Slitherine

is there a way how to adjust which units are under which commander? For example if I want to divide my infantry into three groups with c-c and sub-gens commanding each group..

i am also interested is it possible to do this

At deployment you can switch units from one command to another by selecting the unit, mousing over a unit in the command you want to move them to, and clicking on the switch command icon. You can move generals from one unit in their command to another.

By using these two orders you can achieve what you want.

e.g. General is in a cavalry unit, but you want him to command some of the infantry instead. Move several infantry units into his command, then move him to one of the infantry units, then move his original cavalry unit to another command.

thanks. Btw, will the assignment be kept for next battle, or this has to be done in deployment again?

JaM2013 wrote:thanks. Btw, will the assignment be kept for next battle, or this has to be done in deployment again?

It has to be done at deployment for each battle.

ok, good to know, thanks.

I'm finding setting up a command structure quite confusing. Take my current Indian army. I have a C-in-C and two sub-generals. All the elephants are under one sub-general, and if I click on the unit, the units under its command are highlighted. I've tried to create another chariot and cavalry command under the other sub-general, however, when I click on the unit, all the rest of the army are highlighted, exactly the same as when I click on the C-in-C.

I think the whole setting up command structure could be made a bit easier, perhaps with a pop-up box similar to the purchase unit screen, with maybe the possibility to drag units to the list of commanders underneath, like so.

Before:
____________
Spearmen: 24
Archers: 8
Cavalry: 4
____________
- General C-in-C
----------------
- Sub-General
____________

After:

____________
-
____________
- General C-in-C
Spearmen: 24
Archers: 8
----------------
- Sub-General
Cavalry: 4
____________

the_iron_duke wrote:I'm finding setting up a command structure quite confusing. Take my current Indian army. I have a C-in-C and two sub-generals. All the elephants are under one sub-general, and if I click on the unit, the units under its command are highlighted. I've tried to create another chariot and cavalry command under the other sub-general, however, when I click on the unit, all the rest of the army are highlighted, exactly the same as when I click on the C-in-C.

I think the whole setting up command structure could be made a bit easier, perhaps with a pop-up box similar to the purchase unit screen, with maybe the possibility to drag units to the list of commanders underneath, like so.

____________

Its kind of the opposite of what might seem the way to do it.
First find the unit you want to add to a subcommanders command, then select it (the unit you want to add NOT the subcommanders unit). Next, hover the mouse over the subcommander you want the selected unit to join. You should see a pop up that has a grid like looking symbol, click that and now the selected unit is under the command of that subcommander.

TheGrayMouser wrote:Its kind of the opposite of what might seem the way to do it.
First find the unit you want to add to a subcommanders command, then select it (the unit you want to add NOT the subcommanders unit). Next, hover the mouse over the subcommander you want the selected unit to join. You should see a pop up that has a grid like looking symbol, click that and now the selected unit is under the command of that subcommander.

I think I did that. It's also not straightforward selecting which units one wants to be generals, as one often seems to have to transfer their assigned formations first. Other useful tools might be a way to click Select Commanders and then one click to assign a commander to a unit. Also, a tool for commander units with which one could select/deselect subordinate units with one click, rather than selecting every individual unit, right-clicking to select the transfer command option and then clicking on the commander.

So, the way for deciding which units are generals and which troops are under which generals is really clunky. I think this would be a better system:

Click on general and there are would be two options:

a) Transfer general. The general would be able to move to any other unit. None of this having to change the unit to the general's command first.

Current system (for switching generals to units that aren't already under their command):

1) Click on unit that general is being moved to to select it.
2) Right-click on general.
3) Select 'switch unit to selected units command' option.
4) Click on general.
5) Right-click on unit to transfer general to.
6) Select 'Transfer general'.

Proposed system

1) Click on general to select it.
2) Right-click on unit that the general is being moved to.
3) Select 'Transfer General'.

b) Select units under generals command. So one would select this and then click on whichever units one wanted to to be under that general.

Current system

1) Click on unit that is to be placed under general's command to select it.
2) Right-click on general.
3) Select 'switch unit to selected units command' option.

This has to be done for each unit, so transferring ten units to a particular commander would require thirty clicks and twenty journeys across the screen with the mouse.

Proposed system:

1) Click on general to select it.
2) Right-click and choose 'select units to command'
3) Click on each unit that will be under their command.

So to transfer ten units to a general would require only twelve or thirteen clicks and only ten journeys with the mouse.

Can anyone come up with a better system?

Also, it's still unclear whether the C-in-C is able to have troops directly under their command, or whether there's a chain of command and troops are all supposed to be under sub-generals with the C-in-C as a layer above them.

Am I right in thinking there is no benefit to allocating troops to your C-in-C's command (other than his bodyguard) since he can affect all troops in the army anyway? Also there is no benefit of allocating light troops to a command either? I think it might be worth experimenting with a light cavalry C-in-C that you keep in the rear of the army, zipping around bolstering troops.

vakarr wrote:Am I right in thinking there is no benefit to allocating troops to your C-in-C's command (other than his bodyguard) since he can affect all troops in the army anyway? Also there is no benefit of allocating light troops to a command either? I think it might be worth experimenting with a light cavalry C-in-C that you keep in the rear of the army, zipping around bolstering troops.

I think he'd need to be in combat to provide the cohesion test bonuses and light troops aren't so good in combat.

the_iron_duke wrote: .....
Can anyone come up with a better system?

What you've suggested is better UX but there were a number of legacy issues that made us keep the current system. It's not ideal as you've pointed out. At the time we had to pick our battles, but we never say there isn't room for improvement. The current list of proposed changes is huge and would take years to implement and test so we have to triage and decide priorities.

Thanks.

Sorting out the general issues is top priority. Current plan is to allow extra supernumerary generals to be added at deployment if there are less than 4 after force selection. Adding generals for points during force selection doesn't really solve all the issues because it does not address the issue for pot luck armies and auto force selection battles.

However, it will need beta testing before it goes live.

I had to look up the definition of supernumerary.