Unit unable to move

[Cunningcairn]

The cataphract in the picture below and the lancer to its left on the hill had been fighting a LF unit in the previous turn. The LF immediately dispersed when it broke after combat with the lancer. This is the beginning of my turn and the lancer that had been in combat with the LF can move normally but the cataphract with all its AP's cannot move at all. Can someone please explain to me why this is happening?

Picture3.jpg (91.89 KiB) Viewed 2412 times

[pompeytheflatulent]

Could it be because of the difficult slope on the corner the cataphracts are trying to cut through that the cataphracts just straight up do not have enough AP to move one square diagonally?

[SuitedQueens]

My best guess is that Dispersion happened at the beginning of the next turn and Cataphracts spend their turn on Pursuit action.

[Cunningcairn]

Could it be because of the difficult slope on the corner the cataphracts are trying to cut through that the cataphracts just straight up do not have enough AP to move one square diagonally?

No they had 16AP and could charge the next turn.

[Cunningcairn]

My best guess is that Dispersion happened at the beginning of the next turn and Cataphracts spend their turn on Pursuit action.

No it happened in the previous turn and the unit broke and immediately dispersed fighting the lancer and not the cataphract. The lancer was able to move in my turn but not the cataphract. This inability to move has been happening to me quite a bit but normally when my unit is ZOC'd and I charge the ZOC'ing unit with another of my units which stays in combat. I am still unable to move the unit that was originally ZOC'd although the ZOCing unit is now in combat.

[SuitedQueens]

Unfortunately I can't reproduce the issues from your threads in my games. I don't know if you fish for them specifically, but I never saw something like that before on YT or anywhere else too. Not to say that you are manufacturing specific narrative, just interesting that no one reported this stuff before.

Anyway, another interesting rule irregularity is that unmaneuvrable units count as mobile for the purposes of charging. But if they step to >=45 degree square first then they can't and they can't move into this square under normal circumstances too.

[Cunningcairn]

Unfortunately I can't reproduce the issues from your threads in my games. I don't know if you fish for them specifically, but I never saw something like that before on YT or anywhere else too. Not to say that you are manufacturing specific narrative, just interesting that no one reported this stuff before.

Anyway, another interesting rule irregularity is that unmaneuvrable units count as mobile for the purposes of charging. But if they step to >=45 degree square first then they can't and they can't move into this square under normal circumstances too.

No I can't reproduce it again at will either. If I could I would have identified the problem. Since my last post I have had 2 instances where I have moved a unit and it has frozen because it has supposedly seen a hidden enemy unit which was not visible before the move. That was absolutely not the case. Problem is I have to crash the game to show this happening which is becoming tiresome. I agree and would also like to know why it is not happening to anyone else. I have been told to reinstall the game which I did . I've also been told I'm just unlucky and I'm just experiencing 1 in a 1000 chance events. Now the suggestion that I am manufacturing a specific narrative?!?! Possibly it is my game style that is pushing the boundaries and exposing these fringe events and I think the comment of a rounding issue might be the closest to understanding what is happening. I think the answer lies in analysing the code that is calculating the results. There are also issues that I don't experience yet other players do. It is units not testing when being shot at and receiving enough casualties to need to do a test. I think the player is going to post a query.

On your unmaneuverable foot comment. Yes I believe that is working as designed and isn't really an irregularity.

[SuitedQueens]

Now the suggestion that I am manufacturing a specific narrative?!?! Possibly it is my game style that is pushing the boundaries and exposing these fringe events and I think the comment of a rounding issue might be the closest to understanding what is happening.

I wouldn't say someone pushing boundaries of gameplay if they are not using enough light cavalry. Visit my thread "Playing for tricks" and check "Mechanics questions" where I posted another example of 5 piece setup when I wasn't aware of "light horse doesn't change engaged unit facing" rule. Ofc it's possible without LH units, but other units not even close to being that mobile which means that things you can do is not that complex.

It is units not testing when being shot at and receiving enough casualties to need to do a test. I think the player is going to post a query.

I had this one too on couple of occasions. I clearly dealt more than 10% but CT wasn't happening.

On your unmaneuverable foot comment. Yes I believe that is working as designed and isn't really an irregularity.

I mean that's strange, but makes sense cause unmaneuvrable units will be too weak and easy to exploit otherwise.

[Cunningcairn]

On your unmaneuverable foot comment. Yes I believe that is working as designed and isn't really an irregularity.

I mean that's strange, but makes sense cause unmaneuvrable units will be too weak and easy to exploit otherwise.

Yes I think it makes perfect sense as it is not a drilled maneuver but rather a charge which would not require them to maintain perfect formation requiring turns and change of facing.

[Cunningcairn]

Now the suggestion that I am manufacturing a specific narrative?!?! Possibly it is my game style that is pushing the boundaries and exposing these fringe events and I think the comment of a rounding issue might be the closest to understanding what is happening.

I wouldn't say someone pushing boundaries of gameplay if they are not using enough light cavalry. Visit my thread "Playing for tricks" and check "Mechanics questions" where I posted another example of 5 piece setup when I wasn't aware of "light horse doesn't change engaged unit facing" rule. Ofc it's possible without LH units, but other units not even close to being that mobile which means that things you can do is not that complex.

I'm sorry I don't understand the LH statement. I will read your threads.

[rbodleyscott]

It is units not testing when being shot at and receiving enough casualties to need to do a test. I think the player is going to post a query.

I had this one too on couple of occasions. I clearly dealt more than 10% but CT wasn't happening.

The 10% is very much an approximation. I have explained this at length in other threads, so I am not going to do so here, but the short version is this: In order to get roughly the same effect as shooting in both turns (as in the tabletop game), each unit that shoots in fact shoots 2 volleys in a turn - but separate cohesion tests are taken for all concatenated 1st volleys and all concatenated 2nd volleys.

The upshot is that the 10% is very much an approximation, and it is all WAD.

In any case I am not in favour of making it easy for players to be able to calculate fairly exactly whether it is worth shooting another unit at a target or not. That really does not represent anything that a real life commander could do.

[Nosy_Rat]

It is units not testing when being shot at and receiving enough casualties to need to do a test. I think the player is going to post a query.

Sometimes combat log shows cohesion tests taken in those cases, it's just the "hold firm" visual missing.

Regarding the cataphract case:

My guess is that lights broke in the in-between-turns phase, and cataphracts are considered having pursued them. Lancers seem to be on the difficult slope and so were unable to pursuit (at least I think severely disordered cavalry never pursuits).

[SuitedQueens]

Sometimes combat log shows cohesion tests taken in those cases, it's just the "hold firm" visual missing.

Nope, that's not the case as stated above:

The upshot is that the 10% is very much an approximation, and it is all WAD.

I always have my Combat log open during shooting specifically.

Regarding the cataphract case:
My guess is that lights broke in the in-between-turns phase, and cataphracts are considered having pursued them.

Can't put it better. We both guessed the same thing and I believe that how it works.

Lancers seem to be on the difficult slope and so were unable to pursuit (at least I think severely disordered cavalry never pursuits).

Units get full AP on Pursuit and starting square doesn't matter for MP calculation, only the squares you go through.

[Cunningcairn]

Picture6.jpg (81.4 KiB) Viewed 2159 times

It is units not testing when being shot at and receiving enough casualties to need to do a test. I think the player is going to post a query.

Sometimes combat log shows cohesion tests taken in those cases, it's just the "hold firm" visual missing.

Regarding the cataphract case:

My guess is that lights broke in the in-between-turns phase, and cataphracts are considered having pursued them. Lancers seem to be on the difficult slope and so were unable to pursuit (at least I think severely disordered cavalry never pursuits).

The slope is actually good going although it looks steep. Both lancer and cat were not disordered or worse. I fought the enemy unit in my turn and it immediately dispersed as it had nowhere to rout. As with all these issues I experience they come in phases which in much earlier posts on other issues I was told it is statistical clumping. The inability to move into a square and units freezing as they have supposedly spotted unseen enemy (which they haven't) follow that same pattern of statistical clumping. So if they have little chance of occurring it could be a calculation rounding error that covers all these issues including units not breaking at less than 50%. I realise that does not explain why I experience these events more than others and only a few experience them at all.

[Paul59]

Picture6.jpg

It is units not testing when being shot at and receiving enough casualties to need to do a test. I think the player is going to post a query.

Sometimes combat log shows cohesion tests taken in those cases, it's just the "hold firm" visual missing.

Regarding the cataphract case:

My guess is that lights broke in the in-between-turns phase, and cataphracts are considered having pursued them. Lancers seem to be on the difficult slope and so were unable to pursuit (at least I think severely disordered cavalry never pursuits).

The slope is actually good going although it looks steep. Both lancer and cat were not disordered or worse. I fought the enemy unit in my turn and it immediately dispersed as it had nowhere to rout. As with all these issues I experience they come in phases which in much earlier posts on other issues I was told it is statistical clumping. The inability to move into a square and units freezing as they have supposedly spotted unseen enemy (which they haven't) follow that same pattern of statistical clumping. So if they have little chance of occurring it could be a calculation rounding error that covers all these issues including units not breaking at less than 50%. I realise that does not explain why I experience these events more than others and only a few experience them at all.

In the screenshot in your first post the Cataphracts banner seems to be darkened.

[rbodleyscott]

Picture6.jpg

Sometimes combat log shows cohesion tests taken in those cases, it's just the "hold firm" visual missing.

Regarding the cataphract case:

My guess is that lights broke in the in-between-turns phase, and cataphracts are considered having pursued them. Lancers seem to be on the difficult slope and so were unable to pursuit (at least I think severely disordered cavalry never pursuits).

The slope is actually good going although it looks steep. Both lancer and cat were not disordered or worse. I fought the enemy unit in my turn and it immediately dispersed as it had nowhere to rout. As with all these issues I experience they come in phases which in much earlier posts on other issues I was told it is statistical clumping. The inability to move into a square and units freezing as they have supposedly spotted unseen enemy (which they haven't) follow that same pattern of statistical clumping. So if they have little chance of occurring it could be a calculation rounding error that covers all these issues including units not breaking at less than 50%. I realise that does not explain why I experience these events more than others and only a few experience them at all.

In the screenshot in your first post the Cataphracts banner seems to be darkened.

It also has "No CC" which means that its CannotControl flag has been set. This flag is always reset to 0 at the start of the turn (before residual melees belonging to the previous turn, routs, pursuits etc. are adjudicated), which means that it must have been set to 1 during the residual melee, pursuits etc. phase. This only happens if the unit pursues or routs.

This suggests that, as SuitedQueens suggested, the unit actually "pursued" the dispersing unit in the residual melee/rout/pursuit phase. I am guessing that the cataphracts were the unit that actually broke the enemy unit, and the other unit did not "pursue" because by the time it reached the point in the internal sequence where it would do so, the routers had dispersed, so it didn't get flagged with the CannotControl flag. If so, this could be termed a feature rather than a bug.

If it happens again, to Cunningcairn or anyone else, please could you provide more examples as they arise. Preferably with game saves if it happens in SP.

[Cunningcairn]

Picture6.jpg

The slope is actually good going although it looks steep. Both lancer and cat were not disordered or worse. I fought the enemy unit in my turn and it immediately dispersed as it had nowhere to rout. As with all these issues I experience they come in phases which in much earlier posts on other issues I was told it is statistical clumping. The inability to move into a square and units freezing as they have supposedly spotted unseen enemy (which they haven't) follow that same pattern of statistical clumping. So if they have little chance of occurring it could be a calculation rounding error that covers all these issues including units not breaking at less than 50%. I realise that does not explain why I experience these events more than others and only a few experience them at all.

In the screenshot in your first post the Cataphracts banner seems to be darkened.

It also has "No CC" which means that its CannotControl flag has been set. This flag is always reset to 0 at the start of the turn (before residual melees belonging to the previous turn, routs, pursuits etc. are adjudicated), which means that it must have been set to 1 during the residual melee, pursuits etc. phase. This only happens if the unit pursues or routs.

This suggests that, as SuitedQueens suggested, the unit actually "pursued" the dispersing unit in the residual melee/rout/pursuit phase. I am guessing that the cataphracts were the unit that actually broke the enemy unit, and the other unit did not "pursue" because by the time it reached the point in the internal sequence where it would do so, the routers had dispersed, so it didn't get flagged with the CannotControl flag. If so, this could be termed a feature rather than a bug.

If it happens again, to Cunningcairn or anyone else, please could you provide more examples as they arise. Preferably with game saves if it happens in SP.

Thanks will do.