Game mode with camps

[Yeferz01]

Are there any plans to add a battle mode with army camps to the game? It strikes me the a significant feature of a lot of field battles in the medieval and ancient eras is fighting over and pillaging of the other side's camp. Open battle mode doesn't depict this however. I was wondering if implementing mechanics or a game mode to represent this aspect of medieval battle was something that has been considered and that people would be interested in?

[Mord]

Funny, I was just thinking about this the other day. I am all for it. In the least I'd like to see some tent models added to both titles.

Mord.

[Mord]

Out of a 144 views I guess no one else cares?


Mord.

[Dux Limitis]

I think should bring it to the game.If I remember,in the original tabletop army books there're camp and fortified camp selections to choose(Depend on the nation/armylist).And I think most folks here must know the Battle of Pliska in 811 AD,a well known battle about the camp raid.But if the Mr.Richard not replied this topic yet might means this mode won't be add to the game.

[rbodleyscott]

I don't rule it out, but there are other priorities at present.

[Dux Limitis]

I don't rule it out, but there are other priorities at present.

Thanks for let us know mister.

[Yeferz01]

I should have been a little more clear in my original post. What I had in mind was actually something like a mode which is basically the same as open battle, but with each side having a camp in their deployment zone, similar to those in some of the epic battles. It's more about flavour than wanting a radically different game mode.

[w_michael]

Perhaps camps could work as stationary Standard Wagons. They would provide a positive bonus to the army until routed (sacked) when they would then provide a penalty to the owning army.

[Yeferz01]

Perhaps camps could work as stationary Standard Wagons. They would provide a positive bonus to the army until routed (sacked) when they would then provide a penalty to the owning army.

I quite like that idea, it seems like a big problem medieval and ancient commanders had was their soldiers falling out of order to loot the enemy camp rather than turning to flank an enemy. A mode like this would give a player some incentive to simulate that behaviour. Of course I appreciate that this sort of thing takes effort to implement and balance, so I'd still find camps on the map purely for aesthetic purposes satisfying.

[TheGrayMouser]

Perhaps camps could work as stationary Standard Wagons. They would provide a positive bonus to the army until routed (sacked) when they would then provide a penalty to the owning army.

Great idea using the wagon! I would propose almost the opposite though, there would be no positive effect but rather, just like the ambush scenario when the ambush is sprung, once the “wagon” is sacked all units in a radius test for a cohesion drop. There would need be scripting so players can only place in the center rear area of the map, on clear grids etc to prevent funny business!

[stockwellpete]

FOG1 had compulsory camps and you could choose whether it would be an open camp or a fortified one. I am not in favour of compulsory camps, but I do like the idea of optional camps that could be linked to an increased supply of missiles. If you chose to buy a camp, then maybe your archers could could get more ammunition? Perhaps 2 extra shots, which they would get at the start of their next turn after their ammo had been reduced to zero, provided that they still controlled the camp at that point?

[rbodleyscott]

FOG1 had compulsory camps and you could choose whether it would be an open camp or a fortified one. I am not in favour of compulsory camps, but I do like the idea of optional camps that could be linked to an increased supply of missiles. If you chose to buy a camp, then maybe your archers could could get more ammunition? Perhaps 2 extra shots, which they would get at the start of their next turn after their ammo had been reduced to zero, provided that they still controlled the camp at that point?

Interesting idea.

[TheGrayMouser]

FOG1 had compulsory camps and you could choose whether it would be an open camp or a fortified one. I am not in favour of compulsory camps, but I do like the idea of optional camps that could be linked to an increased supply of missiles. If you chose to buy a camp, then maybe your archers could could get more ammunition? Perhaps 2 extra shots, which they would get at the start of their next turn after their ammo had been reduced to zero, provided that they still controlled the camp at that point?

Interesting idea.

I like this, except it seems it only benefits shooty armies.... Unless as an offset there was a chance your OWN routed units decide to ( under AI controll) sack your own camp!

[stockwellpete]

I like this, except it seems it only benefits shooty armies.... Unless as an offset there was a chance your OWN routed units decide to ( under AI controll) sack your own camp!

There may be other benefits from a camp that we can come up with. I have a few ideas . . .

1) at the moment knights seem to have unlimited lances. They can charge in time and time again with a lance bonus. What if lances broke a bit more often? What if knights had 2 lances, shown in the way that ammo is shown now? And camps gave you +1 lances as a top-up?

2) what if there was a morale rally bonus for proximity to your camp. Say, if a routed unit was within 3 squares of a camp then it would automatically try to rally that turn. Something like that anyway. It would encourage players to keep their camps central and not too far from the battle line.

3) +1 ammo for artillery too

[Dux Limitis]

I like this, except it seems it only benefits shooty armies.... Unless as an offset there was a chance your OWN routed units decide to ( under AI controll) sack your own camp!

There may be other benefits from a camp that we can come up with. I have a few ideas . . .

1) at the moment knights seem to have unlimited lances. They can charge in time and time again with a lance bonus. What if lances broke a bit more often? What if knights had 2 lances, shown in the way that ammo is shown now? And camps gave you +1 lances as a top-up?

2) what if there was a morale rally bonus for proximity to your camp. Say, if a routed unit was within 3 squares of a camp then it would automatically try to rally that turn. Something like that anyway. It would encourage players to keep their camps central and not too far from the battle line.

3) +1 ammo for artillery too

I think the first point is a bit odd because it's conflict with the game rules.The lances,pilums and others are calculate in the overall effects at impact phase but not count in specific numbers.And I think knights in FoG are in mixed unit with sergeants,squires,valets etc.The last two always with the backup horses and additional lances for knights in histroy.

[Athos1660]

Several sources also seem to mention knights charging on and on, even with a lance partially broken, until this lance is unusable.

As a spartian would say about his sword, it is not the size that matters, it is how you use it

[toska]

I would love to see camps in the game!

Some considerations:

How should the camp be represented in the game? a square would be too small, ideally its size is in proportion to the size of the army

How could it be looted or defended? For playability reasons, light units should not be able to do so and at a larger camp, more attacking units would be necessary to do so.

how is looting resolved? Should the attackers be fighting the structure as if it were a troop?

What bonuses or penalties should I have? I'm left with the ability to regroup units that get closer to him and maybe some small general morale bonus. in the same way, when the entire army or some random units are looted, they should pass a morale check.

problems of including camps: players would tend to adopt defensive positions without good reason or fair play to advance to the center of the field

[Buttons]

I would make camps able to be placed by the player and when looted they enforce map-wide morale checks for the army in question. Count it as a town terrain wise which the attacker can move through when they have looted the camp. Looters have to pass automatic morale checks to stop looting after capturing a camp. Fortfified camps are purchased like units for certain armies and make camps immune to light infantry, cavalry, elephants, and chariots.

So for example lets say you punch a hole in the enemy lines and send a unit of cavalry towards the enemy’s unfortified camp. The enemy tries to intercept your unit but fails and you loot the camp. The entire enemy army takes a morale check possibly breaking some units. Your cavalry unit however is busy looting the camp and refuses to turn back towards the battle just like they are pursuing a retreating unit.

Another idea is to make unthreatened units ‘drawn’ to an unfortified enemy camp, as numerous battles have been decided when pursuing units decided to loot the enemy baggage instead of rejoining the battle.

[MVP7]

The simplest way to do camps that I can think of would be immobile unit (or several units grouped together for a larger camp) that would contribute significantly to the overall rout percent. The camp would have to be charged and dwindled down in fairly one sided melee (i.e. looting) over a few turns which would leave the looting unit(s) vulnerable to charges by enemy.

With this approach the camp could be cheap, free or exclusive to some game modes. It would be a tempting target for its rout percent value but risky due to the melee/looting making the attackers uncontrollable for a number of turns (they could even be made flankable from any direction during the looting). Mechanically this should require fairly little new code. From historical point of view it also seem pretty accurate to how fighting involving the camps would usually play out.