Light Infantry

[flippyxtrem]

I do believe Sir Shwick and Andrew Kent can both claim that I bought four Militia and four Landwehr when I played a 2v1 against them. But, surely not I, right? I mean when was the last time I used Militia, right?

And Von Dobeln can account that the last 1v1 we had, I used Landwehr over Prussian/Brunswick Line. But, of course, I never use Landwehr either, right?

Kudos to you

I have no idea what I'm talking about, correct?

He actually dared Flippy to answer that? (quoted from a annymous NTW MP Player on MSN)

Not to sound insulting, but you have been playing this game (NTW MP) for only 2-3 months. ive been playing this game (NTW MP) actively for over a year not to mention the 6 months I played it for Single Player, but that doesnt really count, but what does is that I am a "DIE HARD RUSSIAN PLAYER" and with enough experience playing against any faction to know how to play them to the letter. So I may be at a advantage over you with knowledge about the game.

So, please, next time when you try to contradict my opinion for whatever reason, do not accuse me of not ever using Militia or Landwehr

I did not accuse you of never using them (if I came that way I apologize and agree with your statement) and I applaud you for even using them, however I accused that I never saw you use them, hence that I never had a game with yourself using them, but that was not my main focus of my reply.

My argument was that it would be un-tactical to give up light infantry for opolenchie

reference:

using militia in place of your light infantry or in any other case?



But, my point was, as you mistakenly overpassed and looked over in your attempt to "Disprove me"

I did not overpass your point, I acknowledged that Light Infantry did need some improving and I do in a way agree that Light infantry are used to "soak up damage" for the main line, but in a sense of reality isnt that there job at times?, in many battles it was unfortunatley but tactically so.

This is definetly not a attempt to "disprove you". I am fully confident you will stick to your opinion no matter what, however I will tell you what my attempt is,

it is for other viewers to take in some wisdom and hear out the opinion of what "A Real DIE HARD Russian Player" has to say about your statement of the Russians only use them simply because the Opolnichie are terrible infantry

But, when did you ever see [CG] typed in my post? When did I accuse them of anything?

Well I thought I explained this clearly, here is reference:

Im presuming by "The Russians" you mean people who play the Russian faction dominantly (i have no russian blood, just heart )

While I cant speak for the other russian faction players, I can speak for the Cossack Guard russian faction players.

You said: The Russians

That is a very "General" name, which can include many people who play as the Russian Faction and the Cossack Guards are all die hard russian players and theres six of us, so I come to the conclusion we are a majority in that labled group.

Russian Light Infantry are not use as "Light Infantry" in the least! Nine times our of Ten they are used as Line Infantry!

What are you talking about? We use them all the time for skirmishing!! Its the only thing the russians have to skirmish with!!

Now granted, if your defending and the enemy has close in, you gotta put your lights to some work and most likely they will be like Line Infantry, but really, in history that is what happend, your a Grenadier Guard you should know that the KGL Light Infantry held fast at LaySainte like the ColdStream Guards did at Hougmount or how the Scottish Light Infantry had a great part in routing the Old Guard Chasseurs. They are all remarkable stands.

Now back to NTW, I got proof to back my point, I will gladly send anybody these described replays,

a Replay of a battle were my lights skirmished the enemy into a forest to sucker the enemy into a ambush.

another replay where my 4 companies of light infantry held the very left flank of the my entire army and of my allies as a "flexible holding force" to cover the flank, as historical for russians light infantry

replay that I used russian lights as a screen to protect my army to march into position and again lure the enemy into a heavy engagement.

Remember my argument is about your statement of Russian players only using Light Infantry because opolenchie are terrible infantry. That is definetly not the case.

I do agree that Light Infantry need tweaking (more speed), no mistake about that.

On a historical note Russian Light Infantry/Jagers were sometimes actually used very much like grenadiers as arman noted.

And at the Battle of Hoff, Russian Jagers/light infantry kicked major ass.


Paranoid, Flip?

Defintion of Paranoia is a disorder when a person thinking everybody and everything is out to get him or her, usually occurs at the age of 15-34.

This disorder can cause a person to become extremely fearful of the things that are able (in their minds) to get them.

So, No

What you may be thinking is a disorder called, Flippy

[arman]

He he, original question was that "Russian players use Light because Opolchenie is not good". Whithout engaging in debate my aswer is simple "It's simply much better than line for skirmish and quite good in melee.
Can be used not only for hit and run tactics."

[[GG]SirDabrowski]

Yes, since Jaunary-February is definately 2-3 months. And before that, in November-December, but had a time between the two dates in which I was infected by a virus. So, tell me, Flippy, where did you learn to count? Glad we have that out of the way.

I feel quite, let's just say, ticked off at your general tone in your post.

But of course, you're Flippy, and you're always right, correct? I mean, you've been playing since SEPTEMBER, almost a year? So you know EVERYTHING by now, right?

I've been playing NTW for roughly a little over a year, including Single Player, and Arman just started playing Online! But, of course, since you have been playing Multiplayer since September, then you are a complete expert on this. Yet Arman has only been online for roughly a month, but I know for a fact knows much more then you. So, again, you're assuming things. Unwise to do.

I never did remember saying, "Now, Flippy uses the Light Infantry like THIS!" Now did I? I used an overall generalization when people use the Russian's. Next time, I'm going to use the British as an example, but for some reason, I don't doubt the RFG, GG, or KGL will get in to such a useless uproar, that really isn't needed.

I'm speaking of what I've seen, but I could be blind, I know, what with little experience I have, that players use Light Infantry as Line Infantry. And you agree upon this. I'm glad we agree on this.

But of course, you're arguing over my Opolchenie comment, correct? So, what you're telling me, if you had some "Ukranian Line Infantry" that had KGL Line-Like stats, that you would use Lights over them? Player's predominately ( Now, see, did I say "Flippy Prodominately"? ) use Light Infantry over Opolchenie because Opolchenie SUCK. They use Light Infantry, not because it's "Light Infantry", but because it's better then Opolchenie.

Notice how I didn't say, "Flippy", "The Cossack Guard", etc in my generalization.

I meant, "Players use Russian Lights, not as Lights, but as Line nine times out of ten."

And, by you saying, "When was the last time I saw you use Miltia or Landwehr instead of Light" Or something like that, I gave you two examples to show that I had. Your tone gave the idea that I never used them, or that I wasn't "Good" enough ( I'm apparently such a young player, and SUCH a noobie, that I have no idea what I'm talking about, and I have no real right to have an opinion about anything, as Flippy has SO much more experience then me. ), to use them. I proved you humbly wrong, thank you.

But of course, I'm always wrong, isn't that right Flippy, and you're always right?

[GG]SirDabrowski

[KHD|HitmanM4]

sirdabrowski said:

for some reason, I don't doubt the RFG, GG, or KGL will get in to such a useless uproar, that really isn't needed. [GG]SirDabrowski

Sorry for being pedantic but i wasn't aware we had a KGL clan, do you mean KHD (Kings Heavy Dragoon)?

You say that 9/10 times players use light as line, care to elaborate? I speak for myself in this matter but i use light to protect my line without deploying them in open order as i find them just as or more affective in closed order, does that mean i'm using light as line, in your opinion?

[arman]

Well if Light is just better then Opolchenie but worser than anything else, we would rather take more Line than Light. I personally take Light because I need something to skirmish better than line, and as I have found recently, sending them in melee is also not bad idea. I don't have all stats and can't say about all Light, but I suspect that Russian Light can beat British Line or Russian Line in melee. So when I take them I feel safe that what ever happens they will not be
waste of money :-)

I saw Hitman using lots of light althrough he plays for British and could use KGL or Green Jackets. BTW did you guys noticed that Hitman does not use Green Jackets?

Lets abadon that bitter aguments about personal qualities of each other :-) even me got involved in it:-) Anyways I'm not that good player, Flippy beats me hands down :-) And and Hitman, and Dury, BI and god knows who else
Actually I have completelly lost what are you arguing about

About wrong use of Light:
Actually Light infantry have never been running on the field just like Pethlasts in NTW, running like crazy and cicling like flyes around enemy. Increasing speed of light infantry will not improve realism, I beleave that it fight now exactly as it should. There is not point to expect light infantry to be faster since they are not lighter loaded then line. The diference between light and line was in training mostly and rules of reqruitment.
In Russian code it's writen that light infantry should be used to engage the enemy in vilages, woods, redouts and mountains, that only means that light infantry is not required to fight in well shaped formition, they are adapted to disrodered fightings in mixed environment, when soldier forced to act more by him self instead of just following formition movement and officer orders.
Light infantrymen were choosed from most agile and smart line infantriman because they supposed to be clever and fast thinking persons. In Russian army responsibities of Light infantry were wider then skirmish. They were almost constantly involved in battles involved climbing in mountains, skirmishing but most often assaulting enemy without any formition and going in street fight style disordered melee battles. There were fighting in woods and vilgages where proper formition is imposible and each soldier required to be more brave and smart and prone to panic. They should fight even completelly disconnected from their commander, and without clear view of what's going on arround.

Anyways Russian Light have never been acting as skirmishers running over field and firing falling back and so on.. in NTW it's propertly implemented. While other elite light infantry could be given some behaivior like that.

[[GG]SirDabrowski]

As said by a higher being then myself once, "DOH!" Sorry about that Hitman.

But, what I mean is this: People use their Light Infantry in the same fashion as you would use your line. I will admit I do this myself ( I'm talking about change here, remember. ), BUT. Let me give an example with a screenshot.

img.photobucket.com/albums/v460/mg42madness/Lights.jpg - Like this. A lot of times, I see Lights and Lines set up like this. I'll admit I do it myself, and this is why I asked for the change for lights. They're used not really as Lights, but as a component of Line Infantry.

[flippyxtrem]

Yes, since Jaunary-February is definately 2-3 months

No thats actually one month

And before that, in November-December, but had a time between the two dates in which I was infected by a virus

So thats another month

So, tell me, Flippy, where did you learn to count?

School

Glad we have that out of the way.

Ditto



I feel quite, let's just say, ticked off at your general tone in your post.

Your always ticked off at my posts


But of course, you're Flippy, and you're always right, correct?

uh if you say so...

I mean, you've been playing since SEPTEMBER, almost a year?

April of last year, started playing MP during June of last year.

So you know EVERYTHING by now, right?

No, just alot

Arman just started playing Online! But, of course, since you have been playing Multiplayer since September, then you are a complete expert on this. Yet Arman has only been online for roughly a month, but I know for a fact knows much more then you.

#1 dont bring arman into this

#2 yes hes very intelligent and a very wise man

#3 hes one of the sexiest men in this community

So, again, you're assuming things. Unwise to do.

That being typed from a man who thought Chasseurs a Cheval were infantry, I'll just ignore that.


I never did remember saying, "Now, Flippy uses the Light Infantry like THIS!" Now did I? I used an overall generalization when people use the Russian's

Exactly you used a overall generalization. That includes everybody who plays ntw mp, including myself.


I'm going to use the British as an example, but for some reason, I don't doubt the RFG, GG, or KGL will get in to such a useless uproar, that really isn't needed

This is not a uproar, I just disagree with you about how/why Russian players use there Light Infantry.


players use Light Infantry as Line Infantry.

Yes, I agree that some players do

So, what you're telling me, if you had some "Ukranian Line Infantry" that had KGL Line-Like stats, that you would use Lights over them?

Where did I say that?

They use Light Infantry, not because it's "Light Infantry", but because it's better then Opolchenie.

Thats a weak argument there Dabrowski.

Thats like saying a person who buys british light infantry only buys it because its better than militia.

Notice how I didn't say, "Flippy", "The Cossack Guard", etc in my generalization.

Your Generalization includes anybody who plays the Russian Faction. This would include the Cossack Guards and myself.

meant, "Players use Russian Lights, not as Lights, but as Line nine times out of ten."

I can say that the Cossack guards and myself dont use Lights as Line infantry.


I'm apparently such a young player, and SUCH a noobie, that I have no idea what I'm talking about, and I have no real right to have an opinion about anything

Well of course you have a right to an opinion and to disagree with me, I said that earlier.

Just remember that I have a right to my own opinion aswell and that I have a right to disagree with you also.


I proved you humbly wrong, thank you

If you say so...


But of course, I'm always wrong, isn't that right Flippy, and you're always right?

*yawn* okay that got quite old

Alright Dabrowski this will probably be my last post in this thread, because now im just wasting my time with your extreme posts that have no products of real reasonable argument or discussion, I'll let you get the last word that you crave so much for dab

but I must say,

I have enjoyed this debate and taken great interest in the various points of view, however, bottom line is I disagree with some of the statements made and other people have every right to disagree with mine. No reflection was or is intended on any of the participants,.

Have a nice day

[[GG] Lord Ashram]

Lets get back on topic please. Now. Thanks much.

Personally I find lights arent too great yet... I think the best way to get them on track as "lights" would be to speed them up a touch so they move faster, and extend their range a bit to allow them to pick at line infantry while staying out of range. This increased range would be more a representation of "effective range," as the lights would shoot from afar. I do wish that inherent in the engine for mtw there was some way to make guns lower morale of a unit, to signify the killing of officers and the feeling of threat under fire, but unfortunately there isnt:(

Anyway, back on topic. Thanks.

Ash

[KHD|HitmanM4]

I think your answer is merely for gameplay reasons, Ash.

What we have to do is access the 'problem'. Why are players finding lights not as affective as they should be?

The most potent weapon the lights posses is not their musket but the light/open formation. However in ntw i find my lights will take as many hits in a loose formation from musket fire than in the tight formation. I also believe accuracy is increased in the tight formation? This is where i pick up on Sir D's point. Sir D points out that lights are being used like line. Why do you think this is? The answer in my opinion is that players find lights more affective in a tight formation than they do the open formation. There is clearly something wrong here.........

Maybe, just maybe the answer to the problem lies in making the loose formation more affective? That doesn't mean increasing their range and speed

Now i'm no modder so i don't know if the above is possible but that is my opinion anyway.

Cheers

[flippyxtrem]

[glow=red,2,300]Maybe, just maybe the answer to the problem lies in making the loose formation more affective? [/glow]

I think that is the answer.

What has to be divided is gameplay and historical accuracey.

Ash suggested longer range for lights but that doesnt make sense because most light infantry units were armed with simple muskets. French Light Infantry, British Light Infantry, Russian LIght Infantry etc etc

What gave Light Infantry there advantage over line was there open skirmishing formation, the ability to not take to many hits and give a accurate sparatic fire onto the enemy while they are also in the range of the enemy infantry. This is what made them effective, not the ablility of range or higher speeds, but to the ability of there loose formation of not taking to many hits.

Lights were used to

1. fight other enemy light infantry
2. open stage for attack (disrupt enemy line infantry)
3. hold a flank (something like a rear guard action or holding action)
4. alot of other stuff I cant think of right now

I suggest some people to pick up some books and read more into light infantry. I have a bit on the pennisula campaign and its very interesting. The french light infantry (volts) were really good skirmishers.

It does make sense that increasing the range and speed of lights would make skirmishing somewhat more possible but its just not historical

and if i had a choice, i'd prefer history and that deserves a chance.

thx for that post hitman, made a whole new window on things.

[flippyxtrem]

Okay actually no Light Infantry stats have to be changed at all unless its for a historical accuracey fix

NO NEED FOR A INCREASED SPEED

NO NEED FOR A LONGER RANGE

I'll tell you why,

I just had a test run, 1 test, gonna have more soon, but gonna post this earlier find,

the current projectile stats are no good for light infantry in loose formatin.

with armans modiefied projectile stats things are alot better

I'll explain, in current projectile stats

infantry shoot bullets as arrows in ntw, those go up and than fell down, so instead of aiming they simply shower anemy with bullets, as it translates in the projectile stats.

as result the distance that bullet pass before hitting the enemy is long and accuracy getting reduced accordingly while formition is loosed the concentration of bullets become loose as well as result the chance of it hitting soldier smaller

however, if trajectory is flat then fire is concentric and this problem should not be present

armans modifed projectile stats does this, and it works great from my first test






I started below a hill a little ways down and enemy got first shot, I was in loose formation and dident even take a hit. Then enemy did second volley and killed 1 man. I got my first volley in and I killed 3 men!! Enemy Line Infantry stayed in close formation for about 8-10 volleys then switched to loose formation and backed up a bit for some reason. When it backed up i ceased fire and let it get the first shot again and then i resumed fire.

This is one test, British Lights reload 2 seconds faster than French Line but both have same range and enemy french line were on highground and got two shots in before my first shot.

Impressive what loose formation can do for Light Infantry in armans modified projectile stats.

Cheers


THE HISTORICAL REVOLUTION IS ON!! ;D

[arman]

More test should be made to make sure that it works. I have noticed the same when testing the new projectilestats. So I was surprised when Hitman said that infantry kills less in loose formition.
I'm going to do more test for that. I hope it resolves the issue.

You can also see on the picture that with loose formition even some soldier that have clear view standing in 3th and 4th rank fire. So this is much more like skirmishing in loose formition. Every one that have clear view fires. Dont even need to deploy it in 2 ranks.

As for speed I think it runs significantly faster than line already. I woudn't like it to run as fast as skirmishers run in Rome so that even cavalry sometime finds hard to catch them.

[flippyxtrem]

More test results with armans projectile stats.

I had a 100 man unit of Russian Light Infantry (close formation) vs 100 man unit of British Line Infantry

I had my lights just stand there and take a beating, not firing a shot.

My Light infantry lost 74 of a 100 men in 15 volleys

I did the test again but this time had my Light Infantry go into Loose Formation.

My Light Infantry lost 24 of 100 men in 15 volleys


[glow=red,2,300]NEXT TEST[/glow]

Combat

100 man British Line Infantry vs 100 man Russian Light Infantry (loose formation)

British Line lost 54

Russian Lights lost 27

Light infantry won

Second test

British Line vs Russian Lights (close formation)

British Lost 39

Russians Lost 31

Light Infantry won, however I did let myself get the first two shots and the enemy AI kept firing then stopping its fire was hard to keep up with.

So the some results are there, gonna test more out. Without a doubt a human player vs human player can proudce better/clearer results.

Cheers

[[GG] Lord Ashram]

Hmm... okay, a few points.

First, my IDEAL fix would be to eliminate loose formation in any unit not designated LIGHT. That would be the best way to handle it, but unfortunately it isnt possible:(

Second, light infantry was absolutely faster than line. In fact, the reason troops were selected to be lights were they were smaller, faster men with better accuracy and usually smarter; the generals of the time felt that in order for men to be able to "handle" being light infantry, they definately needed to be smarter than the average man.

Unfortunately, when lights are used "properly" in NTW, it is usually only because the player has a sense of historical accuracy and wants to use them in the "proper" way:) For the most part, you can just throw line units into "loose" formation and do basically the exact same thing that the light infantry can do, but cheaper:)

The problem when balancing historical desire with gameplay desire is how to do it:) Unfortunately, Hit, the problem is that video game players naturally gravitate to what "works." There is no real difference in what "works" between lights and line at the moment. They both move about the same speed, they both have the same basic range, and they can both use loose formation. So you have to figure out a way, in 1s and 0s, to make them PLAY different.

Loose definately lowers how many hits you take.

Flip, I didnt get what you were testing there? Also, I would use the same unit for the friendly unit as the enemy unit; that way you arent testing any of the variables of unit stats, but rather testing your imposed conditions; i.e. loose formation or firing uphill or whatever.

Any projectilestats changes will effect all unit types, so that wont change the inherent way we use lights as opposed to how we use line.

Ah phone gotta run:)

[flippyxtrem]

www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/1841764035/102-2902659-7467331?v=glance

Talking about Light Infantry pick that up, its a good book, never a waste to educate yourself

Your Point:

Second, light infantry was absolutely faster than line. In fact, the reason troops were selected to be lights were they were smaller, faster men

This is true for French Light infantry to some extent

Light Infantry had to be quick men because they had to form marching columns to line formation and then into skirmishing formation quickly. Now the real hard part was going from a Skirmishing formation back into a marching/line formation.

There quick speed made it possible to do it just as fas as line infantry, not necessarily quicker, so increasing there speed even higher than what it is now is not right.

however that is not the full picture here.

British Light Infantry were not small men, they had small men, but they had all sizes of men

Russian and Prussian Light Infantry, those were big men who were not slow but not faster than there Line Infantry comrades

So speed say for French Light Infantry can be historically changed and justified, but changing every factions light infantry to now a higher speed? Thats not right.

better accuracy and usually smarter; the generals of the time felt that in order for men to be able to "handle" being light infantry, they definately needed to be smarter than the average man.

Yes they were marksman, but this dident give them magical powers to extend the accurate range of there muskets.

French and British Light Infantry both had muskets same as the line infantry. Except say for some units that had rifles (95th, KGL Lights etc)

British Light Infantry- Brown Bess (good ol' bessy)
British Line Infantry- Brown Bess

Light Infantry range should be the same however in some cases light infantry in NTW already have a bit longer range 4100-4200 and thats all they real need, and I think it simulates there marksmanship skills just fine.

British Light Infantry have a range of 4000 but they reload some 18 seconds faster so I think thats balanced, could go for some testing on that

And they were not really smarter? there tactics of skirmishing were good and smart, but for example British Light Infantry were made up of marksman who were once criminals, not the brightest of men

They seemed smart, but that came with there training and the experience of war.


Unfortunately, when lights are used "properly" in NTW, it is usually only because the player has a sense of historical accuracy and wants to use them in the "proper" way:) For the most part, you can just throw line units into "loose" formation and do basically the exact same thing that the light infantry can do, but cheaper:)The problem when balancing historical desire with gameplay desire is how to do it:) Unfortunately, Hit, the problem is that video game players naturally gravitate to what "works

Well good, let people play the game how they want to, your alternatives are not good historical alternatives and are forcing people to use them the way you want to, that is not good, that is dictating how to play the game.

Look at those votes above 10 say light infantry are good gainst 2 votes

There is no real difference in what "works" between lights and line at the moment. They both move about the same speed, they both have the same basic range, and they can both use loose formation. So you have to figure out a way, in 1s and 0s, to make them PLAY different.

Historically there wanst much difference between Lights and Line except when two major differences, skirmishing formation and there skirmishing duties.

Same basic range? well they all mostly had the same weapons as there line infantry comrades.

Both can go to loose formation? yes they can, read about the British Foot Guards at Hougmount, they went into loose formation

Flip, I didnt get what you were testing there?

did you try reading it first?

Also, I would use the same unit for the friendly unit as the enemy unit; that way you arent testing any of the variables of unit stats,

No, you missed the point, and besides your gonna be facing enemy units that have different unit stats anyway, im not testing light infantry versus light infantry im testing how it can work to use lights and that they are good with those changed stats.

British Line Infantry should of destoryed my Russian Light Infantry, they did not because my Lights were in loose formation and took less hits.



Any projectilestats changes will effect all unit types, so that wont change the inherent way we use lights as opposed to how we use line.

So your saying that it will change, but not change, okay

Yes players can go into loose formation with Line Infantry, but that wont work on a gaming field on mp, nor is it historically accurate, now if a gamer wants to do that, then fine, let people play the game how they want to man, your cutting to deep and making these uncalled for drastic changes.