Do you guys think that the arty in NTW is just a little overpowered? Idk, I've only had this for a day and a half.
It's just that it feels like they are more accurate, more deadly, and faster than ever before in ETW. Again, IDK, maybe i just have to get use to this.
Probably faster and more accurate because Napoleon is a slightly later era than Empire. Technology advances...
Hussarknight Seraph Emeritus
posted 12 April 2010 02:24 AM
EDT (US)
2 / 7
Artillery is definitely more powerful, but I don't think it's overpowered. Historically, technology had advanced a lot since Empire and artillery was used on a much larger scale (especially by Napoleon) so it fits well in the timeframe of the game.
I do use artillery a lot more than in Empire. With a few cannons you can decimate enemy cavalry before they reach your lines, because their horses make them big, hard-to-miss targets. This also works a treat on enemy generals which you can often kill in a very early phase of the battle.
Hussarknight
SwampRat M2TW Ladder Leader
posted 12 April 2010 07:35 AM
EDT (US)
3 / 7
My personal question about the artillery is how easily moved it is, how much ammunition there is etc. It's not as obviously problematic as say M2TW where a few chaps could move a trebuchet, including 20 odd large rocks and 10 dead cows, around; but for example horse artillery can shift nicely around the battlefield with as much ammo as it likes and noone has to worry about munition heaps being hit etc. I've not done any research, but does anyone know how much ammunition could be ported around easily, if the rate of fire is reasonable and if there was any issue with constant firing such as overheating (I guess not personally) that'd make things unreasonable?
If all of the minor details I mentioned are ok then they've probably got an ok fit - you can't do without infantry (although with grapeshot being good it's close) but most armies would take cannon.
Howlitzers are nasty though, at least they're not percussion cap ones for the most part - combine that bit from ETW with the current guns and it'd be a nightmare to attack them.
I found it a bit weird that they don't have shrapnel shots, considering that it was invented during the Napoleonic era and they have Ironclads that where first invented in the 1850s. It is probably because it would be overpowered, but still.
"The satisfaction in this game lies in to see 300 heavy armoured horsemen ride chock in an easy snowfall, while fire arrows criss-crosses the evening sky" - Swedish historian and permanent secretary of The Swedish Academy Peter Englund on Medieval 2: Total War (translated by Thrashmad)
"A game that contains both Carl Linnaeus and five different types of artillery projectiles are indisputable exceedingly detailed." - Peter Englund on Empire: Total War (translated by Thrashmad)
Gnarlyhotep Infantry
posted 12 April 2010 12:56 PM
EDT (US)
5 / 7
I've not done any research, but does anyone know how much ammunition could be ported around easily, if the rate of fire is reasonable and if there was any issue with constant firing such as overheating (I guess not personally) that'd make things unreasonable?
I'm not so familiar with napoleanic/european style guns and their caisson and limbers, but American Civil War era guns carried ~30 shots in their ammunition chests that were part of the limber. This is all very dependant upon the size of the piece, smaller guns could carry more shot without overburdening the horse team.
The larger ammo cases, and limbers designed to act as resupply during battle, allowed placement of larger ammo dumps in the rear, theoretically out of range of the enemy guns and again theoretically without impacting the rate of fire. This did not always hold true, as evidenced with Confederate problems with maintaining supply and rate of fire for their artillery during the final day at Gettysburg (the supply dumps were too far back to allow for continuous resupply, and the roadways were constricted and congested all morning).
The only real way to address this in game would be to limit ammunition on the guns, and allowing for resupply from the baggage, which I think is a bit beyond the limitations they've had to impose for the battles.
Although that includes canister rounds and other rounds as well.
Gaius Colinius Seraph Emeritus
posted 15 April 2010 03:58 PM
EDT (US)
7 / 7
I think a future "NTW Realism" mod would definitely look at limiting the amount of ammunition artillery has. It just doesn't make sense that infantry run out after a while but cannons can keep blasting away until the battle ends.
And yes, cannons were good in ETW but they are lethal in NTW. Technology has moved on and accuracy is improved so it's about right. I really like this though because in previous TW games, I tended to ignore artillery so this is forcing me to change my entire gameplay style.
-Love Gaius TWH Seraph, TWH Grand Zinquisitor & Crazy Gaius the Banstick Kid Got news regarding Total War games that should be publicised? Then email m2twnews@heavengames.com. My blog. Nelson was the typical Englishman: hot-headed, impetuous, unreliable, passionate, emotional & boisterous. Wellington was the typical Irishman: cold, reserved, calculating, unsentimental & ruthless" - George Bernard Shaw Vote for McCain...he's not dead just yet! - HP Lovesauce