British 95th Sergeant

Users who are viewing this thread

pod455

Squire
Hello reader,
the British 95th Rifle Sergeant has come to attention. Why do they suck at shooting? I know there are better than normal line Infantry but than doesnt beat it, Are they better in melee with a rifle or something?

Why dont the devs take out the Sergeant and add a Chosen Man (Which are better at shooting).
Or what about a Nock Gun? Alot of factions have the Musketoon and that acts like a shotgun, why shouldnt the British have one?
 
I see someone's been reading/watching a certain series of books/movies.

In short:
The Serjeants are less proficient in shooting because of the fact that they give a bonus to the running speed of the riflemen (If I remember correctly) without having to carry a colour, unlike their light infantry counterparts.

The 'Chosen Men' weren't better shots, but rather potential NCOs. Basically the Lance Corporals of their day.

If a Nock Volley Gun is added, it needs to take away half of your health each time you fire it, to simulate your shoulder being shattered.
 
haha, sharpe, no infact

But do sergeants have better melee or something like that since they have worse shooting?
 
Nock guns were actually very rare, designed for use aboard navy ships, few sailors had the strength and durability to wield them, and the officers were worried the sparks created by the gun could set fire to parts of the ship.
 
Regardless of their bonus giving, they should be able to shoot at the same level as rankers. Only one sergeant can be chosen after all and making them poor shots doesn't balance anything.
 
Crayon said:
Regardless of their bonus giving, they should be able to shoot at the same level as rankers. Only one sergeant can be chosen after all and making them poor shots doesn't balance anything.
Well said sir!
 
Crayon said:
Regardless of their bonus giving, they should be able to shoot at the same level as rankers. Only one sergeant can be chosen after all and making them poor shots doesn't balance anything.

Making them as good a shot as a ranker hardly balances anything. So why bother putting them on the same level?
 
Sergeant's are hard capped, I don't see why they should be worse shots.


To throw the historic card into the mix, didn't NCOs and even Officers in the 95th have to prove themselves to the men by being just as proficient in shooting?
 
No, but they were expected to train WITH the men, which was already a big step forward. Though many officers indeed trained their rifle skills, it was more some kind of sport.
 
I'm not sure if its noticeable, I was playing as a 95th Sergeant on TDM just to test this (and managing to piss off everybody else wanting to melee me) and I was still making consistent kill-shots.
 
the 95th sergeant is still a better shot than a normal Line Infantry unit but its worse than a 95th ranker
 
Code:
"Rifleman"def_attrib_multiplayer|level(20),wpex(50,5,90,5,206,5),knows_common|knows_ironflesh_2|knows_power_strike_1|knows_athletics_3,swadian_face_middle_1,swadian_face_old_2],

Code:
"Sergeant"def_attrib_multiplayer|level(20),wpex(80,5,80,5,50,5),knows_common|knows_ironflesh_2|knows_power_strike_1|knows_athletics_3,swadian_face_middle_1,swadian_face_old_2],

Difference is
  • 206 Proficiency in crossbows (firearms) whereas the Sarge has 50
  • 50 Proficiency in one handed (swords obviously) Whereas the Sarge has 80

Worth noting the 33rd Ranker has 150 in crossbows (which appears to be the default for all classes)
 
Back
Top Bottom