Native American factions overpowered?

**knoddy** · 03-06-2009, 02:20

Originally Posted by ArtillerySmoke

Let me ask you, since it's my FIRST concern: Is the AI tech'ing up as well?

If it is, this is indeed Total War.

short answer yes.

long answer - yes :P if u go to trade tech with them u can get a rough idea of what they are teching up etc :) whether theres any sense behind their tech decisions i dont know :)

**Oleander Ardens** · 03-06-2009, 08:37

Well as a matter of fact the more successfull native tribes ditched their bows very fast for muskets and later rifles. The supply with guns and ammo was a most decisive factor in the various wars between the various native and European coalitions. Yet people seem to continue to believe that bows are inherently superior.

In an open battle there was hardly a contest between Europeans and Natives. Then again open battles were only a small part of the spectrum of warfare. The tactics employed were often innovative for the theater of war but already in use in quite some parts of Europe. What do guys think what Jaegers, Dragoons and Hussars were for?

And "Moving Home" was indeed a major and sensible strategy for Native tribes as they tried to flee a superior enemy.

I understand CA that they wanted to give the Natives due but hopefully they didn't overshoot.

BTW: Units only armed with melee weapons should be outgunned easily. Even the Scottish fielded only a small percentage of their units with their "typical" melee weapons at Culladon.

**Don Esteban** · 03-06-2009, 14:13

Remember, smallpox killed far more Indians than battle. Without that they may have survived far longer....

**Discoman** · 03-06-2009, 15:23

The Native Americans weren't pushovers, they had managed to beat the young U.S. on several occasions (Chickamagua wars). There was also leaders like Tecumseh who wanted to unite the Indian tribes, which ultimately failed.

**andrewt** · 03-06-2009, 19:01

Originally Posted by Oleander Ardens

BTW: Units only armed with melee weapons should be outgunned easily. Even the Scottish fielded only a small percentage of their units with their "typical" melee weapons at Culladon.

I've started wondering about this ever since I started playing Empire. It seems units only get a few shots off before melee starts if one side decides to charge. I was wondering how pure, melee units got obsolete if that was the case since a guy with sword/shield/armor should have an advantage against the earlier infantry. Perhaps range is lower in Empire compared to what it was historically as a balancing mechanism.

**ArtillerySmoke** · 03-06-2009, 19:02

Originally Posted by andrewt

I've started wondering about this ever since I started playing Empire.

How long has it been?

**andrewt** · 03-06-2009, 19:09

Originally Posted by ArtillerySmoke

How long has it been?

Since yesterday! But yeah, it seems you can close pretty fast to melee range.

Also, the natives are only slightly weaker in firepower but a lot weaker in melee, at least in the RTI campaign. I've taken to rushing them in melee.

**Dayve** · 03-06-2009, 20:18

I've also had frustrations against the American natives. I had an entire army, including 3 sets of 12 iber cannons, dragoons, line infantry and all the auxiliaries that go with them, completely wiped out when i was ambushed by some tribe in north-west Canada. I started with 1,200 men, they had double that amount, i killed 300 of them, they killed 1,123 of mine... all that escaped was a unit of native indian musket mercenaries. The irony!

Don't forget, these people are savage in melee combat and will go through any musket infantry you put in front of them. I've watched them charge at units of British line infantry, take a volley, lose 1/6 of their men, clash with the line infantry and wipe them out in under 15 seconds.

Their archers are also a pain... longer range than anything you have, save cannons, and inflict massive casualties. That's where your rangers come in, or even better, cavalry.

**Oleander Ardens** · 03-06-2009, 20:26

Screenshots requested!

What kind of bayonets did you have? With solid ring long boyonet a well trained unit has a long spear with which they should be able to hold more than their own against lightly armored foes.

It is sad that archers seem to do overly well given that Indians tried to get muskets instead as fast as possible.

BTW: This comes from somebody who was quite decent with a heavy bow.

**ArtillerySmoke** · 03-06-2009, 20:46

Originally Posted by Dayve

I've also had frustrations against the American natives. I had an entire army, including 3 sets of 12 iber cannons, dragoons, line infantry and all the auxiliaries that go with them, completely wiped out when i was ambushed by some tribe in north-west Canada. I started with 1,200 men, they had double that amount, i killed 300 of them, they killed 1,123 of mine... all that escaped was a unit of native indian musket mercenaries. The irony!

Don't forget, these people are savage in melee combat and will go through any musket infantry you put in front of them. I've watched them charge at units of British line infantry, take a volley, lose 1/6 of their men, clash with the line infantry and wipe them out in under 15 seconds.

Their archers are also a pain... longer range than anything you have, save cannons, and inflict massive casualties. That's where your rangers come in, or even better, cavalry.

LOL...you got worked by Native Americans.

J/K, but seriously ...it's good that I'm seeing so many reports of people getting beat. M2TW was a cakewalk for everyone day 1.

**Marquis of Roland** · 03-06-2009, 22:48

Originally Posted by Dayve

I've also had frustrations against the American natives. I had an entire army, including 3 sets of 12 iber cannons, dragoons, line infantry and all the auxiliaries that go with them, completely wiped out when i was ambushed by some tribe in north-west Canada. I started with 1,200 men, they had double that amount, i killed 300 of them, they killed 1,123 of mine... all that escaped was a unit of native indian musket mercenaries. The irony!

Don't forget, these people are savage in melee combat and will go through any musket infantry you put in front of them. I've watched them charge at units of British line infantry, take a volley, lose 1/6 of their men, clash with the line infantry and wipe them out in under 15 seconds.

Their archers are also a pain... longer range than anything you have, save cannons, and inflict massive casualties. That's where your rangers come in, or even better, cavalry.

LOL yeah I just fought that battle in RTI myself the other day. They probably killed you when half their army jumped out of the bushes opposite the other half right?

Fortunately for me I had units of line infantry as my 2nd line and so I simply about faced and opened fire point blank. I also still had my cavalry uncommitted so they had a chance to roll up their flank. Still took about 400 or so casualties though

**Quillan** · 03-12-2009, 22:16

Originally Posted by andrewt

I've started wondering about this ever since I started playing Empire. It seems units only get a few shots off before melee starts if one side decides to charge. I was wondering how pure, melee units got obsolete if that was the case since a guy with sword/shield/armor should have an advantage against the earlier infantry. Perhaps range is lower in Empire compared to what it was historically as a balancing mechanism.

It's really a matter of your tech. Until you get Fire By Rank, your unit typically fires one massive volley, then spends the next 20-30 seconds reloading. That gives plenty of time for the target to recover from the volley, charge, and get into melee combat. With Fire By Rank, you should get the front rank to fire, then the second rank, then the third, each a couple of seconds later. This should keep the shock effect rolling.