Logo Platform
logo amplifiers simplified

Mortar defense

Reply
Copied to clipboard!
5 years ago
Aug 9, 2020, 1:50:27 AM

As I was watching OpenDev footage of the combat scenario “Wading into battle” on YouTube, I noticed that the Naginata Samurai unit has a base combat strength of 46, and that the Mortar unit has a base combat strength of 40.  When the Samurai attacks the Mortar it does between 15-25 damage and receives no damage, itself.  This is where my understanding of the combat system breaks-down.


How can a unit of artillery defend itself with a combat strength of 40?  40 is an almost equivalent number to the combat strength of a Samurai.  So I started deeply thinking about how this combat strength could have been obtained.


Possibility number 1:   there’s a unit guarding the guns. This makes complete sense, given that guns during the time period of this scenario were expensive and powerful pieces of equipment, and that it was considered extremely embarrassing for any nation to have its artillery stolen from it.


So if that was the case, why does the Samurai unit take no damage from the Mortar’s defenders?


Possibility number 2:   The defenders set traps to thwart attackers.  Again this makes sense, but… then, why do the Samurai take no damage from the engagement?


In my view, historically, pieces of artillery were extremely valuable, vulnerable pieces of equipment.   When a unit reached it they would either destroy it or capture it.  I remember reading about military officers teaching their army to disable or destroy their own artillery rather than letting their enemies capture them.  Google, “spiking a cannon” for details, if you want to learn about this.


This model, where attacking an artillery unit slightly damages it, makes sense if you’re shooting it with another artillery unit, since the artillery shells would likely destroy a few guns or disable/kill a few artillery crewmen.


This model also makes sense if you’re shooting the Mortar with a ranged unit such as crossbowman or arquebusiers, as they could easily disable/kill some of its crew by shooting them.


To me however this model does not make sense in the context of a melee unit such as infantry or cavalry attacking it.

 

Sorry if I’m nitpicking a mundane detail, but the way artillery defense is implemented in this game doesn’t make sense to me.  If anyone knows and can explain how this combat model makes sense, or has any suggestion on how to improve it please leave a comment.  I’m really looking forward to this game and I want it to be as good as it can possibly be when it comes out next year!

0Send private message
5 years ago
Aug 9, 2020, 10:00:12 AM

You are right. Its is implemented as a mobile, long range, combat unit that can take a hit before dying. 

And trebuchets are quite powerful too. If i have to siege, id bring as many as i can and just put defensive units in front. 

Would do the same with mortars. Just spam thoose and concentrate fire on enemy  ranged units while defending with a strong counter to whatevery the opponent has. 


Range seems to be a bit strang in this game anyway. Mortars are nearly sheeling the whole battlefield. What happen ich there is rocket atillery? Maybe it doesnt even have to be on the battlefield!!

Updated 5 years ago.
0Send private message
5 years ago
Aug 10, 2020, 3:31:16 PM

Well, realistically the cannons would be captured, not destroyed (the crew would be killed though).

While the crew may have some weapons, they're like much less capable of fighting and have much worse gear so they'll likely lose without inflicting much damage. The idea is that their entire army is supposed to prevent enemy soldiers from gettng close to the artillery in the first place.


Destorying an artilerry (aside from being a waste) is probably quite difficult, as those things are made of a solid piece of metal (cast iron or bronze I think in most cases), and are made to withstand explosions, by design. (Also, it's not like they carried grenades or C4 charges around back then). It's probably possible to somehow make the cannons unusable, at least temporarily, but it may take a bit of effort, and it would leave yourself somewhat vurnerable to hostiles.


Of course, for the purpose of a consistent game, they chose to make mortars act like most other units, in that they have some amount of HP and can't be captured.


Does it make sense? Not really. Could it be better? Probably. Is it worth changing? Debatable.

Updated 5 years ago.
0Send private message
?

Click here to login

Reply
Comment

Characters : 0
No results
0Send private message