic to cause more casualties by, say aiming one enemy unit with two own units? I'd imagine that by shooting at one enemy unit with two of yours that the enemy's unit would loose soldiers faster while there's another enemy unit in the line that's not being shot at at all. So I've a hard time understanding why my line was reduced to about a third while the enemy's line was quite healthy.

The unit that volleys first can gain a considerable advantage over the course of many volleys if that first volley gets a lot of kills. The advantage mushrooms because the unit that fired first is firing larger volleys than it's receiving on every subsequent volley.

A little archer support in an otherwise even gun skirmish can tip the scales dramatically especially if several archers target a single gun unit, reduce it and then target another gun unit. If you use this archer support strategy, you have to use the gun advantage gained to good effect to compensate for the money spent on the archers.

Enfilade fire gets more kills which is something to consider as well.

If you fall behind in the gun skirmish, switching to loose formation will minimize further losses. You can also experiment with using loose formation at the start of the skirmish.

As a gun unit tires some of the men will take longer to reload, so you'll start seeing partial volleys. The reload time is 21 seconds. Rotating 3 rank firing produces a volley every 7 seconds. Going to more than 3 ranks doesn't decrease this time, but it does decrease the number of men in the first rank who will be shooting and exposes the unit to more secondary hits from enemy fire.

Test I've done in STW indicate skirmishing in 3 ranks is more effective than in 2 ranks, but using the fire-at-will = off followed by fire-at-will = on to unlease an immediate first volley can be effective as well. Later in the game using this technique to fire a volley at close range is highly effective since most units have reduced morale by then.

In MTW, the density of the trees was reduced relative to STW, but the range of concealment they provide was not reduced. This leads to the phenomenon that you may not be able to target a unit with guns that is near the edge of the trees eventhough they appear to be outside the tree line. Archers can shoot into trees.

Guns are more limited than archers in the vertical elevation at which they can fire. This is something to consider when attacking high ground because moving in closer can put guns in a position where they can't shoot if the hill is steep.

In general, ranged units should be used in loose formation when skirmish against higher ground otherwise you will loose the skirmish quickly.

Guns can get backkills for a considerable distance behind the target unit. Since the trajectory is a shallow arc, this backkill distance is increased when the target is on higher ground. For units on a reverse slope to be protected from backkills, the reverse slope has to be fairly steep. A small rise or ridge will not provide protection from backkills if you have units up on the ridge which can be targetted by guns. If you want to use infantry to protect ranged units, one technique is to place the anti-cav infantry inbetween the ranged units although that does expose them to being fired at directly.

[R'as al Ghul]

Very informative. Thanks, Yuuki.

In MTW, the density of the trees was reduced relative to STW, but the range of concealment they provide was not reduced. This leads to the phenomenon that you may not be able to target a unit with guns that is near the edge of the trees eventhough they appear to be outside the tree line. Archers can shoot into trees.

I've had that in one of the last games.
I wasn't able to target the unit but they were able to shoot out of the trees. Quite irritating, but then it's also realistic. It should be easier to shoot out of the tree cover than into the trees.

[Tomisama]

The unit that volleys first can gain a considerable advantage over the course of many volleys if that first volley gets a lot of kills. The advantage mushrooms because the unit that fired first is firing larger volleys than it's receiving on every subsequent volley.

Just to be perfectly clear.

Is this correct?

This dual gun line only fires the first volley all at one time, only once*. Then, even though they are left in a two rank configuration, subsequent volleys will return to one third active. And that the “advantage mushrooms” because the initial kills reduces the enemy’s ability to respond. That the advantage is then advanced over time, as the initial numerical imbalance continues to be magnified.

Also that the first volley salvo can be revisited by toggling fire-at –will?

Have i got it right

Edit: *Does this happen automatically, or is this only activated by a fire-at-will toggle?

[R'as al Ghul]

This dual gun line only fires the first volley all at one time, only once.

If you switch to Fire-at-will=on the unit will switch ranks and only one rank will fire with 1/2 the strength of the unit while the second rank reloads.

Does this happen automatically, or is this only activated by fire-at-will?

Only when fire-at-will=off and waiting for the individual soldiers to reload until every man has reloaded can you produce a full rank fire from both ranks.

Then, even though they are left in a two rank configuration, subsequent volleys will return to one third active.

No, when deployed in two ranks the unit will use 1/2 of its soldiers to fire. Although this volleys are more powerful, reload time is longer than with 3 ranks and during the time you need to reload you'll take casualties from opposing 3 rank fire.

And that the “advantage mushrooms” because the initial kills reduces the enemy’s ability to respond. That the advantage is then advanced over time, as the initial numerical imbalance continues to be magnified.

Correct. Which brings up a question.
What's better, to stand with your unit (fire-at-will=on) and wait for the enemy to come in range, or order your unit to target the enemy while he's not in range, thereby making your own unit walk towards the point when the unit comes into range?
Normally I'd guess that waiting is better but sometimes I have units that are in range and have fire-at-will=on but they don't do anything.

[Tomisama]

No, when deployed in two ranks the unit will use 1/2 of its soldiers to fire. Although this volleys are more powerful, reload time is longer than with 3 ranks and during the time you need to reload you'll take casualties from opposing 3 rank fire.

Hmmm. Time for each man to reload should not very from 3 to 2 or even 1 rank. Not good

[R'as al Ghul]

Hmmm. Time for each man to reload should not very from 3 to 2 or even 1 rank. Not good

You've a point there. Clearly a mistake on my part.
Could it be that when deployed in two ranks, they always fire with both ranks?
(One kneeled down and the rear rank standing, and not shifting ranks at all)
That would mean that this unit could only produce a (full) volley every 21 seconds whereas when deployed in 3 ranks a unit produces a volley every 7 seconds.
We've to wait for the experts to clear this.

[CBR]

If using 2 ranks or less they will only fire full unit salvos. You need 3 ranks or more to get the revolving rank fire. But having deeper than 3 does not give you anything except overall fewer men that fires.

The only thing you get from toggling the fire at will button off is that you control when the unit fires. That means you can wait until you can unleash that devastating point blank salvo.


CBR

[Puzz3D]

Could it be that when deployed in two ranks, they always fire with both ranks? (One kneeled down and the rear rank standing, and not shifting ranks at all)
That would mean that this unit could only produce a (full) volley every 21 seconds whereas when deployed in 3 ranks a unit produces a volley every 7 seconds..

Yes. Sorry I wasn't clear.

When in 2 ranks, all 60 men shoot and reload time is 21 seconds. This is the formation I was referring to when using the fire-at-will = off / fire-at-will = on switch. That way you avoid the possibility of the men going into a 21 second reload cycle before they shoot and taking multiple 7 second volleys from enemy guns in 3 ranks. Although if the unit is advancing, it should shoot right away or possibly after a brief delay when it stops moving. I believe specifically targeting a unit will trigger a reload cycle, but I might be wrong about that. A problem with turning fire-at-will off is that you might forget to turn it on.

When in 3 ranks, only the 20 men in the front rank shoot. The reload time is still 21 seconds, but you'll get 20 man volleys every 7 seconds because the men rotate ranks. I don't bother with the fire-at-will off/on when skirmishing in 3 ranks because you'll never take more than one enemy volley before your men shoot.

The mushrooming advantage has nothing to do with 3 rank vs 2 rank volleying. It happens when both skirmishers are in the same shooting formation simply because the second unit to shoot has taken losses. When in 3 ranks, men from the 3rd rank will fill out the 1st rank and the firepower of the volley may not be reduced for the first couple of volleys, but after that the lack of men in the 3rd rank will mean all the men in the 1st rank are not ready to shoot. The 3 rank firing continues until there are no men left in the 3rd rank.

Another thing to be aware of is that the fire-at-will AI will not shoot if the unit is partially out of range, but the unit will shoot if manual targeting is used. This can lead to your gun unit not returning fire. It can happen if the enemy unit advances but stops partially outside max range and then opens fire with manual targeting. It can also happen when your gun unit takes a step back due to taking takes losses from an enemy volley if that puts it partially outside max range and the enemy is manually targeting your unit. For this reason it's best to advance somewhat inside max range if you don't want to be micromanaging your gun units.

Use hold position with ranged units so that they will return to their original position after skirmishing back, and so they won't chase a manually targeted unit that moves out of range.

Use hold formation with ranged units when you don't want them to skirmish backwards or break formation. You would use this to give a close range volley, to provide close support to your frontline, to make a last ditch stand or when there is a good chance of routing the incoming enemy unit.

[Tomisama]

Just a little tidbit concerning Teppos, for you all to mull over

About a year ago I found an article (that I can’t find again to save my life) that earnestly proposed that the triple rank rotation was a myth. That the idea was never used by the Japanese. A mistake was made by a European observer, who saw a three man deep formation, and concluded a European concept on it. That what was actually going on was a “best shooter” (my words) out front, with two loaders.

Ya think?

[R'as al Ghul]

Dr. Stephen Turnbull writes in his Samurai Sourcebook:

[..] Oda Nobunaga's use of three ranks of rapid volley firing at Nagashino does not seem to have been repeated very often. This may be because the concentration needed by his gunners was facilitated by the defense works. In most cases, two ranks of fire seems to have been the maxixum possible. Any gap in the rhythm was made up by archers, and several contemporary illustrations show a small number of archers standing beside the arquebusiers, while the sperman stand ready to form a defensive hedge.

This is funny:
The Zohyo Monogatari recognises that once the enemy reach one's lines the arquebus is useless, so he includes advice on when and how to engage in hand-to-hand fighting under the protection of the spearmen:

If the enemy come close, because you will be replaced by men with spears, divide up to right and left. Remove the ramrod, sheathe the arquebus in the arquebus bag, and cross swords with them. Aim at the helmet, but if loan swords have dull blades and are likely to snap, aim at the enemy's hands and legs and you can cut at them.

[Tomisama]

Turnbull is definitely an expert, but he “is” relying on the reports of others.

For example:

On examination, the defenses at Nagashino would only allow facing for 1000 of the 3000 gunners reported to have been there to take on the Takeda. So it is surmised that they must have rotated.

On closer examination, the physical measurement shows that there was not enough room for even the proposed rotation, so it has been offered that there was only one shooter for every three gunners.

Further supporting this idea is the report that there is no mention of the tactic of multiple rank rotation (even two) in any historical Japanese writings, or any historical pictures of battle. I don’t know if this is true, but I know I have never seen more than one rank depicted in any artwork (have seen bows behind guns). But will continue to look

[Puzz3D]

On closer examination, the physical measurement shows that there was not enough room for even the proposed rotation, so it has been offered that there was only one shooter for every three gunners.

That's still effectively a rotation even if it's only the guns that are being passed up to the front man.

[R'as al Ghul]

Turnbull in another book:

Discipline was such that Nobunaga's men were able to deliver organized fire, perhaps even rotating volleys, into the successive waves of Takeda attack.

So he doesn't seem sure.
Apart from that I cannot imagine that the Samurai wouldn't have recognized the advantage of constant fire. Arquebuses need to be reloaded and that takes time. That time was either covered by Archers or other teppos.
But to imagine a rotating Napoleonic style rank fire is equally absurd to me.
Units were small, sometimes only a dozen or 20 soldiers. I could imagine that they may have developed a rythm of shooting. One unit after another so that the enemy is under constant fire.
High ranking Samurai indeed developed a certain sharpshooting technique and were aiming for enemy commanders. Of course they don't reload their own guns, they have their retainers for it. I can imagine three people being busy with reloading the Samurai's guns while he keeps on shooting.
The Ashigaru squads didn't have any retainers and did the reloading themselves. To ensure that they won't be overrun during reload by enemy forces they had archers and yari for their protection.

R'as

[Nakamura Lobato]

Hello,

There is an interesting discussion going on here: http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?t=112666

about the Teppo. I thought it might either add to your depiction of the Teppo or even enhance the discussion.

I have totally reconsidered my position about guns and the samurai due to your historical depiction.

I have reloaded Samurai Warlords and am delighted to play the game again. It is wonderful. I look forward to future releases with relish. The latest incarnation is great.

While it is abhorrent for me to think about as a Christian, the inquisitor character could be used in Samurai Warlords as a historical device for reducing Christians in the Japanese provinces. There were waves of anti-Christian sentiment and crucifixions in Japan at the time, and the inquisitor could be used to reduce Christians to increase loyalty in certain areas. Naturally some daimyo were Christian, and also had guns as a result so, a way to tie it in.

Naka

[R'as al Ghul]

Hi Nakamura,

I hope you don't mind my merging your post with this older thread.

[TosaInu]

Turnbull in another book:

That famous Nagashino battle wasn't decided by guns like depicted in Akira Kurosawas movie Kagemusha.

It wasn't 1,000's of guns mowing down all Takeda forces within a few minutes.

The 3,000 guns must have done damage though, but there were other factors. The Takeda cavalry charge already lost momentum as they had to cross the Rengogawa river which had steep banks (about 50 m from the fences, and well within lethal and effective range). The back was covered by dense woods, making flanking near impossible. Sure, it was the gun that killed, but the terrain had to help a lot. Spear armed samurai were mixed in with the gunners, preventing the teppo to rout/being overrun, and there was fierce close combat. The battle started around 6 AM and lasted at least till 13.00. My bet is that Oda would have lost if it weren't for the terrain.

No musket or bow made the cavalrycharge obsolete.

[Tomisama]

Hello,

There is an interesting discussion going on here: http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?t=112666

I had two posts on the above thread, and was about to follow up with more information requested by one of the other posters, and found my posts have been removed. My ID has disapeared, and I can't login.

I have sent an email to Admin, but in any event wont return there

[Puzz3D]

I had two posts on the above thread, and was about to follow up with more information requested by one of the other posters, and found my posts have been removed. My ID has disapeared, and I can't login.

I have sent an email to Admin, but in any event wont return there

I noticed that Tomi, and that has stopped me from posing to that thread.

[Tomisama]

I have sent an email to Admin, but in any event wont return there

The whole thing was very strange indeed, but apparently not the work of an individual. I received the following email today.

See announcement here:
http://www.twcenter.net/forums/annou....php?f=9&a=124 . You will
have to take a few minutes to recreate your account at
http://www.twcenter.net/forums/register.php . Sorry.

So I guess it’s ok?

Very strange though, very strange

[Tomisama]

Just a little tidbit concerning Teppos, for you all to mull over

About a year ago I found an article (that I can’t find again to save my life) that earnestly proposed that the triple rank rotation was a myth. That the idea was never used by the Japanese. A mistake was made by a European observer, who saw a three man deep formation, and concluded a European concept on it. That what was actually going on was a “best shooter” (my words) out front, with two loaders.

Ya think?

Below is not the article I was referring to, but it does tell the story. Although I do believe he is wrong about Europeans using this technique, I have not found any reference for that. On the contrary, I believe that in Europe they used the triple rank (or more) rotation of gunners that we saw in Shogun.

However, the story goes that Nobunaga had been putting his thinking helmet on. Instead of one man taking care of the whole process, he had formed teams of four and divided the tasks, rotating several matchlocks inside earthworks so that each sniper could concentrate on aiming and keep shooting with barely a pause while the others cleaned, loaded and primed the next gun for him to fire. Although the technique was commonly used in Europe, no Japanese warlords had tried it before.

http://www.hartford-hwp.com/archives/55a/403.html

P.S. Looked it up and in “The evolution of weapons and warfare” by Dupuy, on page 114 says that 10 rotating ranks were required to maintain continuous fire (Spanish tactics in the 1500s).

[R'as al Ghul]

High ranking Samurai indeed developed a certain sharpshooting technique and were aiming for enemy commanders. Of course they don't reload their own guns, they have their retainers for it. I can imagine three people being busy with reloading the Samurai's guns while he keeps on shooting.
R'as

Thanks for looking that up Tomi. Keep em coming.

[Puzz3D]

Below is not the article I was referring to, but it does tell the story. Although I do believe he is wrong about Europeans using this technique, I have not found any reference for that. On the contrary, I believe that in Europe they used the triple rank (or more) rotation of gunners that we saw in Shogun.


http://www.hartford-hwp.com/archives/55a/403.html

He doesn't give credit to the Ikko-ikki monks for showing Oda Nobunaga the value of massed arquebusiers.

Arquebus

"Although the technology and effect of the arquebus was realised the same could not be said for their use in battle. They were slow to reload and could always be outshot by archers who would also be more accurate. It was therefore necessary to train the users of arquebuses, the arquebusiers, properly but it still took time for them to be utilized to their fullest effect. Although it took a relatively short amount of time to train someone to use an arquebus - a great advantage over the longbow which required great strength to use - speed of loading had to be practiced, married to the discipline needed to successfully carry out bursts of volley fire that is one rank firing, followed by another whilst giving time for the first to reload and fire again, and so on. This would keep up an almost continuous rate of fire although usually with more than just two ranks. This meant that pride of place at the front of the battle would have to go to the ashigaru arquebuses which was traditionally the preserve of the samurai. But for firearms to be effective the guns had to be at the vanguard of the army. This social etiquette, however, wasn't followed by the warrior monks of the Ikko-ikki who were the first to use controlled volley fire on a mass scale in Japan five years before the battle of Nagashino. The warrior monks of Ishiyama Hongan-ji deployed 3,000 arquebusiers who forced the main body of Oda Nobunaga's army back after their fortress had come under attack. It comes as no surprise that Nobunaga should then use this volley fire tactic to such devastating effect at Nagashino five years later against the Takeda clan."


This article also supports the playbalance of archers vs teppo in Samurai Wars, and the reload time of the teppo, although near the fastest, is within the range mentioned.

[|Sith|R|AntiWarmanCake88]

So Japenase and Portugtense Teppos have the same Range? I always thought untill this Sunday that Jpaensae Teppo have longer range (since they cost more)

[Masamune]

iirc they have same range, but JT have better accuracy.

[Puzz3D]

JT are 1.5x more effective due to higher accuracy, and cost 1.5x more. PT will generate an average of 1 kill on a YS per 20 gun volley at max range. JT will generate 1.5 kills under the same conditions.

[|Sith|R|AntiWarmanCake88]

Excellet. I'm so embrass that I playes SW this long and never realize that. THank you

[TosaInu]

I didn't either {BHC}KingWarman888. Or it must be that I'm more likely to use them now than in STW. They were a unit to consider in low koku games.

[Puzz3D]

The shorter range arquebus from STW isn't implemented in Samurai Wars. What is implemented is two different arquebuses each with the same range as archers. The Portuguese teppo has exactly the same parameters as the so called musket of STW. The Japanese teppo is a better manufactured copy of the Portuguese teppo, and has improved accuracy.

On flat ground, all ranged units have the same range. On uneven terrain, ranged units with a height advantage have an advantage in range.