View Poll Results: How powerful should cannons and other artillery be in ETW?

Voters
29. This poll is closed
  • Complete Annhiliation. Fortfied structues go down in a shot or two.

    1 3.45%
  • High Destruction. Massive Bloodshed, completely calvary regiments die in a shot.

    3 10.34%
  • Medium Destruction. Lots of men go down.

    20 68.97%
  • Low Destruction. Handful of men, similiar to MTW2

    5 17.24%
  • Minimal. They should only be deadly when aimed at weak points.

    0 0%
Multiple Choice Poll.
Results 1 to 16 of 16

Thread: How powerful should artillery really be?

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1
    Member Member Polemists's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    In the Lou
    Posts
    1,213

    Default How powerful should artillery really be?

    So I like polls, they are fun, they kill time, and opinons are always interesting.


    All this news on Empire Total War land battles has got me to thinking. Just how powerful shound artillery (Cannons, and other seige weapons using gunpowder) really be?

    If you recall there were actually a variety of cannons in MTW2, they were useful but not over powering. There were exceptions of course, but usually they killed a handful of men.

    So in Empire Total War, how powerful do you want to see cannons be?

    Feel free to post your opinon.
    Last edited by Polemists; 10-22-2008 at 13:34.

  2. #2
    Undercover Lurker Member Mailman653's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Mansfield, TX
    Posts
    1,309

    Default Re: How powerful should artillery really be?

    As long as it brings down an elephant in one shot, don't care too much about the rest. How crazy would that be if an elephant takes two or three cannon balls to bring down?

  3. #3
    Member Member PBI's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    1,176

    Default Re: How powerful should artillery really be?

    In my view artillery should be the most powerful arm of the military in this period.

    The caffeine addicts and ADHD rushers have had their turn in the "ZOMG CAVALRY SPAM, CHARGE!" days of M2TW. I want Empire to be geared more towards the boring, meticulous, obsessive-compulsive players like me. So, picking the optimal place to deploy your guns to best dominate the battlefield should be absolutely crucial, and making hasty attacks directly across the enemy artillery's field of fire should have suitably humbling results.

  4. #4

    Default Re: How powerful should artillery really be?

    As far as I know, melee combat WAS historically speaking still a major part of battle back then. but I agree that artillery should be very effective and powerful. But then again, artillery should easily be ripped apart, if not protected from cavalry outflanking the army

    it has to be powerful, but it can`t be the "I win button"
    and you should have to know, how to use it...

  5. #5
    The Dam Dog Senior Member Sheogorath's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    1,330

    Default Re: How powerful should artillery really be?

    Arty should have its best effect against infantry and cavalry. Field pieces wouldn't be too terribly effective against buildings (a solid roundshot is just going to fly right through most non-military buildings with minimal damage), and while grapeshot might knock the paint off and put some dents in the brickwork it probably wouldn't go through.
    Now, against men, artilleries effects should vary. Roundshot depended on the depth of formation of the enemy. Against a line of men three-deep, the most it could kill would be three men. Although you might be able to wound six with a lucky, one-in-a-million shot.
    This is assuming no collateral damage from the wounded men suffering 'friendly stab' with their bayonet or accidentally firing their musket.
    Grapeshot, though, at the right range, could take out massive numbers of men. Considering it was basically a concentrated musket volley firing 1 inch balls (Or, if you were desperate, whatever fit down the barrel. Nails, bolts, cats, small children...
    Regardless, any infantry foolish enough to get too close to a cannon should suffer for it. Cavalry too.
    There was a reason it was difficult to get people to charge artillery batteries. Nobody wanted to find themselves looking down the barrel of a 12 pounder cannon charged with grapeshot. And the effect of those shots on morale should route all but the best trained units in 1-2 shots.
    Tallyho lads, rape the houses and burn the women! Leave not a single potted plant alive! Full speed ahead and damn the cheesemongers!

  6. #6
    Just another Member rajpoot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Neverland
    Posts
    2,810

    Default Re: How powerful should artillery really be?

    Quote Originally Posted by Sheogorath View Post
    There was a reason it was difficult to get people to charge artillery batteries. Nobody wanted to find themselves looking down the barrel of a 12 pounder cannon charged with grapeshot. And the effect of those shots on morale should route all but the best trained units in 1-2 shots.
    Exactlyl; CA give us that, give us that and all will be well..........I mean it's so so sad when you see horses and men charging straight at your precious guns in Imperial Glory........


    The horizon is nothing save the limit of our sight.

  7. #7
    Member Member ByzanKing's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Wisconsin
    Posts
    45

    Default Re: How powerful should artillery really be?

    I think the artillery should just be a "support" group to the ground troops. I don't want to see cannons ripping apart an entire army with a few shots before any type of melee battle begins. Plus we all know CA is notorious for having the AI build entire stacks of nothing but artillery, so hopefully the artillery is not to overpowering, i.e.-war elephants. IMHO.
    Keep it secret, Keep it safe

  8. #8
    Member Megas Methuselah's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Prairie Grasslands
    Posts
    5,040

    Thumbs up Re: How powerful should artillery really be?

    I agree with Byzanking.

  9. #9
    Member Member Sol Invictus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Kentucky
    Posts
    229

    Default Re: How powerful should artillery really be?

    Quote Originally Posted by Poor Bloody Infantry View Post
    In my view artillery should be the most powerful arm of the military in this period.

    The caffeine addicts and ADHD rushers have had their turn in the "ZOMG CAVALRY SPAM, CHARGE!" days of M2TW. I want Empire to be geared more towards the boring, meticulous, obsessive-compulsive players like me. So, picking the optimal place to deploy your guns to best dominate the battlefield should be absolutely crucial, and making hasty attacks directly across the enemy artillery's field of fire should have suitably humbling results.
    I am with you. The obsessive-compulsives must have our moment in the sun.

    I hope that Artillery will not be very destructive at long range but will be quite effective as the range closes.
    "The fruit of too much liberty is slavery", Cicero

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO