The Rally Point (discussion and questions)

[MikeMarchant]

If the unit hadn't taken many casualties, multiple rallies wouldn't be out of the question, particularly if a better morale grade or with a general. I don't recall ever reading multiple rallies weren't possible.

I'm not describing multipe rallies, but a unti rallying after having been broken twice. My recollection is that a unit broken twice can't re-rally.


Best Wishes

Mike

[Swuul]

Have the rules changed regarding rallies or have I just misremembered them?

I've just had an opposition unit rally for the second time after breaking. He broke initially and then rallied and then broke a second time and has now rallied again. I didn't think this was possible. I haven't bothered chasing untis that have broekn twoce.


Best Wishes

Mike

If you are talking of our game, that unit actually rallied now the third time from broken. Warbands, you gotta love them (well, actually, I hate them). So easy to flank and break with flank charges, but they have so damn many men they just keep coming back, especially if being a general. A general unit which doesn't suffer from the "too many men lost" -malus is very likely to come back if it doesn't leg off the field in a couple rounds.

Also, I haven't been aware there would be some rule against a unit rallying and coming back several times. Can't find such a thing mentioned in the rules, can't find it mentioned in the patch notes either.

[rbodleyscott]

Have the rules changed regarding rallies or have I just misremembered them?

I've just had an opposition unit rally for the second time after breaking. He broke initially and then rallied and then broke a second time and has now rallied again. I didn't think this was possible. I haven't bothered chasing untis that have broekn twoce.


Best Wishes

Mike

If you are talking of our game, that unit actually rallied now the third time from broken. Warbands, you gotta love them (well, actually, I hate them). So easy to flank and break with flank charges, but they have so damn many men they just keep coming back, especially if being a general. A general unit which doesn't suffer from the "too many men lost" -malus is very likely to come back if it doesn't leg off the field in a couple rounds.

Also, I haven't been aware there would be some rule against a unit rallying and coming back several times. Can't find such a thing mentioned in the rules, can't find it mentioned in the patch notes either.

There is no such rule.

[MikeMarchant]

Have the rules changed regarding rallies or have I just misremembered them?

I've just had an opposition unit rally for the second time after breaking. He broke initially and then rallied and then broke a second time and has now rallied again. I didn't think this was possible. I haven't bothered chasing untis that have broekn twoce.


Best Wishes

Mike

If you are talking of our game, that unit actually rallied now the third time from broken. Warbands, you gotta love them (well, actually, I hate them). So easy to flank and break with flank charges, but they have so damn many men they just keep coming back, especially if being a general. A general unit which doesn't suffer from the "too many men lost" -malus is very likely to come back if it doesn't leg off the field in a couple rounds.

Also, I haven't been aware there would be some rule against a unit rallying and coming back several times. Can't find such a thing mentioned in the rules, can't find it mentioned in the patch notes either.

There is no such rule.

Thanks, Richard.


Best Wishes

Mike

[MikeMarchant]

If the unit hadn't taken many casualties, multiple rallies wouldn't be out of the question, particularly if a better morale grade or with a general. I don't recall ever reading multiple rallies weren't possible.

I'm not describing multipe rallies, but a unti rallying after having been broken twice. My recollection is that a unit broken twice can't re-rally.


Best Wishes

Mike

Yes, I hadn't realised it was 3 times, though!

I really should have escorted him off the bard with my LF that was nearby and doing nothing useful.

I don't know where I got that rule from. It's been in my head since I've been playing FoG II. I'm going to have to pay more attention to chasing routers off the board.


Best Wishes

Mike

[Swuul]

I am not sure if the British army with Viking allies (that I am using in Early Medieval) is an entirely fair army. No matter what kind of blunders I make during set-up or during the actual matches, all can be rectified by throwing in more meat to the grinder (like in my match vs the Dailami army; I stupidly (and/or because my opponent brilliantly took advantage of my stupidity) lost 12 units in a matter of few rounds, and that meant nothing for the end result). All I really have to take care of is keep the Generals near to the place where first contact with opposition will happen (to get the plus to cohesion tests, which *will* happen, and to get the bonus to rally checks after the units start to get Disrupted), and everything will go on with its own weight (sic) as the mass of units gets into flank and rear charge positions. Then there is the raw spearmen, which are awesome cavalry stoppers because of their massive numbers (ok, the impact round is scary as heck as they usually have 0% to win that), but again, just keep their General close, and then massive difference in numbers means the opposing cavalry has essentially zero chances in the next rounds (though the raw spearmen are absolute poo versus opposing infantry)) while the swarmers have already moved behind the cavalry so that they can not bounce off.

What I find strange is that nobody has used this army-combo in Digital League before. I took this army to this season as an experiment what I can do with a horde of cheap troops backed by a couple crack units (the huscarls and berserkers), and I have to say I have been amazed by the results so far. Almost feels like cheating... Sorry guys

[MikeMarchant]

Another question, and again I don't know whetehr this is a bug or whether I have misunderstood the rules.

An enemy spear unit is charged in the rear by a unit of LH. The light horse does not back off and remains in melee. On my opponent's turn the LH is still in contact and ends up fragemented. Now it's my turn again. With the LH still in contact with the spear I look to charge the spear unit in its rear with cavalry. I am permitted the charge, but it does not offer me the flank attack bonus. There is no question of me being to the spear unit's rear, I am directly behind it with 2 cavarly units and several LH, but none of them are offered the flank bonus.

When I look closely at the unit I can see that it seems to be facing my potentially charging cavalry, and only a few of the figures are facing backwards to the LH. I wondered if the spear unit was in square, but there was no mention of that anywwhere and no figures were facing to the sides. The LH broke on that turn and all of the figures turned to face my cavalry, so definitely not square.

Why would the unit fail to turn to face the LH when charged in the rear by it and remaining in melee contact with it?


Best Wishes

Mike

[batesmotel]

It's a change in the latest update that troops don't turn to face lights if it's would leave them vulnerable to a flank/rear charge.

Chris

[MikeMarchant]

It's a change in the latest update that troops don't turn to face lights if it's would leave them vulnerable to a flank/rear charge.

Chris

Thanks, Chris; that's why I haven't seen this behaviour before.

Such a pity, because I often use LH for this very purpose.


Best wishes

Mike

[paulmcneil]

So are Lights going to get a reduction in cost as their use in outflanking has just been removed?

[DanZanzibar]

20 point light javelin horse... you’re going to give me nightmares!

[Athos1660]

So are Lights going to get a reduction in cost as their use in outflanking has just been removed?

I think that this "skill"/exploit was not meant to be included in the initial price

[paulmcneil]

So are Lights going to get a reduction in cost as their use in outflanking has just been removed?

I think that this "skill"/exploit was not meant to be included in the initial price

Surely it's the same "skill" that is common to all troops, until now?

[Triarii]

Yep the change has rather banjaxed the Bedouin list that, unfortunately, I chose for late antiquity. The prolific LC lancers in that list would have reasonably high chance of 'sticking' to non-light troops with a flank or rear charge (that is without the gamey blocking of a fall back - although I freely admit I was not above doing this). Having a swarm of the LC lancers with a General could create all sorts of problems for the opposition by dint of their being nimble and threatening to turn flanks and force changed facing for the MC lancers to exploit. Not so now. As a result they have become rather useless. I have one ongoing game where six or seven LC lancers were behind the infantry line with the protected MC lancers in front. It was looking good - am in a different game now. Doubly unfortunate as the map is truncated by a river so flanking was difficult with anything except the lights. So the patch notes were rather gloomy reading this time round.

[Athos1660]

So are Lights going to get a reduction in cost as their use in outflanking has just been removed?

I think that this "skill"/exploit was not meant to be included in the initial price

Surely it's the same "skill" that is common to all troops, until now?

Using Light troops to make non-light troops turn and being able to flank/rear charge them with a non-light unit on the next turn is obviously the opposite of a brillant tactic to say the least, wasn't it ? That's the kind of "tactic" that should be removed from the game, shouldn't it ?

[paulmcneil]

I think that this "skill"/exploit was not meant to be included in the initial price

Surely it's the same "skill" that is common to all troops, until now?

Using Light troops to make non-light troops turn and being able to flank/rear charge them with a non-light unit on the next turn is obviously the opposite of a brillant tactic to say the least, wasn't it ? That's the kind of "tactic" that should be removed from the game, shouldn't it ?

Did I say it shouldn't be? Or are you using the usual tactic of arguing against something I haven't said? That should be removed from the stream shouldn't it?

[Athos1660]

Surely it's the same "skill" that is common to all troops, until now?

Using Light troops to make non-light troops turn and being able to flank/rear charge them with a non-light unit on the next turn is obviously the opposite of a brillant tactic to say the least, wasn't it ? That's the kind of "tactic" that should be removed from the game, shouldn't it ?

Did I say it shouldn't be? Or are you using the usual tactic of arguing against something I haven't said? That should be removed from the stream shouldn't it?

Unit costs don't include exploits players discover and use.
When exploits are removed, costs remain the same.
Period.

Have fun.
Cheers!

[SnuggleBunnies]

It's a good change for the game, and light horse are still very much worth their price. See the utter stomping I'm receiving in EMA using an army with no light horse!

[MikeC_81]

It's a good change for the game, and light horse are still very much worth their price. See the utter stomping I'm receiving in EMA using an army with no light horse!

You sure its the LH? I think you made the same mistake I did when I played EMA and picked an army with no lancers and no def spears. Those are the two defining unit types for that period imo.

[SnuggleBunnies]

Lancers is a problem too but the lack of light horse makes it very difficult to push my cavalry onto the offensive or to decisively win the skirmishing fight, or to chase down fragmented enemy units.