Slitherine

I just had these three situations in a game with Bosporans against Pontics:

1) Disrupted Horse Archers (bow, sword, unprotected avg. cavalry) charged by disrupted Thureophoroi (Off. spear, protectected avg MF) - cavalry stands.
2) Fragmented Horse Archers (bow, sword, unprotected avg. cavalry) charged by disrupted Thureophoroi (Off. spear, protectected avg MF) - cavalry evades
3) Pontic cavalry (armoured, light spear, sword superior cavalry) charged in the rear by Horse Archers (as above) so fighting at -2 POA for Pontic cavalry - stands

Is there a bug here? Is there some random chance in deciding if a cavalry BG will evade? Is the program logic for this so complex that I haven't been able to figure it out?

Feeling completely mystified about when BGs should or should not evade.

Chris

I have no explanation for 1 and 2, However, I have never seen a cavalry unit evade when struck in the rear , they basicaly stand and take in the proverbial arse

TheGrayMouser wrote:I have no explanation for 1 and 2, However, I have never seen a cavalry unit evade when struck in the rear , they basicaly stand and take in the proverbial arse

I think I have seen them evade in the case of a rear charge if the charger is obviously better than the chargee, e.g. if the situation I described in 3 was reversed, I think the average, unarmoured horse archers would evade from the superior armoured Pontic nobles but I won't swear to that.

Chris

Im pretty sure they never evade when attacked in the rear , and actually count on it!, however wouldnt bet on it... I wonder if its one of those undocumented features or even a bug? For example, maybe they are supposed to check combat odds before deciding to evade but ARNT calculating the significant penalty for being struck in the rear. I find that I can usually only get light cvalry in a position to hit enemy heavy cav in the rear anyways, maybe that is why I never see them evade...
On a side note i actually would prefer if they were not allowed to evade if hit in the rear if this isnt the case already... How does it work in the TT ??

TheGrayMouser wrote:Im pretty sure they never evade when attacked in the rear , and actually count on it!, however wouldnt bet on it... I wonder if its one of those undocumented features or even a bug? For example, maybe they are supposed to check combat odds before deciding to evade but ARNT calculating the significant penalty for being struck in the rear. I find that I can usually only get light cvalry in a position to hit enemy heavy cav in the rear anyways, maybe that is why I never see them evade...
On a side note i actually would prefer if they were not allowed to evade if hit in the rear if this isnt the case already... How does it work in the TT ??

On the TT, troops that are allowed to evade can do so no matter what direction they are charged from. In particular, since it takes drilled and undrilled cavalry a full move to face 180 degrees, they normally will have to spend a full turn in charge range if enemy have gotten close to them before they turn away. They are allowed to evade in this situation and will be fine if the enemy do not have sufficient movement to catch them. In the TT rules, evaders always end their move facing in the direction of the evade. I think if this was the case on the PC this would be a distinct improvement in terms of eliminating the problems with a BG evading on the enemy player term and then immediately charging back in, possibly from an advantageous position) on the owning player's following turn.

Chris

I think the game logic is in fact fairly clear:

Bosporan cavalry archers should not evade from Thureophoroi as they are on equal factors in the impact phase (the cavalry have one for fighting MF in the open, the thureophoroi have one for being offensive spearmen), they have equal numbers of dice and have equal rerolls (i.e. none), they thus have equal "average hits". [The latter seems to me to be the factor actually used by the program to decide - which is why cavalry will evade from equal cavalry which are better grade or have a general, because the latter have higher average hit expectancy].

The same applies if both are disrupted, but not if the horse archers are fragged and the thureophoroi disrupted.

A "feature" of the current version of the program is that the logic does not take into account the effects of being charged in the rear, hence if they would stand frontally they stand if attacked in the rear, doh. Iain has intimated that they intend to correct this.

rbodleyscott wrote:I think the game logic is in fact fairly clear:

Bosporan cavalry archers should not evade from Thureophoroi as they are on equal factors in the impact phase (the cavalry have one for fighting MF in the open, the thureophoroi have one for being offensive spearmen), they have equal numbers of dice and have equal rerolls (i.e. none), they thus have equal "average hits". [The latter seems to me to be the factor actually used by the program to decide - which is why cavalry will evade from equal cavalry which are better grade or have a general, because the latter have higher average hit expectancy].

The same applies if both are disrupted, but not if the horse archers are fragged and the thureophoroi disrupted.

A "feature" of the current version of the program is that the logic does not take into account the effects of being charged in the rear, hence if they would stand frontally they stand if attacked in the rear, doh. Iain has intimated that they intend to correct this.

It certainly seems that if the logic takes into account the fragmented state then it ought to also take into account a rear charge!

As far as I can tell, evasion also seems to ignore POAs for terrain, e.g. for being uphill so it definitely does not appear to be simply looking at the probability of winning the impact as displayed in the shield. I've seen Roman protected average cavalry evade from opposing superior protected cavalry, both with light spear), when my Roman cavalry was uphill from the Superior enemy cavalry. And superior re-rolls don't make up for a full POA advantage.

Chris

Another anomaly I've seen is protected, average light spear, sword Indian Cavalry stand when charged by protected, average Macedonian HF pikemen. That certainly is not an equal POA at impact.

Chris

batesmotel wrote:Another anomaly I've seen is protected, average light spear, sword Indian Cavalry stand when charged by protected, average Macedonian HF pikemen. That certainly is not an equal POA at impact.

Hmm. Maybe if the pikemen are below 75% strength - they would then only be a POA up and would have less dice....

rbodleyscott wrote:

batesmotel wrote:Another anomaly I've seen is protected, average light spear, sword Indian Cavalry stand when charged by protected, average Macedonian HF pikemen. That certainly is not an equal POA at impact.

Hmm. Maybe if the pikemen are below 75% strength - they would then only be a POA up and would have less dice....

I just tried to duplicate this and couldn't so maybe there was something else affecting it in the game I was playing. It's been a while.

I did just verify that Roman average cavalry uphill from Superior Belgian cavalry did evade even thought the shiled showed the Belgian Superior cavalry with a 25% chance versus 46% or so for the Roman cavalry. I lost cavalry this way before when it evaded off board when I wasn't expecting it in the Sambre scenario.

Chris

Parmenion: "Hey Alexander! The Persian's are charging our Cavalry on the left flank!"
Alexander: "What What type of unit's charging it?"
Parmenion: "Sec....", "Hey Damocles, what unit's charging you?"
Damocles: "Cavalry.... Err, I think they are armed with light spear and swords. Got small round shield with a goat's head on it... I think. It's a bit dusty, can't really see!"
Parmenion: "Damocles thinks they are cavalry armed with spear"
Alexander: "Which direction are they attacking from?"
Parmenion: "Hey Damocles, where they attacking from?"
Damocles: "They are coming from the North"
Parmenion: "Which way are you facing?"
Damocles: "What! South, I think"
Parmenion: "OK Alex, they are charging him from the North, to his rear"
Alexander: "Is Damocles on raised ground?"
Parmenion: "Damocles! You on raised ground?"
Damocles: "WTF! I dunno, I guess so, it's very dusty and they're right on top of us! Can't see squat!"
Parmenion: "He thinks so, he's not sure"
Alexander: "Is Cleander nearby?"
Parmenion: "Damocles, is Cleander near you?"
Damocles: "Arrghh, I dunno, I can't see!... Ooof!, Arrrgh!"
Parmenion: "Cleander! Cleander! You anywhere near Damocles?"
<silence>
Parmenion: "I don't think Cleander is anywhere near him"
Alexander: "Philotas, you got that bag of bones with you?"
Philotas: "Yeah, sure"
Alexander: "Ok Philo, chuck the bones, and tell me the result"
<Rattle>
Philotas: "Looks like the Dark Man is stalking the Warrior with a Snake"
Alexander: "Re-roll the Snake.... you always re-roll Snakes!"
<Rattle>
Philotas: "Still a Snake!"
Alexander: "OK, Parmenion, tell Damocles to evade the charge"
Parmenion: "Damocles, leg it!"
Parmenion: "You OK Damocles?"
<Silence>
Alexander: "Well?"
Parmenion: "Nevermind"

I hope this gives you an insight regarding whether cavalry will evade or not.

eheheheeee....ya kno...too close to the truth!!!

ROFL nice reply Morbio!

Since RBS is reading this this, I'd like to ask his opinion about how evades are handled in the PC version since they are giving many players so much grief.
Here it is: Should cavalry be allowed to evade in the PC version and if so when?

Deeter

deeter wrote:Since RBS is reading this this, I'd like to ask his opinion about how evades are handled in the PC version since they are giving many players so much grief.
Here it is: Should cavalry be allowed to evade in the PC version and if so when?

Deeter

I am pretty happy with it now that I have figured out when it will happen. (There may still be some grey areas, but I find it predictable in most situations).

There is no doubt in my mind that cavalry should be able to evade.

It could be made optional under player control, but that would be giving players more control over individual units than is historically justifiable - but then, of course, they already do in every other situation.

I have no strong feeling on the matter. I regard it as a feature rather than a bug.

The not-evading-when-attacked-in-the-rear thing is a bug and needs to be corrected.

Thanks for the answer. As this is a pet peave, I've been banging away on the fact that on the TT, only non-shock cav in a single rank can evade. On the PC, any mounted will evade often without warning, running off the table, exposing a flank and abadoning their general. Often these evaders would be advantaged in the subsequent melee had they stood for impact. Instead they're out of the game. Doesn't make sense to me.

Deeter

deeter wrote:Thanks for the answer. As this is a pet peave, I've been banging away on the fact that on the TT, only non-shock cav in a single rank can evade. On the PC, any mounted will evade often without warning, running off the table, exposing a flank and abadoning their general. Often these evaders would be advantaged in the subsequent melee had they stood for impact. Instead they're out of the game. Doesn't make sense to me.

Deeter

There is an easy way to avoid this - don't make your stand within an evade move of your rear board edge.

Yes, learned this the hard way. Also I've learned not to expect my cavalry to be of much use protecting a flank.

Deeter

What's the easy way to avoid your general being the only mounted left fighting when all others have evaded? Other than not have a cavalry general actually up with his mounted troops.

Evade is utterly broken as it stands.

Morbio wrote:I hope this gives you an insight regarding whether cavalry will evade or not.

More about the kinks in long-distance "real-time" modern battle management.

In ancient times there would be no time to link up to Alex - unit would have been thinking about the enemy and their options for a while, unless surprised, in which case it could mean any of counter-charging (receiving), turning and evading, internal confusion, or some combination thereof. All the POA factors could weigh in that balance.