Cav breakoffs

dazzam · Post by **dazzam** » Sun May 15, 2011 3:45 am

How is it that a cav unit can break off from a combat moving through the hexes adjacent to enemy units but when moving normally they are unable to do this without initiating combat?

TheGrayMouser · Post by **TheGrayMouser** » Sun May 15, 2011 4:53 pm

I think the answer is hidden within your question: hexes....

jonno · Post by **jonno** » Mon May 16, 2011 10:59 am

I'm not sure that is an answer....

If the unit can't move through these hexes in normal movement, or when routing - why should they be able to move this way in a break-off.

I can't even see the logic in this ability.

I recently had a break-off where the enemy cavalry unit moved through the 1 hex gap between two of my infantry units. Seems a bit silly to me.

Maybe something worth "fixing" - even if it is a test to fail.

Jon

Morbio · Post by **Morbio** » Mon May 16, 2011 11:47 am

This has been raised before and there is a longish thread on the subject. I don't think there was ever a satifactory explanation (IMO) apart from the unit is actively not trying to engage and is able to adjust its formation to avoid the units, whereas to charge past units, to attack, may not be possible without engaging if the charging formation is held.

I agree that this doesn't make sense and should either be disallowed or impose a cohesion drop if the break-off involves weaving between non-light units.

TheGrayMouser · Post by **TheGrayMouser** » Mon May 16, 2011 1:23 pm

I dont think you can even try to rationally explain in terms of realism or what is happening on the microlevel.... Which is why I posted a laconic answer (or a guess really)

Hexes: if a unit needs to break off it is going to actually need minimum two clear hexes between an enemy unit in order to simply break off one hex. If break offs are really constricted thru "tighter zoc's" , it likly will be a something that rarly happens or even worse, cavalry get easily trapped between a rock and hard place much more than is reasonable. I think its one of those compromises where getting it perfect is not likly unless it is nixed altogther.

Logic in the TT game isnt perfect either. A unit can aproach an enemy GB and become "pinned" , unable to leave that zone ( at least not easily) yet it can scedaddle away its full movement and basically change facing TWICE in a break off....

That being said I have no major problem with it now, I would rather have it than have it go away altother

dazzam · Post by **dazzam** » Mon May 16, 2011 1:46 pm

The reason I brought it up was that I have seen very silly outcomes with this inconsistency in the rules. Take for example my roman auxillary who where engaged in combat with some enemy cav. Some of their auxillary buddies has carefully maneuvered to the rear of the cav ready to charge them in the rear. There were in fact 2 aux units in the rear of the cav and foolishly left a one hex gap in between them. Much to their horror at the end of the turn the cav break off through the narrow gap. Next in my opponents turn the cav then charged the auxils in the rear and manged to rout them in the one turn.

On one hand you could just say thems the rules and just play to it but outcomes like the above do seem a little silly. I'm not sure how the above example would ever happen in a real battle. I would support the cav being able to evade perhaps past and adjacent hex if it was in the rear arc of the unit but not right past it's front. It's just wrong.

TheGrayMouser · Post by **TheGrayMouser** » Mon May 16, 2011 1:55 pm

Yeah, some odd and frustrating things do happen. at least you started playing after they changed the routines some. Sometimes bg's used to literally braek off a staggering # of hexes.. In excess of 20 sometimes (no exageration!

)

CaptainHuge · Post by **CaptainHuge** » Mon May 16, 2011 3:25 pm

I don't know for sure, but I would agree with Gray Mouser that the exception to the rules is probably to make breakoffs work. It was probably found that following the ZOC rules made the ability to break off too rare to be useful. I like the ability of cavalry units to break off, so it works for me.

frankpowerful · Post by **frankpowerful** » Mon May 16, 2011 3:39 pm

TheGrayMouser wrote:That being said I have no major problem with it now, I would rather have it than have it go away altother

now that cavalry units breaking off don't land any more behind enemy lines as it used to happen earlier, the system works fine for me... it is indeed one of the features i appreciate the most in FOG

pantherboy · Post by **pantherboy** » Mon May 16, 2011 4:36 pm

dazzam wrote:The reason I brought it up was that I have seen very silly outcomes with this inconsistency in the rules. Take for example my roman auxillary who where engaged in combat with some enemy cav. Some of their auxillary buddies has carefully maneuvered to the rear of the cav ready to charge them in the rear. There were in fact 2 aux units in the rear of the cav and foolishly left a one hex gap in between them. Much to their horror at the end of the turn the cav break off through the narrow gap. Next in my opponents turn the cav then charged the auxils in the rear and manged to rout them in the one turn.

On one hand you could just say thems the rules and just play to it but outcomes like the above do seem a little silly. I'm not sure how the above example would ever happen in a real battle. I would support the cav being able to evade perhaps past and adjacent hex if it was in the rear arc of the unit but not right past it's front. It's just wrong.

In general you should be able to predict when the cavalry will be disengaging and as such since you couldn't close the gap you shouldn't of moved in such a manner that was going to expose their rears to the cavalry after break-off. I don't really have a problem with how it works now. The conditions are set when break-off will occur and as such prediction of events is possible with high accuracy. The one factor that you may not count on is that the cavalry wins a melee disrupting the enemy and as such won't disengage unless further good order foot are present. So in your example if your foot had lost the melee bad enough to disrupt then the cavalry would of remained stuck and exposed.

dazzam · Post by **dazzam** » Mon May 16, 2011 11:45 pm

I've attached an image of potential breakoff situation..Can anyone please tell me where the cav unit highlighted in green will end up after breaking off..and more importantly why?

http://img84.imageshack.us/img84/2730/breakoff.png

Morbio · Post by **Morbio** » Mon May 16, 2011 11:59 pm

dazzam wrote:I've attached an image of potential breakoff situation..Can anyone please tell me where the cav unit highlighted in green will end up after breaking off..and more importantly why?

http://img84.imageshack.us/img84/2730/breakoff.png

I can't remember the rules well enough to be sure (which is probably why I don't win more games

), but I think it will break off because the next melee will be at a disadvantage (i.e. the odds favour the foot troops), so therefore the cavalry will break off and be ready to charge again.

dazzam · Post by **dazzam** » Tue May 17, 2011 12:12 am

they do break off next turn but what I am interested in finding out is where they will end up or at least a range of possibilities based on any guidelines published or otherwise.

I accept Steve's comments that it is relatively easy to determine the chance of a break off..what I don't understand is where they will end up. Steve suggests that one should not move into a position that would expose their rear after a break off. The percentage chance that they will end up there is part of that decision..the rules that determine where that place will be is another part of that decision and on that I am still unclear.

I also accept that break offs are a lot better than it use to be. However I would like to know the basis of determining where they could break off to.

TheGrayMouser · Post by **TheGrayMouser** » Tue May 17, 2011 12:24 am

well , they need to go a full cycle before they attempt to break off, so if you charge a cavalry in, combat , then its your opponents turn and he resolves melee, and THEN when he hits end turn your cavalry will attempt to BO, and so on at end of every turn. I am pretty certain they will always attempt to Bo their full movement allowence

I would say that in your example, the Equite will break off one hex southeast. I played around w th editor to see if they would do anything but, using skirmshers etc as blockers and results were the same. I assume you are trying to determine under what circumstances they can slide thru ZOC's ? That is a mystery but it does happen. I sometime feel the game we play on the server isnt exactly the same engine used when playing your own scenarios head to head or vs the AI..... But that would be crazy... or would it? LOL

dazzam · Post by **dazzam** » Tue May 17, 2011 2:07 am

tks TGM..I think you are right in that they attempt to move their full move allowance. They only retreated one hex in the example I posted as moving 4 hexes would have left them in contact. I then tried it one hex back and they retreated 2 a spot 2 hexes behind the unit that were originally behind them. The ZOC only applies if the full movement points would see them end in the ZOC. I tried with lights, cav and MF and it retreated through the ZOC's for all of them.

At least I understand the basic mechanic of it now. However I still don't agree that they should be able to pass through a ZOC..expecially if they are passing through 2 ZOC's at one time ie a one hex gap. I also don't see how they have enough time to fight a combat..retreat a full Movement allowance and then charge again on their own turn. They should not be able to charge again straight away as there simply would not be enough time for them to do all the above.

Xiggy · Post by **Xiggy** » Tue May 17, 2011 6:46 pm

I think they will only breakoff if they think they are losing. The question is when does the computer think they are losing? I would like to be able to control when and if a CAV unit breaks off.

omarquatar · Post by **omarquatar** » Tue May 17, 2011 7:45 pm

Xiggy wrote:I think they will only breakoff if they think they are losing. The question is when does the computer think they are losing? I would like to be able to control when and if a CAV unit breaks off.

not true...they retreat if the opposing enemy infantry is in good order...and breaking off is not decided by the owning player

deeter · Post by **deeter** » Tue May 17, 2011 10:37 pm

Also, on the TT, cav that can't break off due to firendly troop blocking, IIRC, will lose cohension. If due to enemy troops, they are destroyed!

Deeter

TheGrayMouser · Post by **TheGrayMouser** » Wed May 18, 2011 2:33 pm

Observation that i noticed last nite that somewhat negates my observations from my post 3 up...

Had 2 cavalry bgs in melee for several turns w one enemy cavalry BG, resolved melee on my turn and dropped enemy BG to fragged... Had a Infantry unit in range so decided to impact with it to finish the job... It failed to rout enemy cavalry at impact but remained steady itself. Somewhat suprisingly when i hit end turn the enemy cavalry BG broke off.....
So appears when multiple unit types are involved or are added into a combat all bets are off...

batesmotel · Post by **batesmotel** » Wed May 18, 2011 2:57 pm

If mounted are already in melee, adding a new impact opponent will not change when they break off. Mounted break off if half or more of their foot opponents are steady. This is different from TT rules and it should be if half or more of all their opponents are steady foot.

Chris