[a / b / c / d / e / f / g / gif / h / hr / k / m / o / p / r / s / t / u / v / vg / vm / vmg / vr / vrpg / vst / w / wg] [i / ic] [r9k / s4s / vip / qa] [cm / hm / lgbt / y] [3 / aco / adv / an / bant / biz / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / fit / gd / hc / his / int / jp / lit / mlp / mu / n / news / out / po / pol / pw / qst / sci / soc / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / vp / vt / wsg / wsr / x / xs] [Settings] [Search] [Mobile] [Home]
Board
Settings Mobile Home
/vst/ - Video Games/Strategy


Thread archived.
You cannot reply anymore.


[Advertise on 4chan]


What is it about the pike & shot era that scares strategy game devs so much? Literally more strategy games have been set in the Bronze Age than in the pike & shot era.
>>
muttoids can't understand it. muttoids are a large market.
>>
and not just by body mass
>>
>>1733590
Fucking rent free. The real answer is that it wasn't super popular 20 years ago and therefore there's nothing to remake or steal from back then.
>>
>>1733590
Why is it American dev's responsibility? There are plenty of Euro strategy devs who could do the job.
>>
>>1733581
I can only think of cossacks, and honestly, it sucks real hard
>>
>>1733581
Little interest in the period and no one can really make a game out of battle dynamics that are sort of contradictory. Pike formations are both good in melee and good in range.
>>1733614
Cossacks was fun. It was jank, but it was fun and the best attempt at the period.
>>
>>1733606
lmao get dabbed on pablo
>>
>>1733581
Does Shogun 2 not count?
>>
>>1733622
Its was an okay attempt, but honestly is so simple and easier compared to the age series, that it was no wonder it got forgotten pretty easy
>>
>>1733634
Technically yes for the greater time period and a lot of the technology used overlaps, but regionally, specific tactics, and politically no.
>>
File: 1698235684477305.jpg (59 KB, 870x489)
59 KB
59 KB JPG
>>1733581
there was that german mod for medieval 2 iirc, and pic related.
>>
>>1733581
I really wish there was an English Civil War game. THe pike and shot era was truly kino. Knights with guns but still an era where guns wern't overpowered or widely available
>>
>>1733581
Scissors-paper-stone of Pike-Horse-Shot is just too difficult a concept to comprehend for developers.
We'll get lootboxes in Creative Assembly games before it.

The main reason is probably that you'd have to command formations rather than right click enemy + zoom in to watch the animations.
>>
File: 1519113852840.gif (1.03 MB, 286x258)
1.03 MB
1.03 MB GIF
>>1733632
>>
>>1733581
>finally google battle in pic after seeing it used in 6 gorillion pike and shot threads
>it was a defeat for the pike and shot dudes
what gives
aren't there any paintings from battles where the pike and shot dudes won to use as thread starters
>>
>>1733581
>men on horses shoot blindly into squares
>if you break formation and chase the horses then they slaughter you
sounds like a shitty meta
>>
>>1733659
<P&S Campaigns
Based
Can't go back to Total War after playing Slitherine's games. The battles feel way too unrealistic and gookclick-y.
>>
>>1733581
Unironically requiers high IQ to appreciate the ear and warfare.
>>
>>1733833
*era
>>
>>1733581
Formation-intense warfare with a heavy focus on gunpowder, cavalry, and artillery. Mixed formations were common as well. It doesn't sound easy to develop, at least for an RTS.
>>
>>1733609
burgers are a large market. you must expect your game to sell in america, otherwise it fails.
>>
The best you'll get is a Total War game and it'll suck cock, just like everything eurodevs make
>>
>>1733823
>Slitherine's games
I like them too, but turn based strategy isn't very realistic as well
>>
>>1733740
But the French also used pike and shot tactics back then
>>
>>1733740
>>1733950
I sort of remember reading about this guy who was like the pike&shot hardcore pro that mastered the way of warfare and beat anyone else at it, until he fought the guy who had devoted his mind to countering the pike&shot. It was pretty sad and hilarious at the same time.
>>
>>1733950
ah okay. i was going by this sentence from wikipedia
>Rocroi shattered the myth of invincibility of the Spanish Tercios, the terrifying infantry units that had dominated European battlefields for the previous 120 years. The battle is therefore often considered to mark the end of Spanish military greatness and the beginning of French hegemony in Europe during the 17th century.[7][8] After Rocroi, the Spanish progressively transformed the tercio system incorporating more of the line infantry doctrine used by the French over time.

thought the tercios were the pike and shot dudes and the french were using line infantry at the battle but i guess that's not what it says
>>
>>1733970
Ah yes, I couldn't find much info on the armies' composition, but I'm pretty sure pikes were still a thing in western armies until the late 17th century. But iirc the French would progressively change tactics by focusing on infantry firepower that became the norm in the 18th century.
>>
>>1733686
The problem with an English Civil War game is that Cromwell and his New Model Army are genuinely too OP compared to the other factions. More so even than Caesar was with his legions or Napoleon with his Grand Armee. Cromwell built the New Model Army from scratch and proceeded to buckbreak the rest of the British Isles within a few years without losing a single battle or siege. The game would just be a rush for the other factions to crush the Parliamentarians before 1645 when Cromwell's military reforms go into place.
>>
File: Battle of Cerignola.jpg (466 KB, 1200x867)
466 KB
466 KB JPG
>>1733968
That's just military meta evolving in real time for you. Sucks when you get caught at the tail-end of a certain style of warfare you specialize in becoming obsolete. Like the Burgundarians getting destroyed by Swiss pikemen. Or the Swiss pikemen themselves getting destroyed along with French cavalry by early Spanish pike & shot tactics at the Battle of Cerignola.
>>
>>1733581
It's a relatively obscure and brief era of history and largely involves minor, regional wars in europe and Spain/Portugal subjugating indigenous populations in one-sided colonial wars. It's not nearly as marketable as the preceding late medieval era or the following 7 Year War era, French Revolution etc.
>>
>>1733946
I disagree. Historically speaking an average pitched battle lasted for hours, so a form of abstraction is needed. Four-part turn system represents it much more accurately than one side beating the other because of better micro in a battle lasting 10 minutes.
>>
>>1734015
>charging into a gunline behind a ditch with stakes
what the fuck is with the French and their suicidal cavalry charges?
>>
>>1733581
It’s my favorite era and yes I’m American. I read three books on it
>>
>>1733970
The line infantry here refers to more linear formations that contrasted with the square formations of the tercios and were a natural progression regardless of nation. In any case, the details of the battle itself wasn't actually a decided by the pike and shot tactics in question, but by French cavalry winning the cavalry battle and proceeding to rout the Spanish mercenaries and flank the Spanish infantry.
>>
>>1734037
Sounds more like a matter of taste to me.
Btw it would be very cool to have TW-style campaigns for Field of Glory, did Slitherine ever consider this?
>>
>>1734075
There's Field of Glory: Empires and the incoming Kingdoms version, but they heavily resemble a tabletop game. Converting saves to the mainline game to fight battles is still a feature, though.
>>
>>1733581
It was dominated by the Spaniards and there is no chance the anglos recognize the major power they fucked to hell and back to become the major superpower in the last 250-ish years.
>>
>>1734083
>dominated
Source needed.
>>
>>1734052
In their defense, this is literally THE battle where arquebuses/muskets become the bread & butter weapon of infantry and not just substitutes for crossbows. The plan wasn't to route the enemy, but just to clear out the arquebusiers in the frontline so that the Swiss pike mercenaries (still considered damn-near invincible in close quarters) could close the distance without being harassed by a barrage of missile fire. The French tactics at Cerignola were actually better than the ones at Crecy and Agincourt. Unfortunately, the Spanish tactics at Cerignola were also better than the English tactics at Crecy and Agincourt.

Also, Gonzalo de Cordoba, the principle Spanish commander during the Italian Wars, severely outclassed his rival general at Cerignola. Dude was the Father of the Pike & Shot Era and remained one of the six best practitioners of the art until its obsolescence imo (the other five being the Grand Duke of Alba, Gustavus Adolphus, Oliver Cromwell, Turenne, and Eugene of Savoy).
>>
>>1734095
Any book on military history will tell you that

>>1734077
It would be nice if they added those for future titles. It seems a lot of work thoughever
>>
>>1734109
>Any book on military history will tell you that
"Golden age" Spain lost nearly every war they've been at.
Even the Italian Wars were a failure because they destroyed de jure Habsburg land to deny it France.
>>
>>1734118
Lmao absolutely not true. Cope.
>>
>>1734118
t. Francis I King of France
>>
>>1733581
You say that as if the bronze age isn't an almost perfect strategy game setting and the pike and shot era isn't one of the worst. It is a shitty transitional period between pre-gunpowder warfare and the bayonet, where you get the worst of both worlds as far as gameplay goes, and the European wars of the period have almost zero cultural relevance today.
>>
>>1734083
Are these anglos in the room with us?
>>
>>1734121
There was no Spanish expansion in Europe. The Spanish dreams of an empire were beaten out of them by everyone around them.
Spaniards only inherited lands through succession and even then they couldn't hold them, see the 80 years war.
>>1734122
>French monarchs plunder the shit out of pro-Habsburg Italy and leave
>pro-Habsburg Italian states lose relevancy forever
>S-Spain totally won these wars!
>>
>>1734118
t. French scum
>>
>>1734102
Wouldn't a grande batterie done the job better? Or was that too early. I swear they were using them before Napoleon.
>>
File: OIP.jpg (7 KB, 126x180)
7 KB
7 KB JPG
>>1733686
Go to Steam and look for "Fire and Fury: English Civil War".

As for the time. We have 'The Thirty Years War' and 'Pike and Shot'.

Also, the end of Medieval 2 is literally early 1500s warfare, while Empire Total War starts with 17th century pike and shot.
>>
>>1734131
I think the French artillery didn't arrive in time to the battle
>>
>>1733740
The image only became popular after the artist posted it on wikipedia to promote illustrate the art style
>>
>>1733933
you can make some extremely successful games without the mutt market. just look at world of tanks, they've made money hand over fist and the US server has been on life support for a decade now.
>>
>>1734131
cannons were siege weapons before people started using those "gonne" things in the battlefield
>>
>>1734131
Cannons at the time needed significant emplacement time. They were carried with the baggage train and deployed for static fighting, like sieges, but too slow and cumbersome to employ in battles between maneuvering armies.
Cannons that could keep up with the army in battle, as well as the complex gunnery math that actually gave them some degree of accuracy, were a paradigm-shifting breakthrough in warfare.
>>
>>1733740
The battle of Rocroi is famous mostly due to the fact that the Spaniards stood against a French artillery bombardment without breaking and routing like the German and Italian contingents allied to them.
The French commander bid them to surrender and the Spaniards famously replied "your excellency forgets that he is talking to a Spanish regiment". The French commander allowed them to leave the field with their weapons and standards, which was an honourable defeat.
So Rocroi is the end of Spanish military supremacy but it shows that even up to that point Spanish units were renowned for their discipline and fearlessness.
>>1733970
as this anon said >>1734071 , both Spanish and French were using a mixture of pikes and gunners, but the battle was really decided by French cavalry and artillery.
The thing is, there was a smooth transition from the OG Spanish tercios, which were squares of pikes with gunners on the sides to shallow lines of pikes with gunners on the sides. The first to use these lines were the Dutch in their rebellion against Spain.
The Swedes took this line model but added depth to it by putting several of these lines together in an arrow formation, which he dubbed "brigades".
The Swedes used their army to defeat the Spaniards at the battle of Breitenfeld pretty badly. Afterwards the Spanish adapted to the times and pretty much abandoned the deep squares of the 16th century, instead using formations pretty similar to those of the Swedes. With this the Spanish stalemated the Swedes at Lützen and then absolutely buck broke them at Nördlingen, forcing France to join the 30 years war to prevent the Spanish from dominating central Europe, hence the battle of Rocroi later on
The point being that the tightly packed squares of the original tercios were long obsolete by the 1640s and weren't used at Rocroi. Both sides fought with lines of pikemen and gunners

Lines of only gunners with bayonets only became a thing around the very end of the 17th century
>>
>>1733634
It does which is why it was so good
>>
File: Untitled.png (40 KB, 3325x1081)
40 KB
40 KB PNG
Gonzalo Fernández de Córdoba, Maurits van oranje and Gustavus Adolphus are the big three men of the military revolution of the early modern period.
>>
>>1734126
>There was no Spanish expansion in Europe
seems like after the middle ages, none of the big dick badass military countries like france, spain, sweden, everyone was afraid of really expanded in europe for long. only the clown car countries like the habsburg monarchy and russia stayed huge for centuries
>>
>>1734126
>>1734126
>There was no Napoleonic expansion in Europe. The French dreams of an empire were beaten out of them by everyone around them.
Retard.
All the other powers of Europe were scared shitless of Spain, which is why they all banded together against it several times. The main focus of France's military for two centuries was preventing Spain from growing more powerful.
Spain was fighting France, the Dutch, the Ottomans, Switzerland, half of Germany, Sweden and England. The fact that Spain managed to keep that for over a century is incredible.
The main problems of Spain were that they had a small population (compared to France) and that their need to focus on the Mediterranean to keep the Ottomans at bay prevented them from building up Atlantic naval superiority. Then again, pretty hard to fight off the navies of France, England and the Netherlands all at the same time. This forced Spain to be a land power in Europe.
The logistics of the Spanish road were unseen since antiquity. No other power could have held to a detached piece of land surrounded by enemies such as Flanders like Spain did.
>>
>>1734326
noted spaniards pappenheim and willenstein, lmao
>>
>>1733581
>This thread for the billionth time
>Except this is bait this time around
As always, zoomers too young to know about Cossacks
>>
>>1733992
>Cromwell and his New Model Army are genuinely too OP compared to the other factions

This can be said about how many armies are represented in strategy games. Don't forget that he started off losing the war before he created the New Model Army.
>The game would just be a rush for the other factions to crush the Parliamentarians before 1645 when Cromwell's military reforms go into place
Why couldn't this work? You could also have the Royalists do their own reforms to hold the Parliamentarians back for long enough to rouse up international support. Get the Catholics on side as they wanted to. There's plenty of opportunity for the Royalists to get the upper hand.
Take HOI4 for example. Its possible for Poland to steamroll Germany from 1936-1938, but by 1939 it will likely be a loss. It's also possible for Germany to be worn down by a two or three front war as they were historically. Does this take away from the fact Germany had very good tech and a highly professional army? Not really.
Cromwell and his army was only a part of the Parliamentary forces, albeit a very important one. The rest of the parliamentarians were fairly ambivalent toward the idea of a republic. Swaying them could be a mechanic. Outside the realm of strategy it might even be nice to see an assasins creed style game set in the era.
>>
>>1734553
The Spanish commanders were busy fighting in Flanders.
Most of the elite troops of the Imperial HRE armies were from Spain.
Also at Nördlingen the Imperial armies were being led by a Spanish commander, cardinal Fernando.
>>
>>1734536
Again with the schizophrenic Spanish solipsism.
Spain was a part of a greater empire and even bigger coalition, fighting against other coalitions, who had no problem fighting each other at different times.
The only country in Europe that truly fought alone against everyone was the Ottoman Empire, and Spaniards have no right to compare themselves to them, they were in an entirely different league.
Spain was a paper tiger propped up by American metals. When Spain was fighting a prolonged, losing war against Dutch merchants, France was funding an immensely successful Swedish intervention and eliminating internal revolts against centralization.
The result? The Spain was beaten on a strategic level, while France annihilated the Spanish-supported rebels and created the first modern state.
>>
File: b1e.jpg (39 KB, 434x600)
39 KB
39 KB JPG
>>1734601
Take the L already kid
>>
>>1734607
Ran out of arguments already? I figured.
>>
>>1733581
napoleon total war is slow as shit and is not as popular, same as empire
cossacks too is very niche
there just isn't a big enough market for it
>>
>>1734601
Turkroach detected
>>
File: 1648 Total War.jpg (508 KB, 2560x1440)
508 KB
508 KB JPG
>>1733581
The era less well known turning it thus into more of a niche market.
Doesn't help that it's harder to make a decently working combination of melee and gunpowder combat.
>>
>>1734601
>The only country in Europe that truly fought alone against everyone was the Ottoman Empire, and Spaniards have no right to compare themselves to them, they were in an entirely different league.
Rangeban roaches
>>
>>1734635
No, you got obliterated already, roach
>>
>>1733590
Why tf can't they understand it? Their country was born during that era
>>
>>1733581
What's there to fucking play? They just stand there and shoot each other.
>>
>>1733590
I am an American mutt and I want some good pike and shot games tho
My white friends only care about WW2 or the early middle ages, which are also cool
What now nigha?
>>
>>1734727
But he's right? Also Turkish ISP's have 4chan banned, so there already is a pseudo-rangeban.
>>
>>1734756
this is the last period of history when dedicated melee units and cavalry breakthroughs were actually common.
>>
>>1734770
He isn't. The Ottomans had mutually beneficial, if not outright friendly relations to some European countries. What allies did Spain have? Austria and some German statelets? In exchange Spain was drawn into fights with fucking Sweden. Check a map. Sweden and Spain should never have had a reason to go to war otherwise.
>>
>>1734984
Ottoman "allies"
>France (except when they weren't, e.g. at Candia)
>Romanian principalities
Spanish allies
>Portugal
>all of Italy
>the Pope himself
>Austria, Bohemia, Croatia, and royal Hungary
>Catholic majority of the HRE
>Flanders
>Poland-Lithuania

Spain had lots of allies, full stop. Even at Lepanto the Spaniards formed a minority of the Holy League since they were too weak to match the Ottomans in a proper one-to-one combat. Spain never experienced anything even remotely resembling the Great Turkish War.
>>
>>1733581
>>1734083
Because it's not a good time for Anglos so the Anglosphere don't buy it
>>1734022
One good thing about Europa Universalis is making me realize that this era also has super rich history. And it took the Swedes to take up the mantle.
>>
>>1734125
Considering this is an anglo website, yes.
>>
>>1735107
>>all of Italy
lol not even close
>>Bohemia, Croatia, and royal Hungary
Not really allies, more like enemy nations that were conquered.
>>Flanders
A money sink.
>>Poland-Lithuania
????
Sure they also fought Sweden and the Ottomans but it was due to their own reasons, unrelated to Spain.

Also you are ignoring population numbers. Most people don't realize how underpopulated Spain is.
In the late 16th and early 17th centuries Spain had about 8 million people. Their Italian territories and allies had about 5 million more. The von Habsburg controlled territories in the HRE had 8 million *after* Bohemia was conquered.
On the other hand, the Ottomans alone had 30 million, France 20 million, England 5 million and Sweden and the Netherlands about one and a half million each.

Not sure why you seethe at the idea that Spain was the military hegemon of the 16th century in Europe. When Charles V died, he gave Spain to his eldest son and the HRE to his youngest son, that should give you an idea of which realm was valued more.
>>
File: 22 02.jpg (493 KB, 804x1181)
493 KB
493 KB JPG
>>
>>1735150
>lol not even close
Venice, Milan, the Papal State, and Naples already amounted to nearly the entirety of Italy and that's before even counting minor Holy League members.
>more like enemy nations that were conquered.
Bohemians were Habsburg subjects in the past, and the Bohemian revolt completely ended the ambitions of Bohemian Protestants to secede. Wallenstein himself was a Bohemian. Hungary and Croatia were inherited and integrated peacefully
>A money sink.
And the richest provinces in Europe per capita. France or England claiming the Netherlands would be a disaster for the Catholic cause.
>????
>Sure they also fought Sweden and the Ottomans but it was due to their own reasons, unrelated to Spain.
I've had enough. Nigger, you have no idea what you are talking about.
You can only think in nationalistic narratives, but remain completely ignorant of the actual context behind said narratives. In 16th and 17th centuries all of Europe was embroiled in a series of gigantic, interconnected wars, Spain was not fighting alone. Numerous conflicts had a direct impact on Spain's war effort even if they did not involve Spain in any way, and the wars Spain did involve itself in was due to Spain's own interest. Your isolationist fantasies of alternative timeline where Spain is better off without Austria has no basis in reality.
>b-but muh population
Can you actually name the problems with Spain having lower population than France and how that impacted their wars? If you think it was a matter of manpower, don't bother, and read on the recruitment in the early modern period worked, how the prolonged war affected it, and how post-Westphalian elites tried to address it in the following decades.
>>
>>1735150
>Not sure why you seethe at the idea that Spain was the military hegemon of the 16th century in Europe
You're making an outlandish claim and then act surprised when you get called out on it. Spain wasn't hegemonic in any way, she was firmly checked by the French and the Dutch, and having a high quality military does not mean much when you can't actually back it up with successes.
The Ottomans were considered the hegemonic power in the West and thus were the most politically isolated. What little allies did they have absolutely hated them, did not cooperate, or outright switched sides. By the end of the 17th century even the French, Protestants, and the Orthodox joined the Holy League's effort to take a part of an eschatological final struggle against the "Antichrist". Martin Luther himself wrote about the Turks, and not Spaniards, being God's punishment for christian sins.
This is the level of fear and awe the Porte projected, as opposed to Spain, which was merely a regional power.
>When Charles V died, he gave Spain to his eldest son and the HRE to his youngest son, that should give you an idea of which realm was valued more.
Ferdinand wasn't his youngest son, he was Charles' own brother, and his inheritance wasn't based on prestige but actual political needs of the time. Philip was granted Spain because he was essentially a Spaniard, and numerous lands to the West such as Flanders were given to him because Spain was still in England's good graces at the time and with territories close to Austria he'd be forced cooperate with the Austrian branch due to shared geopolitical threats. Ferdinand on the other hand was firmly an Imperial and was thus more qualified to rule as an emperor. And the Holy Roman Emperor, should I add, was still the most prestigious title in christian Europe.
>>
>>1735256
>The Ottomans were considered the hegemonic power in the West
Let's not get delusional here Mehmet.
They were the hegemonic power in the Balkans and eastern Med. Most European powers spent far more resources fighting amongst themselves than with the Ottomans, ie your Great Turkish war was an afterthought compared to the war against the French going on at the same time.
>>
>>1735256
>>1735107
>>1734601
evet evet the osmanli empire was very stronk and slaugheted the puny raiya! and also cok enlightened, unlike evil unjust hristiyanlik colonizers :))))

btw i am white german man from frankfurt this is simply TRUTH :)))
>>
>>1735371
Ah yes fellow yaya. I am Heinz Herman also from Frankfurt eyalat and I am truly demoralized now.
We should have accepted ottoman superiority.
>>
>>1734330
How the fuck does Swedish system work being so packed without massive amount of friendly fire?
>>
>>1735377
It is less packed than the original Spanish tercios but it has more depth than Maurits' lines.
Over the late 16th and early 17th there was a shift towards more fire and less melee in Western Europe. Even cavalry mostly stopped charging and instead just discharged their pistols before retreating to reload.
But Gustavus Adolphus campaigned in Poland-Lithuania, were he saw firsthand the effectiveness of the Polish hussars, which were still charging. Gustavus realized that musket technology still wasn't at the point where entire battles could be decided by small arm fire and that melee was still relevant. He reintroduced charging cavalry to Western Europe and gave more depth to his formations so that they could resist enemy charges and so that they could advance and fight against the enemy without breaking and getting flanked like the Dutch lines tended to do.
Keep in mind Gustavus didn't disregard fire. He drilled his musketmen more so than any other army and he created the concept of regimental artillery pieces, giving a small cannon to each unit.
>friendly fire
ummm anon, people don't fire if they got their allies in front of them. The entire unit doesn't have to fire all at one.
The frontage of the unit (how wide it was) was a huge issue at the time for military theorists. Basically the idea was that wider units could have more musketmen firing simultaneously BUT were more susceptible to charges than deeper units.
The Swedish brigade was a good compromise that was both efficient and stable.
>>
>>1735407
>Basically the idea was that wider units could have more musketmen firing simultaneously BUT were more susceptible to charges than deeper units.
lol just research kneel fire, these oldies were dumb AF
>>
File: 289.png (2.85 MB, 1600x1400)
2.85 MB
2.85 MB PNG
>>1735254
>Your isolationist fantasies of alternative timeline where Spain is better off without Austria has no basis in reality.
????????????????????????????
meds
>>1735256
>The Ottomans were considered the hegemonic power in the West
OH NO NO NO NO
>>
File: i.png (1.7 MB, 2096x1256)
1.7 MB
1.7 MB PNG
>muh ottoman strong
>gets btfo in the Mediterranean by Spain
>gets btfo in the Indian Ocean by Portugal
>gets btfo in Hungary by Austria
>>
>>1735416
Why don't you try to speak like a human being, instead of chimping out when people disagree?
>>
>>1733581
They don't know how to model pike blocks. They've literally never succeeded at realistically portraying a pike formation in combat in real time.
>>
>>1735256
>The Ottomans were considered the hegemonic power in the West
Maybe by the countries east of them, but Europeans and North Africans not ruled by Turks certainly didn't believe that.
>and thus were the most politically isolated
Lmao. Turks made friends with other Yuros all the time. The Swedes, English, and Dutch especially had good relations with the Ottoman Empire because their respective countries were separated by other nations they were all constantly fighting with. It was the eastern, central, amd Mediterranean Europeans who had all had constant beef with the Turks.
>>
>>1733581
Play M&B WFAS
play GSG's COSSACKS
>>
>>1735256
>The Ottomans were considered the hegemonic power in the West
We did not care
>But Lepanto
Yes, that is it.
>>
Right now WW1 and Medieval era seems to be the "thing" in the more normie GSG sphere. You've had a lot of WW1 hit or miss (mostly miss) games being released over the past 10 years spearheaded by Battlefield 1 (FPS, I know but still it had an influence). Medieval period has been gaining popularity again in the past few years but it looks like CA won't be able to deliver due to all of their failures beating them down until they've nearly collapsed, so there's nothing on the horizon there. There's some M2TW modder that's trying to make his own M3-like game, and a bunch of colony sims there instead.
>>
I've only played the free siege of vienna one, but wargame design studio pike and shot stuff is fun.
>>
>>1735315
>>1735371
>>1735414
>>1735565
>>1735585
>all this historically illiterate cope and seethe by 3rd estate subhumans (not actual Spaniards)
Another W for me.
>>
>>1735775
Behold the seething turkroach!

t. Spaniard
>>
>>1735507
Does ANYONE know how to model pike blocks??
>>
I blame the american education system. as far as most people are concerned history skipped from medieval times, which they imagine as the lord of the rings and skyrim, right to abe lincoln freeing the slaves in the civil war.

even this brainlet
>>1734124
is saying the period wasn't culturally relevant even though the 30 years war was basically world war 0.5.
>>
>>1735814
why do americans have to make all your video games?
>>
>>1735775
this
ispanyastan tercio would LOSE to elite turkish YENICERI
>>
I don't get what's going on in this thread. Clearly both the Spaniards and the Ottomans were a big deal in the 16th-18th centuries. Yeah if you were France you probably spent more time worrying about Spain than the Ottoman Empire and if you were Poland-Lithuania you spent more time worrying about the Ottomans but that's to be expected and doesn't detract from either of them
>>
>>1734022
>Brief era
>Lasts 200 years
>Minor, regional wars
>30 years war, minor
The problem is public education not just mutts but europoor as well. You spend weeks on WW2 but like a day on the 16th and 17th century.
>>
>>1734126
>There was no Spanish expansion in Europe.
Why would they need to conquer the continent they rightfully inherited?
>>
>>1735143
>Because it's not a good time for Anglos so the Anglosphere don't buy it
It's not a good time for anyone, even the people who were on top. It was an incredibly interesting and based time though.
>>
>>1736073
Except the roaches, and only them. Maybe they should be the one who make the games
>>
>>1733590
chinks can't understand it either
it's exclusively a theme for european chuds
>>
>>1735254
>Can you actually name the problems with Spain having lower population than France and how that impacted their wars?
The larger a population is the larger the military it can field and supply. A lot of people produce a lot of stuff. Simply by virtue of being a huge market international trade will be routed to population dense areas. That has obvious effects on the money the monarch can take out of the economy to finance his projects. Be those wars, prestige buildings or modernizations of the state organs.

There is a reason Elisabeth crapped her pants when the Spanish Armada was sent against England.
>>
>>1735256
>Martin Luther himself wrote about the Turks, and not Spaniards, being God's punishment for christian sins.
Because the Spanish were christian.

>Spain, which was merely a regional power.
Spain was the first empire where the sun never set. Stop being such a turk roach, greek rape baby.
>>
>>1735256
England, the Netherlands and France helped the Ottomans in every way they could
>>
>>1736016
They couldn't even hold what they owned. Beggars can't be choosers.
>>1736130
Neither Spain nor France had mass conscription. There was no way for these millions to actually compete in any way.
Spain was richer than France thanks to colonialism.
>>1736134
>Because the Spanish were christian
And they were papists. Being a Christian of different denomination was already almost as bad as being a Muslim.
>Spain was the first empire where the sun never set
A meaningless statement. Spain owning trade outposts all over the world doesn't equate to actual power projection, which is why Spaniards got assfucked by everyone in Asia.
>greek rape baby
Greeks are even more mixed than Turks are.
>>1736254
English and Dutch assistance amounted to sending their prayers. Only France directly cooperated with the Porte, and only sometimes, in a very limited scope. Otherwise they were akin to the Safavids, meaning a secondary front while the real action was happening where the Ottoman invasion was commencing.
>>
>>1736343
>mass concscription
A large population is good for far more than manpower. The more people a state has the larger the economy is. It's clear that you just don't want to admit that you are wrong.
>>
>>1736351
>A large population is good for far more than manpower.
Economy was not the reason for Spain's failures. Spain had no power to tackle on France and was defeated on a strategic level in the Netherlands.
Spain simply wasn't strong enough to compete with France or the Ottomans, and I'm sorry that it hurts your nationalist feelings.
>It's clear that you just don't want to admit that you are wrong.
That's rich coming from someone who thought Ferdinand I was Charles' youngest son, doesn't know the sheer extent of Spain's possessions in Italy or the usual members of the Holy League, and what impact the Ottomans had on the European psyche.
>>
>>1736360
I was answering your inane claim that population numbers don't mean anything in war without mass conscription.

And, midwit, you're talking to several different people. You're the only one here who thinks you are smart.
>>
Wow, a pike-and-shot thread topic with over 100 posts? Neat! I--
Oh.
>>
>>1736716
Unavoidable.
>>
>>1736700
Armies of the TYW increased over time despite the economic and demographic devastation.
Unless war manages to impact the demographics of the military class in any major way, population doesn't matter.
Spain lost militarily, not demographically. Having five more people in your shithole village did not impact the greater strategy of the war, brainlet.
>>
>>1736716
You knew it. I knew it. Everyone knew it.
That's why this board is shit.
>>
>>1736730
Spain lost because of economic and organisational factors, not military defeat. The expense of nearly a century of continuous warfare - which fell mostly on an increasingly impoverished and depopulated Castile - in combination with the inability of the later Habsburg monarchs to reform the state and organise revenues in the manner that the Protestant powers had managed and the creeping economic crisis caused by poor management of New World trade and silver led to the Spanish Empire simply burning out. It wasn't until after the Bourbon absolutists began their reforms that Spain had the resources to play the role of a great power, and by then England and especially France had surpassed her
>>
>>1736101
there is no chinese videogame market

(there is a huge chinese GAMBLING market)
>>
>>1735799
I do.
>>
>>1736796
you couldn't model a spherical cow faggot
>>
>>1736771
So you're saying that Spanish failures caused the wars to last decades, and the decades of war caused an internal crisis they could not recover from?
I'm glad you're agreeing with me. No idea why you're so obsessed with putting the cart before the horse, though.
>>
>>1736794
Every RTS/RTT developer is stuck in chink pandering mode, whether it’s pointless or not
>>
>>1736730
>Armies of the TYW increased over time despite the economic and demographic devastation.
Yeah, well nearly all other expenses were cut in exchange. It's not that a desperate state can't field a large army for a time. It's that a bigger population base allows one to afford a larger army.

>Unless war manages to impact the demographics of the military class in any major way, population doesn't matter.
That's absolutely stupid. I won't repeat myself. Just make fun of you. You really are pathetic. Just admit that you were wrong.
>>
>>1736343
>English and Dutch assistance amounted to sending their prayers
Absolutely delusional
>>
>>1736900
>Yeah, well nearly all other expenses were cut in exchange. It's not that a desperate state can't field a large army for a time. It's that a bigger population base allows one to afford a larger army.
The armies didn't increase for a time, they increased for years, decades, beyond all sustainable levels. European states simply couldn't field 100-200k armies for longer than one or two campaigns without harming their economy. The armies increased as a part of the arms race between the Catholics and Protestants and it wasn't a result of some magical population growth, the peasants that had their villages burnt and family killed had no perspectives beyond joining the army themselves. The population shrank, the army grew.
>It's that a bigger population base allows one to afford a larger army.
Again, Spain was the only Christian state that could afford such an army. And for decades. With no effect.
They failed to achieve their military goals, which means they failed, which means they were defeated. So much for their military hegemony.
If you can't understand that fact, you're simply retarded.
>That's absolutely stupid. I won't repeat myself. Just make fun of you. You really are pathetic. Just admit that you were wrong.
You're not making fun of me, you're just making a fool out of yourself. You're a historically illiterate contrarian that lives in the present and has no knowledge about the contemporary circumstances you're discussing.
>>1736903
Tell me about that time when a Dutch-English-Ottoman coalition formed a fleet to defeat the mighty Spanish Armada.
>>
>>1733590
fpbp
mongrel men in shambles
>>
>>1733933
70% of Europe is brown Muslims and the other 30% are antifa sissies 4 bbc who think history games are for fascists.

white amerigods are the only humans who’d buy and appreciate pike and shot game
>>
>>1736343
turk cope
the ottomans were always the secondary theatre compared to france
>>
>>1737366
You still don't get it. The armies in the 30 years war took their supplies from the populace of the occupied territories. More people = more soldiers that can be supplied. Mr. Dunning-Kruger, you are defending the indefensible.

>Spain eventually ran out of steam therefore they never domunated European battlefields
Napoleon eventually lost and therefore was never dominating continental Europe.
>>
>>1734022
>It's a relatively obscure and brief era of history and largely involves minor, regional wars in europe and Spain/Portugal subjugating indigenous populations in one-sided colonial wars.

>30 Years War
>The real World War I
>Wiped out 1/3 of the population of Europe
>Minor
>>
>>1733581
Imagine someone playing a Total War game in that era who has no idea about history.

>Where the fuck is Germany?
>Why is there an empire named after pillows and carpets?
>Why the hell is playing Poland "Very Easy?"
>>
>if you don't conquer the entire European continent then you failed and were never really powerful to begin with
Well I guess then Great Britain, France, Germany, Russia, the Ottomans and everybody else failed, according to the turk itt.
The France of Louis XIV and of Napoleon were checked in place by coalitions. Great Britain could never own large tracts of territory on the continent. Germany was btfo in both world wars. The Ottomans were checked by the Holy League.
It is a constant of European history from the early modern period onwards that whenever someone gets too powerful other actors band together to keep them in place. In the 16th century that someone was Spain and thus a coalition against them was gradually formed, spearheaded by France.
>>
File: Battle of Pavia.png (248 KB, 389x1271)
248 KB
248 KB PNG
>>1737967
And Napoleon lost in a decade while Spanish military supremacy lasted a century.
>>
>>1738231
>an empire named after pillows and carpets
Alright I'm blanking on that one, which do you mean with that?
>>
>>1738229
no murica no interest.
europe is no longer the heart of the civilized world. perhaps there is no civilized world anymore.
>>
>>1738467
Ottoman Empire
>>
>>1738480
Fuckin hell, I might be retarded
>>
File: Game.jpg (108 KB, 967x727)
108 KB
108 KB JPG
Anyone play this? The time period interests me and the system is fine, but are the battles themselves fun?
>>
>>1738480
i thought persia because persian carpets
>>
>>1733590
>>1733933
>>1735814
Why do Americans gush so hard for ancient Rome, Medieval knights and Vikings, or samurai then? They aren't from any of those cultures either.
>>
>>1742682
Hollywood.
>>
melee will always be cooler than guns
>>
>>1733992
The New Model Army was revolutionary because of its recruitment/regimental system rather than battlefield tactics. IIRC it was one of the first modern military forces where troops were mixed with men from other regions/cities under a professional officer corps rather than being regional levies serving all together under the command of their local lord. It was consequently able to refresh units immediately after a battle.
I think their actual tactics differed little from other factions but the troops were diehard ideologically driven puritans/republicans/proto-socialists while their enemies were fighting for some noble or the Catholic church.
>>
>>1738537
>JTS
the big downside is all his games are built around multiplayer. AI is nonexistent in a lot of scenarios
the company that took over JTS, Wargame Design released some more pike and shot games
>>
bump for guns
>>
File: 20240506215931_1.jpg (320 KB, 1600x900)
320 KB
320 KB JPG
i'm apparently too dumb for the third tutorial mission
on that point, what's the fucking use of arkebusiers? they move fast and shoot, but can't take a charge from any company of horse and get shredded at range by any pike and shot companies. I thought of holding them in reserve, but you can't shoot at a unit engaged in melee so I would have to catch a unit after it has routed my guys, but, even then, it would still likely lose in the melee after the charge
I lost my right flank because it was 2 kuirasseur & 2 arkebusier vs 4 horse and so the horsemen just ran around my kuiras. I won the hill on the left with my kuiras, but the battle was a slog, even with my height advantage, and so the Swedish foot still advanced on me. I tried putting some units of pike and shot on the hill, but the hill "advantage" meant they still took higher casualties to the Swedish guns.
The center held out as it could, but it's not like my lines could match the Swedes in firepower or melee skill.
I don't like how infantry can't support a friendly unit being charged by cavalry, even if they've a clear shot or a flank/rear charge. My cannon also only did 0-2 casualties a turn, which does nothing against a unit of 600 Swedes.
>>
>>1749977

you want to avoid getting charged by the swedish cavalry with your arquebusiers at all costs since they have little armor and the swedish charge is so brutal.
you cuirassiers have a lot better armor than the swedish horse so if you survive the charge you are extremely likely to win in the extended melee,
>>
>>1733581
Theres really only pike and shot and maybe some total war mods. I used to play a little flashgame sidescroller where you controlled a whole pike and shot formation, you could purchase more and more guys and specialists like Doppelsöldner with Zweihänder and halberds. Your enemies were bog standard fantasy creatures like orcs etc. It was pretty simple but entertaining for a while anyone might know the name ?
>>
>>1736012
>the 16th and 17th century.
Probably the least well known european centuries right next to the couple hundred years between the dissolution of west Rome and the crowning of Charlemagne.
>>
>>1733581
Probably part of it is that it's impossible to represent in a 1:1 manner and requires some degree of abstraction to properly depict something like an encounter between two mixed units like tercios. Pikes have been abysmal in every Total War made after Rome I, for example.
>>
>>1734326
>Rocroi
Fun fact, the Rocroi is one of the fucking smelliest cheese you have a vague chance to find in a normal supermarket.
No, this has nothing to do with the battle. Just wanna avoid others the potential trauma if you are visiting the region.
>>
>>1752915
Isn't all Belgian-adjacent cheese odoriferous? Some people even feel that your bloomy cheeses smell.
>>
File: jannies.jpg (137 KB, 850x1023)
137 KB
137 KB JPG
>>
>>1758459
those brushes are ideal for janitorial work
>>
File: jannies 3you.jpg (77 KB, 599x193)
77 KB
77 KB JPG
>>1758485
>>
File: thenameofthegame.jpg (1.54 MB, 2034x1748)
1.54 MB
1.54 MB JPG
i love playing as the ottomans in pike and shot but they are the only faction that dont have any troops actually armed with pikes. did they never field pike formations irl?
>>
>>1735204
I see this guy's art everywhere but I can't find his actual name. Can I get a sauce?
>>
File: 22 01.jpg (792 KB, 1522x2160)
792 KB
792 KB JPG
>>1759503
no
>>
>>1758548
ottomans were more of cavalry faction
>>
>>1758548
>>1759511

The Ottomans were one of the gunpowder empires. They didn't need pike blocks because of the abundance of cannons and guns in their arsenals.
>>
>>1758548
They had the shot but not so much the Pike.
Didn't really fit the Janissaries style of personal martial prowess. Sure they stood in formation, but when it's time for the melee they prefer to get close and personal rather than fighting in formation. Its what made them superb shock troops.
>>
>>1734675
>cossacks too is very niche
>t. amerimutt
And before you go all "muh slavjank played by russoids" - it's one of the most popular games in France. To the point they've made 2nd one about Napoleonic Wars
>>
>>1736101
I am south american and I love it.
>>
>>1759759
>gunpowder empires
never understood this retarded meme names, pretty much every empire used guns at that point
>>
>>1758548
The sick man of europe wasn't exactly known for its innovation or fluidity.
>>
>>1733581
Landsknecht clothing is for faggots. Make your own games
>>
>>1760567
you're the faggot
>>
File: 1680061386744114.png (431 KB, 640x478)
431 KB
431 KB PNG
>>1733581>>1733686
There's Pike and Shot. The title covers the whole era, from its early days at Pavia to its end at Rocroi. It also includes the Thirty Years War, the English Civil War and most of the Ottoman-Habsburg wars. And that's just vanilla. There's a ton of mods and custom scenarios available made by the community.
There are, however, other four games worth mentioning: English Civil War (by AGEOD), Thirty Years War (by AGEOD), Renaissance (by Wargame Design Studios) and Thirty Years War (by Wargame Design Studios). Renaissance and Thirty Years War, both by WDS, are true tactical wargames, and it takes some getting used to. But once you do familiarize yourself with the mechanics, you're in for a treat. The same goes for both titles by AGEOD, although their scope is more operational/strategic and not tactical.
>>
>>1733581
>march pike square forward into enemy
>win

At least phalanxes need to be babysat.
>>
>>1733634
It’s hard, because firearms are somewhat far down the tech tree or else require you to be Christian. But I’ve beaten an Oda legendary campaign using long-yari and matchlocks. It’s not really pike and shot since the matchlock units have to fire in a line, and can’t do things like hide within the pike formation.


If you’re patient enough to drag a campaign long enough to get firearms though, it’s a fun strategy. Add fire rockets for what would otherwise be the field guns.
>>
>>1760546
they arent exactly the sick man yet in the time period where the game is set. pikes would be useful vs the polish because they bring a lot of winged hussars that can maul even your best siphais in melee
>>
>>1760533
>pretty much every empire used guns at that point
And by "this point" you mean...?
Because Roaches used them on scale and in quantity far greater than anyone else prior to them and for quite a while, the only ones to get that far into them, too. Short for Hussites, Europe was effectively nogunz till the 1460s, and then only for the concepts like siege artillery to put unruly barons in France under king's heel. Otherwise, there were less guns around Europe than there were machine guns when WW1 started. And if you don't know what that means - you're a special kind of clueless faggot



[Advertise on 4chan]

Delete Post: [File Only] Style:
[Disable Mobile View / Use Desktop Site]

[Enable Mobile View / Use Mobile Site]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.