Is anyone else looking forward to their old tactics being out of date.

I can't really say much about Shogan as I've never played that but it's always seemed that mostly the tactics of R:TW carried over to M:TW and vice versa. But with E:TW it looks like we're going to have to re-evaluate and will probably lose a fair few battles at first. Then of course there's the brand new naval battles. As much as I looked forward to Rome and Medieval 2 this seems like an entirely new game. Sort of how GTA improved with 3, VC and SA but really changed with GTA4.

Or are you more apprehensive/hostile about these changes. I could see why some people wouldn't like the change from the formula of the previous games we all enjoyed. We are creatures of habit.

I am super pumped. Nothing will ever be the same as Shogun lol, but Empire is touching my favorite period in history. Im actually looking forward to a more infantry centered army, as I was never a fan of using too much cav in any of hte previous games.

I played mostly with archer/artillery heavy based armies anyway. Empire will be a nice break for me actually, as I wont have to use up 4/8 slots on infantrymen on the off chance the enemy army is able to get off a charge against my lines. I never was a big cavalry user anyway, I'd much rather stand at range and fire the bows etc.

This game might be right up my alley tactics-wise, especially if there's good anti-infantry artillery that's effective. :hmg:

The naval battles I'm really going to have to work on though, and develop a good tactic for. Otherwise my ships will be afraid to leave port without numbers that would be considered an armada or fleet by all current standards. 5 french ships sailing against my 10? I can't micro that!! RUN FOR YOUR LIVES MEN!!! :surrender:

I'm a lot like Shadow_Wolf33. My playstyle consisted of defensively using lots of archers with a few heavy troops as support. Empire will be great because my tactics actually work a lot better than they did in previous games :laugh4:.

In fact I was quite suprised when I utterly destroyed the Americans in the Demo. I thought I was going to lose at first until I learned how things worked :2thumbsup:.

But it will definitely be nice to have to get used to new tactical challenges.

Considering musket range is basically the same as javelin range, based off the demo at least I'll get along fine.

The demo has already shown me that my old tactics don't work! I'm also a big fan of archer types in previous TW games, however I've found that the musket weilding troops in the ETW demo feel very different the archers of previous games. Plus when drill firing etc become factors I think this will really be a whole new experience!

My old play style was in its basics - Archers, Ongars and Riders. (plus some urban cohorts to kill pesky greek pikemen)

In a sense, nothing has changed, except for the fact is like like archers versus archers where I usually was just killing footmen in comparison.

I would be interested to see the range of troops we get though. In terms of numbers, strength and range.

Well, I'm going to be using solid blocks of pikes and charging into melee as soon as possible in ETW, just as I used to in RTW and M2TW. It doesn't matter if my pikemen become obselete, they will still fight like men.

Come what may, most of my battles will be locked down in melee. I refuse to change my tactics. :snobby:

(will archers have a greater range and overall superiority over musketeers, I wonder?)

Bah, my men will fire their one shot, and then bayonet charge like no other!

Originally Posted by A Very Super Market:
Bah, my men will fire their one shot, and then bayonet charge like no other!

Except maybe the Scots... :clown:

I will be the British and use my Scots that way! :P

Of what I played in the demo, I really like the new style of warfare. Can't wait until armies go against each other with Platoon firing researched to really create some harsh killzones. :yes:

I think what I am most pumped about is the fact that for the first time since Shogun and MTW, we will be able to relieve units effectively. It always seemed that in Rome and M2, once a unit was engaged in the melee, that was it. If you attempted to pull it out of the fight to let it rest, you risked loosing more men during the pullout. From what Ive seen in the demo, when multiple units ingage in melee, they all proceed to the action, instead of spreading out into a massive blob with only 10 guys actually engaged like in RtW and M2. This will allow a relief unit to engage and hold back the enemy while the first unit to make contact pulls out, without sustaining massive losses. Also the very nature of forming lines and shooting across distances allows for units to be moved in and out of the main line easily.

I think the biggest change will be the diminished role of cavalry, in the demo at least they really seem very fragile under musket fire, and therefore a lot less effective against infantry than they used to be. As far as I can see the only asset they will really hold now is mobility, to race around the flanks and chase routers rather than being in the thick of the battle. It will be interesting to try to adapt to use them more cautiously; since I am not a big fan of cavalry anyway I suspect I may tend to abandon them entirely apart from a couple of units to chase routers. For one thing it looks like we will need to be much more careful with generals now, getting them anywhere near the enemy line infantry will be practically suicide.

Artillery seem to behave more like archers in previous games, long ranged and pretty accurate and therefore good for keeping up a constant, demoralizing, but comparatively bloodless barrage, rather than the pot-luck devastation inflicted by their medieval forebears. Of course in grapeshot range they become much more efficient killers, but I'm not sure I will be using grape all that often TBH; using artillery at close range seems like an inherently risky approach to me.

Interesting idea about the possibilities of relieving line units, hopefully with the main encounter taking place at range there will be more possibility for breaking off an unfavourable encounter in good order, although ordering your men to turn their backs to the enemy muskets is still unlikely to do wonders for morale. It will be interesting too to see how effective charging to melee will be, in the demo I didn't find it too effective; I hope for some sort of balance where in the normal course of things charging straight in to a full strength enemy line will mean disaster (except for a few nutcases like the Swedes), but charging once the enemy are already depleted will act rather like a charge to the rear in previous games and end the battle in a decisive rout rather than a ragged shootout.

Naval battles of course are a whole different kettle of fish. Playing the demo, I was reminded of how badly lost the first few battles I played in STW, not really knowing how best to use my fleet other than some vague ideas of raking fire and doubling up being quite effective. It will be fun to learn a whole new set of battle tactics.

I must be one of the few that things it's great that my tactics will finally be up to date.
I played too much NTW so the game influence my tactics too much.
In RTW this wasn't much of a problem since the AI was pretty easy to beat and in M2TW I usually did fine until gunpowder where my tactics improved or I just simply modded so the gunpowder untils were available from the start.
So I'm happy that my tactics finally won't be off by a few 100 years.

In MTW gunpowder tactics were quite effective thanks to poor AI. If you lined up your gunpowder units just in front of a wall of pikes or high-end spears you could blast away. A couple swords or cavs were nice in case the enemy didn't want to play that game. A valor 7 arquebus unit works wonders against general's bodyguards.

I'm not so sure. I'm looking forward to trying new tactics. However, I enjoyed having cav heavy armies in previous games because I liked wiping out routers. I dislike having to fight many clean-up battles against small remains of defeated armies.

Tactics? Who uses tactics?

Originally Posted by lot:
Tactics? Who uses tactics?

Me. At least, I attempt to. :sweatdrop:

Personally, the biggest challenge will be learning when to trade shots, and when to switch to melee. So far, in the demo, I've had poor luck with charging/boarding.

Originally Posted by Malkut:
Personally, the biggest challenge will be learning when to trade shots, and when to switch to melee. So far, in the demo, I've had poor luck with charging/boarding.

It will be interesting to see how this pans out in game. IRL, depending on range, opposing lines of infantry would only fire a few volleys before one side would attempt a charge or withdrawal. Also, there are very few instances of prolonged melee, in most cases the notion of being skewered on a bayonet was enough to cause most soldiers (even regulars) to break in the face of a serious bayonet charge. In game, it will all depend on the moral system, though thankfully we wont see any of that COMPLETE RUBISH BAYONET HERO FIGHT TO THE DEATH NONSENSE we saw in Imperial Glory lol.

Battle in ETW will be different but the old tactics will still apply and are invaluable for even the most experienced tacticians out there. Mistakes will be that much more costly however, cavalry commanders for example have to know the right moment to strike because one volley will take out a cavalry unit and bayonets will mop up whats left of it.
One good charge however can be devastating but are you willing to risk it against my artillery gaurded by a unit of line infantry hiding in dense forest?

Defender vs attacker advantage is not so significant anymore either now with the introduction of all those artillery pieces.Are you still going to stand with your troops cowering on a hill while my artillery shoots a tremendous barage of cannonballs in your tight formations?
You will be forced to engage your troops in open field and exchange musket fire.

These are only a few examples of many situations that will occur in the battlefield, things will be much more balanced and i expect many honorable open field confrontations.These will be bloody and brutal battles but we will remain gentlemen in command to lead our armies to victory.

This makes me wonder however if officers are taken into account that as soon as one falls the unit will suffer a blow in morale?

Amusingly, I'll likely be using my favorite tactic from MTW (1). Line up my Italian Infantry on a hill, put geonese sailers behind, and go on crusade! Now it'll be line infantry in front, arty behind, and cavalry be damned! :D

/hopefully I don't face a lot of cavalry xD

I think it will be actually kind of similar to the old area. The main infantry will be engaging, with the first few ranks doing the fighting and the rest kind of sitting there, the artillery does the equivalent of archers(more range, but less effective and poor in melee), and cav, overpowered in the other games, is rather diminished thank goodness

Yeah, of course thats an efficient way to make use of your guns.

Originally Posted by crazyviking03:
It will be interesting to see how this pans out in game. IRL, depending on range, opposing lines of infantry would only fire a few volleys before one side would attempt a charge or withdrawal.

See, that's got me thinking that, should two units of infantry meet on the battlefield, than it might be wise to let the enemy fire a volley first, at long range. Then, while they're reloading, my unit can run closer and fire a somewhat more effective volley.

It'd be a micromanagement nightmare to do with an entire army, but I can't help but wonder if the principal is sound.

It absolutely works on a 1v1 basis. If you want to try that with groups (ie, two lines against each other) turn off fire at will, wait for the enemy to fire, advance a bit (the GUI has a shortcut button for that now), set to run, stop, and turn on fire at will.

Though you will have fewer men to fire with.

The elimination of the time limit also removes a bit more of the defender bonus.

However, if you only lose a handful on their volley, it can still be worth it.

Don't try it against platoon-firing units though. You'll move forward just to get hit with a second (and possibly third) volley at closer range. Theoretically, you could wait for the enemy to finish firing all the volleys, but you'd have just a few seconds to move into position with a lot less men.

Originally Posted by Alexander the Pretty Good:
However, if you only lose a handful on their volley, it can still be worth it.

Yes, I too am thinking of it in terms of attrition. You absorb a weak blow to deliver a stronger one.

I wonder if that kind of thinking will be more common, in an era where everyone can kill instantly from a distance.

Originally Posted by Malkut:
Yes, I too am thinking of it in terms of attrition. You absorb a weak blow to deliver a stronger one.

I wonder if that kind of thinking will be more common, in an era where everyone can kill instantly from a distance.

It should be carried out by disciplined troops however.But like others said against platoon firing this is a bad idea.So in that case the best tactic would be to use weaker troops that are able to carry out one volley and then engage in melee to interupt the enemy while the more professional regulars advance in firing range behind them.Once in position relief those weak units and let your professional troops finnish the job.