Attack and Defence Again

[Ludendorf]

Yes, I know, another incredibly specific mechanics thread. I think I need to turn all of the kind responses I've had for these into a guide at some point.

If I am besieging a province, and my enemy moves to relieve that province, will I be attacking or defending? What if the province falls to siege, and then the enemy invades the now-taken province on the same turn resolution.

I said incredibly specific.

[Soar]

If one army moved during the last movement tick and the other did not, the one that did not move is always the defender, based on this post. It used to work in a different, more opaque manner before version 1.0.6.

I'm not sure what happens when two armies arrive in the same region at the same time (and yes, you can make that happen while still besieging the region - your army only needs to be in the region at the *start* of each turn to keep the siege going!). I think the "exact impulse" mentioned by Pocus in the linked post might mean the randomly determined movement sequence during the individual movement tick? In which case, it's probably a coinflip, though I don't quite recall exactly what was claimed in the discussion I saw on the micro-details of how movement works in the game.

[loki100]

...
I'm not sure what happens when two armies arrive in the same region at the same time (and yes, you can make that happen while still besieging the region - your army only needs to be in the region at the *start* of each turn to keep the siege going!). I think the "exact impulse" mentioned by Pocus in the linked post might mean the randomly determined movement sequence during the individual movement tick? In which case, it's probably a coinflip, though I don't quite recall exactly what was claimed in the discussion I saw on the micro-details of how movement works in the game.

yes, if both arrive in the same impulse its random as to who defends and who attacks

impulses aren't random, in effect the first sees every unit on the map expend 1 MP, the second sees every unit expend its second MP and so on. So more MP mean you carry on moving while other stacks/units have stopped.

[Bullseye500]

Yes, I know, another incredibly specific mechanics thread. I think I need to turn all of the kind responses I've had for these into a guide at some point.

That's a hell of a good idea!

[Soar]

impulses aren't random, in effect the first sees every unit on the map expend 1 MP, the second sees every unit expend its second MP and so on. So more MP mean you carry on moving while other stacks/units have stopped.

Within an individual movement tick / impulse, armies (apparently?) move in some sort of randomized sequential order. However, battles are only resolved once once all armies have completed their movement for the tick, so I'm not sure whether that has any relevance to gameplay. I know I didn't just imagine it as I was able to find one comment from Pocus implying it was the case.

My original speculation on how it might relate to the attacker/defender mechanics was just grasping straws, though. In the end, if it's always a coinflip, the exact mechanism that makes it into a coinflip doesn't really matter.

[desertedfox]

If the attack and defence values of all units were indentical and not differnt, ie attack 7 defecne 7, then this issue would go away to a large degree.

To be handicapped because your pike are defending whilst the enemy were lucky, (yes lucky, becasue that is what is boils down to 90% of the time), to be the attacker and receive a huge and unrealistic combat advantage.

Pocus has stated one of the main reasons for the differecne is to facilitate strategic manouvering and making the game more interesting.

I disagree. There is enough strategic manouvering happening when leader traits and the terrain are taken into account, without adding in an artifically lower defence value of many units.

Doing this can often result in a lop sided battle that you had no control over as the enemy entered your region by going first in the turn sequence and you just have to suck it up.