Can we play with gunpowder units in the late age's?

[Hector]

Cuz it would be real nice if we could:D. I dont mean a musketeers but units like Janissaries who had in the early ages a rifle?

[Klauwaart]

nope that will not be possible - no guns or kannons in the game

[Henrik]

Originally posted by Hector
Cuz it would be real nice if we could:D. I dont mean a musketeers but units like Janissaries who had in the early ages a rifle?

NO ! - we are so lucky that the devs have decided not to include this ! - and for that the majority of us loves'em for it

[Sir Turylon]

Actually...

it is accuracy. This game isn't really set in the gunpowder time. and, the janissaries did not first use the gun.. (get AoE2 out of your head. :P)

[Kuno of Gersenau]

Yeah, no gunpowder, like Frank once said:

Originally posted by Frank Fay
When gunpowder came, the Knights died like weasels

:D ;)

[Hector]

ok thnx guys:)

[d'Honaire]

Cannons, at least, and some gunpowder units give some players an unfair advantage, but it is fun to blow stuff up though.:cheers:

[Drake Maethor]

mmmmm :rolleyes:.....
No so unfair!

Let's think about this....
First, let's separate gundpowder siege weapons from what can be called medieval 'guns'. Now let's analyze about them separately and predict the impact they would have upon this game.

1) Medieval 'guns'
In the early days of the gundpowder age, back on the latest days of Medieval, hand gundpowder units were still far away from the muskets of modernity. They were unevolved, 'raw', long and narrow tubes of metal, that would fire any thing that could be useful, including arrows. They lacked precision, took long time to load, and were dangerous stuff... for the man who fired one I mean. And for the man who was the target... well apart from lacking precission, they hadn't got the firepower to pierce the strongest armours. Of course they still were firearms, and so they could be mortal weapons specially if you lacked strong armour.
How would they affect KOH then? Considering that in this game one succesful hit is a dead, and the long time they would take to load, I say that they wouldn't be so different than to a crossbow. Except in the precission, where the crossbow absolutely beats them.

2) Siege weapons.
The main change that gundpowder weapons brought was in the sieges. The fall of Bizantium is the best example. Walls that would endure weeks, maybe months of rocks crashing against them now would fall in a matter of days to the new cannons. Medieval cannons brought something that sieges often lacked: speed. Famous for during months, now they could last just weeks.
And castles ceased to be the strong citadels they used to be.
Gundpowder siege weapons affected a lot the way of doing sieges. But how they would affect KOH?
In this game there are two different parts in a siege. One is the siege itself, and the other one is called 'the assault'. When an assault is ordered then a battle screen is loaded, and only then siege weapons take part in the siege. So siege weapons can only fire in a battle scenario. But battles scenarios don't last the months a castle siege lasted in reality. They are an ingame battle and so they will be, for gameplay reasons, relatively fast. And then, as the devs have stated, the speed in which a siege weapon, a normal one (not a gundpowder one), destroys a wall will be very fast compared to the real time.
So we can affirm that the normal siege weapons will carry, in a way, the firepower of the gundpowder ones!
So, gundpowder weapons would have a big effect in this game? I say no.

My conclusion: In the only way gundpowder weapons would affect this game is in the spirit of it, in the sensations that it will give to the player. But they won't would add a real tactical advantage.

Add on:
That is unless that gundpowder siege weapons could be used against troops, firing something like grapeshot ammo, in the way cannons were used in the following periods. Then they could add an important tactical advantage. But I don't know if gundpowder weapons had been used that way in medieval times. In fact I think not. So... I stick to my conclusion!

[Gorgoroth]

Seriously I wouldnt even play with the game if there would be gunpowder in it. :D
I dont like the "gunpowder era" strategy games.
Example: Cossacks.
Same goes for modern age warfare. Isnt this weird? :D

I prefer the dark / medieval games, and the fantasy strategies! Hell yeah fantasy rocks. Oh and I also love the "space strategies". But fantasy is the best.
:cheers:

[Sir Turylon]

Here's the deal.


Early gunpowder cannons were extremely expensive to produce and maintain and even transport. Would you rather have.. 5 trebuchets or 2 cannons? Accuracy, the catapults and trebuchets would be a lot easier to aim.

Gunpowder shouldn't be in KoH for coujple reasons.
A) It would detract from the "Honor" in combat. ;) *Knight charges out to sally the siegers and gets cut down by hail of lead* Yay, this would practically garuntee siegers would be invincible.

B) They would not fit the time period. KoH is based on early, high, late. IIRC, gundpowder did not come into play (to full effect, bot just 1-2 small cannons) until very late in the "late age."

C) Who wants a cannon when you can have 12 trebuchets raining death on a castle? :)

D) Devs decision, and they have chosen to retain the "honor of combat." :cheers: to them for doing that. :cool:

[Gorgoroth]

If I will see a single cannon in KoH, I will stand in front of it! :D :D

[Hector]

u guys are right it is much more fun without gunpowder units, but now i am thinking why not import from china for money:p

[Beyazit I.]

There is a Turkish saying(hope thats the right translation for "sprichwort") that says: " Gunpowder Weapons has ended the Time of Honourfull fighting; Unfortunetly its Time for dirty Warfare. No Honour can stand against a Arcebuse."

I think that fits to this discussion ;)

[Sir Turylon]

I like the one... I think Frank quoted in here one time..

"Gunpowder gave courage to the coward." It is so fitting. :)

[Drake Maethor]

Originally posted by Sir Turylon
C) Who wants a cannon when you can have 12 trebuchets raining death on a castle? :)


First, you cannot have 12 trebuchets in one army in this game. There is a limit, and is less than 12.
Second, you cannot talk about honour in the battlefield while at the same time desiring to have a pack of trebuchets 'raining death to a castle', something so typical of gundpowder weapons, and btw unreal (forget Age of Empires). You are rejecting gundpowder for honour reasons while at the same time desiring their same effect: fast destruction.

But that exactly proofs my previous statements. Why would we want gundpowder in this game? If adding gundpowder weapons to this game would have very little effect!

And finally, how many of you speak about honour while at the same time support the inclusion of crossbows?

"Gundpowder gave courage to the coward." I disagree because is an uncomplete statement: technological advantage gives courage to the cowards.

Armour gave courage to the cowards, swords gave courage to the cowards, shields gave courage to the cowards, horses gave courage to the cowards, catapults gave courage to the cowards, steel gave courage to the cowards, gundpowder gave courage to the cowards, ironclads gave courage to the cowards, chemical weapons gave courage to the cowards, airplains gave courage to the cowards, bombs gave courage to the cowards, nuclear weapons gave courage to the cowards, missiles gave courage to the cowards.
As long as there is a technical disadvantage in a battlefield and as long as there are no ethical codes like the ones some knights followed, there is no honour.
When you'll be playing this game, and you'll order your heavy feudal knights to chargue against a pack of revolting and hungry peasants, and I know you will :p, then please remember if only was just gundpowder what gave honour to the cowards.

And however, when we remember WWI and the first dogfights in the air don't visions of knights come to our mind eyes? Knights charguing to each other, fighting with gallantness, with honour and comradship between enemies. Don't we see honour there?
However they used machine guns and airplanes. Gundpowder had already been invented a long time ago. Yet, they fought with courage.
Because they fought under the same conditions, and they followed ethical codes.
And so did the pilots in WWII, when their enemies would parachute out of the plane

But lads, btw, don't think that agree in adding gundpowder weapons to this game. My previous posts was just an analysis to the tactical effects that the early gundpowder weapons would add to this game. Without considering honour and ethics.

[Sir Turylon]

bah.

Drake has lost his sense of honor. :) j/k

Sure, technological advances would be nice... but seriously.... Gunpowder in a game based on castles, knights and sieges prior to Turkish empire?

You also have to realize that gunpowder was VERY rarely used up until the very late middle ages when it replaced all other forms of siege.

Of course, it reduced the amount of time a city would have to be sieged. But... This game is based 100% on accuracy... if it was... we'd see the HRE and other such things.

Cannons would seem overkill in such a game.. possibly even giving a few states a HUGE advantage over the others.

Who said nobody used 12 trebuchets? :) You forget that trebuchets can be both large and small. It is just the concept of lobbing a stone that defines what the machine is called.

[Drake Maethor]

Honor?
What is that? :p

Hey! I never said that I wanted gundpowder in this game!
I repeat myselft: JUST ANALYZED THE IMPACT IT WOULD HAVE IN THE BATTLES

And then I've spoken a bit about if it really has been gundpowder what 'gave courage to the cowards'. I said that it was not neccesarily gunpowder what did that. That any considerable technological advantage can have that effect.
The main problem with gundpowder I think is that it sounded the end for the knights. Warriors who fought with a code of honor. And after their fall honorable fights faded away from the battlefield. And no other honorable warrior came to replace them. Gundpowder left an unfilled vacuum.

However, with gundpowder or not gundpowder I assure you we will see unhonourable fights in this game. For example full iron clad mounted knights against peasants with pitchforks. A fight I won't call honorable.
But yes, it will be still in the Age of Knights, the honourable warriors. But also in the age of viking sackings and the age of crusades where 'holy warriors' masacrated babies.

Back to my analysis: I made a mistake in my analysis: I forgot that cannons can be movable. And trebuchets are left where they are deployed in this game. So cannons would be a greater advantage than trebuchets.

About the 12 trebuchets.... What I say is that in this game there is a LIMIT for siege weapons in your army, I don't remember it exactly but is LESS than 12. Sorry to say but you won't have your 12 trebuchets 'raining death' :p

[Sir Turylon]

aye aye,

Cannons (that had any chance of doing real damage to a castle's wall) were movable... by 4 oxen and laborous work. :) Trebuchets were more widely seen because their accuracy was far greater.

Did you ever see that special on PBS... wait... nvm.

on Public tv over here... They did a special on the trebuchets. One American team, and one English team faced off. One used a fixed trebuchet, the other used wheels.

The shots were very accurate... basically point, figure out the release trajectory... and wham.

[HappyAdolf]

I like fighting with Honor very much. Thus I like in StarTrek the Klingons and in Fantasy the Dwarfs.

[azores]

sure not in medivial times! BUT seeimg whar SUNFLOWERS was capable to do in KOH my biggest dream now is the these guys at SUNFLOWERS make our dream come true ! the dream is that of having the same format of KOH but in exploration and colonial era !!!wonderful !!! with the map streching to amercia and africa yeh great great what do u say guys ?? GUNPOWDER would do some noise there !