A new unit type?

[mrrpnar]

In medival times there where many kinds of units with most of them being in the game but, there's one major unit missing from the game, the Runner (soldier), they were the main unit to deliver and take orders from generals in wars and if were absent, the army would quickly fall into disarray. So I thought of a mechanic where if you dont have many of those in your army then you would start suffering some attack and moral debuffs, the unit size should be a small 100 manpower unit (that cant attack very well so it wont be abused) and for every five units you would need on one of those units

 

[grommile]

I see no gameplay benefit from adding this unit, just a lot of administrative busywork.

 

[MK1980]

in practice each your army regiments would have hundreds of additional people for all sorts of administrative and logistics tasks on top of that raw number of actual combat personell. not every task is worth simulating. boring stuff should be abstracted away.

i mean, our armies can also see into adjacent provinces which also implies that they deploy scouts, collect information from the population and so on. that could also be a mini game that would likely be more interesting than moving runners back and forth to relay orders. but it would also be on a similar level of "pointless busy work" that should be abstracted away.

 

[ImAdrian]

I think the units are fine as they are now. But if we're looking at ways to diversify them, one thing that could be done is to split infantry in swordsmen & ranged units.

Ranged units would be the used in the back row (like artillery is now), while artillery could be something that is used more sparsely along with ranged units, similar to how cavalry is used together with infantry in the front row. Also, artillery would be more focused towards sieging.

 

[grommile]

That's not how Early Modern infantry formations worked.

 

[ImAdrian]

That's not how Early Modern infantry formations worked.

What do you mean? Swords were still used until around 1940, along with gunpowder-based firearms. So it's not a stretch to have melee + ranged units. Especially since the game starts in 1444... Of course as you progress towards the 19th century, the formations will change.

 

[grommile]

What do you mean? Swords were still used until around 1940, along with gunpowder-based firearms. So it's not a stretch to have melee + ranged units.

The Wikipedia article on pike and shot tactics is a good introduction.

 

[MK1980]

swords weren't really used as battlefield weapons after the early medieval period. people carried them as sidearms. basically the same role that pistols have today. having "swordsmen" in a game that starts in late medieval would be really anachronistic.

edit: "late" medieval, not "high"

 

[ImAdrian]

The Wikipedia article on pike and shot tactics is a good introduction.

It's literally in the name "pike and shot". They used pikes (melee) + ranged units (arquebusiers or musketeers)

 

[ImAdrian]

swords weren't really used as battlefield weapons after the early medieval period. people carried them as sidearms. basically the same role that pistols have today. having "swordsmen" in a game that starts in high medieval would be really anachronistic.

The game starts in 1444, you can be sure people used swords back then...
Also, see the comment above, pikes were still common up until early 18th century.

 

[Horn and Ivory]

It's literally in the name "pike and shot". They used pikes (melee) + ranged units (arquebusiers or musketeers)

Yes, indeed, but not as two separate units. The formation is a mixture of pikemen and musketry.

The notion of having the ranged units in the back row also makes little sense, as thanks to the short effective range of early firearms, the muskets would often be deployed in front of the pikes, and then run back into the ranks of the pikemen when the enemy got close.

 

[ImAdrian]

Yes, indeed, but not as two separate units. The formation is a mixture of pikemen and musketry.

The notion of having the ranged units in the back row also makes little sense, as thanks to the short effective range of early firearms, the muskets would often be deployed in front of the pikes, and then run back into the ranks of the pikemen when the enemy got close.

Tbh i wasn't arguing that they should be separate units. I said units are fine as they are now. I was merely suggesting IF you do want more diversity, here's what you can look into....

 

[MK1980]

the units have a "fire" and "shock" rating. that's your ranged vs. melee mechanic. as the game progresses, firearms become more powerful and units gain more fire pips.

doesn't make sense to separate musketmen and pikemen into separate unit types since they fought within the same formation.

 

[ImAdrian]

the units have a "fire" and "shock" rating. that's your ranged vs. melee mechanic. as the game progresses, firearms become more powerful and units gain more fire pips.

doesn't make sense to separate musketmen and pikemen into separate unit types since they fought within the same formation.

It works like that now, yes, but it doesn't mean we cannot re-design the whole combat system to fit two separate unit types. Do we want to is the question? Probably not, it's fine as it is now.

 

[3ishop]

Plus issue is by mid-late game that only melee units you have (I think saying "Sword" was a mistake and you meant melee) are cavalry for most nations. Infantry had switched to being firearm equipped.

 

[makaramus]

swords weren't really used as battlefield weapons after the early medieval period. people carried them as sidearms. basically the same role that pistols have today. having "swordsmen" in a game that starts in late medieval would be really anachronistic.

edit: "late" medieval, not "high"

sweden used them for long time but not in traditional sense
they used it for their proffessional army, strategy was both side fire their riffle and when enemy starts reloading they instead draw their swords and start charging
here is the catch:Those weapons took time to reload... when people trained with swords reach to you in melee range while your gun is empty and you lack training in melee combat... its over for you.
it worked for long time until reloading became much faster. It almost made sweden an empire actually
but yea suggestion is stupid they were still infintry as usual and fought like riffleman with exception of charging with sword. There was no "strickly swordman" for long time in europe as far as I know