No rear charge POA

[deadtorius]

In a recent game I played I had an enemy cav unit that was being attacked by one of my own cav units. On the following turn I charged the enemy cav, that was still frontally fighting my other cav with a unit of LH. On the TT lights that rear charge do not cause the target to drop cohesion but still fight at ++/-- in impact. My charge went in at a - for me + for the enemy cav. Either this was intentional or something is not right in the rear charges.

[pantherboy]

In a recent game I played I had an enemy cav unit that was being attacked by one of my own cav units. On the following turn I charged the enemy cav, that was still frontally fighting my other cav with a unit of LH. On the TT lights that rear charge do not cause the target to drop cohesion but still fight at ++/-- in impact. My charge went in at a - for me + for the enemy cav. Either this was intentional or something is not right in the rear charges.

Lights don't get positional advantage versus good order medium/heavy troops.

Cheers,

Steve

[deadtorius]

Problem with playing both the TT and the PC version of the game, they don't always work out the same way

[cothyso]

I've posted an example in Beta folder in which a LC doesn't get a Rear Attack PoA bonus, even if attacks a very disordered HC in the rear.

[dazzam]

A related issue I think is the CMT that troops with Bows need to pass to effect a charge. Superior troops charging into the rear of the enemy find it just as hard as a full front assault on pikes. Something is just not right there. This is along the lines of my gripe about anarchy charges in that the likelihood of success from the ensuing combat has no bearing on the chances of anarchy.

Now I can understand troops might take matters into their own hands and ignore the orders of their commanders if it was blatantly obvious that carrying out those orders would result in your demise or if they see a target that is all too tempting as they know they can smash the cr@p out them and decide not to wait for orders. But how these factors are not accounted for in the rules is a constant source of frustration for me in this game. At very least lets make quality re-rolls apply for CMT's. My suggestion as well is that if the chance of success in combat is x% above the chance of defeat it should increase your chance of an anarchy charge and if it is x% below it should decrease your chance of an anarchy charge. I would urge the same adjustment in CMT's for bow equipped troops in deciding to charge or not.

[TheGrayMouser]

Bow armed troops do not need to pass a CMT to charge an enemy in the rear (at least the readme notes from pactch 1.2 something indicate this)

[hidde]

Bow armed troops do not need to pass a CMT to charge an enemy in the rear (at least the readme notes from pactch 1.2 something indicate this)

I'm quite sure they have disobyed such orders of mine on many occasions
Could be they were disordered but I think steady have also refused.

My suggestion as well is that if the chance of success in combat is x% above the chance of defeat it should increase your chance of an anarchy charge and if it is x% below it should decrease your chance of an anarchy charge.

Agree!

[dazzam]

I've just played a few games with the Early Persians and had the immortals refusing to charge in the enemy's rear a few times

[TheGrayMouser]

Yeah I could be wrong about this, i remember it happening frequently a while back BUT i have never observed it recently.....
There is a readme doc loose in the main game folder that indicates that medium bows DO not have to test for charging enemy in the rear but who knows , they might have changed it back without documenting:)

[TheGrayMouser]

Bow armed troops do not need to pass a CMT to charge an enemy in the rear (at least the readme notes from pactch 1.2 something indicate this)

I'm quite sure they have disobyed such orders of mine on many occasions
Could be they were disordered but I think steady have also refused.

My suggestion as well is that if the chance of success in combat is x% above the chance of defeat it should increase your chance of an anarchy charge and if it is x% below it should decrease your chance of an anarchy charge.

Agree!

Possibly they refused as it wasnt a valid "rear hit" ?? I have played alot but very often I dont get the rear hit charge when i think I should but likly its an optical illusiondo to the hex angles.

I dont get the suggestion for anarchy... There are two types of anrachy , A when your troops charge w/o orders and B when they disobey an order to charge ... Only shock troops need to test for the one, any troop if disordered can test for the other, as well as bow armed or lights (into non lights)

[TheGrayMouser]

Sorry for the double tap, stupid IE8 wont let me type beyond a certain # of lines w/o "hiding " what I am typing in the window... grrrr

Anyway, I dont agree with % tapering off based on chance of success in combat , basically you want to allow knights to aproach and block PIKES w a much lessor chance to anarchy because it might hurt them? But they will go rabid when lowly mediums are in front of them (and likly chances are you would be charging anyways) Id rather have no anarchy at all than to make it predictible enough that it becomes an advantage

[dazzam]

I just tested it out on a custom scenario but you can not see if there is a CMT for the immortals with bow to charge or not. tested it on a rear charge and a frontal charge and no CMT for either is apparent in the verbose info on the bottom left of the screen for either.

Would appreciate the view of the games designers as to what the actual rule is here.

[TheGrayMouser]

I just made my own test scenario :: line o medium archers facing a line of pikes, half the pikes fwrd the other half rear exposed

4 out of 6 medium bows failed the cmt to charge the pikes head on and it did display in the verbiose box "failed cmt test-other" (whatever that means)
However it said nothing about the ones that passed.

I ran several times and the archers never failed to charge the pikes in the rear even once... Of course this doesnt prove anything but....

Oh, make sure no leaders are in range if you test , the ist 2 times i ran every one passed every time, that plus one they give apparently makes a big differnce;)

[deadtorius]

The restriction on bow armed troops charging is for those troops who only have bows, Immortals are not classed as straight bow troops since they do posses armour and melee weapons so should be able to charge without the need of a CMT...... or at least that is how it works on the TT not sure about the PC version really

[TheGrayMouser]

The restriction on bow armed troops charging is for those troops who only have bows, Immortals are not classed as straight bow troops since they do posses armour and melee weapons so should be able to charge without the need of a CMT...... or at least that is how it works on the TT not sure about the PC version really

Ah, so maybe it has to do if the BG has an impact weapon?


Edit just tested using "immortal archers" lightspear and bow some still failed to pass and didnt charge pikes head on.

My guess is if the non-light BG has a bow(or likly any other missle weapon) (and is not mixed) then in needs to pass a cmt to impact charge

[dazzam]

Ok..just did the test with the immortals superior troops with LS & Bow. and got one to fail a rear charge..got error message 'persian MF immortal failed a Complex Move Test.(other)' the unit was disrupted and out of general range but nevertheless proves that bow armed troops so face CMT when charging rear which seems to be in contradiction to the release notes.

[TheGrayMouser]

Ok..just did the test with the immortals superior troops with LS & Bow. and got one to fail a rear charge..got error message 'persian MF immortal failed a Complex Move Test.(other)' the unit was disrupted and out of general range but nevertheless proves that bow armed troops so face CMT when charging rear which seems to be in contradiction to the release notes.

Were the Immortals disrupted? If so they would succomb to the rule that any disrupted unit has to pass a cmt to charge (whether its a rear charge or not)

[deadtorius]

generally if your disrupted you have to pass a CMT, same on the TT. Fragged can't charge at all. Otherwise the not charging anarchy thing on the TT is restricted to archer units who are armed with missile weapons and I think they have to be MF too. Once again the PC game might be different as the devs did choose to make changes from the TT game when they designed this game.

[dazzam]

thanks deadtorius I think it's the disrupted issue that is causing the test. I tested it again with 40 rear charges by the immortals that were not disrupted and they all charged fine so given the CMT criteria i think the chances are there is no CMT for rear charges with missle troops..I stand corrected.

I do wonder though if charging in the rear should be a positive factor in the CMT for disrupted troops as at present there seems no difference between head on assaults and rear charges if you are disrupted.

[deadtorius]

In the TT rules you don't get any bonuses for a CMT to rear charge an enemy, you only get the -1 for being disrupted. I have seen glorious charges cancelled and victory slip away because of those bad die rolls.
Sometimes your troops will refuse to charge even when the odds are strongly in their favour.... oh well