Heavy Cavalry Frontage Question

[Geffalrus]

I understand that units are given a(n invisible) number score that determines where the game will try to line them up on the battlefield. Heavy infantry have a low score and go in the very center, while cavalry and skirmishers go on the flanks. The issue/question I have regards the relative numbers for Regular Infantry and Companion Cavalry (Hellenistic heavy cavalry).

During a recent battle on a Plains (frontage 12), I brought my doomstack of 2 Silver Shields, 4 Phalanx, 4 Mercenary Infantry, 2 Companion Cavalry, and 2 Anatolian Cavalry.......plus a whole mess of Lydian Archers. The Mercenaries were included because of their Besieger trait. 14 total units to fit into 12 spaces for the melee round.

On the battlefield, my army lined up with the Companions relegated to the rear rank/support zone while all the Infantry and Anatolian Cavalry filled in the remaining spaces in the line. This is not exactly what I wanted, to be honest. I fully expected that my Companion Cavalry would take precedence over the Anatolians and Merc Inf, both of which are nice units, but not as powerful as the Companions. The Companions have higher Attack/Defense, Experience, Stamina, and HP values than either the Anatolians or Mercs. Had they been in line instead, they'd have been in much, much less danger of losing their duel. And even if they did, they were much more likely to survive.

Now, going forward, I can sidestep this problem through precise unit/army composition. But it still seems incorrect that either the Skirmish Cavalry or the Merc Infantry would take priority in the battle line. Terrain doesn't even factor in, as neither unit has a terrain related bonus, nor does the Cavalry have any terrain related penalties (unlike pikes and elephants, for example).

Is this really working as intended? Is it fixable if not?

[mgardner]

I feel your pain... Today I witnessed a defensive battle where all my support units were the free garrison units, while the provincial skirmishers in the stack were not involved in the fighting at all.

[budd]

I wonder if any kind of user setup is possible for the empires battles. sometimes i don't want to export to FOG2 but worry about the auto setup, so i export.

[AlexDetrojan]

This is a major issue with in game battles. There should be an option as to how to set up your army. What General would set up their army willy nilly.
Alex

[budd]

I was thinking about this some more as i play. I imagine the setup would be for SP only as it would slow down MP play, but what about a setup template for each army that the user could set and was changeable as your army units changed. would that work in SP and MP?

[Geffalrus]

This is a major issue with in game battles. There should be an option as to how to set up your army. What General would set up their army willy nilly.
Alex

Obviously you don't want to add a step to the automatic process that governs battles during the game. However, maybe there could be a UI option added for the army where a window of some sort pops up depicting battles with various terrain that can be selected. The player can then rearrange units within the fundamental parameters (heavies in the center, etc). That way the player could prioritize certain infantry, or cavalry, or skirmisher types.

Otherwise, maybe the devs could take another look at the algorithm governing units allocated to the field of battle and tweak it a bit. There needs to be a priority for better units within the acceptable framework. Heavy cavalry should bump out weaker medium foot, for example.