factions?special units? Strategies?

Just wondering what everyone thinks the factions will be. I know the CA site said that England, Spain, America, France, Prussia, and America are all playable but I was wondering what other factions you think they will include. Also, what do you think each factions special units/strengths and weaknesses will be. It's a pretty safe assumption to say that England will have a great navy but what else sets the countries apart? Also, I will admit I don't know a great deal about the strategies of warfare at this time. I am assuming there was a lot more strategy involved than I realize or else CA wouldn't bother making the game. Does anyone know what kind of strategies were comman at this time? I know the Prussians would overload one flank and then try to encircle the other flank.(Modern Version of Alexander's tactic.) One last question, does anyone know which faction will make the most use of dragoons? I think they will be a lot of fun to play with based on how they're used.

They said Charles XII of Sweden is in the game so one would rather expect Sweden to be in the game.

The ottomans

You mentioned America twice.

Well all mentioned, Russia, The Ottomans, proably some Algerian Faction, Austria, Saxony,Bavaria(Y'know, German States) The Italian States (Pope, Venice,etc) Scotland and ireland maybe, Portugal, The Netherlands, India, Some Asian States, Some Indian Tribes, Mexico.

Thats all I can thnik of.

Mexico won't be in; they only gained independence in the 1820's.

Maybe New Spain instead?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Warluster

You mentioned America twice.

Well all mentioned, Russia, The Ottomans, proably some Algerian Faction, Austria, Saxony,Bavaria(Y'know, German States) The Italian States (Pope, Venice,etc) Scotland and ireland maybe, Portugal, The Netherlands, India, Some Asian States, Some Indian Tribes, Mexico.

Thats all I can thnik of.

---

I'm not so sure about Scotland...

After all, Scotland and England ceased to exist as seperate independent countries in 1707 when they merged to form the United Kingdom.

Well, I thought this had already been established?

The press release said of the 10 playable factions, there would be:

Britain
France
Spain
Prussia
America
Ottoman Empire
Russia (reference to Peter the Great)
Sweden (reference of Charles XII)

So 2 are missing. Chances are that one of those has got to be Austro Hungary. The other one could be The Netherlands (though in decline throughout the period), Portugal? Maybe Mughal India?

Ah, those are playable ones but we were, or I was under the impression, we were talking about playable AND non playable factions.

I seriously hope that the Habsburg empire (Austria-Hungary) is in the game, it`s a mayor player on the continent in that era. It has fought numerous wars against France and Prussia. And it has probably a nice choice of units ranging from german line troops to the swift hungarian skirmishers and hussars

What about Denmark-Norway? If Sweden is in they should be as well. Poland likewise.

I'm wondering over the 3 continents, is is Africa or Asia that is the third? Europe and America seems pretty clear.

If you look to colonization and the overseas trade race, portugal and the dutch definitely have their rightful places as playable factions. if you look to the napoleonic wars austria-hungary has a very central role and must be in. and denmark-norway, while not a big power player, actually has something of a role in both.

doubt any non-western factions will be in, they historically lack the capability to be global powers.

so i think they should all be in. btw 10 factions arent exactly a lot, must be the least of any tw game yet?

Coming from a Dutchman this may sound suspect and overly patriotic but you would expect the Dutch to be a shoe in for inclusion. In the early 1700s they were one of the major world powers and at the forefront of military development. Hard to believe nowadays, such a tiny country.

Would be interesting to see them in a Total War environment though. The survival of The Netherlands historically was because no other major land power would except another to occupy them, to preserve the balance of power. Whoever was attacking the Dutch tended to soon have an alliance arranged against them. Hard to see this happening in a Total War context. I'm expecting the Dutch to be quickly overrun, TBH.

As we know, unlocking factions to play with is relatively simple on TW games and even though CA didn't intend you to play with them, they mostly work fine when you do unlock them, with only a few requiring a tweaking.

I would entirely expect an Indian faction of some kind to certainly be involved, likely the Mughals. Dependant on just how this map works, there may well be a African continent too so I would expect some African tribes to appear should that be the case. Indians may well make an appearance to cause a nuisance in America, after all the War of Independence doesn't happen until late on into the game.

There is a big choice of people to include, who will find their way into the game is another matter and really we can't speculate entirely until we see a map of the area actually involved, as I'm not really sure on that one yet.

Besides, the modding community will probably already be setting the wheels turning in their heads (or is that just me?) for what to do, not in any depth of course but I am sure it will continue to thrive.

Better have Russians or I'll be boiling mad :smash:

Yeah, it was kind of strange not to mention that the Russia is playable faction, when at that same time Peter the Great is one of the heroes in the game. I hope for the sake of gameplay and sense that these heroes will be only passive characters to add persona to factions. Bring different passive elements like better training for troops or better trade etc.

[\Quote]Well all mentioned, Russia, The Ottomans, proably some Algerian Faction, Austria, Saxony,Bavaria(Y'know, German States) The Italian States (Pope, Venice,etc) Scotland and ireland maybe, Portugal, The Netherlands, India, Some Asian States, Some Indian Tribes, Mexico.[\Quote]


Russia yes
Ottomans certainly
Austria
Prussia
England
America
France
Spain
maybe portugal
maybe holland
sweden
but as for the rest of your ideas they would be unhistorical and ridiculous based on the infrostructure of the time

I would suspect that the faction list would be roughly as follows:
Britain
France
Portugal
The Throne of Spain
New Spain
Netherlands
Denmark and Norway
Sweeden
Russia
Prussia
Austria/Hungary
The Ottoman Turks
Bavarian States
Some kind of imalgimation of eastern european factions, encompassing lithuania, poland etc
America
Mahratta Princes (India)
Persians
Algerians (most likely)

I would also highly suspect emergent factions, such as Ireland, American Indian Tribes, the US (opposed to it being british america), and many other ones to shake it up some what.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NagatsukaShumi

As we know, unlocking factions to play with is relatively simple on TW games and even though CA didn't intend you to play with them, they mostly work fine when you do unlock them, with only a few requiring a tweaking.

---

I'm wondering if that will be true with this one though, unless you just ignore sea power and the western side of the map. The choice of playable factions seems to be based on who had major force projection with navies during the period (with the curious omission of the Dutch??). That makes sense, as a showcase for the new naval combat engine, and it's probably why Russia didn't make the list.

It will be interesting to see if those other unlockable factions can actually get access to the shipyards, navigation tech, and ship types that the playable factions have, or if they're blocked out of advancement due to the tech tree... something like the situation with M2TW with the Byzantines or Scotland in the late game, with respect to gunpowder.

If they are blocked from major sea power, then maybe the modders can try their hand at an alternate history mod, where these other factions can get their ships. Or maybe the game is winnable as, say, Russia if you just ignore sea power.

Ugh, I would have thought that CA realised that no one likes having unplayable factions. Everyone is playable in MTW 2. The worst thing about Rome was having to mod it to use like have the factions.

The Dutch should defently be in if their starting at the War of the Spanish Succesion. Leaving out the dutch would be akin to leaving out the U.S. in WWII.

I don't know if they need a pourtagal faction, much of thier power was gone by this time, as they merly played a secondary role.

I'm interested in how the America's will start out. Will it be Spain, Britain and France slugging it out against each other and the indigenous population or would New Spain, New France and America be a separate entities?

Also the CA site particularly mentioned the revolutions in France and North America. Would these be represented by new emergent forces or would there be a mass rebellion within the French and British ranks?

Lastly how much will the logistics of supply come into play? Feeding and equipping far flung armies in distant lands could make or break a campaign. Foraging can alienate the local population and can be vulnerable to a scorched earth policy whilst resupply from a home base can leave dangerously extended supply lines.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Destroyer of Hope

The Dutch should defently be in if their starting at the War of the Spanish Succesion. Leaving out the dutch would be akin to leaving out the U.S. in WWII.

I don't know if they need a pourtagal faction, much of thier power was gone by this time, as they merly played a secondary role.

---

Could you have a Peninsular War with out Portugal?

Were the Dutch not in a union with Britain in 1700?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Caledonian Rhyfelwyr

Were the Dutch not in a union with Britain in 1700?

---

I think there where various alliances around this this time (Grand Alliance and Triple Alliance) which the Dutch and British were both part of but Britain and the Netherlands where not in union like Scotland, Wales and England are.

you cant have a game wich is partly about the napoleonic wars and not include russia! thats just silly.

emergent factions and some scripted rebellions would be a natural part of a game in this period, the jacobites as has been mentioned by several people here would be nice.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Warluster

You mentioned America twice.

Well all mentioned, Russia, The Ottomans, proably some Algerian Faction, Austria, Saxony,Bavaria(Y'know, German States) The Italian States (Pope, Venice,etc) Scotland and ireland maybe, Portugal, The Netherlands, India, Some Asian States, Some Indian Tribes, Mexico.

Thats all I can thnik of.

---

scotland and ireland were part of the british empire at the time, weren't they?

i'd guesstimate:

1. england
2. france
3. prussia
4. austria-hungary
5. russia
6. ottomans
7. spain
8. portugal
9. dutch
10. sweden

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cornwallis

but as for the rest of your ideas they would be unhistorical and ridiculous based on the infrostructure of the time

---

I guess not. German states were major then. Think War of Spanish Succesion, War of Austrian Succesion. The Italian States were still there, and definetly the Pope!

The rest are fine as well. What part do you think unhisotrical?

Ireland was not part of the British Empire then. I don't think.

Well, they said that Churchill was in, so it follows that so will Eugene. So it follows that the Holy Roman Empire will be too.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Warluster

Ireland was not part of the British Empire then. I don't think.

---

England and Ireland had been linked since the Norman conquest with a series of conquests and rebellions until at the start of the 18th Century Ireland became part of Great Britain.

Wooooo....! Continental army finally. My guess for special units would be tons of militia for the Americans and don't forget Hessian troops for England.

Speaking of special units... I'm wondering how they'll handle Marine-type units for boarding actions in naval combat. Will it be a regular infantry unit, or a special Marine unit that can only be used on ships? I'm guessing a special unit to keep the numbers down. You can't have a regular stack with thousands of soldiers on a single ship, but maybe they'll have a single stack spread out among the fleet or something, if they use regular infantry. Will you recruit Marines separately, or will you get an automatic number related to the size of the ship, the way it's done in the abstract in RTW and M2TW? It will be interesting to see how they handle this.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zenicetus

I'm wondering if that will be true with this one though, unless you just ignore sea power and the western side of the map. The choice of playable factions seems to be based on who had major force projection with navies during the period (with the curious omission of the Dutch??). That makes sense, as a showcase for the new naval combat engine, and it's probably why Russia didn't make the list.

It will be interesting to see if those other unlockable factions can actually get access to the shipyards, navigation tech, and ship types that the playable factions have, or if they're blocked out of advancement due to the tech tree... something like the situation with M2TW with the Byzantines or Scotland in the late game, with respect to gunpowder.

If they are blocked from major sea power, then maybe the modders can try their hand at an alternate history mod, where these other factions can get their ships. Or maybe the game is winnable as, say, Russia if you just ignore sea power.

---

Depends if theres anything like Glorious Achievements mode, in which case playing a small nation with no real navy power would still be winnable on land.

Either way, I can't see CA not giving them ships because even if your not them, you'll need to fight them for it to be anywhere enar sensible imo, even if they are weak ships in comparison, they should be able to defend themselves someway or another.

If not, the modders will undoubtedly help out.

I just hope I don't have to do the win as one of the five factions to unlock other factions thing again.

I am more curious about the Factions that can occur during the game. I mean obviously American and India are british colonies but what if one of the other colonies beats back it's Colonial Overlord.

Personally I look forward to the major euro powers and Russia, still I wonder how they plan to make Napolean as powerful as he was in real life. I mean I can't see the AI being that tactical. Maybe it will be like Mongols, huge stacks of musketmen just keep popping up in france haha.:laugh4:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Polemists

Personally I look forward to the major euro powers and Russia, still I wonder how they plan to make Napolean as powerful as he was in real life. I mean I can't see the AI being that tactical. Maybe it will be like Mongols, huge stacks of musketmen just keep popping up in france haha.:laugh4:

---

Well, none of the TW games have been historical re-enactment games. There are some scripted events like the Mongols, and the discovery of gunpowder. But the design has always been something of a sandbox, where anything can happen depending on interaction between the AI factions and the player. It begins as a "snapshot" that's more or less accurate for the starting point, and then it evolves from there in unexpected directions.... like the Pope going on a rampage sometimes in M2TW, conquering vast territory.

So I don't think we need to see Napoleon pop up in every Empire campaign game. That would be boring.

Quote:

---

Were the Dutch not in a union with Britain in 1700?

---

Yes, but William of Orange dies in a year so it's preaty useless. From their they each go their seperate ways although they are still allied.

I'm surprised america would be in. the time period is supposed to be early 1700's to 1800's, so the game starts well before there was a USA.

A lot of the early game would be colonizing the americas. What if France got the vast majority of what is now the eastern US rather than England? Would there have been an American Revolution?

This would all have to be handled very carefully and circumspectly to avoid laughably unhistorical situations.

Now, I'm happy they choose this era, it has great possibilities both on land AND at sea. I just hope CA gives this title some serious thought.:book:

Mughals are in. :beam:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by IsItStillThere

I'm surprised america would be in. the time period is supposed to be early 1700's to 1800's, so the game starts well before there was a USA.

A lot of the early game would be colonizing the americas. What if France got the vast majority of what is now the eastern US rather than England? Would there have been an American Revolution?

This would all have to be handled very carefully and circumspectly to avoid laughably unhistorical situations.

Now, I'm happy they choose this era, it has great possibilities both on land AND at sea. I just hope CA gives this title some serious thought.:book:

---

Yeah, but TW isn't 100% about historical accuracy, it gives you the tools and the situations but it doesn't always follow history. It's like a puzzle, you get the pieces but its up to you to make the picture.

http://www.shacknews.com/images/imag...c3b294bd3a.jpg
Anyone else noticed the tripple decker US ship? :laugh4: Must be for ballencing issues since the US never had first rate ships, more like Frigates and Corvettes.

Quote:

---

Anyone else noticed the tripple decker US ship? Must be for ballencing issues since the US never had first rate ships, more like Frigates and Corvettes.

---

This is the kind of thing I was referring to earlier. The USA was never a first rate naval power until the 20th century. Nor was it ever an empire (it did have imperialistic tendencies, but again that wasn't until after the era the game covers).

I think it might be better to have the game cover 1650-1770 or thereabouts and eliminate the need to deal with the tricky american revolution thing. It just seems like they are asking for trouble otherwise.

This is supposed to be a total war game, not civilization (where the souix can build a nuke or sent a spaceship to alpha centauri!). That kind of thing has its place in the civ series, no need to bring it into the total war games. As far as I know, all the previous TW games the units available to each faction were available (or at least close to what was available) historically.

Fact is, there is a large market of American gamers out there. They are dying to play as Americans and they do not want to be told that in reality their navy was a lightweight and their army would be no more then a speed bump for just about any other army. Thus reality needs to be altered a fair bit.

Uh-oh, I'm going to get flamed for saying that. :help:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Elmar Bijlsma

Fact is, there is a large market of American gamers out there. They are dying to play as Americans and they do not want to be told that in reality their navy was a lightweight and their army would be no more then a speed bump for just about any other army. Thus reality needs to be altered a fair bit.

Uh-oh, I'm going to get flamed for saying that. :help:

---

:laugh4: Maybe, maybe not. The US army had its moments of brilliance, but overall they suffered from disunity at times and poor leadership/lack of discipline in some occasions. Just look at some of the battles that occured during the War of 1812. Though I believe this topic should go in another part of the forum.:book:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by IsItStillThere

As far as I know, all the previous TW games the units available to each faction were available (or at least close to what was available) historically.

---

/throws bees at you :laugh4:

There will be no flaming. :stare:

I have to agree with Elmar. I also wouldn't be surprised to see the americans have a lot of elite troops when historically they only really had militia troops (at the time). This would have to be done for balancing issues as well. Unless they really improve the AI, I don't see it beating back the British empire with rag-tag bands of militia.

Thats the point isnt it? Every campaign is different. Total War lets you create your own history, not follow it.

It's 1700-1850, so all units from 1700-1850 are available. Then, you can change history and gets units earlier. It's like the Marian reforms in RTW, they could happen earlier based on how hard the player teched. By around 1850, America had some decent units. They'll probably be crappy versions of civil war era units to reflect being a decade earlier.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Elmar Bijlsma

Fact is, there is a large market of American gamers out there. They are dying to play as Americans and they do not want to be told that in reality their navy was a lightweight and their army would be no more then a speed bump for just about any other army. Thus reality needs to be altered a fair bit.

Uh-oh, I'm going to get flamed for saying that. :help:

---

Not from me, and I'm an American gamer. I know my history... that's somewhat rare over here in the general population (not to mention our Fearless Leader), but hopefully a knowledge of history is a little more common with our TW players. :beam:

I'm just curious about how they'll handle this, since I haven't seen any indication that the game has more than one choice of starting period. The game can't handicap an American player with a late start vs. the other factions, so how does that work? If you choose America, do you start as a British colony faction on good terms with the crown (which is another faction), and then you can rebel whenever you want? You won't have as many resources to start with (especially military), but you'll have HUGE potential for economic expansion based on trade and local resources. So maybe that's what they're doing.

The TW series has always mixed history with the idea of a sandbox game where you can move in non-historical directions from the starting conditions. So if the player has enough time before rebelling from Britain, they can probably build up a strong army and navy. In other words, the revolution doesn't necessarily have to occur in 1775. It can be earlier if you're ready, or later if you want to build up more strength (again, just guessing here that they might doing it that way). The relative strength of the actual, historic army and navy in the colonies are not all that relevant with that type of game design.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zenicetus

I'm just curious about how they'll handle this, since I haven't seen any indication that the game has more than one choice of starting period. The game can't handicap an American player with a late start vs. the other factions, so how does that work? If you choose America, do you start as a British colony faction on good terms with the crown (which is another faction), and then you can rebel whenever you want?

---

Quote from CA (many thanks ICEK for the link);

"CA are going to enable players to play as the newly colonised Americas, fighting for their independence from the British. The revolutionary war began in 1775 and continued on until 1783 - the tail end of Empire's period, but that doesn't matter. "

So it does look as if the player can decide the timing of the American revolution.

Yea, Anyway back to the 10 factions, I understand it so that many people thinks that the 10 factions ingame will be the only factions..
Thats wrong, there will be around 50 factions ingame, 10 are playable..
Alto fear for my homeland beeing unplayable, i am shure it is ingame. so that when i am finished with my campain as the Britts, ill mod Denmark - Norway into the game..

Undoubtably, as in the last two games, you will be able to mod factions in easily.

Quote:

---

Fact is, there is a large market of American gamers out there. They are dying to play as Americans and they do not want to be told that in reality their navy was a lightweight and their army would be no more then a speed bump for just about any other army. Thus reality needs to be altered a fair bit.

---

No, you're not getting any flames from me :beam:

I would just remind CA about how well TW shogun did. No american units in there! Ditto with the medieval games.

Wouldn't it be funny if the americans were treated like rebels (which they were!). In other words, they just pop up around 1775 (ala the mongols in M2TW), non-player controllable.

Look out, its the Yankee horde!!!!:help:

The Americans will be like the barbarians from Rome: Total War. They will be good at using cover, hiding, ambushing, and they will have some strong units that might attack without orders. The U.S. didn't have much of a navy until about 1800 and even then it wasn't anything special.

It just occured to me that another special unit that England should have is Torie militia. This unit should only be avaiable when the English are in North America.

Iran under Zand Dynasty ???

Weren't Tories Irish highwaymen who robbed English nationals?
That wouldn't be a bad unit for rebel stacks in Eire.

Quote:

---

It just occured to me that another special unit that England should have is Torie militia.

---

There were definitely loyalist units raised by the Brits in the revolution. I forget if they were called tories or something else, but I know what you mean.

I believe that the estimate as to the general feeling of the colonists when the war broke out was that about a third of them were revolutionaries, a third were loyalists, and a third were indifferent either way.

Given that, its absolutely amazing the revolution succeeded.

USA never had 3 deck, first rate ships? How about Pennsylvania
Started in 1916 but delayed by budget till 1837 & never actually used as a ship of the line. :balloon2:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hoom

USA never had 3 deck, first rate ships? How about Pennsylvania
Started in 1916 but delayed by budget till 1837 & never actually used as a ship of the line. :balloon2:

---

Quite a find there, she's a beauty from that picture.:yes:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by IrishArmenian

Weren't Tories Irish highwaymen who robbed English nationals?
That wouldn't be a bad unit for rebel stacks in Eire.

---

:laugh4:
Sorry, I just read that and laughed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by A Norseman

Yea, Anyway back to the 10 factions, I understand it so that many people thinks that the 10 factions ingame will be the only factions..
Thats wrong, there will be around 50 factions ingame, 10 are playable..
Alto fear for my homeland beeing unplayable, i am shure it is ingame. so that when i am finished with my campain as the Britts, ill mod Denmark - Norway into the game..

---

Yeah, I read that in a another thread but I didn't saw that confirmed in any previews. Where did you read that?? Anyone else heard about it??

Read the Summary Thread. That has all the confirmed infomation.

I really wish they had a Australia. They might, as they are including South East Asia, but...

native americans are bound to be in there as NPCs probably so the French and Indian War can take palce

:laugh4:

Australia hasnt had a decent war. No need for any part of Australia.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pevergreen

:laugh4:

Australia hasnt had a decent war. No need for any part of Australia.

---

lol but it is an important colonization country! Then again this could cause controveersy with the whole slavery thing as well you cant say the brits were very nice to the aboriginals

Not really a fought over part of the world, I'm sorry to say.

In the Empire period, everyone is supposed to be using muskets, lining up in rows , shoot a few volleys then charge? There's calvary too.. but I don't know how they are going to introduce elements of tactics as in Medieval times when there are more types of troops to throw around.

e.g infantry (pikes, spears, swordsman -heavy and light varieties for all), range units (archers, crossbow with AP bolts, gunpoder with AP and moral effect), calvary (light and heavy), range calvary, artillery and so on.

Empire is just muskets, calvary (light), and artillery.

Are there supposed to be castles since walls are pretty much an obselete thing by then? Then no siege?

Forts where determinent for ground control up to WW1 and even sometimes in WW2, so definately there should be forts.

Cavalry could exist in 3 types : cuirassiers (heavy cavalry), hussars (light cavalry), dragoons (missile cavalry).
Infantry in a few types : Line infantry(heavy infantry), Grenadier(shock infantry), Fusiliers(range expert), Chasseur(light infantry)
Artillery would be maybe : Mortars/Howitzers, Obusiers, Canon, horse artillery.
In M2TW you dont have much more types of troops.
Each type will have countless variations like in medieval :)

In this period there where a huge number of unit types. The cav only was at least 3 types- light (hussars like), heavy(kirasirs) and dragoons like. About try magor types of artillery systems (guns, hovitchers and mortars), and a lot of infatry. And this is only in Europe. What about Asia? Napoleon fight a huge HA army in Egypt, and the Mongols where tread for Russia up until the end of 18 century (and the russian army was capable to give to any of the magor European powers army a pretty hard time). The forts not only did't disapire but become huge and expensive, made out of earth and ditches to counter the guns. In fact the trenches started to appear in the late medieval times in Italy. So there is really historically point of a lot of unit types and god sieges.

Okay, based on what I've been reading about the game and warfare at this time it seems the basic Rock, Paper, Scissors matchup goes something like this.

Infantry square beats cavalry, cavalry beats infantry column, infantry column beats infantry line, infantry line beats infantry square.

Obviously it will be more complicated then that but that seems to be the equivelant of the Archers, Cavalry, Pikes trinity from RTW.

The only thing I know about the ship battles is that if you point your ship straight upwind your :furious3: d

Hmm, I'm slightly worried about their wanting to reduce sieges, and increase battles. Basically the opposite of this era (discounting the latter 18th cen.)
I hope that they decide to make sieges vastly more important than battles, which were often indecisive. If one could trap an army in a city then it has no where to go, and is effectively put out of action. It also means that you can be sure of making gains upon you're victory.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pevergreen

:laugh4:

Australia hasnt had a decent war. No need for any part of Australia.

---

Oh, I just remebered Aussie wasn't around (Y'know, Empire style) until 1900. lol.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by woad&fangs

Okay, based on what I've been reading about the game and warfare at this time it seems the basic Rock, Paper, Scissors matchup goes something like this.

Infantry square beats cavalry, cavalry beats infantry column, infantry column beats infantry line, infantry line beats infantry square.

Obviously it will be more complicated then that but that seems to be the equivelant of the Archers, Cavalry, Pikes trinity from RTW.

The only thing I know about the ship battles is that if you point your ship straight upwind your :furious3: d

---

Possibly they will make it exactly like you said, but that would be a pity and make the game ridiculous. Warfare in this time was not so easy. Only three examples: Infantry carrees were beaten not seldomly by cavalry charges (mostly when shattered before with fire). In the Prussian army of Frederic II. in the 18. c. the making of carrees was forbidden, the Prussian infantry had to face cavalry charges in line. Well trained Infantry in line often beat attacking columns.
An rps approach would be a bad method to deal with black powder warfare.

Geala, it turns out you are quite right about well trained lines beating columns.:bow: And as I said in the last post this is just the basic RPS like Cav, Archers, Pikes. There will be countless variations just like in the other total wars. Some basic naval tactics I have found are to aim your broadside at either the enemies front or back. This minimzes the number of cannons the enemy can aim at you and your cannons can fire the length of the enemy ship killing all of the enemy cannon crew in one shot if you are lucky. Also lining your large ships up in a straight line lessons the likely hood of them getting in each others way. This was why large ships were often called ships of the line. I just saw a map of Europe in 1700 and the thing I was most surprised by was the sheer size of Poland/Lithuania.

I don't exactly have much confidence in CA getting the game mechanics right.

My guesses is that:

1. They will not get infantry tactics right, ie. units attacking enemies for close combat will rarely falter meaning it will have to be resolved in CC.

2. Ship combat will be all about running battles of ships all intermingled instead of the way it actually worked ie. ship lines, raking, breaching, isolation, boarding etc.

3. There will still be horrible bugs that breaks the game. f.x. the 2 years per turn turns VS. .5 years per turn character ageing (I once saw only three popes in the game between 1080 and 1520)

This is a short time span and who knows, they could put in monthly turns...which would be good from a weather stand point. You would need something like that with a world wide map...it should not take years to cross the sea! Maybe a world voyage but that is all.

I could be wrong but I expect some of it to be broken up into scenarios with America included.

That said this has the potential to be a really epic game!
In the past Naval War and Land War have been handled by sacrificing one area or the other! Ship to Ship combat requires small unit scale, particularly with prize ships and Marines. Battery and Company scale seems best for something like this...On land as well this could be fun. Regiments of the time may have had only a few hundred men in them so a few companies of a hundred men would work for most of the world outside Europe. As it is a new engine they could also allow more units into the battles to make up the larger battles.

This is a very complex undertaking and CA deserves praise just for taking it on...It could be that they have taken on too much and what ever comes out will disappoint many, but I for one can't wait to see what they will give us.

Besides with this engine it will open the way for RTW2, MTW3 etc as well as loads of others.

I'm pretty sure at the start of the 17th century they were still using pikes too. Don't forget about them.

Castles were mainly in the shape of forts.

Take a look at the Tactics thread. Pikes are there :grin:

Doesn't seem to me that tactics get more basic simply because equipment was relatively standard. If anything the fact that almost every soldier could both shoot and fight in melee and was trained to maneuver in a variety of formations made them much more flexible and opened up whole new possibilities in terms of strategy.

Pikes are probably a unit used early in the campaign, like town militia. I can't imagine they will be very important.