Latest FoG feedback

[deadtorius]

Personally if they cleaned up what causes anarchy it might solve some problems. On the TT foot troops won't anarchy on mounted, including elephants and chariots, so no chasing LH about. Mounted wont anarchy on elephants, they really dont want to go there anyway
They wont burst through friends if the only target is Lights.
They wont anarchy into enemy in or beyond disordering terrain, so no pikes charging into the woods
If they are in terrain or they are defending a wall, riverbank or field fortification they wont go
They dont test if there for routers

If the PC game had those factored in the anarchy might at least be less stupid and possibly more controlled. Although I dont know what to do in the scenarios with Alexander as he seems to always run off after something that is in range.

[Paisley]

I'd tend to agree with all those. Perhaps in an ideal world that sort of stupidity would occur once in a blue moon, but it's probably easier just to ban them. I'd also make an exception in cases 1 and 3 if the enemy was rear-chargeable or fragmented. And I'd add 'defending an 'upslope' hexside to case 4.

But even were all that fixed, there'd still be the issue that per formation, anarchy is over 2.5x as common on the pc as on the tabletop (eg a pike formation on the table is 8-12 bases which is represented by 3-4 formations on the pc, a legion formation might be 4 bases, which would be 2 formations on the pc (twice as many) and a typical unit seems to be 6-8 bases or 3-4 formations on the pc (3-4 times as many)). I'm sorry to bang on about this, but I think it's just as important as anarchy AI. Anarchy on the tabletop works in a player happy way (I presume) because its incidence is pretty low and it affects a big chunk all at once in a single formation thta has some staying power. On the pc its incidence is 2.5x higher (or more) because of the higher number of formations fielded for any given number of bases and it is quite likely to be peicemeal in its effect and given the low staying power of pc formations compared to the pc, the effect is presumably roughly doubled again.

Therefore I think anarchy tests should be made easier to pass. If we're rolling 2d6, I'd say a drilled unit in command should be failing about 1 time in 36 as a max. That'd be a roll of 2 on 2d6. That would cover the first problem of higher number of formations.

The effect of the low staying power can only (it seems to me) be countered by anarchy happening at the start of a player turn so the player can move up units to simulate the effect of a larger-formation anarchy charge on the table. You've still got the problem that your anarchist may not have moved to contact as you would have wished, and so may make maintaining a line more difficult, he may well have been unsupported and so more likely to be disrupted than if he'd been moved by the player, but the general effect would be more akin to what I imagine it is on the table.

If anyone wants to give table examples to give some beef to the actual chances of anarchy, that'd be great. I presume a 7 is needed to pass the CMT and you get a bonus of +1 for being drilled and another +1 for being in command. So the test is failed on 4 or less for drilled/in command. That's a 1 in 6 chance and so given the typical 6-8 base formation on the table is represented by 3-4 counters, anarchy should be about 3-4x less frequent, so about 1 in 18 or 1 in 24 ratherthan the 1 in 36 I postulated. So maybe give +2 for disciplined and +1 for being in command, meaning the test would be failed on a 2 or a 3 on 2d6 and so anarchy would be 1 in 12. Still to high really but 1 in 36 might be considered too low

[davouthojo]

Looking at the rules, greater than a 7 is needed to pass a CMT. So, given temptation, I reckon the following are the percentages to charge:

8%: Drilled, adjacent to inspiring general
17%: Drilled, adjacent to a general or in command distance of inspiring general
28%: Drilled in command, Undrilled in command distance of inspiring general
42%: Drilled out of command, Undrilled in command
58%: Undrilled out of command

Short of code rewrites (some of the ideas in the thread would be great!) I'd say there is a case to make these 1 pip harder, so that drilled adjacent to an inspiring general have a 3% (1 in 36) chance as Paisley suggests.

[jamespcrowley]

They already are - quality re-rolls apply to these die rolls to.

It would seem not. Under 'Troop Quality' it states quite clearly that quality re-rolls do not apply to CMTs. However, I see that Drilled is taken into account in so far as drilled BGs pass on a 7 rather than an 8.

Perhaps troop quality ought to be factored in; elite and superior troops really shouldn't be anarchy charging as much as average troops.

[Paisley]

I'd say superior and elite drilled would have a case for getting the bonuses, I'm not so sure about undrilled... almost the reverse if anything...

If everyone needed a 7 or more to pass and drilled elite gave +1, drilled superior +1, and in command +1 (+2 if inspired) and drilled infantry gained an additional +1 then you'd have:

Drilled elite infantry, inspired: +5 (will not anarch)
Drilled superior infantry, inspired or Drilled elite infantry in command +4
Drilled average infantry, inspired, or Drilled superior infantry in command or Drilled elite infantry out of command +3
Undrilled infantry (any grade) inspired +2
Undrilled infantry in command +1
Undrilled infantry 0

and so forth.

[deeter]

I can't fathom what the developers have done to anarchy or why? It was probably a little too rare bedore but now it's almost guaranteed. Furthermore, when it happens is completely annoying. I suspect the higher the quality, the more incentive there is to charge. I'm on the verge of going to all non-shock troops just to be rid of this!

Deeter

[76mm]

I'm on the verge of going to all non-shock troops just to be rid of this!

it's not just shock troops, pikes also get it very badly...

[RyanDG]

I'm on the verge of going to all non-shock troops just to be rid of this!

it's not just shock troops, pikes also get it very badly...

Pike are shock troops.

[arsan]

I can't fathom what the developers have done to anarchy or why? It was probably a little too rare bedore but now it's almost guaranteed. Furthermore, when it happens is completely annoying. I suspect the higher the quality, the more incentive there is to charge. I'm on the verge of going to all non-shock troops just to be rid of this!

Deeter

+1! Its really frustrating... nearly to the point of making 1.2.5 unplayable
Anarchy happens muuuuch more frecuently now!
All my Ptolemaic army continuously goes anarchist on me! The only non shock troops i have are my slingers and elephant so...
This new anarchy system seems little "Hellenistic armies friendly".
Why was the anarchy system changed at all?? i don't recall seeing much complains about how it was before...
Talk about fixing whats wasn't broken... i can think of a dozen more urgent issues FoG would need to improve before...

On the this thread there are a lot of cool ideas, but i suspect most of them (new phases, new hold buttons...) are hardly doable. At least at short term

I will be satisfied with anarchy charges being like they were befor and with making sure all TT restrictions are correctly applied in the PC game (MF not charging out of terrain, HF not chargin in terrain, foot don't charging cavalry...)
Just my 2 cents

[batesmotel]

I can't fathom what the developers have done to anarchy or why? It was probably a little too rare bedore but now it's almost guaranteed. Furthermore, when it happens is completely annoying. I suspect the higher the quality, the more incentive there is to charge. I'm on the verge of going to all non-shock troops just to be rid of this!

Deeter

+1! Its really frustrating... nearly to the point of making 1.2.5 unplayable
Anarchy happens muuuuch more frecuently now!
All my Ptolemaic army continuously goes anarchist on me! The only non shock troops i have are my slingers and elephant so...
This new anarchy system seems little "Hellenistic armies friendly".
Why was the anarchy system changed at all?? i don't recall seeing much complains about how it was before...
Talk about fixing whats wasn't broken... i can think of a dozen more urgent issues FoG would need to improve before...

On the this thread there are a lot of cool ideas, but i suspect most of them (new phases, new hold buttons...) are hardly doable. At least at short term

I will be satisfied with anarchy charges being like they were befor and with making sure all TT restrictions are correctly applied in the PC game (MF not charging out of terrain, HF not chargin in terrain, foot don't charging cavalry...)
Just my 2 cents

Why are you buying pikes if you don't want to charge with them? In 1.2.5, foot shouldn't anarchy charge either shock mounted or opponents in bad terrain as far as I have seen. Against pretty much anything else, you probably should be charging with the pike. If you don't want to risk the anarchy charges, stay out of charge range of the opposing troops and put a skirmish screen two hexes in front of your pikes to avoid being forced to test for charging opposing skirmishers.

Chris

[Morbio]

I can't fathom what the developers have done to anarchy or why? It was probably a little too rare bedore but now it's almost guaranteed. Furthermore, when it happens is completely annoying. I suspect the higher the quality, the more incentive there is to charge. I'm on the verge of going to all non-shock troops just to be rid of this!

Deeter

+1! Its really frustrating... nearly to the point of making 1.2.5 unplayable
Anarchy happens muuuuch more frecuently now!
All my Ptolemaic army continuously goes anarchist on me! The only non shock troops i have are my slingers and elephant so...
This new anarchy system seems little "Hellenistic armies friendly".
Why was the anarchy system changed at all?? i don't recall seeing much complains about how it was before...
Talk about fixing whats wasn't broken... i can think of a dozen more urgent issues FoG would need to improve before...

On the this thread there are a lot of cool ideas, but i suspect most of them (new phases, new hold buttons...) are hardly doable. At least at short term

I will be satisfied with anarchy charges being like they were befor and with making sure all TT restrictions are correctly applied in the PC game (MF not charging out of terrain, HF not chargin in terrain, foot don't charging cavalry...)
Just my 2 cents

Why are you buying pikes if you don't want to charge with them? In 1.2.5, foot shouldn't anarchy charge either shock mounted or opponents in bad terrain as far as I have seen. Against pretty much anything else, you probably should be charging with the pike. If you don't want to risk the anarchy charges, stay out of charge range of the opposing troops and put a skirmish screen two hexes in front of your pikes to avoid being forced to test for charging opposing skirmishers.

Chris

I'm no expert on the rules, I just play, but I mostly find that pikes do worse charging legions (or similar), or other pikes, than receiving the charge. I don't know if the POAs or whatever are the same, maybe it is just perception, but I've certainly observed that attacking is worse than defending - the percentages are often the same, but the results are worse.

[batesmotel]

I'm no expert on the rules, I just play, but I mostly find that pikes do worse charging legions (or similar), or other pikes, than receiving the charge. I don't know if the POAs or whatever are the same, maybe it is just perception, but I've certainly observed that attacking is worse than defending - the percentages are often the same, but the results are worse.

The POAs are the same whether the pikes charge or receive the charge. One advantage of receiving is that it may be easier to have rear support in place if you lose to the legions than if you are charging. If you are careful when you charge, you can often have rear support for most of the charging pikes and at that point it is probably to your advantage to have the initiative rather than waiting and taking your chances on anarchy charges. An IC is a good investment if you think you do want to stand and receive with your pikes. With an IC in command range, steady pikes should only fail the CMT not to charge on a roll of 4 or less on 2D6.

Chris

[RyanDG]

I'm no expert on the rules, I just play, but I mostly find that pikes do worse charging legions (or similar), or other pikes, than receiving the charge. I don't know if the POAs or whatever are the same, maybe it is just perception, but I've certainly observed that attacking is worse than defending - the percentages are often the same, but the results are worse.

if I had to guess as to the reason why this is, it deals with the perception of what happens after that first combat. If a Pike holds cohesion after the initial charge, the Pike's combat results swing signficantly in their favor. If you have received the charge, this allows you to selective stage these melee combats to your benefit by using the Pike's who have not lost cohesion to disrupt and fragment the enemy troops that charged into you. If you are forced to charge, the first melee combat phase is no longer in your control (the phase that Pike's really excel at as long as they are unbroken) and because of this, it may seem like your results are skewed against you (since your opponent will be using the disordered Pike to leverage your line against you). Ultimately, depending on unit type, even if the POAs are the same - due to the nature of the single battle group combats in the PC version of the game - there may be a slight advantage to receiving a charge so that you have full control over the resulting melee combat phase and are able to do your best to downplay your disordered units and focus more on where your advantages are.

[SRW1962]

I haven't had many, if any problems with anarchy since the update, but I do acknowledge other people have and I can fully understand their frustration when they suddenly find that the way they are used to using their troops is suddenly turned on its head. As an interim measure until the situation is resolved I would say that possibly the best thing to do with your lines of pikes etc that you don't want to go pusuing the enemy in penny packets is to keep it simple, very simple. By this I mean that you should endeavour to make sure that your battle line is dressed and ready as a coherent whole before you get within charge distance of the enemy, then when the time is right simply commit the whole lot. But ensure prior to this that they have adequate skirmisher support as a line in front of them to chase off enemy skirmishers who will try to pull units out of position etc and use your skirmishers to chase theirs off so that your pikes etc can simply launch themselves at the enemy battleline uninterrupted. This is the way I use my shock troops as I never try to hold station unless of course it is a defendable position that you know that your troops won't (or shouldn't) charge out of and even then I still mostly go on the attack (or defend agressively), although I am sure that most people will have figured this out for themselves by now.

[arsan]

Why are you buying pikes if you don't want to charge with them? In 1.2.5, foot shouldn't anarchy charge either shock mounted or opponents in bad terrain as far as I have seen. Against pretty much anything else, you probably should be charging with the pike. If you don't want to risk the anarchy charges, stay out of charge range of the opposing troops and put a skirmish screen two hexes in front of your pikes to avoid being forced to test for charging opposing skirmishers.
Chris

Well, i woudl love to charge with them if they will wait for me giving them orders form time to time instead of scattering around charging behind anything that passes under his radar... "hey look, some skirmishers around... lest run after them with our 15 feet pikes instead of keeping formation with our buddies. We will not catch them of course but it will be interesting to get stranded alone just in front of the whole enemy army!"
Are they drilled phalangites trained to fight as a whole or heat guided missiles??

I haven't seem my pikes charging in terrain (still...) but sadly i've seen my thorikitai leaving a nice steep hill to charge an elite legionary on the open. Ouch! It wasn't nice to see!
Not to talk about that lancer cavalry that does an anarchy charge against a pike unit, gets mauled and disordered, breaks off and anarchy charge again against the same pike unit next turn, receives 20% damage ad route off the map

I don't mind a certain degree of Anarchy like we had before, but since 1.2.5 it happens more than 2 time as frequently. When on every turn you have some BG's going nuts it stops being fun and becomes a chore
What has been tweaked so now it happens all the time??

[petergarnett]

I have to say I'm not happy with HF making anarchy charges against LF - did no-one tell them the LF would run away evading!

[deadtorius]

but they will do it on the TT too. I think those lights are taught 100 of the greatest shock troops insults in several languages and they run up and taunt the heavies who then charge as the lights run away laughing. Although with the new evade rules I have actually managed to catch a few of the ever evasive little buggers

[IainMcNeil]

There was a bug in 1.1.2 that prevented foot anarchy charging, so it was fixed in 1.2.5 so you will see it more often but only because the bug got fixed.

You have to get your head around tht idea that if you put your shock troops in charge range, expect them to charge. This is what they did and why they are classified as shock troops. Knights and Pikes did not stand off - when close they engaged. If you dont want them to charge you must stay further back from the enemy. When in charge range, shock troops are already committed. Once you get your head around this concept I think it will all fall in to place.

If you dont want skirmishers to draw you in to a charge you must screen with your own skirmishers - as they did historically.

[Paisley]

Right... so it's futile for pikemen to attempt to hold a hilltop? I actually have no problem with that so long as I know... there is a gamey solution that involves hanging back in Wellingtonian style behind the crest. (with Swiss of course one just crushes the enemy anyway so there's no need for gamey solutions there...)

And there's still the fact that because there are 3-4 times as many formations on the pc, anarchy by the table rules is 3-4 times as common. Which is just silly.

In fairness, I can see that pikes were used as shock troops. But the way hillsides work in FoG, shock troops can't charge down hill unless they 'hang back' and allow the enemy perhaps to gain the top of the slope. If you see what I'm saying.

[deeter]

I'm still trying to get my head around the reason for changing when anarchy happens, not how often.

Deeter