Mortars and rockets?

**Sheogorath** · 03-12-2009, 18:52

Mortars would (technically) be siege equipment, intended to take on troops behind walls and suchlike. They're modestly effective in that role, I find. Certainly no worse than cannons at taking out troops standing on walls.

On the subject of sieges, I find it amusing that forts are, if anything, tougher than castles were, in regards to artillery fire, than in MTW2?

Well, maybe that's just because your basic cannons tend to miss a lot more.

**IlDuce** · 03-12-2009, 18:56

Originally Posted by Sheogorath

Mortars would (technically) be siege equipment, intended to take on troops behind walls and suchlike. They're modestly effective in that role, I find. Certainly no worse than cannons at taking out troops standing on walls.

On the subject of sieges, I find it amusing that forts are, if anything, tougher than castles were, in regards to artillery fire, than in MTW2?

Well, maybe that's just because your basic cannons tend to miss a lot more.

If I'm taking on a fort I tend to use my 64 pounders. They have almost as good a range and by the tiem the mortars have taken out a few men on the wall the cannon will have demolished it.

**Khorak** · 03-12-2009, 19:57

Originally Posted by Sheogorath

On the subject of sieges, I find it amusing that forts are, if anything, tougher than castles were, in regards to artillery fire, than in MTW2?
:

That's because they were. Cannons swiftly rendered medieval fortifications obsolete as they became more sophisticated and available, by the period in time Empire covers, fortifications were specifically built to reduce the effectiveness of the cannons that would be used against them.

Even seemingly minor things such as making a tower round instead of square could be the difference between it being a viable fortification or an easily levelled deathtrap for cannons.

**Sir Beane** · 03-12-2009, 20:51

Originally Posted by Khorak

That's because they were. Cannons swiftly rendered medieval fortifications obsolete as they became more sophisticated and available, by the period in time Empire covers, fortifications were specifically built to reduce the effectiveness of the cannons that would be used against them.

Even seemingly minor things such as making a tower round instead of square could be the difference between it being a viable fortification or an easily levelled deathtrap for cannons.

Many fortifications designed specifically to counter cannon used rings of earthworks, ditches, hills etc. You don't see any of that in Empire sadly. Even Star forts are nowhere near as impressive as they are in real life.

**knoddy** · 03-12-2009, 22:14

barely kill anyone O.o

im taking on spain atm in spain, and i just won 4 battles at the end of turn by defending and putting my motars at the back of the map, having them constantly killing the whole battle, all 5 units of motars in that army are up to like 3 xp now and are getting hundreds of kills per battle. particularly good for wiping out cavalry and generals :D sure they miss alot but if they land and explode in the middle of a unit they can kill 10-20 guys

**Sir Beane** · 03-12-2009, 23:38

Mortars with percussive shells are absolubetly deadly. They seem to kill more people than cannon fire. They also have gigantic range and can fire over obstacles

.

Rockets aren't as great really.

**knoddy** · 03-12-2009, 23:40

ye havnt got rockets yet, but mortars are ownage, the trick is, finding somewhere u can fight a defensive battle and setting ur motars well back from your lines, that way if the ai goes for a firefight, u can keep smashing them with motars while they are fighting ur infantry :)

canister shot cannons on flanks are fun too :P

**Hooahguy** · 03-13-2009, 00:33

mortars are amazing for siege battles. often both sides will get clogged in a tight area, in CQC and i wil just set my mortar to "anti-infantry" and fire away. takes more of their men than mine.