The Thirty Years War

[battosai]

Yeah, and even a tiny, hungry Innsbruck is included here. :P

[Von Bert]

Infantry units ?
I would try point out the difference among musketeers and pikeman.. the "couple of the 1600 century"..

So..maybe musketeers ll then have less defense (?).. and a variable firepower (less "fire) ..but able to give some lucky shoot..
pikeman can be more "traditional"units.. so.. just example :

musketeer : 5a,3d 2h 1f
pikeman: 4a,4d 2h,2f
tercios: 5a,3d 3h,2f

but maybe i didnt get well what u mean about "distinguish infantry types in two categores"

btw.. (danke 4 past present.. about your map/my town ! )

[curtsibling]

The good thing about those infantry types is that the AI
will build them both, due to the A/D settings are all level.

[Von Bert]

@curtsibling
just to know.. the A/D level rules for AI units , the musketeer/knight position rule,are still to be considered also in TOT ?

[curtsibling]

Yep - The bug with those slots still exists in ToT.

[battosai]

Sups,

I've pointed out how this fortress vs artillery thing works at it best. As I mentioned, I has three choices:

1. Forts as the only non-AA units: I'ts a bad option because a fortress really needs more than 200% of a AA-unit's defense to defend first. Why ? I guess the manual teaches us facts if it says that the AA-flag means 300% vs plains and 500 % vs missiles.

2. "Pearl Harbour": Over this term I totally forgot that land units can "capture" ships in ports, too, so it's an even more useless option. (Btw I didn't know that this also works with ships on open land squares )

3. Fighter vs Helicopter -> Shot vs Fort: That works fantastic. If the fort is handled as a helicopter it really has 50% less defense than other units against fighters (in contrast to AA flag), plus it's firepower is reduced to 1, even it's nominal at 10. So, the cannon shots are more than remarkable higher effective against forts than infantry, not to mention the cavalry. Even if defense is setted to the absolute maximum (127), so that the fort always defends first, it's strengh is dramatically shrinked due to the firepower loss.

Now I'm all in all contented with my battle system, and I'm very keen on converting it to other war scearios but first I must finish this one.

@Van Bert: You're suggestion is not bad but with already two parameters the unit place for infantry is almost filled to the maximum, while I want to hold some space to some special units for the barbarians. From the point of regiment structures, musketeers and pikemen were put together to one "unit" by all warfaring states, be it tercios or lines. The only exception might be theAustrians, who still had a very high weight on pikemen (therefore I want to keep that seperate unit for regiments of maybe more than 80% pikemen). By the way, sgainst some "prejudices" or whatever I have to mention that pikemen had a more offensive character than musketeers by that time. I find it interesting to keep the both infantry types seperated but change their roles. Anyways, three determinants are really much and would raise the number of infantry types to a confused salad. But if you want I could let one of the other determinants fall - or reduce in variety at least.

Another point could be to have pikemen as reliable - traditional - allrounders , as you say, Van Bert, and put the musketeers along a more differed progress line. Sadly, the flintflock was not developped until the last third of the 17th century, so that technical innovations (who were proceeding during the war) are not that sepectacular here, while the tactical and structural are.

[Von Bert]

_Battosai
UNITS?? hat off !
You always leave me without words to reply ! :O )

FORT ? dunno if u can need.. but WERD100 is exploring the use of a "Sea-carrier-parachute-unit"..as land-fortress.
When u parachute it.. it ll not be able to move anymore.. but it can hold planes(shell) and can be attaccked "as ship in port".
( and AI do attack it.. i found out in some test)
Sure.. i dont think AI would build it..
other problem with it.. is that ALL cities that can build it.. must be "seaside-cities".. but u can edit this with the civcity tool ..

[battosai]

Well, the AI doesn't matter for now. I concept only for PBEM-Playing (for Poly: Yes, a full turn can be done in a week or less *hide*).


The See-carrier.parachute-unit... Keep in mind, Werd, regarding the stats, that any land or air unit takes advantage of the "Pearl harbour" anomaly when attacking a ship on a land square (is this the right thread ). **** youz told it in your, post Bert. I'm always drunken for a short time after one beer when I come from work. And, hell, I was dreaming of parachuting fortresses but still I find it ugly that they can be moved over Ocean (and here it means over Rivers :\ ).

Any other suggestions about this infantry salad thing? See you later, chaps !

[Exile]

This fighter/helicopter idea; does it work?

It would be a way to create real siege units that are both necessary to reduce fortifications and mostly useless in the field.

Speaking of which, I haven't seen John Ellis lately. Wasn't he working on a Spanish Succession war scen?

[techumseh]

Originally posted by Exile

Speaking of which, I haven't seen John Ellis lately. Wasn't he working on a Spanish Succession war scen?

Years ago.

[battosai]

Originally posted by Exile
This fighter/helicopter idea; does it work?

It would be a way to create real siege units that are both necessary to reduce fortifications and mostly useless in the field.

My test succeeded after I setted the role of the siege unit on air dominance (just air domain or fighter flag doen'st work), and the flight intervall of the fort has to be 0 of course. I haven't illuminated the full potential of this idea yet. Maybe it also works with land/ sea siege units?

[battosai]

For Dario or other unit stat testers: here's my rules.txt. Before I uploaded the BE IV rules, cos I posted a PBEM turn at the same time.

I'm still waging if the weight in the tech tree (and therefore in the infantry) should lie on military technics, tactics or (recruiting) structures.

btw: the stats of the dragoons and all german spelled units are obsolete!

Edit2: For a fighter-chopper test you should use a 48-pounder against a modern fortress (the old fortres is still setted as a ship) and compare the result with any infantry unit (mercenarytercio, regular line that got higher stats.

[battosai]

@Cyrion: How does this look to you? I did everything you mentioned, excepted the "lake" south of Basel, whcih is actually the ship-capable Aare River. If you have more suggestions, how to make the pass roads look more logical, tell me.

Edit: whoops, I isolated Geneve from the road net.

[battosai]

The Infantry Tech Tree

Most scientific discoveries that can be made are placed in the infantry section. I've chosen a compromise between all three factors, though I don't know yet, which unit can be developped by what.

[Cyrion]

Originally posted by battosai
@Cyrion: How does this look to you? I did everything you mentioned, excepted the "lake" south of Basel, whcih is actually the ship-capable Aare River. If you have more suggestions, how to make the pass roads look more logical, tell me.

Edit: whoops, I isolated Geneve from the road net.

The pass roads look good, thanks!

"ship-capable Aare River": (Aar, not Aare, BTW): well, if you mean small rowboats, ok, but otherwise I wouldn't qualify the Aar as "ship capable" (and yes, I lived in that area for a few years too, 2 km from the river ), so I would still remove it...