Mexican balance

[mouthnhoof]

I made my third character, this time a Mexican. I quickly realized why fighting the Mexicans was so much easier than fighting US, Indians or even bandits & Lawmen. The Mexican troops have some equipment issues that make them ineffective vs. similar or even lower tiers of opponents. I searched the net but found very little information about equipment of the Mexican troops during the French-Mexican war, so it is hard for me to comment on historical accuracy. Consider this mostly gameplay recommendations.

Infantry line:
Until Sargento level, their use the crappy Springfields, which are the worst muzzle loaders. The Cabo's, mid tier (level 22) about equivalent to Regulars (level 20) and Volunteers (level 24) still use ONLY these 3 crappy guns. Their accuracy is so low that they hardly snipe anything beyond pistol ranges and against cavalry they just keep getting interrupted during reload. I can easily keep 10 of them from reloading just by riding around bumping them with my horse. The Sargento's (4th tier level 24) have access to Enfields and shotguns which is nicer, but sub-par for their tier/level where other factions not only have breech-loaders but also repeaters. The top tier Contra Guerrilla use the revolving rifles which are not great, but at least give some volume of fire.

They are armed like they just got out of the US-Mexican war. Even if they are still very dependent on muzzle loaders, at least give them a few good ones. I'd expect that by 1866 with all the civil war surplus and while they fight the French, some better rifles would make it into their arsenal.

Suggestions:
Give Enfields to "regular army", that is Cabos and perhaps also to Soldado. The revolving rifles are nice guns to make them "typically mexican" and make them more common in their arsenal (give also to Sargentos). This maintains the inferior armament vs. US troops (even vs. Lawmen), but at least gives them something competitive.

Husars:
The Dragons and Husars are nice for their level, but their pistols are not really fit for cavalry (Deringer, Pepperbox, Pocket?). Their saving point is that they have a cavalry sword. The Lanceros are actually less effective than the Hussars: a little better with their pistols (S&W for cavalry?), but the lance is less effective than the sword, especially since they will pull it out in the last minute or when stopped. It is counter-productive to upgrade  the Hussars, both in money and effectiveness.

They are far more effective when ordered to "hold fire" and do an old-fashioned sword/lance charge than when they try to use their staple guns. The problem is that you'll likely have other cavalry and cannot order "hold fire" only to these guys. As it is now, there is no reason to train Husars over Carbineros.

Suggestions:
Either make them dedicated mounted pistoliers with suitable pistols and ability to hit something, or go completely melee and remove their firearms. In the latter case they will be effective vs. infantry but vulnerable to other cavalry - at least good for something.

Carbinero:
Carbineros are OK for they level, the Oficials could get more low caliber revolving rifles to fit the theme, if you choose to make these the Mexican repeater.

 

[insomniac]

I agree, some boost is badly needed to mexico. I think soldado is fine but cabos may have access to enfields or other more accurate rifles. Maybe some skill increase too.

Dragons are very effective with eagle head swords but their one shot pistol makes them useless for ranged attack. Maybe they should have some revolvers.

As i sidenote, even i agree that mexico troops needs some tweaking, they will still be less effective than U.S troops, that's because it is supposed to.

 

[Highlander]

First, I'm against making revolving rifles a typical Mexican item.

I agree that Mexicans are weaker than all other factions. I think this is mostly because of the muskets. In earlier versions the muskets were pretty accurate compared to other rifles and pistols. They were slow, but when fired quite deadly. Over the time PC kept increasing accuracy and damage of everything else. Currently a good pistol is not significant less accurate than a musket.
I think we should reduce the stats of rifles and pistols and besides give US troops worse equipment. I think a lot of US troops should also get muskets. Breech loaders should be rarer in my opinion. As Civil War has just ended, I assume that -like during it- muskets were still used by a lot of Infantry.

 

[Peralta]

I noticed their infantry is more effective on the long range than the US infantry in some situations, majorities of my US volunteers and regulars often suffer high losses from soldados and cabos on long range if I just let them fire and hold ground...

 

[insomniac]

First, I'm against making revolving rifles a typical Mexican item.

I agree that Mexicans are weaker than all other factions. I think this is mostly because of the muskets. In earlier versions the muskets were pretty accurate compared to other rifles and pistols. They were slow, but when fired quite deadly. Over the time PC kept increasing accuracy and damage of everything else. Currently a good pistol is not significant less accurate than a musket.
I think we should reduce the stats of rifles and pistols and besides give US troops worse equipment. I think a lot of US troops should also get muskets. Breech loaders should be rarer in my opinion. As Civil War has just ended, I assume that -like during it- muskets were still used by a lot of Infantry.

I support PC for the accuracy case, sorry. Rifles are still much more accurate then pistols. I think the accuracy scale of MB is logaritmic or exponential, i don't know but there is a huge difference between 80 and 100 acc.  I think the guns are quite balanced.

Maybe we would rather give slightly better equipment to mexico troops. Giving U.S worse equipment doesn't bother me.

But i believe a player who joined the mexico, will have no problem beating any enemy AI faction. Soldados and Cabos hurt a lot if they hold ground. Cabos may have better rifles though. Mexico has good cavalry options also.

 

[The Bowman]

Just decrease the reloading time of muskets.

 

[Peralta]

Just decrease the reloading time of muskets.

Why?

Mexico has long-range infantry and some good cavalry to keep the enemy occupied while reloading, so either get used to the reloading or don't join them

 

[Highlander]

We won't decrease the reload time.
And I don't think Mexico is good at long range. Repeating rifle troops have the same accuracy, but higher shoot frequency.

 

[Peralta]

We won't decrease the reload time.
And I don't think Mexico is good at long range. Repeating rifle troops have the same accuracy, but higher shoot frequency.

But lower damage (a key factor in 19th century volleys )

 

[insomniac]

Americans get repeating rifle troops late. I mean veteran regulars can get repeating rifles, which corresponds to level-4. But they consume ammo too quick. Once they ran out of ammo, they are just some funny guys with a small knife. 

But i agree the biggest firepower in the game as long as they have ammo.

Maybe mexico troops should have repeating rifles at some point. I don't know their levels well, maybe the level after cabo, sargento or what the hell

Or better we should have 2 seperate troop trees for them like Regulars-Volunteers.  Because people might have chose single shot riflemen in some cases like sieges which takes a long time and conserving ammo is vital.

 

[mouthnhoof]

We won't decrease the reload time.
And I don't think Mexico is good at long range. Repeating rifle troops have the same accuracy, but higher shoot frequency.

But lower damage (a key factor in 19th century volleys )

The higher volume of fire, even if it takes more than 1 hit to kill prevents the muzzle-loaders from reloading making the difference even more pronounced. The accuracy of the Springfields is lower than most carbines, except perhaps the Hall-North. Maybe too low? ALL repeaters are more accurate than the Springfields. If that is how it should be, Cabo's should have better options.

edit:
rate of fire also compensate in a way for accuracy by giving you more rolls of the dice.

 

[LCJr]

If you trust Osprey Man at Arms 272 "The Mexican Adventure 1861-67" has some info.

According to them the Republicans were smuggling weapons from the US during the ACW.  England delivered 10,000 Enfields in 1863 and 20,000 more were purchased in 1866.  Also mentioned is Trevinos 1st Cavalry division[Army of the North] having 1200 men armed with Spencers.  Small numbers of Sharps and Remingtons had also been purchased plus what they could capture from the French and Imperialists.  Some units of the Army of the North HQ were armed with Henrys.  At the siege of Queretaro the Cazadores of Galena and infantry armed with Henrys shot the Imperial Empress Dragoons to pieces.

In 1862 regular infantry are described as being armed with Enfield rifles, minie conversions and some 'Mississippi' rifles.  The National Guard units are described as being poorly armed with smoothbore muskets and even flintlocks.  They don't specify what type but I'd guess they were leftover Brown Bess muskets and Baker rifles from the Mexican American war.

Thanks to such tireless efforts, by 1866 some Republican army units were better armed than their French and Imperial opponents.

There's also a photo of 'Maximilian's execution squad'[1st Mobile Battalion of the state of Nuevo Leon] armed with 1853 Enfields.

I think we should reduce the stats of rifles and pistols and besides give US troops worse equipment. I think a lot of US troops should also get muskets. Breech loaders should be rarer in my opinion. As Civil War has just ended, I assume that -like during it- muskets were still used by a lot of Infantry.

Could you clarify what you mean by 'musket'?  As in smoothbore or rifle-musket. 

The higher volume of fire, even if it takes more than 1 hit to kill prevents the muzzle-loaders from reloading making the difference even more pronounced.

It's also a stationary reload.  The AI is pretty poor at hitting a moving target but can hit stationary targets at pretty impressive distances.

 

[Kitteh]

Alright, I'm going to edit the Mexican troop trees now.

 

[LCJr]

I'll probably be wishing I'd kept my mouth shut when you're done too

 

[novemberman]

give all the mexicans a bottle of tequila to drink and fight with

 

[Kitteh]

EDIT: made Americans get less breech loaders and later, and gave Mexicans better guns earlier. Should be fairly balanced now.

 

[Awkward]

Give the Mexicans some better Melee weapons. I like that they have muzzle loaders, it fits well with my game-play style.

 

[Banastre]

First, I'm against making revolving rifles a typical Mexican item.

I agree that Mexicans are weaker than all other factions. I think this is mostly because of the muskets. In earlier versions the muskets were pretty accurate compared to other rifles and pistols. They were slow, but when fired quite deadly. Over the time PC kept increasing accuracy and damage of everything else. Currently a good pistol is not significant less accurate than a musket.
I think we should reduce the stats of rifles and pistols and besides give US troops worse equipment. I think a lot of US troops should also get muskets. Breech loaders should be rarer in my opinion. As Civil War has just ended, I assume that -like during it- muskets were still used by a lot of Infantry.

I agree. Perhaps the issue isn't that Mexico is underpowered, but the US is overpowered. I have noticed US infantry are far too exceptional in shooting, with a Volunteer able to outshoot a Soldado. Not to mention the US has a larger yet useless troop tree. Volunteers are more expensive than Regulars, but are much weaker, and really serve no purpose.

 

[insomniac]

Regulars should be more expensive than volunteers i agree.

 

[mouthnhoof]

If you trust Osprey Man at Arms 272 "The Mexican Adventure 1861-67" has some info.

According to them the Republicans were smuggling weapons from the US during the ACW.  England delivered 10,000 Enfields in 1863 and 20,000 more were purchased in 1866.  Also mentioned is Trevinos 1st Cavalry division[Army of the North] having 1200 men armed with Spencers.  Small numbers of Sharps and Remingtons had also been purchased plus what they could capture from the French and Imperialists.  Some units of the Army of the North HQ were armed with Henrys.  At the siege of Queretaro the Cazadores of Galena and infantry armed with Henrys shot the Imperial Empress Dragoons to pieces.

In 1862 regular infantry are described as being armed with Enfield rifles, minie conversions and some 'Mississippi' rifles.  The National Guard units are described as being poorly armed with smoothbore muskets and even flintlocks.  They don't specify what type but I'd guess they were leftover Brown Bess muskets and Baker rifles from the Mexican American war.

Good info, thanks!
This MOD got me doing some reading on the US-Mexico, French-Mexican and the Indian wars, some pieces of history I knew little about (not an American). Who said computer games are not educational.

Perhaps the issue isn't that Mexico is underpowered, but the US is overpowered. I have noticed US infantry are far too exceptional in shooting, with a Volunteer able to outshoot a Soldado. Not to mention the US has a larger yet useless troop tree. Volunteers are more expensive than Regulars, but are much weaker, and really serve no purpose.

Regulars are level 20 and Volunteers are 24, this is why they are more expensive. The regulars however have quite significantly higher skills. This inverse skill-level relationship carries over to the veterans but there the vet-regular also get repeaters. It seems like the levels are simply reversed between the two branches.
Also, I think that generally infantry should not get repeaters (maybe on a low probability) except perhaps the top tiers. The frequency of all repeaters on troops should go down a bit.