how to hold a line

[omarquatar]

is it right and realistic that defending BGs MUST advance after winning a combat?
maybe i've not learnt how to play yet, but i find impossible to stand fast and hold a good defensive line, as your light troops and cavalry will fallback if attacked and your infantry will advance if victorious.
i find that defensive tactics in the game are simply not feasible, but they were a reality on ancient and medieval battlefields. in the game, one is always forced to attack

[deadtorius]

IF you are beside an enemy then you must attack it. Charging enemy lights you run the risk of following them, that does seem to be one of the jobs of LF troops historically, taunt your enemy and force them out of the line to chase you. I have found that my HF does not often bother to chase after routers, or move up after an enemy is destroyed. Cav and MF seem to be the ones who like chasing off. In the case of cav that seems to fit the bill as they are generally more aggressive and lacking in mental powers compared to the foot troops. Must be the downside of being part of the overly inbred elite of any given society.
Shock cav will always stand (knights, lancers, chariots) Lights and non shock cav will get a new decision tool to either stand or run in swords and scimitars, it will be a drop down you can set for them. Then they will stand fast, run all the time or act as they do now, depending on what orders you give them.
At present they will run if they are being attacked and the attacker has better odds in the impending combat or not. Historically lights don't want to mix it up and are supposed to run. Cav on the TT will only have the evade option if in a single line, which the PC game assumes all cav are in a line so they have the evade option always.
Try fighting a very bow armed enemy and watch them stand back and keep shooting you, most of them don't want to engage in melee. Sometimes its just better to attack, seems the virtual dice like you better if you are on the offensive, but that is just a personal observation.

[76mm]

Also, I don't understand the combat effects, which penalize you for attacking into, or defending from, certain types of terrain, such as steep hills, rivers, swamps, etc. It seems like if a phalanx unit is next to a swamp, and is attacked by some MF unit, the phalanx would have the brains not to go into the swamp, but rather would rather wait for the exhausted MF to drag themselves from the mud and then harpoon them?

[Morbio]

Also, I don't understand the combat effects, which penalize you for attacking into, or defending from, certain types of terrain, such as steep hills, rivers, swamps, etc. It seems like if a phalanx unit is next to a swamp, and is attacked by some MF unit, the phalanx would have the brains not to go into the swamp, but rather would rather wait for the exhausted MF to drag themselves from the mud and then harpoon them?

You'd like to think so, certainly I do and I've often thought that it seemed odd to be penalised as if the phalanx is in the swamp too. The only way I can rationalise this in my mind, and I'm not 100% convinced, is that a phalanx operates by closing up and pushing against the opponent, and trying to move forward at a steady pace. A consequence of this is that the front few ranks can't just stand on the edge and that some of them get pushed into the swamp and become ineffective... then the officers react and get the phalanx moving back a bit to let those in the swamp get out. This probably repeatedly happens and in the meantime while all of this is happening the phalanx isn't fighting effectively and the swamp army is taking chunks out of the disordered phalanx. The alternative is that the phalanx is just standing on the edge and not pushing forward, but the consequence of that is that it isn't as effective as normal (when it is pushing forwards). I'm not an expert on how a phalanx operates, this is just my interpretation, so maybe those that have greater knowledge of this may wish to explain.

[kujalar]

Also, I don't understand the combat effects, which penalize you for attacking into, or defending from, certain types of terrain, such as steep hills, rivers, swamps, etc. It seems like if a phalanx unit is next to a swamp, and is attacked by some MF unit, the phalanx would have the brains not to go into the swamp, but rather would rather wait for the exhausted MF to drag themselves from the mud and then harpoon them?

The marathon is a scenario where this problem would rise in its full effect if the scenario would have swamp hexes it historically should contain on the edges of the battlefield.

This is complicated problem. One way to handle it could be.

Unit should pay some movement to clear the cohesion penalty. Cost could be maybe 0.5 / level of disorder.
This cost should be paid in clear terrain after the unit enters the terrain.
If unit is forced into closecombat (impact or melee) it cannot pay the cost. It needs to fight with cohesion penalties.
Unit could regain its cohesion in normal rally phase at the end of turn for no cost of movement the same way as fragmented or disorganised is solved (maybe automatically if there is no enemycontact).

[kujalar]

Also, I don't understand the combat effects, which penalize you for attacking into, or defending from, certain types of terrain, such as steep hills, rivers, swamps, etc. It seems like if a phalanx unit is next to a swamp, and is attacked by some MF unit, the phalanx would have the brains not to go into the swamp, but rather would rather wait for the exhausted MF to drag themselves from the mud and then harpoon them?

The marathon is a scenario where this problem would rise in its full effect if the scenario would have swamp hexes it historically should contain on the edges of the battlefield.

This is complicated problem. One way to handle it could be.

Unit should pay some movement to clear the cohesion penalty. Cost could be maybe 0.5 / level of disorder.
This cost should be paid in clear terrain after the unit enters the terrain.
If unit is forced into closecombat (impact or melee) it cannot pay the cost. It needs to fight with cohesion penalties.
Unit could regain its cohesion in normal rally phase at the end of turn for no cost of movement the same way as fragmented or disorganised is solved (maybe automatically if there is no enemycontact).

Do not know if this is too complicated. Another way would be to remember who was the original attacker, so there could be difference if the combat is fought "more" on swamp or clear hex.

[TheGrayMouser]

Also, I don't understand the combat effects, which penalize you for attacking into, or defending from, certain types of terrain, such as steep hills, rivers, swamps, etc. It seems like if a phalanx unit is next to a swamp, and is attacked by some MF unit, the phalanx would have the brains not to go into the swamp, but rather would rather wait for the exhausted MF to drag themselves from the mud and then harpoon them?

You'd like to think so, certainly I do and I've often thought that it seemed odd to be penalised as if the phalanx is in the swamp too. The only way I can rationalise this in my mind, and I'm not 100% convinced, is that a phalanx operates by closing up and pushing against the opponent, and trying to move forward at a steady pace. A consequence of this is that the front few ranks can't just stand on the edge and that some of them get pushed into the swamp and become ineffective... then the officers react and get the phalanx moving back a bit to let those in the swamp get out. This probably repeatedly happens and in the meantime while all of this is happening the phalanx isn't fighting effectively and the swamp army is taking chunks out of the disordered phalanx. The alternative is that the phalanx is just standing on the edge and not pushing forward, but the consequence of that is that it isn't as effective as normal (when it is pushing forwards). I'm not an expert on how a phalanx operates, this is just my interpretation, so maybe those that have greater knowledge of this may wish to explain.

The combat mechanism is a little hard to get used to in this respect, probobly because it is so differnt from other turn based games where two enemy units can be adjacent to each other and not considered activley engaged unless the active player "attacks" Most games the non active "defender" is assumed to to get the benefits of whatever terrain it is in.... Just a different kind of abstraction i guess...
My own stab to "rationalize" the way it is in fog: hexes dont have disctinct linear breaks in terrain, the terrain "blends in to eachother so that pike unit on clear engaged w that medium in the swamp is on "partialy" swampy ground.. Kinda of weak I guess , although you could also assume that both sides are pushing back and forth and , as has been explained by the developers a Bg isnt necesarily one tight formation but rather a group.....

[76mm]

I have to say that I find the terrain effects to be the worst thing about this game, it is really almost impossible to make use of defensive terrain. Steep hills are a good example...you would think that a heavy foot unit on top of a steep hill would be in a pretty good defensive position, but in FoG that is not the case, because the unit is very disordered. Or am I missing something?

I think that the initial defender should get the benefit/disadvantage of their terrain, because the attacker is moving to them after all. A pike unit attacking INTO a swamp should suffer penalties, while a pike unit defending on dry land from a unit attacking FROM a swamp should get a benefit, if anything. Such a unit would be defending and would presumably not position themselves right among the lilypads, but well back from the soft ground.

Same issue applies for woods, streams, etc. I also find it very bizarre and counter-intuitive that units don't benefit from defending a river bank.

[TheGrayMouser]

Same issue applies for woods, streams, etc. I also find it very bizarre and counter-intuitive that units don't benefit from defending a river bank.

I believe they do ( I assume you mean your defenders are behind the river and the enemy is entering the river hex to attack)
Unless the terrain chart is wrong, gullies, ditches, rivers, bridges and streams only disorder units IN that hex, not units engaged in combat with them
(lower case d per the chart) where as all the other terrian is upper case D which disorders troops in or attacking/being attacked

[deeter]

I find understanding terrain effects critical to playing effectively. I refer to the terrrain chart often and wish there was a hot key to bring it up. The thing about HF on steep hills is that they all get very disordered, but Impact foot get more POAs wheras pikes are toast. Same with swamps. As phalanx armies always sought out a wide open field, I would suggest staying there and not getting even closse to swamps or steed hils or woods, etc. That all seem s correct and historical.

What is bad to me is when anarchy, evades and unexpected pursuits draw units out of terrain, but I can live with that for now.

Deeter

[76mm]

I believe they do ( I assume you mean your defenders are behind the river and the enemy is entering the river hex to attack)
Unless the terrain chart is wrong, gullies, ditches, rivers, bridges and streams only disorder units IN that hex, not units engaged in combat with them
(lower case d per the chart) where as all the other terrian is upper case D which disorders troops in or attacking/being attacked

Sorry, I was not very clear--the stream comment refers to MF, which do not suffer any penalty from attacking from a stream.

[TheGrayMouser]

I believe they do ( I assume you mean your defenders are behind the river and the enemy is entering the river hex to attack)
Unless the terrain chart is wrong, gullies, ditches, rivers, bridges and streams only disorder units IN that hex, not units engaged in combat with them
(lower case d per the chart) where as all the other terrian is upper case D which disorders troops in or attacking/being attacked

Sorry, I was not very clear--the stream comment refers to MF, which do not suffer any penalty from attacking from a stream.

But they do, they are disordered so they only attack at 67% ( I guess they lose a dice) Also if they are spears they also lose a poa AND if they are attacking swords/heavy weapons the swordsman/hw blokes get an additional poa for fighting "non steady" spears

[76mm]

But they do, they are disordered so they only attack at 67% ( I guess they lose a dice) Also if they are spears they also lose a poa AND if they are attacking swords/heavy weapons the swordsman/hw blokes get an additional poa for fighting "non steady" spears

?? Maybe we have different terrain charts? On mine, it does not show that MF become disrupted if attacking from a stream?

[Brigz]

But they do, they are disordered so they only attack at 67% ( I guess they lose a dice) Also if they are spears they also lose a poa AND if they are attacking swords/heavy weapons the swordsman/hw blokes get an additional poa for fighting "non steady" spears

?? Maybe we have different terrain charts? On mine, it does not show that MF become disrupted if attacking from a stream?

At first I thought 76mm was wrong, but he is in fact correct. MF are not disordered when attacking from a stream. At least according to the terrain chart.

[TheGrayMouser]

But they do, they are disordered so they only attack at 67% ( I guess they lose a dice) Also if they are spears they also lose a poa AND if they are attacking swords/heavy weapons the swordsman/hw blokes get an additional poa for fighting "non steady" spears

?? Maybe we have different terrain charts? On mine, it does not show that MF become disrupted if attacking from a stream?

Maybe its a matter of semantics or the rules and how they are written

A unit in a stream suffers disorder simply for being in the stream., and when it is fighting (lets not use terms like attacke and defend as i think it causes confusion) a unit that is not in a stream, the unit NOT in the stream suffers no bad effects from the terrain, but the unit in the stream suffers penalties (from being disordered or very disordered)

Other terrian (trees swamps) causes disorder to a unit that is in it AND to any adjacent enemy units (whther they are in clear or not) when they are "fighting" (which is mandatory when they are adjacent)

The two types of terrian do have different effects It is never good to be in a gully or stream, wheras being in other terrain can be advantaggious by being less bad for your unit ie a medium vs a cavalry unit or pike for example....

[Brigz]

Then the Terrain chart is in error. It clearly shows that streams have no affect on MF. Where in the "rules" does it say that MF are disordered when in a stream hex?

[TheGrayMouser]

Then the Terrain chart is in error. It clearly shows that streams have no affect on MF. Where in the "rules" does it say that MF are disordered when in a stream hex?

Oh my, my bad, problem is the chart is zoomed out and my old eyes clearly couldnt read it, now I understand what 76mm is saying Medium have no impact if in streams or gullies etc per the chart grid... That seems very odd, shouldnt they? ( i feel they should)

Sorry for the confusion , i swear a long time ago I made a test scenario to test the effects and i swear they were

[Brigz]

Then the Terrain chart is in error. It clearly shows that streams have no affect on MF. Where in the "rules" does it say that MF are disordered when in a stream hex?

Oh my, my bad, problem is the chart is zoomed out and my old eyes clearly couldnt read it, now I understand what 76mm is saying Medium have no impact if in streams or gullies etc per the chart grid... That seems very odd, shouldnt they? ( i feel they should)

Sorry for the confusion , i swear a long time ago I made a test scenario to test the effects and i swear they were

Indeed. You would think that anyone attacking out of a stream would be penalized. Maybe not LH.

[Brigz]

Hmmmm...contrary to the TEC I wonder if in the game, if you hold the cursor over a MF unit in a stream, it will say if they are disordered or not. I'll have to check that out.

[TheGrayMouser]

I just remade my test scenario and Mediums have no ill effects at all assaulting troops opposite a steam (or gully) Even Offensive spear mediums still get the spear POA ( I thought they wouldnt as not "clear terrain" but oh well there it is, no effect at all, and after all these years assuming otherwise

I guess mediums are your combat engineers to be used to assault rivers!