![]() Depends too much on your own army composition, your opponents the terrain etc. In general, the Early P&S units are partially armoured which can help vs archaic weapons ( bows ) and possibly some melee situationsįrom a cost wise "value" of 1-2 it hard to say what is better, 1 Early P&S or 2 strelets. Strelty as medium foot are pretty vulnerable even to weak cavalry, but will suffer less mal effect in rough terrainīig P&S units = more vulnerable to artillery *as heavy or mixed troops they get a cohesion + modifier when needing to test *" " can ignore enemy ZOC's and can attack cavalry* *as they are keils they are immune to flank attacks *kiels getting POA bonus in impact and melee *streltzy (until they suffer losses) have maybe 2.5 x the firepower There is a cap for infantry units in how much SIZE of the unit can fight, and that is 600 size worth(for shooting and melee, its different for cavalry and lights too), so you are correct in that shooting 40% arquebusers of the 600 cap (for the early P&S) is less than 100% arquebusers of 600 cap ( for the streltzy) However, the Streletz will lose combat power the very ist casualty they take, while theoretically the P&S unit can lose 1200 size worth of men before being effected.īasically to some abstract degree, the game assumes greater "size" is deeper ranks, vs greater frontage. ![]() (You can find a units size in the UNIT xls file spreadsheet)Ī streltsy unit is likely 600 size while an early pike/shot unit is 1600 The game factors combat power by UNIT SIZE, not # of men per se. Ie, I'd much rather have four crossbowmen, or four commanded shot, or four almost anything else than a single big pike-and-shot block.Īgain, while massing infantry should create some inefficiencies - you're a bigger target, and troops get in each other's way - I think these are a big exaggerated in the game, and numbers should matter more. I've played later games too and generally speaking, while the big 1000-2000 man units are powerful compared to other units, they're very weak compared to their manpower equivalent in other units. In the real world, if you had 2,000 troops, it shouldn't cost that much more to field pikemen and musketeers than it does to field bardiche-and-musket-men. But from a realism perspective, shouldn't numbers count for more? Pike and shot, not streltsy, became the dominant way to deploy infantry for about 100 years. P&S units are twice as expensive as streltsy in points, not four times as expensive, and so this is not imbalanced. The one advantage of a pike and shot formation is that it's less vulnerable to cavalry charges- and even that is negated somewhat because it can only face in one direction at once, and thus can easily be charged in the rear. Two streltsy can decimate a P&S formation that represents twice as many troops. Each streltsy inflicts a lot more casualties than it receives in both shooting and melee, and the only advantage of the 2000-troop formation is that it has more manpower to burn. I know this is not the heyday of the formation, but even so, these units - while a decent buy point-wise - seem a terribly ineffective use of manpower.Ī pike and shot body here represents about 2000 troops, 40 percent of whom are gunners. ![]() I'm playing Poland versus Russia in the late 16th century, where Poland can deploy early pike and shot units. I like this game a lot, but there's one aspect that's been bugging me.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |