Infantry & cavalry weapon variety and technology tree

[Matt_Lane]

What variety of infantry & cavalry weapons are we likely to see in ETW and what technological development will there be during the time period.

One of the great things for me about M2TW is the large variety of troops available which stems from the great variety of weapons employed. We have axes, swords, spears, pikes, javelin, long bows, cross bows, the list goes on. I have often acquired a new unit just because they looked cool or their weapon seemed different (apparently acknowledging you have a problem is the first step in overcoming it )

Now from the artwork I've seen ETW is likely to have a colorful mix of troops, grenadiers, fusiliers, rifleman etc but their variety seems limited to their uniforms whilst they all employ similar arms, namely pike, musket, rifle, pistol, saber, lance and grenades. Am I over simplifying things here or is this all that was available?

Secondly I cant see how the unit types are going to develop its weaponry technologically. M2TW saw pikes and firearms introduced and armor develop as the time period evolves where as ETW looks as if it will only loose pikes early on and maybe have rifles become more available later. Is this the case because if so I feel I'll spend the entire game fielding armies of similar infantry and cavalry with unit variations limited to moral and experience.

[Evil_Maniac From Mars]

Artillery! Artillery! Oh, the many types of lovely cannon...

[Sheogorath]

Artillery! Artillery! Oh, the many types of lovely cannon...

Howitzers, guns and unicorns, oh my!

[Rhyfelwyr]

Well there's 50 factions and many of them are not so developed, so we will probably see plenty of spears, axes, clubs, shields, elephants, camels, and plenty of interesting units in general. Also I think there's some kind of AOR system IIRC, so there should be variety even in the European armies.

Yeah plus 500+ different siege weapons.

(250 of which can also be mounted on elephants. I want to see a Grand Tsar Cannon on an elephant!)

[Sheogorath]

Nuclear powered tsar-cannon firing elephants on steroids! With lazers on their foreheads!
THIS I DEMAND!

[Herkus]

Hopefully Empire will support 3 different weapons in one unit, otherwise it will be hard to depict European grenadiers (musket, bayonet, grenade) or cavalry with lance, sword, bow for Eastern cultures like India, Persia etc.

[Mailman653]

Well there's 50 factions and many of them are not so developed, so we will probably see plenty of spears, axes, clubs, shields, elephants, camels, and plenty of interesting units in general. Also I think there's some kind of AOR system IIRC, so there should be variety even in the European armies.

Still cant get away from those elephants can we?

[Furious Mental]

At that stage Eastern cavalry also started using firearms as well as bows. Really even if CA cbf putting in that many weapons they should at least give modders the discretion to add as many as they want and define when they are to be used. E.g. use a sword in melee by default but use an axe if the enemy wears armour.

[Brenus]

The problem won’t be the weapons used by cavalry or infantry, but how it will be used, the tactical approach… A Dragoon had a different function than a Hussar or a Cuirassier… Lancers and Chevau (x?)-légers had the same function, more or less, but the resolution of the tactic employed in wars will be the key problem. Will the Cuirassiers be able to sabotage the guns in putting a nail in it? What they failed to do in Waterloo…

Same with infantry… Lignards and Voltigeurs had different use… Will it be possible to take the enemy flag? Will it be possible to include a regiment in the Imperial, Royal, Consulaire Guards (Young and Old Guards for Napoleon)?
What about new kind of units as Engineers (Génie – Pontonniers –Bérézinna)?
If the battle or siege can be prolonged more than one day… And the possibility to use guerrilla tactic without shamed to loose a battle, that would be great….

[LadyAnn]

I dislike technology tree.

Annie

[Abokasee]

I dislike technology tree.

Annie

Its going to be a bit unbalanced if there was no tech tree at all, then it would simply be a case of "who can produce the best the fastest" basically a arms race were it would be certain that the largest and richest factions would easily win

Then again, its like that anyway, but still, just dont make the tech tree complicated as, the MTW2 tech tree (what my Dismounted Druzhinas have to be trained at the top level infantry citidel barracks, but I can get normal Cavalry Druzhinas straight away?)

[marrow]

I dislike technology tree.

Annie

Totally agree. As mentioned by the OP, there's a huge variety of units in M2TW but I doubt it adds to gameplay. I still think that STW's simplistic approach to units and army composition made it by far the most consistent and challenging on tactical level of all TW games to date.

I don't like uber units, or units that quickly become redundant once you can produce newer and better ones.

I am really hoping ETW will reintroduce original rock + paper + scissors balance on the battlefield and make battles more about tactics and skill and thus give AI a helping hand too.

Thanks!

[Furious Mental]

That made sense in STW, which covered a period of 150 years of warfare in one country. But it would have been quite ridiculous if applied to any TW game made since.

[TosaInu]

Totally agree. As mentioned by the OP, there's a huge variety of units in M2TW but I doubt it adds to gameplay. I still think that STW's simplistic approach to units and army composition made it by far the most consistent and challenging on tactical level of all TW games to date.

I don't like uber units, or units that quickly become redundant once you can produce newer and better ones.

Hello,

You mean a steep techtree that voids what you already have, as STW did have a techtree too.

Yes, yet another reason to make eras like MTW had and more turns per year.

[marrow]

Indeed correct, Tosa.

@ FuriousMental - my opinion is that Europe-wide map, national factions each fielding dozens of units, 2 years per turn and many other aspects of MT2W somehow don't gel with original TW concept. To me it's just a bit much, but then again I'm weird. Don't get me wrong, I do think more variety usually makes for a better game, but I still fight battles with the same units in M2TW once I finally get to make them and I hardly ever bother with most of the units (or buildings) that developers spent so much time designing. The game just gets boring and I feel that adding extra hundred units cannot change that, moreover, is a waste of a few weeks' wrok that could have gone towards improving AI. Again - I'm quite weird, so maybe it's just me.

[rajpoot]

Yeah plus 500+ different siege weapons.

(250 of which can also be mounted on elephants. I want to see a Grand Tsar Cannon on an elephant!)

You don't say 500+ seige weapons???!!! When did this come out??
But ooooooh man!! If its for real, wow!!! Can hardly wait!!

[TosaInu]

You don't say 500+ seige weapons???!!! When did this come out??
But ooooooh man!! If its for real, wow!!! Can hardly wait!!

Hello asj_india,

That was a joke I think. 250 of them mounted on elephants and the bit about the Czar Cannon on an elephant should make that clear.

[Sheogorath]

Hello asj_india,

That was a joke I think. 250 of them mounted on elephants and the bit about the Czar Cannon on an elephant should make that clear.

Yeah, we all know theyre REALLY going to mount their siege weapons on the flammable pigs and Illuminati assassins.

[lars573]

What variety of infantry & cavalry weapons are we likely to see in ETW and what technological development will there be during the time period.

One of the great things for me about M2TW is the large variety of troops available which stems from the great variety of weapons employed. We have axes, swords, spears, pikes, javelin, long bows, cross bows, the list goes on. I have often acquired a new unit just because they looked cool or their weapon seemed different (apparently acknowledging you have a problem is the first step in overcoming it )

Now from the artwork I've seen ETW is likely to have a colorful mix of troops, grenadiers, fusiliers, rifleman etc but their variety seems limited to their uniforms whilst they all employ similar arms, namely pike, musket, rifle, pistol, saber, lance and grenades. Am I over simplifying things here or is this all that was available?

Secondly I cant see how the unit types are going to develop its weaponry technologically. M2TW saw pikes and firearms introduced and armor develop as the time period evolves where as ETW looks as if it will only loose pikes early on and maybe have rifles become more available later. Is this the case because if so I feel I'll spend the entire game fielding armies of similar infantry and cavalry with unit variations limited to moral and experience.

Your not oversimplifying the arms they used. ETW is set between the major developments of personal arms. That is the introduction of the bayonette in the 1680's and the development of the precussion cap musket, and revolver pistol in the 1830's. The technologies of war that did develop in the 18th century were in organization and tactics rather than personal equiment. For example military formations developed in the period ETW covers are still in use today. They being, the corps, the division, the brigade, and the battalion. Rifles are going to be around from the start. IIRC the first rifled muskets were made in the 17th century.

Now on the diversity of arms used is another matter. Once again were are going to have western europe doing things a certain way (fighting with the weapons you listed) and when you go outside that area things get more intersting. In Russia for example they're militia units could come armed with anything from pikes and muskets to farm implements, axes, or clubs. This comes from my knowledge of the Russia's Napoleonic era Opliniechne (SP) whom were only issued a uniform (consisting of a brown or grey overcoat and a cap with the imperial crest on it) and had to provide their own weapon. In north africa and the middle east things aren't going to have changed much from the late era units of M2TW. Bows were used right along side muskets in ETW era. In fact you could use the exact same M2TW models for Sipahi lancers, Jannisary hvy inf and musketeers, Ottoman infantry, Azabs, and Sipahi HA for the ETW Ottoman faction and not be inaccurate. All that would change would be their effectiveness. As Jannisary equiment and tactics hadn't changed in 200 years by that point. In India you'd also see melee units and bow units.

[Matt_Lane]

Your not oversimplifying the arms they used. ETW is set between the major developments of personal arms. That is the introduction of the bayonette in the 1680's and the development of the precussion cap musket, and revolver pistol in the 1830's. The technologies of war that did develop in the 18th century were in organization and tactics rather than personal equiment. For example military formations developed in the period ETW covers are still in use today. They being, the corps, the division, the brigade, and the battalion. Rifles are going to be around from the start. IIRC the first rifled muskets were made in the 17th century.

Now on the diversity of arms used is another matter. Once again were are going to have western europe doing things a certain way (fighting with the weapons you listed) and when you go outside that area things get more intersting. In Russia for example they're militia units could come armed with anything from pikes and muskets to farm implements, axes, or clubs. This comes from my knowledge of the Russia's Napoleonic era Opliniechne (SP) whom were only issued a uniform (consisting of a brown or grey overcoat and a cap with the imperial crest on it) and had to provide their own weapon. In north africa and the middle east things aren't going to have changed much from the late era units of M2TW. Bows were used right along side muskets in ETW era. In fact you could use the exact same M2TW models for Sipahi lancers, Jannisary hvy inf and musketeers, Ottoman infantry, Azabs, and Sipahi HA for the ETW Ottoman faction and not be inaccurate. All that would change would be their effectiveness. As Jannisary equiment and tactics hadn't changed in 200 years by that point. In India you'd also see melee units and bow units.

I'm encouraged that the factions outside of Western Europe are likely to offer us some variety of units . I just hope that we utilize them tactically so that they don't just become cannon fodder for units armed with muskets.

I agree that historically development during the period was less about infantry arms and more about tactics and organisation but I'm not sure that CA will be able to represent these changes in the game. I've read that the divisions of armies was brought about by their increase in size and need for flexibility and mobility. Playing TW however allows us an omnipotent control of our generals so we divide our units as and when needed. Similarly I cant see the game dictating an evolution of tactics to the player other than the way it uses its own AI. If this is the case will the game be able to offer us a progressive development in a similar way M2TW.

I must say that for a gismo junkie such as myself I'm hoping that an armory of new fangled artillery and harbors filled with pretty sailing boats with placate my need for shiny new things.

[magnum]

I think they very much need to include new variables, specifically along the lines of training. During the time period this game covers the factions started to become similar in general tactics and unit types. While various factions did keep unique units or army compositions (thinking Napoleans love of cannon heavy armies), the real differences were in their ability to perform certain types of maneuvers in an orderly fashion. Whether it be reloading their rifles, accuracy of their shots, ability to maintain formation while advancing, etc, those are some of the things that truely differentaited the various armies.

[LadyAnn]

That made sense in STW, which covered a period of 150 years of warfare in one country. But it would have been quite ridiculous if applied to any TW game made since.

The timespan of Empire is less than 150 years, according to announcement to date.

Annie

[lars573]

I'm encouraged that the factions outside of Western Europe are likely to offer us some variety of units . I just hope that we utilize them tactically so that they don't just become cannon fodder for units armed with muskets.

Well since arour had been dropped before ETW starts bows are going to be much more effective than in M2TW.

I agree that historically development during the period was less about infantry arms and more about tactics and organisation but I'm not sure that CA will be able to represent these changes in the game. I've read that the divisions of armies was brought about by their increase in size and need for flexibility and mobility. Playing TW however allows us an omnipotent control of our generals so we divide our units as and when needed. Similarly I cant see the game dictating an evolution of tactics to the player other than the way it uses its own AI. If this is the case will the game be able to offer us a progressive development in a similar way M2TW.

Well CA calims that they are changing the way fighting in done to include the increased importance of things like unit cohesion and training.

I must say that for a gismo junkie such as myself I'm hoping that an armory of new fangled artillery and harbors filled with pretty sailing boats with placate my need for shiny new things.

Two words, Congreve rockets. Some more words, which were based on Indian (spefically Mysore) designs.