Musket & Bayonet

[Wilhelm]

Had anyone seen anything like this?

Been obsessing over the idea of the Imperial Handgunners using a bayonet on their firearm rather than switching to a sword.

I remember back in Shogun 2 FotS you could have your troops use a rifle animation for ranged, then switching to the spear animation for melee, it was bloody awesome way of implementing bayonet wielding infantry.

Has anyone see anything like this? The zombie handgunners do not count as their animation doesn't quite work for the living.

Cheers.

[RCMidas]

Not a thing for the Empire, I'm afraid. They got their tech from the dwarves, who do not really use polearms, and so when the design was merely upscaled to human size, the option to add a bayonet and use it as an improvised spear was not practical.

Plus the whole idea for humans was to avoid getting their ranged into melee in the first place, and in the horrible scenario of failing to do so, swords were simply a better defensive weapon than a big knife on an unwieldy and very expensive piece of gear. The idea behind the bayonet was to make charges easier - and as the Empire do not want their handgunners to be charging anywhere...

Dwarves, for their part, would not care if their ranged got into melee. Plus their whole "suicidal honour" thing. So since a great big axe is better than a piddly little knife for melee combat, they do not do bayonets either.

Why do the Vampire Coast make use of them then? Because of boarding actions. Bayonets in a boarding action are exactly what you need, whilst retaining piratical firepower. Fighting in the confines of a ship mean that being able to stick your enemy in the gut before he crosses the length of the corridor to reach you, then blow a hole through him and into the guy behind him, is a very useful thing to do.

Since most of the other factions prefer open field or defensive siege battles - as historically, being on the offensive side of a siege was a brutal affair you wanted to avoid at any cost - the use of bayonets was simply not encouraged outside of, perhaps, very rare and exceptional circumstances. Some Free Companies would probably make use of such a tactic, at least in the lore, as they are a hybrid ranged/melee unit.

[Sins]

There was a huge argument about it some months back in these forums, but the summary is: bayonets are anachronistic for the Empire, aren't really replacements for a real melee weapon in any way, shape or form (their use was largely a matter of convenience in the real world, whereas fantasyland doesn't need to deal with real logistics and training) and would be inadequate against most enemies the Empire faces. Like, look at the size and toughness of an orc, and imagine stabbing him in the chest with a knife, and try to think about how much that's actually going to stop a hulking green rage monster compared to properly running him through with a sword or decapitating him.

At the time period the Empire is based off of, we only had plug bayonets, which meant your gun was useless afterwards without a lengthy un-plugging process. By the time we had socket bayonets (what most people think of when they hear "bayonet") we had also pretty much completely invalidated the concept of melee combat, which is still very much a thing in Warhammer, so the idea of needing a real melee weapon to fight off some dude with an axe was silly- a bayonet was cheaper and adequate, and moving to engage in melee combat was almost entirely about shock tactics anyway.

In short it sounds like having a knifegun is a really good idea, until you get into the details of how exactly you would use it and what you're using it against, at which point it's actually really silly. This is without getting into the real nitty-gritty of it, like the consequences of trying to stab someone with your incredibly expensive and valuable handgun, or the extremely limited reach of a bayonet vs. a sword (in short: you have a couple inches at the end of your gun that's remotely useful, compared to the entire sword). The real answer the Empire has no bayonets is probably just a stylistic choice, but even aside from that, its probably impractical to use them anyway.

[Wilhelm]

I'm well aware of pretty much all of this.. Hate to sound like a c*nt but I didn't ask if it was practical or accurate.. Just if there was a mod of this description.

Either way, cheers for taking the time to respond.

[Friends with Benedicts]

piratical

[Mr. Wiggles]

What a ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥, rifle+bayonet was a devastating combo used by anyone.
The real answer is: Games Workshop designed imperial handgunners this way.

[Wyvern]

Originally posted by Mr. Wiggles:

What a ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥, rifle+bayonet was a devastating combo used by anyone.
The real answer is: Games Workshop designed imperial handgunners this way.

This^
The attempts to justify the lack of bayonets from a historical/realism standpoint are quite frankly laughable. The only semi-legit reason I can think of is that for the pike and shot time period empire represents, bayonets aren't in common circulation yet(which is a stretch to put it mildly, given that they're common enough for pirates to get them, but what can I say). Of course, in reality the reason is just that GW designed them that way, as Wiggles noted. It's warhammer, so there's a lot of ludicrous design choices, from the warhammers, to the prominence of sword armed units, to the lack of bayonets.

[Wilhelm]

I stand by the original question, anyone seen anything modded that gives us it

[Tr0w]

I've not seen any bayonet mods for TWWH, but if you really want to use bayonets there's always Empire Total War.

[Sins]

It might involve editing some fundamental game stuff that modders can't really touch. Either that, or nobody has really cared to, but given the extensiveness of some unit/total overhaul mods, I imagine if having them fight with bayonets were feasible, someone would've done it by now.

Gotta admit tho its funny seeing people with no knowledge of 16th, 17th or 18th century combat absolutely dead certain the bayonet was the king of all melee weapons when its only real advantage was letting you bring more guns without sacrificing all melee potential.

I'm not saying a gun with a socket bayonet on it is a useless weapon or anything, but when you're talking about why its good you're definitely starting with how good it shoots people and not how good it stabs people, because its really not that great at the latter compared to any real melee weapon, and examples like Killiecrankie demonstrate this.

Truthfully yes, the direct answer is "because Games Workshop didn't give them bayonets", but if you're looking for an explanation why they wouldn't, its less an oversight and more a matter of basing The Empire on early 16th century Germany, a century before anyone had ever used a bayonet. They didn't exist in the time period the faction is based on, and if you want an explanation of why you wouldn't use them anyway its because they're just barely adequate melee weapons even when you have them, and thats without having to fight superhuman opponents.

[Tr0w]

Originally posted by Chaotic Submissive Succubus:

It might involve editing some fundamental game stuff that modders can't really touch. Either that, or nobody has really cared to, but given the extensiveness of some unit/total overhaul mods, I imagine if having them fight with bayonets were feasible, someone would've done it by now.

Gotta admit tho its funny seeing people with no knowledge of 16th, 17th or 18th century combat absolutely dead certain the bayonet was the king of all melee weapons when its only real advantage was letting you bring more guns without sacrificing all melee potential.

I'm not saying a gun with a socket bayonet on it is a useless weapon or anything, but when you're talking about why its good you're definitely starting with how good it shoots people and not how good it stabs people, because its really not that great at the latter compared to any real melee weapon, and examples like Killiecrankie demonstrate this.

Truthfully yes, the direct answer is "because Games Workshop didn't give them bayonets", but if you're looking for an explanation why they wouldn't, its less an oversight and more a matter of basing The Empire on early 16th century Germany, a century before anyone had ever used a bayonet. They didn't exist in the time period the faction is based on, and if you want an explanation of why you wouldn't use them anyway its because they're just barely adequate melee weapons even when you have them, and thats without having to fight superhuman opponents.

Obviously it wasn't the king of melee weapons if your purpose is purely melee, guns dominated the battlefield though. So having the ability to have your musket formations be able to switch into what is essentially a pike block to fend off cavalry charges or to attempt to punch through the enemies line is places is highly useful. But yes for things like naval boarding things like curved swords, axes, and pistols would be more appropriate or in the case of cavalry, swords and lances.

[Sins]

Originally posted by Spr1ggan:

Originally posted by Chaotic Submissive Succubus:

It might involve editing some fundamental game stuff that modders can't really touch. Either that, or nobody has really cared to, but given the extensiveness of some unit/total overhaul mods, I imagine if having them fight with bayonets were feasible, someone would've done it by now.

Gotta admit tho its funny seeing people with no knowledge of 16th, 17th or 18th century combat absolutely dead certain the bayonet was the king of all melee weapons when its only real advantage was letting you bring more guns without sacrificing all melee potential.

I'm not saying a gun with a socket bayonet on it is a useless weapon or anything, but when you're talking about why its good you're definitely starting with how good it shoots people and not how good it stabs people, because its really not that great at the latter compared to any real melee weapon, and examples like Killiecrankie demonstrate this.

Truthfully yes, the direct answer is "because Games Workshop didn't give them bayonets", but if you're looking for an explanation why they wouldn't, its less an oversight and more a matter of basing The Empire on early 16th century Germany, a century before anyone had ever used a bayonet. They didn't exist in the time period the faction is based on, and if you want an explanation of why you wouldn't use them anyway its because they're just barely adequate melee weapons even when you have them, and thats without having to fight superhuman opponents.

Obviously it wasn't the king of melee weapons if your purpose is purely melee, guns dominated the battlefield though. So having the ability to have your musket formations be able to switch into what is essentially a pike block to fend off cavalry charges or to attempt to punch through the enemies line is places is highly useful. But yes for things like naval boarding things like curved swords, axes, and pistols would be more appropriate or in the case of cavalry, swords and lances.

Of course the guns great, but thats kind of my point here. Like, we had firearms for centuries prior to having bayonets, but thats because guns weren't good enough to justify replacing almost all your melee soldiers with gun-carrying infantry. In a setting where guns do not have that overwhelming dominance- where they aren't so good that the concept of melee combat is a quaint notion from a bygone era- bayonets aren't worth it, and you want a real backup weapon that can give you a chance against other soldiers, something you can equip in seconds or less, something that isn't heavier and clumsier than what the orc/elf/chaos worshipper/undead/beastman/skaven charging you has.

[Wyvern]

Originally posted by Chaotic Submissive Succubus:

It might involve editing some fundamental game stuff that modders can't really touch. Either that, or nobody has really cared to, but given the extensiveness of some unit/total overhaul mods, I imagine if having them fight with bayonets were feasible, someone would've done it by now.

Gotta admit tho its funny seeing people with no knowledge of 16th, 17th or 18th century combat absolutely dead certain the bayonet was the king of all melee weapons when its only real advantage was letting you bring more guns without sacrificing all melee potential.

I'm not saying a gun with a socket bayonet on it is a useless weapon or anything, but when you're talking about why its good you're definitely starting with how good it shoots people and not how good it stabs people, because its really not that great at the latter compared to any real melee weapon, and examples like Killiecrankie demonstrate this.

Truthfully yes, the direct answer is "because Games Workshop didn't give them bayonets", but if you're looking for an explanation why they wouldn't, its less an oversight and more a matter of basing The Empire on early 16th century Germany, a century before anyone had ever used a bayonet. They didn't exist in the time period the faction is based on, and if you want an explanation of why you wouldn't use them anyway its because they're just barely adequate melee weapons even when you have them, and thats without having to fight superhuman opponents.

Nobody is saying the bayonet is the king of all melee weapons(it's functionally just a short spear, so basically every other polearm is instantly better and more capable). But as far as a versatile backup melee option goes, it's not bad at all, since it basically gives you a short spear. It's a better melee option than just about every other backup weapon you could ask for, especially for formation fighting in which it was typically used(trench warfare was another story, and the plethora of different clubs or sharpened entrenching tools used for CQC during WW1 kinda shows that).

Given that a handgunner is probably not particularly well trained to use a sword, the sword has inferior reach and pretty miserable armor penetrative qualities itself, I find it not at all convincing that it makes a more reasonable or viable CQC alternative to a bayonet.

Plus, the battle of Killiecrankie is a pretty horrible example of "bayonet bad" when the problem was that the government troops didn't even manage to fix their bayonets to begin with, panicked and routed. It's highly unlikely having some alternate backup weapon would have changed that at all.

Edit: As a further note against the bayonet though, I do believe some issues with early bayonets were technology/reliability, since apparently some of them had a habit of falling out. Obviously, that makes them a lot less appealing than having a weapon that will not fall apart in your hands.

[Imposter]

That would be quite the change in animation details.

[Sins]

A note on sword vs. short spear: Obviously while the short spear is better in formation fighting, once things degenerate to a melee- and in Warhammer canon things degenerate to a melee at the drop of a hat because its dramatic- you'll want a sword over a short spear in most occasions.

It sounds counterintuitive due to reach concerns, but a sword is mostly threatening blade, while a spear only needs to worry about the tip. Probably our best sources on this are people who do Roman-era reenactment- the general consensus there is that while you can still hold a formation you want a spear, but the second there's no firmly held formation you want a sword. The reason for this, to reiterate my above point, is that once someones past the tip of your spear (either by dodging, blocking, or otherwise not being firmly impaled on it) you have very limited options to deal with the situation, and more often than not, they'll find a way past an individual spear. We're expected to believe this happens a lot in Warhammer, which isn't entirely unreasonable in a world where your pike wall needs to contend with firebreathing dragons, endless tides of zombies, god-blessed fanatics of all stripes and so on.

As for Killiecrankie specifically: Yes, I realize they never fixed their bayonets, but thats the point I'm trying to make with it. Bayonet fixing is slower than pulling out a real melee weapon that will prove much more effective in close combat- so if you're not dealing with real-world logistics and living in fantasy land where you can make the best choice ignoring all practicality, why not take the faster, better option of a real backup weapon over a bayonet that requires as much if not more training to use properly? A sword works great against anything that isn't 100% armored head to toe. There's a reason smaller swords were such popular backup weapons throughout all of history: they work pretty good against anything that isn't functionally a steel box, they're easy to carry, store and draw, and it has better reach than any other feasible backup weapon (unless you're a LSG in which case, ♥♥♥♥ it, bring that spear).

When you take all that into account and look at the world of Warhammer, I'm just saying you don't need to resort to "Games Workshop is big dummies who don't know about REAL weaponry" to get a satisfactory explanation for a lack of bayonets or for handgunners carrying swords. There's some actually very satisfactory answers for why they didn't, ranging from the particular period of history the Empire is based off of to practical matters of whats liable to end up in melee with handgunners in the fiction (as opposed to in the game, where... yeah, its probably Reiksguard or Black Knights). You can totally justify it without resorting to handwavey ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ with an appropriate knowledge of history and historical combat.

[Wilhelm]

......what have I done.