Is this a bug?

[efthimios]

I would like to know if this a feature or a bug.

In multiplayer battle.

Having a light infantry unit staying in a forest while outside there is an enemy heavy cavalry and enemy heavy infantry. The opponent attacks my infantry, barely, withdraws immediately, and of course my infantry do not stand ground or anything but start the pursuit of the cavalry and getting slaughtered. They disengage button is of no use at the moment cause the general is dead. Even if he wasn't though, it is just unacceptable that you would have a light infantry unit constantly leaving the woods to attack in the open heavy cavalry and infantry. IMO, either the units should not be able to make constant disengagements, or have order stand ground to your units.
This is ruining the online game for me. I noticed in a couple other battles too but just now figured it clearly out.

[sum1won]

It is a feature, AFAIK. (note: withdraw is the same as disengage)
I agree that it (disengaging to draw the enemy into pursuit and out of position) is a very powerful tactic- remember the mongols used it and conquered 3/4 of the known world with it, and other famous commanders have also used it.

I think that an order that keeps units from pursuing too far might be useful, as it can be devestating to have them march out of position.

Also, continious disengagements are difficult without drill or advanced drill, and bad timing can result in disaster. Finally, against high-strength opponents, it is utterly useless-they butcher you as you turn to flee. (fanatics).

Finally, one way to avoid it is to use the "halt" command- thats theone with the little buttons. It costs no order points, and though it takes a small amount of time to register, it is invaluable.

If you are that uncomfortable with the tactic, though, Ill try a list or two without units that can do that so easily.

[ehre]

I really disengage adds to the game, you must constantly keep control over your units,

[ehre]

i really think*

[efthimios]

The Mongols did not send some cavalry to charge enemy infantry 15 times and the infantry started to run behind the cavalry in the open fields. The Mongols did use cavalry, but used archers on horses to do this to the enemy. The enemy could choose to run after them, hide, die, or shoot back. The infantry would not give a shit if the mongols could not hurt them.
Also, this game is set like 1500 or so years before the Mongols.

It is completely stupid IMO for the cavalry to be able to do this all the time and draw the enemy units like this. It ruins the experience for me. This is removing the strategy and using game mechanics/programming to defeat the opponent. Thumbs down. (in the modern sense)

[IainMcNeil]

Ths is by design. I think we need this feature to minimize stalemates where one side sits in the wood and one side waits outside.

[efthimios]

Thanks for your reply.

Sorry to hear that. I am going to try some more multiplayer but I have to say, though I see your reasoning, I disagree.

[ehre]

I dont understand how it removes the strategy from the game, if you dont have control over your units and they go charging after his troops, thats strategy to me.

And the mongols did use that strategy, just not to pull people outta trees, they would attack, disengage, and then surround the troops stupid enough to follow

[*Lava*]

Hi!

Does disengaging and stopping require leadersip points?

Ray (alias Lava)

[*Lava*]

And the mongols did use that strategy, just not to pull people outta trees, they would attack, disengage, and then surround the troops stupid enough to follow

Hmm

And I thought this was a game about Rome..

Ray (alias Lava)

[efthimios]

I dont understand how it removes the strategy from the game, if you dont have control over your units and they go charging after his troops, thats strategy to me.

And the mongols did use that strategy, just not to pull people outta trees, they would attack, disengage, and then surround the troops stupid enough to follow

Because if your light infantry over and over again leaves the cover of the trees on its own to pursue heavy cavalry on plain is STUPID. Who ever officer would be in control of such a unit should be hanged then cut his balls off, if he survived the battle. The "attacker" controlling the heavy cavalry is exploiting this feature of the game. From tactical decisions you end up baby-sitting your unit because it won't stay put and will go after a heavy cavalry unit. Every single time.

As for the mongols, what is your point? I am clearly talking about infantry staying inside a forest, and you say "just not to pull people outta trees"???? So, you are aware of many cases of (real) light infantry units leaving cover to go after heavy cavalry on foot? I would love to hear how that ends and how many times it has happened. (leaving aside the centuries in between the eras)

[sum1won]

Relax. It isnt so much that specifically as using the tactic to pull troops out of position-troops have been known to leave a position of safety in order to chase "fleeing" troops.

[tora_tora_tora]

well pardon my bad english, guys.

There are many historical exsample of disicion errors in Roman era's military history.
Well, I don't know why, but one time even Ceaser had to battle during night. Melee combat during night means total disastar for his legions,
but he had to do so during Gallic campaign. And even Caesar makes error, then light infantry captains do make error, I suppose.
And although Mogols are in the middle ages, there are Parthias around the time Caesar lived. They are famous for Parthian shot. And have massacred
several legions sometimes. I forgot his name, but Parthian killed one of Caesar's political rival with his army.
And their tactics is someting like Mongols, I presume.

So, if you look at bird view, and know the battlefield and enemy compostion perfectly, light infantry trying to chase after heavy cavalry is maybe
ridiculous. But from the point of light infantry himself, maybe things different. As light infantry captain watching enemy cavs retreating, for him, it
means only chance to win the battle or chance to get rich booty, as heavy cavalry troops equipment are well-made, or just got excited after getting bored in the woods. Or maybe he is right, as his enemy are really retreating. And horses are not machines, they get exhausted. So maybe they are not in good conditions or maybe there are some prariedogs' potholes over there, and you've got chance.

Maybe people cannot expect every troops to make perfect disicions at every time. So maybe deploy your light infantry further deeper in the woods and let enemy heavy cavalry to attack into the woods where they are disadvantaged. Or why not put on halt button the moment heavy cavalry retreat.
Or if it was a multiplayer game, maybe next time your army could be cavalry heavy.

[efthimios]

I seriously cannot figure out why some of you have a problem with me not liking a feature of the game. I asked (now know that it is not going to change since it is a feature intended by Slitherine) for a patch to either stop the ability of being able to give constant disengage order to a unit, or an order to stand firm, hold ground, don't move a muscle order. Then some of you take this like I am trying to change the way you live or something. I could be mean and say why I think (some of) you are so against changing how things work, but that wouldn't help at all, instead I will accept that it is not going to be (for me) fixed, and you can accept that I hate this feature and it is causing me to not play online. No big deal for you, is it?

[ehre]

And the mongols did use that strategy, just not to pull people outta trees, they would attack, disengage, and then surround the troops stupid enough to follow

Hmm

And I thought this was a game about Rome..

Ray (alias Lava)

touch?©

[fatetriarrii]

Yes, it could be balanced if it was a sub-bonus of Drill of something like that. A "hold line" order, or some-such. Either that, or organized formations might be made not to move. I see what your getting at.

Until then, if it happens, you could do something as suggested, like moving your light infantry further back, or maybe adding in another unit (like archers perhaps) to hit the cavalry as they retreat, or replacing them with heavier infantry. Otherwise, I geuss your just stuck with Single Player

Good to know you haven't completely given up on the game, though

[Redpossum]

Efthimios -

My sympathies are with you on this issue.

I agree, it's a dirty trick. But it is a sad fact of life that victory in multiplayer games, of any genre, often revolves around the use of dirty tricks.

I have just accepted it, and where possible, I use it myself. I do not see where we have any option, if we want to play and compete.

But I do respect your position on this issue, I really do

[sum1won]

Noone has a problem with you not liking the game. We do, however, have every right to say why we think your justification is wrong, and that is what we are doing. It is in fact a dirty trick to use against light infantry, but there are several far dirtier tricks I can think of that have nothing to do with cavalry in particular.

Possum mentioned to me the sole real big problem with the game- the fact that it is all too easy to get stuck with one person having nothing but light infantry survive, and staying in terrain, and the other person having nothing but a few heavy infantry, and staying in the open. This is an awful situation, as it simply occupies both players forever and ever, as neither of them wants to take inititiative and leave, as they would almost certainly lose.

Perhaps a solution to this would be that after several minutes with no action, victory is awarded to the player with the biggest percentage of their army remaining? Because its really the only solution other than allowing troops to flee to lure enemies out of/into a terrain feature.

[ehre]

And i would like to apologize if it sounded like i was attacking you for your view, i re read my posts when you said that and I didnt mean it to sound like that

[Redpossum]

I think Efthimios is understandably upset.

If he's like most of us, he went from kicking the AI's ass in SP to getting used like a doggie chew-toy in MP. And that's upsetting.

When a player that hasn't played MP before enters a community that has been competing against one another for 2 weeks to a month, that new player is going to get handled roughly and rudely their first few games. This is inevitable and unavoidable.

And when this seems to be happening because of a tactic that seems to the new player somewhat underhanded or unsporting, this makes it even more upsetting.

But as Darwin said so clearly, competition leads to evolution. As we have competed against one another, our play styles have evolved and improved.

Look at Ehre, he's about 200% better than he was when I first played him. He went from being almost-a-walkover to being my equal, and a challenger to Sum1won. And it only took him about a week.

How did he do this? He watched, learned, adapted, and improved. He took it in the shorts from Sum1's cavalry, (as we all have a time or three), and he learned to use his own cavalry the same way. He also learned that while there's no way to stop your infantry being drawn out, there are ways to mitigate the effect.

So while I have great sympathy for Efthimios, I'm afraid he's just going through what every new player has to endure when first entering an online game community.

In my defense, I did give him a break when we played, because he was new. At one point, his leader was charging at me alone, while his troops were stopped. I pointed this out to Efthimios, and repeated my warning until he called his leader back. It seemed the honorable thing to do. Not that I'll be pointing out mistakes like that if he makes them this time next week

So, Efthimios, my friend, you have my sincere sympathies. But I'm afraid all you can do is -

Learn, Adapt, Improve, Evolve!