Jump to content

artoo

Community Members
  • Posts

    161
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by artoo

  1. 4 hours ago, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:

    Better as a separate discussion. :) Best to focus on simply making the Han commit-worthy. 

    Its collecting ideas for like Western Han expansion mod. Atm, I think we should settle with eastern Han, ie probably have to reduce cav unit roster a bit, and also there are no props for heavy armored cav the Western Han used.

    The Han as in master branch are pretty complete, I won't add game play features there.

    I am thinking for eastern Han:

    * archer cav(skirmishers)

    * dao cav (sword)

    * Ji  cav (halberd)

    • Like 1
  2. Would there be ideas how to gather horses for cav units?

    Each cav unit costs 1 horse.

     Garrison a horse in the corral with a trickle?

    Add simply horses as starting animals?

    each civ has a different starting horse trickle in the corral?

    Horse loot for enemy corral and stables? could be expanded to any other war animal used, elephants, camels...

     Any ideas? Horses can be traded, technically 2 subclasses, war and work horse.

    This would make such a cool campaign or scenario against the Xiongnu. This is not in the master branch, just testing ideas.

    screenshot0011.png

    • Thanks 2
  3. 5 minutes ago, Lopess said:

    I believe that there is no mechanic for this at the moment in the game, I believe that currently it is easier to train a set of 6 carts that go together, and when the fortress is assembled it becomes fixed in place.

    Such thing could be coded. ;)

    I guess it would need a garrison event to change props and remove the unit. One wagon would do the foundation, the fort, each garrisoned wagon would be added as prop.

    Anyhow, just thinking loudly.

  4. 1 minute ago, Lopess said:

    Initially it was, but now it's just a single structure, if necessary I'll add some eyecandy.

     

    I was thinking, that if wagons are props, it could be assembled quite unusual.

    For example not constructed, but indeed like 6 wagons produced and added until complete. :)

    The wagon fort could become steadily stronger with more wagons added.

    • Like 1
  5. My current proposal to balance archers and crossbows and ranged siege would be to introduce sub classes.

     

    Light, medium, heavy for siege.

    Probably light and heavy archers and crossbows for infantry(and/or cavalry), ie different ranges and damage. A heavy archer could defeat a light crossbowman, but the heavy crossbowman has no infantry match in terms of range and damage.

    I find it pretty difficult as is now to add crossbows in a balanced way without sacrificing too much of accurate implementation, ending up with a re-skinned archer as crossbowman, that has no differences to archer.

     

    Picking up on the idea of having like an additional resource horse(I know only 4 resources in game UI supported), it could coexist with upkeep.

    Say you have to have enough horses to make cavalry units, eg horses could be traded, would give the corral an important function.

     

    Would like to limit the access of the Han to mass cavalry to accurately implement the cav and horse breeding program to defeat the Xiongnu.

     

    The horse breeding could be controlled by giving a horse trickle to corral, that varies for each civ. Horse based civ could have higher horse garrison for corral and higher trickle than eg Han.

    • Like 1
  6. 8 hours ago, Lopess said:

    Offtop(There is also evidence of javelineers with incendiary arrows also from the year 900 -1100 I believe that the tactic was common but it was not something of note or something reserved for the lower social classes).

    Yup, hasn't to be the archer to deliver the fire. :)

     

    The Han Palace guard archers have the ability to switch back and forth between fire(or poison) and default arrows. The blade of the Palace guard swordsman can be switched to poison blade. Special forces.

  7. 32 minutes ago, alre said:

    basically it's the same as a siege tower. If those can be balanced, this can too.

    More like a mobile Roman siege camp, but in terms of defensive firepower, much stronger.

    The Han simply copied the Xiongnu tactics, they had almost no cavalry in the beginning, but used more advance technology.

    Mentioned on the Han thread, 400.000 horse mounted Xiongnu against only 10.000 cavalry units in whole Han China. Infantry and hundreds of thousands different types of crossbows on Han side.

    • Like 2
  8. 2 hours ago, Lion.Kanzen said:

    We compared other reviews critizing to Lars Andersen's videos.

    Point would be, depending on battle, situation, archers can be used in more close combat shooting heavy armor piercing arrows, along with archers behind them shooting lighter long range arrows to prevent advance for example.

    They used different arrows, ie archer is not archer, depends what arrows and bow type used.

    This becomes more relevant if crossbows are added.

    The crazy part, the small size crossbow replica in the earlier vids measured close to 60m/s or 190 fps projectile speed.

    The replica in part 3 had 120 pound draw weight, ie ~60kg, and the measurement of this one is not known yet.

    If the average crossbow used and deployed was at 6 stone class, 180 pound draw weight, then that's a range of >250m, with heavy bolts maybe 200m or so.

    Performance of these mid size crossbows is comparable to a Mongol Bow.

     

    Quote

    Han soldiers were required to pull an "entry level" crossbow with a draw-weight of 76 kg to qualify as a crossbowman.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_crossbows

     

    76 kg or 168 pound, makes it a soldier suitable for a 5-6 stone crossbow.

  9. 2 hours ago, artoo said:

    Sounds good.

    Whats more to worry, if the weapons tech of various civs was accurately implemented, it would cause quite a problem. :)

     

    Look at the range and and draw weight,450m & 340 kg they give on wiki.

     

    Bow length (cm) 70-145   99 122 58-91 80
    Tiller length (cm) 60-70     25.5 95.5  
    Power stroke (cm) 46-51   41 10-18   16
    Draw-weight (kg) 68-340 55-90 20.5 36-90 90-270 180-680
    Range (m) 170-450 230 91.5     340-411
    Lock mechanism bronze vertical trigger bronze block and lever   rolling nut – bone, antler rolling nut rolling nut – metal
    Spanning device winch,
    stirrup (12th c.),
    belt claw (late)
    claw & lever   stirrup (12th c.),
    belt claw (12th c.)
    winch winch pulleys, gaffle, cranequin,
    screw, cord pulley (15th c.)
    Crossbow material composite composite   wood composite steel

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_siege_weapons

     

     

    A few balancing questions.

     

    Given the 1-10 stone unit system for crossbows along with the table above, with an average crossbow at 6 stone, how should crossbow infantry units be balanced?

    The table's smallest crossbow still outranges anything with 170m.

    Archers have iirc by default a 60m range, with upgrades 70m, depending in height, a bonus may apply, so maybe a 100m for archers is max.

    Currently, the crossbows have the same range as bows, and also a +10% range upgrade, but that's not enough based on the data.

  10. Nice, ancient warfare was pretty much mechanized too.

    Hollywood did create a wrong impression with their films.

     

    I think fire arrows should be a feature all civs should have. Doesn't take a genius to use arrows to set buildings on fire, all of them used them.

     

     

    I also think, archery was far less static on the battlefield like shown in films.

  11. 20 minutes ago, Lion.Kanzen said:

    I can think of units to set fire to buildings (except walls)

    I mean more siege units, the bedded crossbows of the Han, or torsion weapons of Romans and Greeks.

    450m range, outranges archers, tower ~5:1, and bows all have same stats, while they should probably have different stats in terms of range and damage(arrow weight)

     

    Its long range artillery for the bigger ones, would probably require new classes for siege units, let alone the damage.

    A 3m long bolt arrow could pretty much cause big damage on buildings and troop concentrations, ie wipe out multiple cav units at once.

    • Like 1
  12. 48 minutes ago, Lion.Kanzen said:

    Once widely overcome they consume stockpile of food. To avoid this you build houses.

    Sounds good.

    Whats more to worry, if the weapons tech of various civs was accurately implemented, it would cause quite a problem. :)

     

    Look at the range and and draw weight,450m & 340 kg they give on wiki.

     

    Bow length (cm) 70-145   99 122 58-91 80
    Tiller length (cm) 60-70     25.5 95.5  
    Power stroke (cm) 46-51   41 10-18   16
    Draw-weight (kg) 68-340 55-90 20.5 36-90 90-270 180-680
    Range (m) 170-450 230 91.5     340-411
    Lock mechanism bronze vertical trigger bronze block and lever   rolling nut – bone, antler rolling nut rolling nut – metal
    Spanning device winch,
    stirrup (12th c.),
    belt claw (late)
    claw & lever   stirrup (12th c.),
    belt claw (12th c.)
    winch winch pulleys, gaffle, cranequin,
    screw, cord pulley (15th c.)
    Crossbow material composite composite   wood composite steel

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_siege_weapons

     
    • Like 2
  13. Just now, Lion.Kanzen said:

    sounds like fun. a killing machine.

    Turns out, the Romans, Greeks are also not as sophisticated in game as they were with weapons technology.

    Like the Xanten Manubalista find iirc 2007, estimated  officially early imperial. I often find myself in disagreement with official dating.

  14. 10 minutes ago, Lion.Kanzen said:

    you could give more details, maybe we draw it.

    Here are some example drawings, but don't ask what dynasty or period they are, its all bit unclear from sources.

    360px-Warringstatessiegecrossbow.jpgTriple_bow_crossbow_wjzy.jpg800px-Imperial_Encyclopaedia_-_Military_

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_crossbows

     

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_siege_weapons

     

    There is already this present , so It think this kind of thing, maybe slightly bigger with longer bow arms mounted on a wagon, or tower, wall etc

     

     

    cb.png

    • Like 2
    • Thanks 1
  15. I sadly can't find any drawing of such Han wagon fort, or even a  full Han military camp.

    From the wiki description, it sounds like the ancient equivalent of a heavy APC or so, or like a Toyota pickup with MG mounted positioned in a circle.

     

    From the descriptions I read of crossbow usage, I think they had those large field artillery crossbows mounted on a wagon, pulled by horse. These are too big, stationary use for defense.

     

     

  16. 12 minutes ago, Lion.Kanzen said:

    sounds like a lot of fun to do. Create a mobile defense fort with archers and crossbowmen.

    Yup. It is 400.000 Xiongnu riders vs 10000 riders in whole Han empire.

     

    Btw, I was thinking to better differentiate civs in game, what if there was a resource horse?

    It would naturally limit the use of cavalry for more infantry based civs and put much emphasis on cavalry civs, Persians, Xiongnu ...

     

  17. Little snippet from a very interesting read on Han cavalry.

     

    Quote

    In 200 BC, Gaozu launched a massive military campaign the defected Liu Xin and Modu with an army of over 300,000.
    It was going on very well, until the battle of Baideng.
    Modu used his 400,000 cavalries to suddenly ambush the Han camp in Baideng,
    cutting off all the supplies and reinforcements.
    Gaozu remained caught in the trap for seven days, only narrowly escaping capture (Twitchett and Loewe, 1986, p. 386).
    The decisive defeat of Baideng played an essential role in formulating a system of dynastic marriages called
    heiqin 和親 (harmonious kinship).
    It is where a princess was sent from the Han court to marry one of the Xiongnu princes,
    as a hostage or a guarantor of non-aggression

    https://www.academia.edu/43316371/Cavalry_in_the_Han_Dynasty_How_did_rulers_change_their_military_policy_to_deal_with_the_threat_of_Xiongnu

  18. 38 minutes ago, Lion.Kanzen said:

    Under which general or emperor did this occur?

     @Lion.Kanzen @Lopess

    Now I remember why I picked Wei Qing as hero :D


     

    Quote

     

    A separate development were the use of war wagons in China. One of the earliest example of using conjoined wagons in warfare as fortification is described in the Chinese historical record Book of Han. During the 119 BC Battle of Mobei of the Han–Xiongnu War, the famous Han general Wei Qing led his army through a fatiguing expeditionary march across the Gobi desert only to find Yizhixie chanyu's main force waiting to encircle them on the other side. Using armored heavy wagons known as "Military Sturdy Wagon" (Chinese: 武剛車; pinyin: wŭ gāng chē) in ring formations as temporary defensive fortifications, Wei Qing neutralised the Xiongnu's initial cavalry charges, forcing a stalemate and buying time for his troops to recover strength, before using the cover of a sandstorm to launch a counteroffensive which overran the nomads.[3]

    The Guangwu Emperor (AD 25-57) introduced an ox-pulled war wagon several stories high with an observation tower, which was deployed at the Great Wall against the Xiongnu.[4] By the 6th century such war wagons reached several meters in height and had up to 20 wheels.[5]

     

     

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_wagon

     

     

    Just shows how so much more sophisticated ancient cultures were than officialdom give them credit for.

    This is like a tank on the ancient battle field, or crossbow tactics are the same as line tactics with firearms. First line shoots, steps behind next two lines, two guys reloads, while other lines fire.

    • Like 1
  19. 4 minutes ago, Lion.Kanzen said:

    Under which general or emperor did this occur?

     

    Give a bit time, I absorbed too much data with Han very rapidly, its atm overlayed with the historical archery sessions I had.

    I get back to you. ;)

  20. 1 minute ago, Lion.Kanzen said:

    I did not know that. makes things more interesting.

     If you consider the vast distance from Han home to the Tarim, its probably safe to conclude the poor Han soldiers didn't travel on foot carrying these heavy crossbows.

    Just imagine you have to carry this for I dunno, 4000+ km along the Silk road, with big mountains, Steppe and desert. Emperor: "nope guys, no horses and wagons today, but I want you to get them" :D

     

  21. 4 minutes ago, Lion.Kanzen said:

    I have in mind to make defenses with Fort carts.

    I read the Han used wagon forts too in their campaigns against Xiongnu, in the Tarim basin region.

    What I read, the Han mounted heavy crossbows on the wagons. Would make sense if you want to defend against mobile horse mounted enemy.

    • Like 1
  22. 9 minutes ago, Lion.Kanzen said:

    Han would have to come first before Xiongnu.

    Yup, but for the props, non buggy Xiongnu would be sufficient, just they are present to use, ie no bugs. ;)

    I kind of have this in mind ...

     

    Quote

    Wang Mang renewed hostilities against the Xiongnu, who were estranged from Han until their leader Bi (比), a rival claimant to the throne against his cousin Punu (蒲奴), submitted to Han as a tributary vassal in AD 50. This created two rival Xiongnu states: the Southern Xiongnu led by Bi, an ally of Han, and the Northern Xiongnu led by Punu, an enemy of Han.

     

    Never ceases to amaze me, what incredible love to detail Mr AlexanderVzla had with the Xiongnu models.

     

     

×
×
  • Create New...