Has anyone else wondered about this?

[Knight of the Temple]

Perhaps this is intended to function as such and maybe there is a very good reason for it, but why do missile units that you'd think could fire immediately (and already have their weapon loaded) actually can't do so, but have to stop and reload before they can even fire their initial shot?

Arbalesters are a good example. Surely their weapon would be pre-loaded so that they could simply aim and fire right away! And THEN reload. Not wait until the enemy is in range and THEN load up and THEN fire. And this is especially important because Arbalesters take a while to reload in the first place, so if you have fast cavalry bearing down on you then you won't even be able to get a shot off - not that I should be complaining about this as usually I can simply charge down enemy Arbalesters without ever having to suffer a volley, but surely they would have their weapon ready to fire immediately! But no, when the enemy is in range they go into 'aiming', then 'firing', only to realise that nothing actually flew out when they pulled the trigger :inquisitive: so then it's on to 'reloading', then 'aiming', and finally a second 'firing' before they actually fire!

Another example is Handgunners. Why on earth would they not have their gun loaded? Why would they wait until the enemy was just about to smack into them before deciding to load up?? That doesn't make sense to me.

In fact, EVERY missle unit that you would expect to be able to fire immediately without having to load first does in fact not do so, and EVERY unit that you'd think WOULD have to load first doesn't have to!

I personally believe that this could be a possible error in code due to an ambiguous description of a variable in the 'projectilestats' file. There is a 'Y/N' (Yes/No) variable for each unit to indicate whether it can fire straight away or has to load first. Looking at the code all seems well initially, but the description in the file of that particular variable gives conflicting information: it says it's for whether a unit can fire immediately or not . . . so for units you'd think would fire right away you'd put a 'Y' for yes and all looks logical in that respect . . . Arbalests, Crossbows, Handguns, Javelins, etc., all have 'Y', but the second part of the description for that variable says it's for whether a unit has to load first or not . . . and THAT is the actual effect that variable is determining, so if you put a 'Y' it means the unit DOES have to load---and not that it can fire immediately. So what you would initially think that the variable is doing actually does the opposite, but I also think it would be highly unlikely that something like this would go unnoticed during the making and testing of the game, so I have to assume that I'm wrong about this, but nevertheless I simply don't understand why certain units don't have a loaded weapon when they should do . . . and units that would need to load first (like archers) can just fire right away, like they've been holding back the string of the bow since they walked on the field. Javelins also are a good example . . . as if you would have to reload a javelin before being able to throw your first one when it's already in your hand. :inquisitive: You'd simply aim and 'fire'.

But anyway, perhaps I'm making a big mistake and this all does in fact make perfect sense. I just can't see it myself, so I thought I would share my wondering and see if anyone else has ever wondered the same!

I could very easily mod the code so that every unit does work the way it should seem to, but I want to experience the game as it was made even if I don't agree with some things . . . so if there's a good explanation then that's all right, but if it is an error of some kind then I'll definitely think about modding it myself at some point.

[bamff]

Hmmmm....I suppose I had accepted it on the basis that such troops would not have marched with loaded weapons, but you do have a point, once they were already on the field and had sighted the enemy, you would think that they might load to stand ready once the enemy came within range.

I would be intrigued to hear if anyone could shed any light as to "why it is so?'

[Knight of the Temple]

I could accept that troops wouldn't march with loaded weapons too, and even that all troops would have 'unloaded' weapons at the beginning of a battle in the game, but I don't accept that when a unit has a weapon that CAN be loaded and prepared (such as crossbows, arbalests, and gunpowder weapons) that it would wait until the enemy was already bearing down upon them before being allowed to load. Obviously it's different with archers and the like, as that's NOT a weapon you would 'load' until you were actually going to fire right there and then.

Because a lot of units are fairly quick to reload anyway you might not even notice these things happening, but for a unit as slow to load as Arbalesters it becomes very noticeable, and the fact that they are simply not allowed to prepare and load their weapon at any point, even if they are just standing and doing nothing else but waiting for the enemy to come into range, makes no sense! And in my view it makes enemy Arbalesters and so on very easy to run down with cavalry without taking any losses because they don't have time to fire their weapon (which most certainly would have been loaded and prepared by that point). So yeah, feel free to charge your best and most cherished knights straight at a fearsome armour piercing arbalest unit and don't worry about getting shot at because nobody has a loaded weapon.

This kind of defeats the whole point---as realistically you'd keep your knights well clear (unless they weren't going to see you coming or you were willing to accept the losses), as at the very least they'd get one shot off, and that would be enough to fell quite a few knights.

[gaijinalways]

Interesting observation and something I haven't given much thought to except with handgunners who often don't seem to get a round off before being engaged by charging ai troops (If you can get them to come around the back, where they have all day fine, but that doesn't often tend to work out for me:inquisitive: ).

[Knight of the Temple]

I haven't really used Handgunners myself yet (but I've seen them in action), and I think I remember reading in the MTW Unit Guide somewhere that it's best to put your Handgunners on 'Hold Formation' until they fire and then switch to 'Engage At Will' for the ensuing melee. If you don't have them holding their formation they'll break out and attack because the enemy gets so close and therefore they won't fire their guns. I haven't tested this, but I do remember reading it in that guide, and it would make sense.

[Knight of the Temple]

Well, I guess the answer to my question is . . . no! Nobody else has really wondered! :shrug:

I'll just have to figure it out on my own. :book:

:closed:

[naut]

Now that you mention it it is a tad weird, I don't really have time to tinker with it though.

[macsen rufus]

I have noticed that if you change target half-way through "loading", missile troops seem to need to reload their weapons, which is a bit daft. You'd expect them to be able to point their already loaded weapons in a different direction, wouldn't you?

I BELIEVE, but could be wrong, that if you keep the "fire at will" turned OFF, the weapon will stay loaded so long as the unit doesn't have any other orders (ie moving!). The reason I BELIEVE this, is that I find it more effective to toggle "fire at will" than to target units specifically. I very often do this in BIG defensive battles where I have a limited number of missile units. Typically I'll have arbs or guns in the front row, set to hold formation so they don't skirmish away, then when the enemy come in range, switch them over to "fire at will". The result is that all units set off an immediate and simultaneous volley, usually causing enough damage to rout the approaching units (arbalesters at ten paces, anyone? :beam: ) THEN I turn off the "fire at will" until the next close approach, and repeat. Having said all that, it's just an impression gained in the heat of battle, and I haven't spent time and effort analysing the loading times etc. And of course it is a purely defensive tactic - with an attack you are constantly advancing and that seems to nullify the advantage.

EDIT: on a second's extra reflection, I think this may be due to the troops loading and aiming when the enemy approach, even though they've not yet had the "order" to fire, hence turning on "fire at will" works immediately.

[Eternity]

I just ran some tests on this, with archers and longbowmen (these have the shoot immediately flag off), and crossbow and kerns (these have the shoot immediately flag on). In the case of the archers and longbowmen, if I leave fire at will on, and when the enemy comes into range, they'll go from standing -> reloading -> aiming -> firing, therefore showing that the flag does seem to suggest that they must reload before firing. In the case of crossbows and kerns, when I leave the fire at will on, they'll immediately pull off their volleys when the enemy comes into range. This time, it's standing -> aiming -> firing, with no need to reload, so it seems the flag works correctly.

However, the real problem comes into play when I decide click on the enemy! The archers and longbowmen info will go from standing -> reloading -> aiming -> firing -> reloading -> aiming -> firing, but the first volley does nothing. They won't even play the aiming animation, but just stand there while they "waste" their first volley and fire on the second. It is similar in the case for crossbows and kerns; they'll go from standing -> aiming -> firing -> reloading -> aiming -> firing, but their first volley won't do anything, with no animation change. So, it seems that the fire immediately flag (in PROJECTILESTATS.TXT) does work, but it's just that you have to leave them on fire at will for it to work correctly.

[Knight of the Temple]

Thanks for the additional input! Eternity, what you said in particular was very helpful as I probably wouldn't have thought of trying that myself! And what you said makes a lot of sense to me so far as I practically never have any missle unit on 'Fire At Will'---I always like to control firing and select targets myself. So I'll have to try it out and see if that does indeed make things work a bit more sensibly!

One thing though . . . when you tried clicking on a target and you noticed these issues, did you have 'Fire At Will' on or off? I mean, can you select a target and have it work properly so long as 'Fire At Will' is on at the same time, or do you need to simply leave 'Fire At Will' on and NOT click a target for the unit to fire properly?

That's all interesting though! As I really didn't get the way things were working.

[Adrian II]

So, it seems that the fire immediately flag (in PROJECTILESTATS.TXT) does work, but it's just that you have to leave them on fire at will for it to work correctly.Aha! I have often wondered about the mysteriously disappearing first volley. Now I know.
Good show, Eternity. :bow:

[Knight of the Temple]

Well, I've just tried a few quick custom battles to test out Arbalesters using the 'Fire At Will' toggle, and I was pleased to see that they do indeed fire properly if you just leave them to 'fire at will'! That's good news!

Unfortunately though, whether 'Fire At Will' is on or off, it doesn't stop the first firing round from screwing up if you actually select your target. But at least now I know how to get it working properly, and from now on when I'm in a hurry and need that first shot to go off I can just toggle 'Fire At Will' and hopefully they'll hit the target I had in mind :beam: and after that I can just manually select the target and it carries on fine from there.

So if you want to charge down an enemy unit with some Arbalesters and need to get a quick shot off, just double click to have them run into range as normal, but make sure 'Fire At Will' is off, and then when they go into their screwy firing round, click 'Halt' to stop firing, and then click 'Fire At Will' and wahey, they'll shoot right away with no problems (and hopefully at your intended target - just make sure your facing is good).

This thread didn't turn out to be a waste afterall. :medievalcheers:

[Caerfanan]

Wooooo, that is intersting business....

I was complaining about xbows in the viking campaigns...

So if I'm correct:
1/ If you click on an enemy, everyone will take the full cycle firing, AND LOOSE THEIR ARROWS
2/ With xbows and javelins, toggling the fire at will unleashes an effective volley instantly.

I'm so in a hurry to try this.

Thanks a lot, guys! ~:cheers:

[Knight of the Temple]

If you click on an enemy your missle unit will screw up its first round of firing and not actually fire anything when it says 'firing'. It will fire properly the second time.

If you have 'Fire At Will' on and DON'T click anything, then your missile units will fire the first volley with no problems, and fire as you would expect (archers load before firing, crossbows don't (i.e. they already have their weapon loaded)).

[Caerfanan]

Just to make sure that I undeerstood well, the moment you toggle the 'fire at will' on your xbows will shoot instantly at the nearest target?

[Martok]

Just to make sure that I undeerstood well, the moment you toggle the 'fire at will' on your xbows will shoot instantly at the nearest target?
Yes. They will automatically begin firing at the first unit(s) to come into range.

[bamff]

Wooooo, that is intersting business....

I'm so in a hurry to try this.

You and me both, Caerfanan!

[Knight of the Temple]

Just to make sure that I undeerstood well, the moment you toggle the 'fire at will' on your xbows will shoot instantly at the nearest target?
If a target is in range when you turn 'Fire At Will' on they will go straight into 'aiming' then 'firing' and with no problems. Watch your facing though . . . try to directly face the unit you want to fire upon if there are many about (after the first volley you can click what target you want). And in case you didn't know, units on 'Fire At Will' will not turn to fire at anything directly behind them.

[Caerfanan]

If a target is in range when you turn 'Fire At Will' on they will go straight into 'aiming' then 'firing' and with no problems. Watch your facing though . . . try to directly face the unit you want to fire upon if there are many about (after the first volley you can click what target you want). And in case you didn't know, units on 'Fire At Will' will not turn to fire at anything directly behind them.
Yes, those men don't have eyes behind them. A pity.
:laugh4:

[Adrian II]

And in case you didn't know, units on 'Fire At Will' will not turn to fire at anything directly behind them.Correct. As far as I know there are only two ways to stop a missile unit from firing if a target is within range: (1) move the unit physically out of range of any target, and (2) make the unit face away from all possible targets.

The latter is faster as well as safer (your missiles are close at hand if they are needed).

This knowledge may come in handy if you want to save ammunition at some stage (e.g. during a lengthy battle).

[Knight of the Temple]

As far as I know there are only two ways to stop a missile unit from firing if a target is within range

Just turn 'Fire At Will' off and that'll stop them firing! And tell them to 'Halt' if they're currently targeting someone.

I don't really understand what you were getting at there. :beam:

[Adrian II]

Just turn 'Fire At Will' off and that'll stop them firing! And tell them to 'Halt' if they're currently targeting someone.

I don't really understand what you were getting at there. :beam:Sorry, it's my quaint sense of humour. Sometimes it goes unnoticed. I remember when I was a fresh member I wrote a post on bridge battles in which I said defenders should always hide at least one unit underneath the bridge. I got five answers and two PM's inquiring how to do it. :dozey:

[Deus ret.]

I wrote a post on bridge battles in which I said defenders should always hide at least one unit underneath the bridge. I got five answers and two PM's inquiring how to do it. :dozey:

:laugh4: :laugh4: :beam: :2thumbsup:

.....

:inquisitive:

....how the hell? :clown:

[drone]

Sorry, it's my quaint sense of humour. Sometimes it goes unnoticed. I remember when I was a fresh member I wrote a post on bridge battles in which I said defenders should always hide at least one unit underneath the bridge. I got five answers and two PM's inquiring how to do it. :dozey:
The unit should be spearmen or pikemen. Only they can effectively jab up at the attackers as they cross the bridge.

[Martok]

Sorry, it's my quaint sense of humour. Sometimes it goes unnoticed. I remember when I was a fresh member I wrote a post on bridge battles in which I said defenders should always hide at least one unit underneath the bridge. I got five answers and two PM's inquiring how to do it. :dozey:

The unit should be spearmen or pikemen. Only they can effectively jab up at the attackers as they cross the bridge.
*snicker* You guys are a riot. ~;p

[Caerfanan]

Correct. As far as I know there are only two ways to stop a missile unit from firing if a target is within range: (1) move the unit physically out of range of any target, and (2) make the unit face away from all possible targets.

The latter is faster as well as safer (your missiles are close at hand if they are needed).

This knowledge may come in handy if you want to save ammunition at some stage (e.g. during a lengthy battle).

Err... I might be missing something, but when I need to stop may archers as they empty their quiver too quicly and I would have them wait a moment in order to shoot at the Royal Body guard commanding the enemy's army instead of a secondary unit, I usually toggle the "fire at will" off and click on halt, shouldn't it do the job?

[Caerfanan]

Sorry, it's my quaint sense of humour. Sometimes it goes unnoticed. I remember when I was a fresh member I wrote a post on bridge battles in which I said defenders should always hide at least one unit underneath the bridge. I got five answers and two PM's inquiring how to do it. :dozey:

...

...

And that was me jumping in the trap with a huge smile on my face!!! :dizzy2:

Ok, you got me Adrian II! :2thumbsup:

Men, this guy not only feeds on camel's meat, he feeds on fresh members also!!! Run away!!! Run Away!!!! :charge:

[Caerfanan]

The unit should be spearmen or pikemen. Only they can effectively jab up at the attackers as they cross the bridge.

Or maybe archers?

IMHO, the armor bonus and/or shield bonus of a unit shot at vertically from below are probably not taken in account. This gives a good adavantage to archer: no armor so no problem with the fact of not being armor piercing, and a fast fire rate that should allow them 2 ou 3 volleys before the enemy unit crosses the bridge.

And you can keep your spears to protect the end of the bridge.

[caravel]

Hashishin are best for treetop and under bridge battles. :beam:

***waits for the deluge***

[Adrian II]

The unit should be spearmen or pikemen. Only they can effectively jab up at the attackers as they cross the bridge.I usually pick some bad Leprechauns for the job. Valour 5 or thereabout. They will sling Irish curses at the enemy throughout the battle.
It beats headhurling, I tell you. :yes:

[Knight of the Temple]

What has this thread decended into? :scastle:

So are you saying you deliberately post nonsense, Adrian? Or does it just happen unintentionally from time to time and afterward you say it was deliberate? :beam:

[Caerfanan]

What has this thread decended into? :scastle:

So are you saying you deliberately post nonsense, Adrian? Or does it just happen unintentionally from time to time and afterward you say it was deliberate? :beam:

Yeah: "Has anyone else wondered about this?" :2thumbsup:

I consider now that Adrian II seeks to give is welcomed knowledge only to those who can make a difference between actual business and fresh members' traps! ~;)

[Adrian II]

So are you saying you deliberately post nonsense, Adrian?God forbid, I am dead serious man. I always keep a unit of Leprechauns on stand by for bridge battles. In order to raise them, you need to win an Irish campaign in VI first. The Leprechaun Tree which you produce in that campaign is carried over into your English MTW campaign through the .leprechaun. cheat code. :yes:

[Knight of the Temple]

:freak:

[gunslinger]

God forbid, I am dead serious man. I always keep a unit of Leprechauns on stand by for bridge battles. In order to raise them, you need to win an Irish campaign in VI first. The Leprechaun Tree which you produce in that campaign is carried over into your English MTW campaign through the .leprechaun. cheat code. :yes:

Actually, you can build leprechauns with any faction as long as you use the gnome editor to allow your faction to build the lucky charms production series of buildings. Once you have built the lucky charms guild, you can start producing leprechaun units. The master level adds 1 valor. You still have to win as the Irish in a VI campaign before you can unlock them, though. That's hard-coded.

[Adrian II]

Actually, you can build leprechauns with any faction as long as you use the gnome editor to allow your faction to build the lucky charms production series of buildings. Once you have built the lucky charms guild, you can start producing leprechaun units. The master level adds 1 valor. You still have to win as the Irish in a VI campaign before you can unlock them, though. That's hard-coded.Respect. :bow: ~;)

Gunslinger, you and I need to get together one day, write a mini-guide for a fantasy faction and have it stickied in the Guide department. I would suggest the Monegasque faction. Their deadliest agent is the Millionaire Divorcee. Once you target her on an enemy General, she will follow him screaming and kicking to the end of the earth and finally kill him in a fit of jealousy. Kinda like the Geisha in Shogun, but without the good manners...

[naut]

:laugh4:

Please do.

[Caerfanan]

Oh my.

Please, do NOT create any association between your two talents.

Please.

:laugh4: :dizzy2: :laugh4:
(Adrian II, victim, Rythmic)