The cossacks conversion collection

[Costa e Silva]

Knight_Bond007, if you wanna have all these in game, there is only one way: Make new tech trees. Or find in gamepacks...

I use an Early musketsman (gunpowder)
Late (musk infantry/strategy schools)
Grenadier (Mil. Tradition)

If you want, there is material to do 4 steps until rifleman...

 

[Costa e Silva]

After end this conversions, someone could do a little modification in "scotish Swordsman", and make a "russian swordsman".

The hat just need a few changes, and after that is only take of the "kilt"(i don't know how to write).

What do you think Steph?
If the owner of this excelent work don't matter of course.

 

[Steph]

Originally posted by Knight_Bond007
i'm thinking on using fusiliers and musketers as musketman replacement, for example, austrian one as german musketman.
but, what about 17c and 18c muskets? choosing or make'm both avaible?....

grenadiers for rifleman.

dragoons and hussar for cavalry...what about the english ironside?

Pikes for Pikeman

is all this correct, or i should think on opening other tech and put this units early or later than the ones i'm looking to diversify?

Could someone please clear me this points?

once again, great units!

You can also wait for Steph's mod, you will find all of them inside (check the thread in C&C).

My units line is as follow:
Harquebusier (civIII musketman) -> Musket (cossacks 17 c musketeer) -> Musketeer (cossacks 18c musketeer) -> Fusillier (Smoking mirror flint lock) -> Rifleman (civ III) ->...
Grenadier (cossacks) -> Guard (BAP or Loulong's grenadier) -> ...
Pikeman -> Pikes (cossacks) -> Musketeer -> ...

Knight -> Cuirassier (cossacks, including ironside for the English) -> tank (later!)
Horse archer -> mounted musket (cossacks 17c dragoon) -> dragoon (cossacks 18c dragoon).
Hussar are a new kind of cavalry that appears at the same time as dragoon.

 

[Steph]

Originally posted by Johann MacLeod
i hope no one forgets about the other cossacks conversion, i only bring this up because thats where the prussian, and bavarian 18th century musketers are, and the saxon units lay.

I don't forget them, they are (or rather will be) in the other thread, with all "standard" cossacks units.
This thread is only for the units made by Shaun "Baddog" Fletcher for a mod

 

[LouLong]

Originally posted by Knight_Bond007

but, what about 17c and 18c muskets? choosing or make'm both avaible?....

If you revamp the tech tree too, then you can create a new tech called "Bayonnette" that will enable 18th century fusiliers for it was not really widespread during the XVII.
IMHO it would make attack slightly higher (charge) but defense same or even weaker, allowing real infantry battles.

 

[Steph]

Originally posted by LouLong

IMHO it would make attack slightly higher (charge) but defense same or even weaker, allowing real infantry battles.

On the countrary! Bayonet should increase defense, as it was a good mean for musketeer to defend against cavalry charge.
Before the bayonet, muskets had to be protected by pikes. Once bayonet appeared, and with the progress in fire arms itself, the pikes disappaered.

 

[Ozymandias]

Originally posted by Steph


On the countrary! Bayonet should increase defense, as it was a good mean for musketeer to defend against cavalry charge.
Before the bayonet, muskets had to be protected by pikes. Once bayonet appeared, and with the progress in fire arms itself, the pikes disappaered.

The "modern" bayonet was a replacement for the original, which fit into the barrel of the musket like a socket and, IIRC, was contemporaneous with flintlocks -- which means that "increased defense" was already augmented by longer range, faster rate of fire, a more reliable ignition mechanism, and volley fire by ranks. Substituting the modern for the socket bayonet was only one (but, from the infantryman's POV, undoubtedly quite welcome!) addition.

-Oz

 

[Steph]

Two new 18c musketeer to download : Russian and Piemont

 

[Knight_Bond007]

Hello. Steph, i've been looking around and i cant find the thread abou your mod....i've seen however some others yours talking about some changes on the tech tree......i could try to make the changes...maybe pushing things a little more, after all, military tradition is more related to napoleon times, and should fit better on industrial times.....well, i'll have to delay my preview thread....

what is sure is that i'll keep adding all this great units!

 

[Elsilhe]

First of all, sorry about the delay I have caused. I just recovered from computer crash. I was able to save some of my work with Cossacks units, but all the software, including PTW and my painting programs were lost. Well, PTW is not a problem but those painting programs are...I'll try to find a replacement ASAP.
Secondly, I've been moving from one city to another, so it has been quite a mess for the last few weeks. Now I'm online with really slow connection, and my responding may take a while.

Somebody mentioned that there was this ghost-error with Swedish Pikeman. Steph, I really did check all the Pikemen that their pikes did not touch the edge. Of course (and most likely!) there's a possibility that I missed just one frame. I just can't believe that it would have to be more than one pixel away from the edge.
Just when I thought that those pikes were all done...

But, I'm still here! Steph, please don't be mad at me! And thanks for patience!

 

[LouLong]

Glad to have you back Elsilhe !

 

[LouLong]

Originally posted by Steph


On the countrary! Bayonet should increase defense, as it was a good mean for musketeer to defend against cavalry charge.
Before the bayonet, muskets had to be protected by pikes. Once bayonet appeared, and with the progress in fire arms itself, the pikes disappaered.

OK, seems I explained myself badly.

I agree bayonets are definitely a plus on the defense. But the fact is that they were even more useful on the attack part, at least considering the tactics chosen at that time. Attacking in front of a shotting enemy then rushing with bayonets. So I don't mean it should lower the defense I just think the bonus for attack should be higher than the bonus for defense to represent the fact infantry could successfully attack infantry.

 

[Ozymandias]

Originally posted by LouLong


OK, seems I explained myself badly.

I agree bayonets are definitely a plus on the defense. But the fact is that they were even more useful on the attack part, at least considering the tactics chosen at that time. Attacking in front of a shotting enemy then rushing with bayonets. So I don't mean it should lower the defense I just think the bonus for attack should be higher than the bonus for defense to represent the fact infantry could successfully attack infantry.

Ah! -- yes, restated that way, I completely agree with your point. IMHO the higher attack factor would represent a qualitative advantage, not necessarily of weaponry, but of training and discipline.

Thanks for the clarification -- I'm going to re-think unit A/D progression between fusileers and riflemen. Methinks all these UUs will come in handy for more than "flavor".

Best,

Oz

 

[Steph]

Originally posted by Elsilhe
But, I'm still here! Steph, please don't be mad at me! And thanks for patience!

I'm not mad at you! It was a good opportunity for me to learn how to make these guys myself, so we can speed up the process. And my units still are not as good as yours (no smoke!).

Now we need to coordinate our effort, it would be a pity to work together on the same unit. Send me an email!

 

[Steph]

Originally posted by LouLong


OK, seems I explained myself badly.

I agree bayonets are definitely a plus on the defense. But the fact is that they were even more useful on the attack part, at least considering the tactics chosen at that time. Attacking in front of a shotting enemy then rushing with bayonets. So I don't mean it should lower the defense I just think the bonus for attack should be higher than the bonus for defense to represent the fact infantry could successfully attack infantry.

I agree to. Here are the stat (attack/defense) of the unit in my mod:
Harquebusier : 2/4
Musket : 3/5
Musketeer: 8/6
Fusillier: 10/7, +1 HP (Napoleonic armies are a lot bigger)
Rifleman : 15/10 +1 HP

Grenadier: 15/6 (but they are a lot more expensive than musketeer)
Guard: 20/8

 

[LouLong]

My (grenadier) Guard was definitely worth doing if he gets a 20 on attack.
BTW I hope you were not disppointed by the results...

 

[Steph]

Originally posted by LouLong
My (grenadier) Guard was definitely worth doing if he gets a 20 on attack.
BTW I hope you were not disppointed by the results...

He was worth it! I've added a new sep in this unit line just for him (and Bap's).
But now, you have to make others for Russia, Prussia, Spain and Austria! And then, make some fictional Aztec, Iroquois, etc.

 

[Johann MacLeod]

this is just a though, and in not sure how it it would be done, but it is to give the grenedeirs a bombard strength, since they did have grenades.

 

[Mawfia1]

Has anyone considered having two advances; one for the invention of the matchlock and another for its innovation into the flintlock?

 

[Johann MacLeod]

i agree, because the grenedeir and the 18th century mustekteer were developed simotanously. they sevred different purposes, instead of being an upgrade of the other as some the tech trees suggest making them, thats my 2¢ worth.(if this point has alredy been made disregard this then, its late and i may have missed it)