Idiotic Fools = Muskets @ Otumba

**Sun of Chersonesos** · 11-05-2006, 00:12

HI,

has anyone noticed that at Otumba the musketeers barely manage to kill anything? My crossbowmen killed 180 while those clowns with socks barely managed to kill 80 between them and kept getting entangled in my infantry line while i was engaged with the aztecs. no good. probably more expensive than the crossbowmen as well, what's wrong with them?

Sun

**ChewieTobbacca** · 11-05-2006, 00:18

Musketeers, and gun units in general, are very ineffective at medium to longer ranges. When a unit of peasants charges you, keep fire at will off until they are very close. Then, when the line fires at them, you will not only see a large # of units die at once, but the morale hit from gun weapons will likely make low morale units such as peasants rout immediately.

Musketeers against armored troops, such as knights, are very effective as well.

**Dan.o6** · 11-05-2006, 00:26

^^ agree 100%

**Aracnid** · 11-05-2006, 00:53

On Otumba, placing all my missile units on the hill my muskets always do better than my crossbowmen, I put all my missiles on fire at will so I can concentrate on my melee units and I normally get 150 each for the muskets and 120 for the crossbowmen.

**Roy1991** · 11-05-2006, 01:33

Put your musketeers in skirmish mode, that way they won't keep switching ranks, turning, etc.
Only the front rank fires, but it's still faster then all the reforming between volleys.

**Zatoichi** · 11-05-2006, 02:10

Also, putting them in 'fire at will' mode will help in this battle, but beware the friendly fire.

**Sun of Chersonesos** · 11-05-2006, 13:35

I form up on the side of the hill.

I won Otumba but thing is I had my crossbows and muskets on fire at will. Wether i had them on skirmish or not i dont know but what i do know is they had exactly the same status order(s).

**Furious Mental** · 11-05-2006, 13:41

Well once you have the game you'll probably be able to change their attack value to whatever you like.

**O'ETAIPOS** · 11-05-2006, 14:28

the reality was that first firearms were extremely inacurate. It is said it was difficult to hit a barn from some 100m with it.
The main values of it were:
-blast of fire
-sound of shooting
-cloud of smoke
-pieces of gunpowder contaminating the wound

As you see it was more anti-morale instead anti-personel weapon. Obviously they were also able to penetrate armour well.

**Aracnid** · 11-05-2006, 14:41

The thing about early gunpower compared with arrows was there was no gradient of effect, it was one hit, one kill, against peasants or knights, with archers they were a lot more effective against unarmoured units than against armoured one (I know about the bodkin arrow). So gunpower units should be better than archers (bar mayby top rank English longbowmen) against armoured units, but should be worse than archers against unarmoured units. This may well have been implemented already, because at Pavia I tended to get about the same killed per volley (c.10) against knights as against pikemen (a lot less heavily armoured).
So even though my muskets did slightly better than my crossbowmen at Otumba it might have been due to a better position, because armour penertration is kinda irrelevent when fighting naked guys.