Quote Originally Posted by Sir Beane View Post
Actually the tradition at this time for many armies was to have a large massed artilley group. While a lot of arty was silly in Med 2 in Empire its pretty much historically accurate. I can imagine how it could affect multiplayer balance however.

Counter-battery fire is the way to go usually.
I HATE counter-battery fire, I just can't stand watching, hoping your artillery kills more than they do.
See yeah, a lot of arty was silly in Medieval 2. I carry on some of that mentality on to Empire, but I still definitely know how to tactically use a 18th century army. :P

Quote Originally Posted by Eusebius86 View Post
Napoleon hated counter-battery fire... unless the enemy batteries were killing more of his troops then his batteries were of the enemy, he never engaged in the practice.

Gameplay wise, I usually send a couple cavalry out to deal with undefended artillery. AI does that all the time.
Well so do I!
When we're talking online, a human opponent never leaves his battery open. In fact, on the big mountains, they put them back up as far as the deployment phase let's 'em.

Quote Originally Posted by hooahguy View Post
thats why i always keep some cavalry far out in the flanks, preferably hidden. when the enemy is all good and locked up, charge at the batteries!
people tend to leave them unprotected.
Nope... I even see someone encase his battery using stakes from light infantry.

I gotta admit this is pretty darn clever, but I really miss the good 'ol "charge home" part of the old time periods as much as I love the new change in tactics in gunpowder warfare.