Archery

[quadalpha]

Seems like there's a feeling that bows are a bit too effective, especially with being able to lead moving targets. Do we know how exactly that works? What does the "accuracy" attribute actually determine? A simple % chance to hit?

Also, do we know how armour rating is handled in archery? I've heard that bow samurai is armour-piercing (as opposed to ashigaru), but that's not in the encyclopaedia, as far as I can remember.

[Centurion1]

they can only shoot in one direction which i see as a hugely annoying characteristic. and its ot really ahistorical the bow was very important for samurai and the pursuit of bushido.

[antisocialmunky]

Yes but their bows weren't that strong and their armor was basically made to be an arrow Shamwow.

[Centurion1]

actually japanese bows were renowed as some of the most accurate in the world along with being very fast.

japanese armor was far from an arrow absorber and only the richest samurai could afford nice armor mostly the daimyo and his hatamoto. being a samurai really wasnt as big a deal as people make it out to be there were plenty to go around.

[Rothe]

Archery seems to be a bit overpowered in the game, especially during castle assaults. Still, I would not want a big change to it, perhaps just to reduce the firing rate of the bows for the best units, but keep the lethality.

I did notice that Samurai bows seem more effective, but it might just be the increase in accuracy.

[aimlesswanderer]

They seem a little too accurate when they can't see what they're shooting at. If they can't sight the target, there should be a big accuracy penalty, and it should take a while for them to compensate when the target moves.

[Nelson]

They seem a little too accurate when they can't see what they're shooting at. If they can't sight the target, there should be a big accuracy penalty, and it should take a while for them to compensate when the target moves.

A LOT too accurate. No line of sight should mean no shot at all.

[econ21]

Allowing castle besiegers to shoot only at units manning the walls would be a nice tweak - both for realism, but also for increased challenge vs the AI when the player is on the offensive.

When the player is on the defensive, I would like to see the AI be more keen on starving out defenders rather than running into a meat grinder.

[quadalpha]

Balance aside, there really isn't any reason why you can't shoot an arrow into a castle. I'm sure they know the principles of indirect fire.

[Dead Guy]

I'm sure that's no problem. Hitting anything in particular inside the walls might be a bit tricky though.

[HopAlongBunny]

I'm curious.

Has anyone tried to grab every archery upgrade?

[Centurion1]

yes i always do and its just ridiculous

[HopAlongBunny]

yes i always do and its just ridiculous

hehehe!

I've got to try it then! I always grab a cpl upgrades and then get distracted

[Rothe]

I already have the Chosokabe with a crafting province and that by its own is ridiculous. My samurai archers are real killers.
I will get the +10 accuracy tech soon, and I plan to go all the way to the legendary dojo to get my super accurate bow heroes.

It seems I could field a stack of only archers, perhaps half ashi, half samurai and win vs. most armies. The rate of fire is really fast and the accuracy means that an enemy ashigaru unit might rout after three salvos or so...

I don't know if I like it this way really... I would prefer a slower paced game, so that firing the bows would be a bit slower, but movement also. Accuracy is perhaps a bit too high at max range. I don't mind accurate shots in the shorter ranges, but at the max it seems too much.

[al Roumi]

Allowing castle besiegers to shoot only at units manning the walls would be a nice tweak - both for realism, but also for increased challenge vs the AI when the player is on the offensive.


Balance aside, there really isn't any reason why you can't shoot an arrow into a castle. I'm sure they know the principles of indirect fire.

Maybe there should be some option for indrect saturation fire? i.e. where the unit targets a large area rather than an enemy unit. This could work a bit like the current targeting of siege weapons.

[Khisanth Magus]

I think it would make a lot more sense if you couldn't actually see where the units were inside the castle until you had someone over the walls, all you could see is the ones manning the walls. After all, the castles are at a higher elevation to you, and have walls, so how are you able to see in? I know that it has been the same in all the total war games, but it would make a lot more sense to have inside the castle be considered concealing terrain. It would also severely diminish the ability for archers to do damage on sieges. They couldn't just stand outside the wall and pepper the units inside with arrows.

Even when they have sight, indirect fire needs a huge accuracy penalty.

[Red_Russian13]

Why not have a similar system to the siege weapons when firing in an indirect fire capacity? Have you noticed how the AoE circle gets really wide at max range and slowly gets smaller closer to the point of origin (POO)? In that case, you could still fire over the walls, but have a penalty to accuracy. Say, perhaps the way CEP (circular area probable) is done, in which 50% of X weapon system's ordnance falls within that radius. I think that would be great, and it would still allow for missile fire from defenders, but would limit it's overwhelming effectiveness.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circular_error_probable

Edit: The guy above me beat me to it...I thought I'd read all the replies first. Apologies. Credit to the poster above.

[al Roumi]

Why not have a similar system to the siege weapons when firing in an indirect fire capacity? Have you noticed how the AoE circle gets really wide at max range and slowly gets smaller closer to the point of origin (POO)? In that case, you could still fire over the walls, but have a penalty to accuracy. Say, perhaps the way CEP (circular area probable) is done, in which 50% of X weapon system's ordnance falls within that radius. I think that would be great, and it would still allow for missile fire from defenders, but would limit it's overwhelming effectiveness.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circular_error_probable


Lol, excellent idea.

[andrewt]

I already have the Chosokabe with a crafting province and that by its own is ridiculous. My samurai archers are real killers.
I will get the +10 accuracy tech soon, and I plan to go all the way to the legendary dojo to get my super accurate bow heroes.

It seems I could field a stack of only archers, perhaps half ashi, half samurai and win vs. most armies. The rate of fire is really fast and the accuracy means that an enemy ashigaru unit might rout after three salvos or so...

I don't know if I like it this way really... I would prefer a slower paced game, so that firing the bows would be a bit slower, but movement also. Accuracy is perhaps a bit too high at max range. I don't mind accurate shots in the shorter ranges, but at the max it seems too much.



I'm playing Chosokabe with max upgrades (4-5 exp, 5 accuracy from encampment upgrade, 20-30 (forgot which) from max crafting and the complete line of legendary buildings and tech). On a field battle, enemy infantry can still close in pretty fast. It usually takes archers a few shots on the same unit to start killing effectively.

Funny enough, I can't tell if flaming arrows are worth it. Seems like the reduction in rate of fire is too much compared to its increased lethality.

[Nelson]

Balance aside, there really isn't any reason why you can't shoot an arrow into a castle. I'm sure they know the principles of indirect fire.

Sure, they could fire into a place they couldn't observe. But to HIT anything the shooter can't see you need a spotter with real time communications to the shooter. Plus the doctine and training to do this.

The astounding effectiveness of archery into a castle in this game is nothing short of miraculous. I would only allow defending units on the edge of walls to fire outward and they would also be the only targets available inside for besiegers to target.

[HopAlongBunny]

Sure, they could fire into a place they couldn't observe. But to HIT anything the shooter can't see you need a spotter with real time communications to the shooter. Plus the doctine and training to do this.

The astounding effectiveness of archery into a castle in this game is nothing short of miraculous. I would only allow defending units on the edge of walls to fire outward and they would also be the only targets available inside for besiegers to target.

All true but...

Unlike previous games, the pathing issues have all but disappeared in sieges. The solution to THAT problem is elegant-open format of the castles provides for essentially a field battle with some height/choke-point advantages going to the defender.

It looks like the mod community is tasked with the problem of making walls act as walls. Since I try not to do sieges, I am kind of happy with the way it is :)

[Dead Guy]

I love it when the AI exploits the way archery works and puts his archer right up against the outermost wall of a castle, so that my archers manning the next wall won't shoot at them (they can't fire in an arc, because there's a roof). It completely eliminates the advantage of the wall :p Either I let my archers man the walls and let the AI shoot my infantry while the AI infantry climb the wall and fight my archers, or I put my infantry on the walls and let the archers have a normal archery duel, since they can shoot at each other in arcs without problems.

How do you guys use archers in sieges? I feel like I'm frequently doing it wrong. In forts it's a no-brainer obviously, but in a fortress/castle? What tier do you put them on, when do you pull them back etc

[Rothe]

Funny enough, I can't tell if flaming arrows are worth it. Seems like the reduction in rate of fire is too much compared to its increased lethality.

I think flaming arrows are mostly for morale penalty, not so much lethality. That is why I tend to open with regular arrows - after a barrage or two, I focus my archers on the key targets and use all my fire arrows. I try to rout enemy archer units if possible, so I can tehn concentrate archer fire on melee.

[econ21]

Last night the AI flaming arrows burnt down a section of my fort's walls. It created a breach that seemed much easier to traverse than scaling the walls. The AI did not exploit the breach (the only thing coming throw the breach seemed to be routers) but it did seem to open up some possibilities.

[al Roumi]

How do you guys use archers in sieges? I feel like I'm frequently doing it wrong. In forts it's a no-brainer obviously, but in a fortress/castle? What tier do you put them on, when do you pull them back etc

I've never deployed troops outside the central wall, but have sent some out to take the fight to the AI and or provide flanking fire. I post my bomb throwers to cover the main approaches & climbing zones where there is an overlap between sections. I've also been dabbling with placing cannons outside, running the gun grew in and out of the fort as the enemy advance or retreat. leaving a unit of Yari Ashigaru does make them a target, also good for drawing fire -if you want to dictate the concentration of the enemy for some matchlock fire, for example.

[Dead Guy]

Doesn't the enemy take your towers which then start shooting at you?

[Nelson]

Funny enough, I can't tell if flaming arrows are worth it. Seems like the reduction in rate of fire is too much compared to its increased lethality.

I never target troops with fire arrows. Only structures.

Fire arrows really would never make any sense to fire at troops when you think about it, especially in a field battle. For starters, the ballistic properties of a burning arrow would be terrible compared to an ordinary shaft. The logistics would be prohibitive not to mention the crazy danger among the archers shooting them. It would be a nightmare.

[al Roumi]

Doesn't the enemy take your towers which then start shooting at you?

yes and no.

They try to take the towers but on most of the maps I’ve played the most dangerous tower is close to the innermost wall –so attackers seeking to capture the tower are in perfect range of eg bomb throwers. This makes capturing the tower a gauntlet for the attackers.

I do sally from the inner wall to the outer to recapture towers -but only between waves.

[andrewt]

I think flaming arrows are mostly for morale penalty, not so much lethality. That is why I tend to open with regular arrows - after a barrage or two, I focus my archers on the key targets and use all my fire arrows. I try to rout enemy archer units if possible, so I can tehn concentrate archer fire on melee.


I've noticed that AI archers are way more intelligent than mine if I don't micromanage mine. It usually send some cheap unit to take fire then have its archers shoot mine. My archers always shoot infantry unless I specifically tell them to focus fire on enemy archers. Which is annoying when that archer unit routs and my archers go out of position.

[quadalpha]

You can pause. I'm a big fan of pausing (perfectionist in that regard). I would fight a battle for an hour and have a ten-minute replay.

[Dead Guy]

Yeah me too. Slo-mo is where it's at.

Too bad it makes it a little bit harder to tell where units are going sometimes, or if a cav unit has impacted all of it's charge yet and is ready to be pulled out.

Archery was it? I have discovered something quite intolerable about archer behaviour, and I strongly suspect it's a consequence of the cursed cones where archers can fire. Way too often when I order a unit to fire at a specific unit, they start to run sideways or something else that's about as useful. This is more prevalent in sieges, obviously, but still happens way too often in the field. Just wheel a few degrees and start shooting? Or better yet, just change your target already, it's clearly within the damned cone.

[Rothe]

Yeah me too. Slo-mo is where it's at.

Too bad it makes it a little bit harder to tell where units are going sometimes, or if a cav unit has impacted all of it's charge yet and is ready to be pulled out.

Archery was it? I have discovered something quite intolerable about archer behaviour, and I strongly suspect it's a consequence of the cursed cones where archers can fire. Way too often when I order a unit to fire at a specific unit, they start to run sideways or something else that's about as useful. This is more prevalent in sieges, obviously, but still happens way too often in the field. Just wheel a few degrees and start shooting? Or better yet, just change your target already, it's clearly within the damned cone.

I'd really love it if the guard mode for archers would lock the unit's location in place but would allow turning in place. That way, when you'd give an order to fire with guard mode on, they'd keep shooting at that target without moving, but would be able to refocus the cone whereever the target moves.

[HopAlongBunny]

I'd really love it if the guard mode for archers would lock the unit's location in place but would allow turning in place.

This would be nice. Having to stop your archers from pursuit is annoying. "Death wish"? "Following up on Success"? I don't care, just stand here! right here!

[Dead Guy]

If units firing at will wouldn't change the direction of the cone to follow the regiment they're firing at will at (oh dear), that'd be a start.

Just shoot at people in front of you for pete's sake.

It's when they've turned their arc like that and then you order them to shoot at a new unit in their original arc that they start running sideways like bleedin' crabs.

[Forward Observer]

Has anybody noticed that standard archers (Samurai and Ashigaru) holding the high ground do not seem to have a greater missile range than than similar opposing missile units like they used to in previous TW games?

Maybe it's the accelerated speed of approaching units that is preventing this, or maybe just my imagination, but I seem to remember in previous TW games---if my archers had the high ground they could always get off at least one killing volley of arrows before the approaching unit could even get into position. I just don't see this tactical height advantage for missile units happening in Shogun 2.

I also don't see Samurai archers having any greater range than Ashi's either. The only units that seem to possess a greater range are warrior monk archers. Of course in my first campaign, I completed it much to quickly to get all the Bushido archery upgrades, so I don't know all the effects of those.

Maybe it's because I'm so used to always playing as England in Med2 since I so favored the range of longbowmen over most vanilla missile units, but I do seem to remember in the first Shogun game that if my archers held the high ground they were simply going to get more missile kills than than any opposing missile unit. Of course there were only Samurai archers in the original Shogun.

[Zarky]

Has anybody noticed that standard archers (Samurai and Ashigaru) holding the high gound do not seem to have a greater missle range than than similar opposing missle units like they used to in previous TW games?

Maybe it's the accelerated speed of approaching units that is preventing this, or maybe just my imagination, but I seem to remember in previous TW games---if my archers had the high ground they could always get off at least one killing volley of arrows before the approaching unit could even get into position. I just don't see this tactical height advantage for missile units happening in Shogun 2.

I also don't see Samurai archers having any greater range than Ashi's either. The only units that seem to possess a greater range are warrior monk archers. Of course in my first campaign, I completed it much to quickly to get all the Bushido archer upgrades, so I don't know all the effects of those.

Maybe it's because I'm so used to always playing as England in Med2 because I so favored the range of longbowmen over most vanilla missile units, but I do seem to remember in the first Shogun game that if my archers held the high ground they were simply going to get more missile kills than than any opposing missile unit. Of course there were only Samurai archers in the original Shogun.

Haven't noticed any range bonus from high ground either, though not having to fire in a high angle is a huge bonus. I think the bushido tree archer upgrades are rather questionable. +10% accuracy and firing speed. The problem here is the %. That isn't a big accuracy boost to bow ashigaru, and is outdone by couple levels of experience. In that sense spear upgrades are much better because they affect ashigaru more in a sense, and building large enough castle already gives experience bonus to recruited ashigaru.

[Rothe]

Haven't noticed any range bonus from high ground either, though not having to fire in a high angle is a huge bonus. I think the bushido tree archer upgrades are rather questionable. +10% accuracy and firing speed. The problem here is the %. That isn't a big accuracy boost to bow ashigaru, and is outdone by couple levels of experience. In that sense spear upgrades are much better because they affect ashigaru more in a sense, and building large enough castle already gives experience bonus to recruited ashigaru.

I also think those are applied to only new units, not your fielded units.

Still, I can now recruit 85 accuracy samurai archers with 58 reload in my Chokosabe game. They are crazy good... Soon I will get my Bow hero and he will be awesome for destroying enemy archers with the 200 range.

[Dead Guy]

Archers don't get a range bonus on high ground, no. It's probably because of the firing arc mechanics? The engine was made for firearms, which aren't as affected by high ground as bows, I guess. It's a damn shame.

[Daveybaby]

Assuming that the firing arcs displayed when a unit is selected are accurate, it seems pretty obvious that there is no bonus. You certainly dont see any distortion of the arc if, say, the edge of the arc lies partly on a hill and partly on flat ground.

[hamysho]

Do you know the penalties for attacking troops in woods or if Archers get a penalty to hit when fire from woodlands? Do archers actually hit trees with their own arrows when they're firing from a forest?

[Dead Guy]

It seems like archers in forests take a lot less casualties when fired upon, imho. But I'm not sure. I haven't tested it.

Mangonels however, I am absolutely sure hit trees. Their projectiles are completely harmless if they hit a tree.