It still doesn't work for gameplay. Everyone who had a clue, especially in pavise vs pavise, just doesn't fire on one unit and lets it run out of ammo.
I hardly imagine not firing on a unit so it runs out of ammo is a tactic used in actually battles
Re: About ammo system
It still doesn't work for gameplay. Everyone who had a clue, especially in pavise vs pavise, just doesn't fire on one unit and lets it run out of ammo.
I hardly imagine not firing on a unit so it runs out of ammo is a tactic used in actually battles
Re: About ammo system
One right point one not complete right point monarch ;)
You are right... its hard to estimate how many arrows your opponent has left. Therefore its nearly senseless to try get him out of ammo. But still mine/our tactic is to kill as many enemy archers as possible. But u need to change your front row of archers to save man and ammo. And later its all about skirmish... kill enemy archers and shoot his troops... like it was in vi... and with their att/deff stats pavs can be used as blockers very well. i dont think shooting has become much easier or trivial with mtw2.
Re: About ammo system
IN a game that is currently running away from archer battles and skirmishing tactics im in favor of any extra strength the archers will get. I mean i dont want super archers running around but i like the way it is but mabey with a little more realism added. Say they cant pick up arrows from comrads whos corpses are at teh other end of the feild. Also horse archers as monarch stated earlier shouldnt be able to pick up ammo at all unless they are left standing still.
"I don't want to achieve immortality through my work; I want to achieve immortality through not dying."
- Woody Allen
Re: About ammo system
That's what I think is bad about the per unit method of ammo. The endgame should not be determined by a few shooters with a huge amount of ammo at the end. When the ammo is per man the value of the shooter drops more rapidly as men are lost. You have to win the skirmish decisively and with conservation of ammo for the remaining shooters to be decisive in the endgame. To win the opening skirmish decisively you need more shooters than the enemy or he has to manage his shooters poorly or you have to make effective melee attacks on the enemy shooters presumably with cavalry.Originally Posted by ELITEofBLIZZARD
BTW, one of the improvements made to the STW engine was to switch from per unit ammo to per man ammo in MTW. In Samurai Wars for MTW/VI, we compensated for that by increasing the ammo of archers from 28 to 36. Guns got a reduction in ammo from 40 to 20 because conservation of ammo was now a factor that could be balanced for the typical length of a battle. This avoids the long boring xbow shootouts typical in MTW. Uncontested shooters are therefore more dangerous, but decimated shooters less dangerous. You have to be more conservative about loosing men in a shooter unit if you want them to remain effective near the end of a battle.
Per unit does that, but I would say it's the wrong solution to that issue. The right solution would be to make the archers more effective.
Per unit ammo does that even more so because the new player isn't going to realize that a shooting unit isn't being reduced in total killing potential as it looses men. With per man ammo, the number of men left in a unit and how long that unit has been firing are the indicators of potential effectiveness and it's going down which is intuitive. Veterans make use of the counter intuitive nature of the per unit ammo model to gain an advantage over new players. I saw it done many times in STW.
Think about the gameplay. Total War battles do not take as much time as real battles. Conservation of ammo was a factor in real battles, and it adds a tactical element to Total War battles if it's present.
_________Designed to match Original STW gameplay.
Beta 8 + Beta 8.1 patch + New Maps + Sound add-on + Castles 2
Re: About ammo system
The devil is in the details, and why not?
Knight of the Round Table
Re: About ammo system
Because the battle may as well be resigned once it's lost, and if you want it lost on the first small mistake or because the opponent doesn't understand the battle mechanics then there is no sense playing it out. There is actually no sense even playing against someone who doesn't understand the battle mechanics, and it's not ethical to continue withholding the information when you realize the opponent doesn't understand a battle engine mechanic.
Last edited by Puzz3D; 01-01-2007 at 19:52.
_________Designed to match Original STW gameplay.
Beta 8 + Beta 8.1 patch + New Maps + Sound add-on + Castles 2
Re: About ammo system
A unit with 40 men will have it's men die at a fast rate till it counts down to 20 or less. So, a good thing would be to reduce the ROF of the enemy's archers by taking the best of what accuracy makes, and reduce all his archer units' numbers to 20, and then start eliminating them one by one.It still doesn't work for gameplay. Everyone who had a clue, especially in pavise vs pavise, just doesn't fire on one unit and lets it run out of ammo.
I hardly imagine not firing on a unit so it runs out of ammo is a tactic used in actually battles
Strangely though, that didn't really work in RTW. Even though on papers it did, but it seems "switching" targets for your archers delays them somewhat!
"Cry, the beloved country, for the unborn child that is the inheritor of our fear. Let him not love the earth too deeply. Let him not laugh too gladly when the water runs through his fingers, nor stand too silent when the setting sun makes red the veld with fire. Let him not be moved when the birds of his land are singing, nor give too much of his heart to a mountain or a valley. For fear will rob him of all if he gives too much."
Cry, the Beloved Country by Alan Paton.
Re: About ammo system
Per unit, because knowing how to rid your enemy of ammo or numbers gave the knowledgeable player advantages over the other.... which is why it pays to study the game.
Also, armies in real life had reserve supplies and runners to fetch.... foot missiles and HA could go back to the rear to load up.... so per unit seems a respectable compromise (and who wouldn't jump off his horse to get more ammo, if you were safe to do so)....
"Crossbowmen, whether Genoese or otherwise, were essentially a static, or at least a defensive, form of infantry. King Philip's decision to send them forward against the English at Crécy, particularly as they were sent without their pavises, strongly suggests that the men in command of the French army during this battle had no real idea of how to use what were at that time regarded as the finest infantry in Christian Europe. The failure of the Genoese crossbowmen and their other infantry at Crécy was relatively brief and easily explained. They were used to forming part of disciplined and structured armies in which they would be closely supported by equally professional cavalry. Not surprisingly, therefore, the Genoese were not keen on advancing without proper preparation, without their pavises and without adequate reserves of ammunition from the supply waggons. Furthermore, they would be attacking at the end of a long day's march with the setting sun directly in their eyes. Their officers complained to the Count of Alençon, to whose battle or division they appear to have been attached, but were ignored."
http://www.ospreypublishing.com/content2.php/cid=199
Last edited by RTKMercurius; 01-01-2007 at 16:31.
Knight of the Round Table
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks