Are bayonet techs critical in early game?

[Slaists]

If youre one of the factions that starts out in the americas it's essential to get at least the first level of bayonet ASAP, otherwise you're going to get slaughtered by the native melee troops you meet early on.

Not really, the British (for example) line infantry's melee stats are superior to any native melee stats post 1.02 even without bayonets. Native Americans have good attack but lack any defense post 1.02...

I use early infantry as musketmen -at least untill I get ring bayonettes. I find it more effective to use Pike units for defensive melee (or agressive positioning to provoke an enemy charge) with wings of musket infantry (line or militia) to flank fire in support of the pikemen.

If you double rank your muskets at 2 rank depth (one unit in front of the other), you can manually advance/retreat the units to ensure more continuous and concetrated fire for greater effect.

Tried to explain it here.

https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?t=116913

I've noticed that too: double/single ranked line men (and even militia) are deadly in the early game against the AI; so deadly that I even feel it's an exploit since the AI never uses such thin formation. Think of it this way: 120 men 3 rows deep would fire 40 bullets in a salvo; the same 120 men stretched out to the maximum (the game would not allow 120 men in single file so there is about 1/3 unit 'second line' leftover if a unit is stretched out to the max) fire 80 or so bullets in a salvo. 80 bullets hitting a 120 men AI unit cause almost an instantaneous rout. If not on that salvo, then on the next...

[Monsieur Alphonse]

Does the attack value increase when a unit gets bayonet's?. In M2TW you could get extra 6 attack points if you retrained a unit at a swordsmith guild. I wonder what the effect of bayonet's and the tech bayonet drill is on the mêlée capability.

[Slaists]

Does the attack value increase when a unit gets bayonet's?. In M2TW you could get extra 6 attack points if you retrained a unit at a swordsmith guild. I wonder what the effect of bayonet's and the tech bayonet drill is on the mêlée capability.

You sure it was +6 attack bonus from a swordsmith guild in MTW2? Sure you were not playing a mod? I always thought it was +1 attack in vanilla.

Attack value is supposed to go up +2 once bayonets are fixed. Further bayonet techs increase charge value.

+2 attack is easily achieved through the troops gaining experience (and you gain defense too). It is possible that bayonets bring extra + to attack against cavalry, but that has not been spelled out anywhere by CA. To me it seems, the big counter-cavalry bonus is embedded in the square formation no in bayonets themselves.

[Monsieur Alphonse]

You sure it was +6 attack bonus from a swordsmith guild in MTW2? Sure you were not playing a mod? I always thought it was +1 attack in vanilla.

It showed +1 extra attack but in reallity it was +6.

[Slaists]

It showed +1 extra attack but in reallity it was +6.

Interesting, sounds quite unbalancing to me. But that's off topic here.

[al Roumi]

I've noticed that too: double/single ranked line men (and even militia) are deadly in the early game against the AI; so deadly that I even feel it's an exploit since the AI never uses such thin formation. Think of it this way: 120 men 3 rows deep would fire 40 bullets in a salvo; the same 120 men stretched out to the maximum (the game would not allow 120 men in single file so there is about 1/3 unit 'second line' leftover if a unit is stretched out to the max) fire 80 or so bullets in a salvo. 80 bullets hitting a 120 men AI unit cause almost an instantaneous rout. If not on that salvo, then on the next...

I've not noticed it routing units in one salvo, but I've only been using 2man depth.

I suppose it is an exploit, but it's not really much more than a maneuvre -sheltering reloading troops behind an advancing firing line. Given the ammount of micro involved in rank rotation(if you have more than 2 groups firing at once) I think it's fair enough. Plus it's like actually calling the fire drill yourself

[Warhammer3025]

Heh that's just like in MTW1 where folks were using the exploitive "stretch a swordsman or feudal men at arms unit out to a single line" so that when they clash with an enemy unit they can encircle it thereby having more men able to fight rather than standing in ranks waiting for their turn to fight. Course in real life that doesnt work cuz a single line of men can be pierced quite easily by a group of men in ranks and countercharging. Talk about old times...

[LuxIrae]

Think the point of cavalry really is just to persuade enemey formations to adopt square so that your troops gain a firepower advantage when engaging in line. Other than hunting down routing units, cavalry is too expensive to replenish and takes too many casualties unless handled really carefully....? Think that was historically accurate for this era?

[Didz]

Think that was historically accurate for this era?

Well the game is actually set in a period of transition. The game starts at the tail end of the with Pike and Musket era, where cavalry were kept off the infantry by stand-of-pike and schiltron. That led to the change in cavalry tactic's and the greater reliance on dragoon's and Reiters. Cavalry tended to focus purley on the enemy cavalry and only after having driven them off did they turn their attention to the infantry. The main objective being to inhibit their movement and force them into 'Stands' so that their own infantry had the freedom to defeat them in detail. Basically, read any Engish Civil War battle report to get the gist of the process. Marston Moor is a classic example.

The development of the bayonet and improvements in musketry saw the fading out of the pike as it was no longer necessary, and for a while infantry gained the upper hand. Being able to drive off cavalry without having to sacrifice mobility, just using firepower alone. e.g. Battle of Minden for example.

Then the cavalry enhanced their own tactic's and dropped the obssession with being a mounted infantry. They developed new organisations and tactic's that enabled them to expliot the extended formations used by the infantry to maximise their firepower. The wheel essential turned full circle and by the end of the period covered by the game we were back to square one. With infantry having to huddle into squares or dense columns to prevent cavalry explioting their formations.

But in between, and for the bulk of the period covered by the game, there is a transition of tactics. By rights, the cavalry in the game ought to start off operating in quite slow mounted columns using horse pistols to deal with pike stands, and gradually evolve the flexible squadron tactic's necessary for delivering shock action to the infantry's flanks and intervals. At the same time the infantry ought to be evolving better firepower (which they do to an extent) and eventually the square formation needed to fend off they new cavalry tactic's.

In between there should be a period of mismatching where some armies will find themselves drilled in the wrong tactic's to deal with those of their opponents. e.g. Pikes faced by shock cavalry, Rieters opposed by platoon volleys etc. What shouldn't be happening of course is the headlong charge into formed infantry, which only actually happened at Universal Studio's remakes.