Rallies.

[tyronec]

After having played a few games my feeling is that there are too many rallies in the game.

In comparison to Ancients my battles have progressed more slowly. This is much what you would expect with the bulks of the units being defensive spears and Knights - the kind of rapid flanking manoeuvres breaking up the line are less common both because of the speed of movement and the difficulties of charging and pinning defenders with the defensive spears. Also combats with knights can often go on for a long time with minimal casualties. Maybe a couple of times have seen a knight unit go rampant and roll over two or more units in a move but it is rare.
What this means is you get a few routs and then there can be many moves before much else happens, so the routed units have more opportunity to rally. Further the armies being used lack the cavalry to chase down the rallying routers, so they have the time to reform and return to the battle.
There is one example in an ongoing game where a unit of knights pursued into a fragmented rallied unit of spears in a village and it looks like they could sit there till nightfall with the amount of damage being dished out by either side.
So if the battle is even there can be a round 1 and then both sides rally up their routed units and line up for a second round. So most of the time it is not going to change the result if one player is ahead but it kind of makes the games drag on if they have hunt down isolated units spread out across the map.

Maybe the balance will change when there are more armies with faster cavalry in the mix but at present it looks like too high a percentage of routed units are getting to rally.

[SimonLancaster]

I haven't seen any difference between the amount of rallies in Ancients and in Medieval. I don't think a routed unit will get more chance to rally because isn't there a turn limit? Isn't it 5 turns or something and then dispersed?

Also, in a game that I played where there were some rallies the units didn't have a chance to get back to fight. When they are fragmented they can only move one square and so almost always they never get back to do anything.

[tyronec]

I haven't seen any difference between the amount of rallies in Ancients and in Medieval. I don't think a routed unit will get more chance to rally because isn't there a turn limit? Isn't it 5 turns or something and then dispersed?

Also, in a game that I played where there were some rallies the units didn't have a chance to get back to fight. When they are fragmented they can only move one square and so almost always they never get back to do anything.

As I understand it the chance of a rally is the same as in Ancients. What I am arguing is that the dynamics of the battles in Medieval is such that rallys from routed will occur more often and can have the effect of dragging the game out and leading to the end of a battle that is not of much fun or interest for either player.
But not always, in our game they had no significant effect.

[SimonLancaster]

I haven't seen any difference between the amount of rallies in Ancients and in Medieval. I don't think a routed unit will get more chance to rally because isn't there a turn limit? Isn't it 5 turns or something and then dispersed?

Also, in a game that I played where there were some rallies the units didn't have a chance to get back to fight. When they are fragmented they can only move one square and so almost always they never get back to do anything.

As I understand it the chance of a rally is the same as in Ancients. What I am arguing is that the dynamics of the battles in Medieval is such that rallys from routed will occur more often and can have the effect of dragging the game out and leading to the end of a battle that is not of much fun or interest for either player.
But not always, in our game they had no significant effect.

Well, you are kind of saying the opposite because you say that battles go slower and melees generally go on longer. You also state correctly that it is a lot harder to get flank attacks which lead to quicker routs.

This all means that routs are more likely to occur later in the battle (if they happen) and not have as much effect on the result other than a little less casualties.

In the game we played recently I think one spearmen unit rallied for you and none for me. It was quite late in the game and it didn’t rally up from fragmented so did nothing.

[stockwellpete]

After having played a few games my feeling is that there are too many rallies in the game.

I tend to agree. I certainly think there are too many rallies from routed of isolated units, which are out of command and a long way from the fighting. While they might not take part in any further combat, they obviously can still affect the outcome of the battle, both in the way it is fought by the remaining units and just by their impact on the scoreboard. They can also make the whole battlefield untidy and incoherent with mini-battles and "Benny-Hill" chases happening across the map (particularly in the case of cavalry armies). When myself and Schweetness101 collaborated on a mod for FOG:Ancients, one of the things we did was to reduce the number of turns a routed unit would have before dispersal and we felt it did make for a better game. Rallying of units that were not routed was unaffected.

[Horde]

Rallies are sometimes annoying, but they usually go in favor of the player who is losing, and I´m ok with that.

[Geffalrus]

What if the mechanics of rallying routed units remain the same - but - the rallied from routed units only refund their rout percent if they enter the command range of a general or a designated command unit like a Standard Wagon (or a similar baggage train unit in Ancients)? That way, units that rally in random places don't prevent a battle resolution - unless - they're near a command unit. If your generals are dead or far away, you can still make use of the units, but you'll still lose if they never get near a general or standard wagon. This would put less pressure on players to HAVE to have light cavalry or rout chasers to deal with routing units. Those units would still be useful, but less crucial.

Rallied routed units could have a status effect indicating that they do not add % back, and that status effect would only disappear when they enter a command radius.

This would also benefit players who spread out their generals over those who mass them all in one place for a power attack. And routed general units would be a high priority for chasing because if they rally, they automatically clear that status effect.

And anything that makes the standard wagon more useful is probably a good thing.

[TheGrayMouser]

What if the mechanics of rallying routed units remain the same - but - the rallied from routed units only refund their rout percent if they enter the command range of a general or a designated command unit like a Standard Wagon (or a similar baggage train unit in Ancients)? That way, units that rally in random places don't prevent a battle resolution - unless - they're near a command unit. If your generals are dead or far away, you can still make use of the units, but you'll still lose if they never get near a general or standard wagon. This would put less pressure on players to HAVE to have light cavalry or rout chasers to deal with routing units. Those units would still be useful, but less crucial

Wouldn’t that punish armies that don’t have light cavalry and heavy infantry armies that get less generals?

Personally, I’ m fine with the way rallying works now, but if it is ever deemed a problem. I’d prefer something simpler.

For example, what if units inside 6 ( could be 4, 5) grids from the sides of the map , and inside 6 grids from their own end zone suffer a rallying and cohesion test penalty, and additionally, units that become routed in these areas or reach them while routing can never rally... A trade off would be that they don’t lose men while routing except when being pursued.

A good secondary effect is it would aid in discouraging players that corner camp and deploy on the back edge.

[Athos1660]

Recipe to cook a good Draughts/Checkers game :
- Nerf pursuing
- Nerf rallying
- Make the terrain flat and open.
(Discard any difficult, rough and non-open squares. Cosmetics suggestion : chequered pattern)
- Nerf highest PoAs, shooting...

[Geffalrus]

Wouldn’t that punish armies that don’t have light cavalry and heavy infantry armies that get less generals?

Personally, I’ m fine with the way rallying works now, but if it is ever deemed a problem. I’d prefer something simpler.

For example, what if units inside 6 ( could be 4, 5) grids from the sides of the map , and inside 6 grids from their own end zone suffer a rallying and cohesion test penalty, and additionally, units that become routed in these areas or reach them while routing can never rally... A trade off would be that they don’t lose men while routing except when being pursued.

A good secondary effect is it would aid in discouraging players that corner camp and deploy on the back edge.

I mean, it would be less so than the current model where any unit that rallies anywhere returns that rout %, requiring some unit to go chase them down. In my suggestion, the rallied router would at least have to work it's way back toward a command unit in order to return that percentage.

Heavy infantry armies don't get less generals. Only a few armies get standard wagons, but currently, they're fairly risky units who need to be in the center of battle. So it wouldn't necessarily make it much easier than an army without them.

[Parallax]

I agree. Enemy rallying to often. I think this mechanic changed of bugged
PS. I have sense, they drop dices every turn, as if they had general. In FoG2Anciens, manual have no detailed description, how rallying working, only "there is chance for rallying"

[TheGrayMouser]

Wouldn’t that punish armies that don’t have light cavalry and heavy infantry armies that get less generals?

Personally, I’ m fine with the way rallying works now, but if it is ever deemed a problem. I’d prefer something simpler.

For example, what if units inside 6 ( could be 4, 5) grids from the sides of the map , and inside 6 grids from their own end zone suffer a rallying and cohesion test penalty, and additionally, units that become routed in these areas or reach them while routing can never rally... A trade off would be that they don’t lose men while routing except when being pursued.

A good secondary effect is it would aid in discouraging players that corner camp and deploy on the back edge.

I mean, it would be less so than the current model where any unit that rallies anywhere returns that rout %, requiring some unit to go chase them down. In my suggestion, the rallied router would at least have to work it's way back toward a command unit in order to return that percentage.

Heavy infantry armies don't get less generals. Only a few armies get standard wagons, but currently, they're fairly risky units who need to be in the center of battle. So it wouldn't necessarily make it much easier than an army without them.

My experience in MP is most players don’t have spare units to herd routers.

I stand corrected on the generals, when was that changed!?