Flank Angle Mod

[Schweetness101]

And I am not sure that over-downgrading each 'effect' in the game (the effect of terrains, the effects of MF on HF, the effects of LF, the effects of Infantry on non-light cavalry, the effect of rear/flank charges etc.) would be a great move for the Vanilla game. But it is a matter of taste and it would certainly make a great mod.

I don't disagree with you. I have not put all of these changes into one mod, and I am not trying to create any sort of overhaul or panacea here. Vanilla FOG2 is my favorite game by far. I've just recently thrown out a few single purpose mods for people to test out some ideas they had, even if I don't necessarily understand their appeal in all cases. I did not understand this mod at first, but stockwellpete has convinced me it is at least worth trying out. It is not that hard of a change to make, so why not give it a whirl? I'm not motivated by the desire to change the vanilla game, but just to experiment, and have fun and help people try out their ideas.

I would argue though that the changes in the cav mod to increase the rate at which cavalry combat is resolved, and the changes to the pike mod (which are numerous, see the thread) are actually increasing the variety in unit behavior and adding more flavor to the game. In particular, the behavior of pikes in vanilla is one area that seemed to be not quite right either historically or in terms of game balance, single or multiplayer, and it seems there is fairly broad community support behind doing something different with pikes, even if I haven't gotten that something right.

The medium foot rebalance though you could argue might be removing unit variety, like for example if we reduced the rough terrain affect between them and heavy infantry. However, it could also be increasing it if say medium foot were made weaker to cavalry in the open (increasing the difference between them and heavies). But, I haven't committed to anything there like with pikes and the cav mod. We've just been discussing and testing out ideas, many of which, like increasing base cost or medium foot cost, would not affect unit variety or homogenize anything.

And I agree with you and RBS that homogenizing for balance is not a desirable goal, and not something I would seek to do.

Speaking of this mod in particular, removing auto drop for infantry 90 degree flanks, but keeping it for cavalry, would arguably be increasing unit variety as well, as explained by stockewellpete (now cav are more important for flanking, rather than just being able to use cheap mediums to do it instead).

cheers, and let me know if there are any mod ideas you want to try out! I'm always up for it.

[Schweetness101]

Ok thanks. I think I have got it changed OK. I will give it a try now. Sorry, modding is way out of my comfort zone.

if it doesn't work don't worry about it I can just upload a new version with the change.

[76mm]

AFAIK the problem with the "mirror" games in FOG2 is that you don't get the same map in the two games, so really they are not mirror at all...you could get a map favorable for one army in one game and a map favorable to the other army in the second. Doesn't help much to select a certain type of map ("hills" or whatever) because the variability within such map types is ginormous.

Regarding this mod, one of the problems I see is that it would seem to encourage players to send off individual units away from the main line to do this or that rather than keeping them in a cohesive line.

[melm]

AFAIK the problem with the "mirror" games in FOG2 is that you don't get the same map in the two games, so really they are not mirror at all...you could get a map favorable for one army in one game and a map favorable to the other army in the second. Doesn't help much to select a certain type of map ("hills" or whatever) because the variability within such map types is ginormous.

Regarding this mod, one of the problems I see is that it would seem to encourage players to send off individual units away from the main line to do this or that rather than keeping them in a cohesive line.

Now mirrored games can be created with exactly the same map.

[Schweetness101]

Regarding this mod, one of the problems I see is that it would seem to encourage players to send off individual units away from the main line to do this or that rather than keeping them in a cohesive line.

I can't be sure of course, but it would seem to do the opposite? ie now the only way for an infantry unit to be flanked by another infantry unit is for that enemy to get all the way around behind it, which is very unlikely if you maintain a line, but still quite likely for a single unit out in the open?

[Athos1660]

I have not put all of these changes into one mod, and I am not trying to create any sort of overhaul or panacea here. Vanilla FOG2 is my favorite game by far. I've just recently thrown out a few single purpose mods for people to test out some ideas they had, even if I don't necessarily understand their appeal in all cases.

I know that and I think we all know that. I like the others thank you fo that !

I would argue though that the changes in the cav mod to increase the rate at which cavalry combat is resolved, and the changes to the pike mod (which are numerous, see the thread) are actually increasing the variety in unit behavior and adding more flavor to the game.

You did a tremendous and very interesting work !

cheers, and let me know if there are any mod ideas you want to try out! I'm always up for it.

well... there is actually one I have desperately tried to make since yesterday for non-light cav : a cohesion test before the impact, ie during the unit is charging, so that the cav fights look somewhat like this :
- Phase 1 : Charge with a cohesion test for both units (the charging one and the charged one)
- Phase 2 : Impact like in the Vanilla game
- Phase 3 : Melee like in the Vanilla game

Till now, I unsuccessfully tried many little things while reading all the script files...

Here is the link to what I achieved (a cohesion test for both units after the impact) : viewtopic.php?f=492&t=98829

If you had any tips, idea...script.. about it, it would be nice

[stockwellpete]

Ok thanks. I think I have got it changed OK. I will give it a try now. Sorry, modding is way out of my comfort zone.

if it doesn't work don't worry about it I can just upload a new version with the change.

Just tried it and it is working fine. Let me know if you upload an updated version with the change as I have two other players interested in trying it out in multi-player. Thanks.

[stockwellpete]

Regarding this mod, one of the problems I see is that it would seem to encourage players to send off individual units away from the main line to do this or that rather than keeping them in a cohesive line.

I can't be sure of course, but it would seem to do the opposite? ie now the only way for an infantry unit to be flanked by another infantry unit is for that enemy to get all the way around behind it, which is very unlikely if you maintain a line, but still quite likely for a single unit out in the open?

Yes, definitely the opposite, I think. Now the emphasis is very much on getting 2v1's rather than flank attacks (which often do involve a bit of a detour to set up). So far battle lines have been more cohesive rather than less. Early days though.

[Schweetness101]

Ok thanks. I think I have got it changed OK. I will give it a try now. Sorry, modding is way out of my comfort zone.

if it doesn't work don't worry about it I can just upload a new version with the change.

Just tried it and it is working fine. Let me know if you upload an updated version with the change as I have two other players interested in trying it out in multi-player. Thanks.

here's that:

https://www.dropbox.com/sh/4zg6jzb7vbso ... xxFTa?dl=0

[TheGrayMouser]

So any attack from a flank on a unit already occupied to its front would inevitably wrap around its rear.

Don't understand this explanation, which would seem to better explain the current mechanics?

I'm not really seeing the logic for neutering flank attacks, even on unoccupied units...units weren't marching around in square, so were facing in one direction or another, and if you hit them from another direction it seems like it should sting?

The main logic is that flank and rear attacks are not really separate things where most units are deployed in extended lines. Also, at the moment you also get so-called flank attacks happening right in the middle of big melees in most games, maybe because a unit has been turned to 45 degrees by one attacker and then hit in the so-called flank by another. In reality there would be no exposed flank there that warranted an automatic cohesion drop (basically because the centre of melees would be jammed full of bodies). Instead players will need to focus on getting 2v1's or 3v1's in the melee itself to wear down the enemy. Given that this should lock units into melees for longer it then puts a premium on making progress with cavalry out on one of the flanks so that they can attack the enemy from the rear.

There will be all sorts of issues with it - not least whether there should still be a +50POA for a unit being hit in the side (I think there probably shouldn't be), or whether the bonus for getting a 2v1 or 3v1 should be a bit higher - because this will change the melee dynamics considerably. I cannot find the discussion from not too long ago where I think some players were saying that cavalry melees take too long so flank attacks should be retained for them, so as to relatively speed up those melees in relation to infantry melees, so that there was more time for developments on the flank to materialise (I think this is a very good point).

I think one of the issues more generally is that our armies are made up of "units" for the purposes of playing the game. How else could you represent armies? But actually, in "real life", soldiers tended to fight as contingents or "battles" (in the medieval period), not as separate units. So this is a way of mitigating that particular anomaly, if that is the right word. Once an army's "units" are engaged in melee, they actually behave more like "contingents" with this idea.

As I say, there are a few of us who were around at the start of FOG2 who want to potter around with this idea and see what we can make of it. It may come to nothing, of course.

Hey Pete, thought I'd throw an Idea out here for you as schweetness obviously has the skill and interest to mod changes and experiment. I'm not sure if this would accomplish what you a looking for BUT

**keep flank and rear hits as they are exactly now EXCEPT:
If the active unit is ADJACENT to the flank of an enemy that is already in close combat and it can legally "engage" by charging according to the current rules ( facing, not ZOC etc) then it can do so but there is NO IMPACT and thus no cohesion drops etc, instead the combat is resolved immeditely by melee capabities with whatever in games rules apply to a unit being meleed by multiple units from multiple direction. Again this would only be for flanks...

This would somewhat be similar to the TT rules where on can join melee in some situations without impact. It would IMHO give a battle line the feeling it was a continuous line where a push back is more of a "bend" or "bow" of the line versus geometric discontinuation of a battle line ( which is then open to flank attacks by fortuitiosly placed rear rank unit at a-historic angles)

[stockwellpete]

here's that:

https://www.dropbox.com/sh/4zg6jzb7vbso ... xxFTa?dl=0

Thanks very much.

[stockwellpete]

Hey Pete, thought I'd throw an Idea out here for you as schweetness obviously has the skill and interest to mod changes and experiment. I'm not sure if this would accomplish what you a looking for BUT

**keep flank and rear hits as they are exactly now EXCEPT:
If the active unit is ADJACENT to the flank of an enemy that is already in close combat and it can legally "engage" by charging according to the current rules ( facing, not ZOC etc) then it can do so but there is NO IMPACT and thus no cohesion drops etc, instead the combat is resolved immeditely by melee capabities with whatever in games rules apply to a unit being meleed by multiple units from multiple direction. Again this would only be for flanks...

This would somewhat be similar to the TT rules where on can join melee in some situations without impact. It would IMHO give a battle line the feeling it was a continuous line where a push back is more of a "bend" or "bow" of the line versus geometric discontinuation of a battle line ( which is then open to flank attacks by fortuitiosly placed rear rank unit at a-historic angles)

OK, TGM. I think I get the idea. If I were you I would talk to Schweetness101 and see if it is moddable. I expect it is. Then we can try it out. Very much agree with this "bend" or "bow" characterisation being desirable.

[76mm]

I can't be sure of course, but it would seem to do the opposite?

Yes, definitely the opposite, I think. Now the emphasis is very much on getting 2v1's rather than flank attacks (which often do involve a bit of a detour to set up). So far battle lines have been more cohesive rather than less. Early days though.

Honestly, sounds a bit strange to me...the main reason to keep in line is to avoid being flanked...seems to me like if you reduce the penalty for being flanked, you reduce the incentive to maintain line? While you say the lines have been more cohesive in your couple of play-throughs, I wonder how generally applicable that would be?

[Schweetness101]

I can't be sure of course, but it would seem to do the opposite?

Yes, definitely the opposite, I think. Now the emphasis is very much on getting 2v1's rather than flank attacks (which often do involve a bit of a detour to set up). So far battle lines have been more cohesive rather than less. Early days though.

Honestly, sounds a bit strange to me...the main reason to keep in line is to avoid being flanked...seems to me like if you reduce the penalty for being flanked, you reduce the incentive to maintain line? While you say the lines have been more cohesive in your couple of play-throughs, I wonder how generally applicable that would be?

you aren't reducing the penalty to being flanked. The penalty is the same. It's just that what counts as a flank for infantry has receded a few degrees so that exact 90 degree attacks are no longer far enough back to count.

The lines would be more cohesive I suspect because:

1) side flank attacks on units at 45 degrees in the middle of the line would now no longer happen. So fewer mid line units would get flanked, and fewer players would do the weird dance where they try to open up a flank mid line by getting an enemy at 45 degrees, which is an a-historical artifact of the grid system
2) you would no longer send individual infantry units out on wide flanks because those are so much less likely to work now. Infantry would be now more for holding a line or occupying rough terrain, not as a dynamic flanking element
3) lone units away from a line are now, relatively, more vulnerable than units in a line, as explained in my previous comment "now the only way for an infantry unit to be flanked by another infantry unit is for that enemy to get all the way around behind it, which is very unlikely if you maintain a line, but still quite likely for a single unit out in the open"

and maybe some other stuff. I dunno, stockwellpete has tested more than me at this point. I mean, if you want you could download the mod and we could do a multiplayer game to try it out.

[Schweetness101]

i hosted a game with the v1.1 of the flank angle mod if there is any interest

[stockwellpete]

I can't be sure of course, but it would seem to do the opposite?

Yes, definitely the opposite, I think. Now the emphasis is very much on getting 2v1's rather than flank attacks (which often do involve a bit of a detour to set up). So far battle lines have been more cohesive rather than less. Early days though.

Honestly, sounds a bit strange to me...the main reason to keep in line is to avoid being flanked...seems to me like if you reduce the penalty for being flanked, you reduce the incentive to maintain line? While you say the lines have been more cohesive in your couple of play-throughs, I wonder how generally applicable that would be?

But if you move units out of the centre now then you will increase your chances of facing 2v1's there, which is a losing strategy in most circumstances. You will still need to keep straight lines to stop this happening.

[stockwellpete]

you aren't reducing the penalty to being flanked. The penalty is the same. It's just that what counts as a flank for infantry has receded a few degrees so that exact 90 degree attacks are no longer far enough back to count.

The lines would be more cohesive I suspect because:

1) side flank attacks on units at 45 degrees in the middle of the line would now no longer happen. So fewer mid line units would get flanked, and fewer players would do the weird dance where they try to open up a flank mid line by getting an enemy at 45 degrees, which is an a-historical artifact of the grid system
2) you would no longer send individual infantry units out on wide flanks because those are so much less likely to work now. Infantry would be now more for holding a line or occupying rough terrain, not as a dynamic flanking element
3) lone units away from a line are now, relatively, more vulnerable than units in a line, as explained in my previous comment "now the only way for an infantry unit to be flanked by another infantry unit is for that enemy to get all the way around behind it, which is very unlikely if you maintain a line, but still quite likely for a single unit out in the open"

and maybe some other stuff. I dunno, stockwellpete has tested more than me at this point. I mean, if you want you could download the mod and we could do a multiplayer game to try it out.

Yes to all those points. In due course we will need to look at the malus a unit gets for being outnumbered. At the moment it is 20% for fighting 2 units simultaneously, 40% for fighting 3 units simultaneously and 50% for fighting 4 or more units at the same time. Maybe the pattern could just be 25%-50%, we'll have to see. The other main issue is the resolution speed of cavalry melees to allow for the possibility of genuine flank attacks that come from the wings.

[Schweetness101]

you aren't reducing the penalty to being flanked. The penalty is the same. It's just that what counts as a flank for infantry has receded a few degrees so that exact 90 degree attacks are no longer far enough back to count.

The lines would be more cohesive I suspect because:

1) side flank attacks on units at 45 degrees in the middle of the line would now no longer happen. So fewer mid line units would get flanked, and fewer players would do the weird dance where they try to open up a flank mid line by getting an enemy at 45 degrees, which is an a-historical artifact of the grid system
2) you would no longer send individual infantry units out on wide flanks because those are so much less likely to work now. Infantry would be now more for holding a line or occupying rough terrain, not as a dynamic flanking element
3) lone units away from a line are now, relatively, more vulnerable than units in a line, as explained in my previous comment "now the only way for an infantry unit to be flanked by another infantry unit is for that enemy to get all the way around behind it, which is very unlikely if you maintain a line, but still quite likely for a single unit out in the open"

and maybe some other stuff. I dunno, stockwellpete has tested more than me at this point. I mean, if you want you could download the mod and we could do a multiplayer game to try it out.

Yes to all those points. In due course we will need to look at the malus a unit gets for being outnumbered. At the moment it is 20% for fighting 2 units simultaneously, 40% for fighting 3 units simultaneously and 50% for fighting 4 or more units at the same time. Maybe the pattern could just be 25%-50%, we'll have to see. The other main issue is the resolution speed of cavalry melees to allow for the possibility of genuine flank attacks that come from the wings.

right, I think that this would pair well with the cav zoc/ap mod

[Schweetness101]

currently this affects elephants and light foot as well, should it? maybe light foot should still have vanilla flanks?

[stockwellpete]

I have put a v1.2 open challenge up in MP, Norman v Breton. So flank attacks are completely removed in this one.