Printable View
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.
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.
Yes but their bows weren't that strong and their armor was basically made to be an arrow Shamwow.
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.
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.
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by aimlesswanderer
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.
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.
I'm sure that's no problem. Hitting anything in particular inside the walls might be a bit tricky though.
I'm curious.
Has anyone tried to grab every archery upgrade?
yes i always do and its just ridiculous
hehehe!Quote:
Originally Posted by Centurion1
I've got to try it then! I always grab a cpl upgrades and then get distracted
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.
Quote:
Originally Posted by econ21
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by quadalpha
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.
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.
Lol, excellent idea.Quote:
Originally Posted by Red_Russian13
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rothe
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.
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by quadalpha
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...Quote:
Originally Posted by Nelson
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 :)
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
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by andrewt
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.
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dead Guy
Doesn't the enemy take your towers which then start shooting at you?
I never target troops with fire arrows. Only structures.Quote:
Originally Posted by andrewt
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.
yes and no.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dead Guy
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.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rothe
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.
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.