Slitherine

Hi, I think I've found a bug regarding the pursuing of routed units. I've seen it before, but this time I've captured the screenshot.

A fragmented slave MF unit has attacked a Parthian Cataphract and routed. The Cat pursued pursued into contact with 2 other units.

It is now my turn and I find the Cat can't attack. Surely this is wrong! Now it has to sit there until it is attacked again! See centre of screenshot below.



Uploaded with ImageShack.us

If the devs want to see the moves then look at the game between Pantherboy and I (DAG Spartacus Slave Revolt vs Parthians). I'll hold off making my move until I get a reply.

I've seen this too in my games but what I've noticed is the pursuer is defeating the enemy unit then following up and inflicting an additional routing hit and thus its one attack is forfeited for the other two units you are adjacent to. If you were blocked by the other units when chasing the router and the router got away then you wouldn't have expended an attack on the routers so the cat would of been free to attack an adjacent unit.

Cheers,

Steve

pantherboy wrote:I've seen this too in my games but what I've noticed is the pursuer is defeating the enemy unit then following up and inflicting an additional routing hit and thus its one attack is forfeited for the other two units you are adjacent to. If you were blocked by the other units when chasing the router and the router got away then you wouldn't have expended an attack on the routers so the cat would of been free to attack an adjacent unit.

Cheers,

Steve

That seems a reasonable explanation of how it is happening. Do you think this is correct behaviour?

Morbio wrote:
That seems a reasonable explanation of how it is happening. Do you think this is correct behaviour?

Not sure but it doesn't bother me now. Before I didn't understand what was happening so I felt cheated of 1 attack usually at favorable odds. Conversely it could save you 1 attack at bad odds. Pro's and con's for everything and is an effect that either side can have in any game so in my view it is fine. It is only a problem if it wouldn't occur or affect certain lists thus creating an imbalance.

Cheers,

Steve

pantherboy wrote:

Morbio wrote:
That seems a reasonable explanation of how it is happening. Do you think this is correct behaviour?

Not sure but it doesn't bother me now. Before I didn't understand what was happening so I felt cheated of 1 attack usually at favorable odds. Conversely it could save you 1 attack at bad odds. Pro's and con's for everything and is an effect that either side can have in any game so in my view it is fine. It is only a problem if it wouldn't occur or affect certain lists thus creating an imbalance.

Cheers,

Steve

I agree with you, the only reason it bothers me is from a (perceived) realism perspective. It just seems wrong that a unit that is pursing routed would ignore enemy units it has run into contact with.

I suspect that the dealing of damage to the routed unit should not happen until after a test to see if in contact with an active unit. If in contact, then don't attack routed.

Slitherine: Have you looked at the game? Can I continue my moves?

If speaking from a realism point of view then it is very difficult for pursuers to break off from the chase to engage other threats. Having served in the military when in combat I kept a tight reign on my men especially when advancing to the attack as they are prone to lose cohesion when routing enemy troops. It is less of an issue in modern warfare but in the classical period troops would follow and commit slaughter at this point. If they advance too far with unprotected flanks then they come under threat of counter-attack.

Sorry we've been too busy with Immortal Fire to look at this. It sounds like it is working as intended though so I would continue.

OK, thanks for the feedback. I'll continue.