Blocked Break Offs

[rbodleyscott]

Much has been written in the past about the issue of deliberately blocking breakoffs, which can be used for various cheesy in-game ploys.

Various solutions have been suggested, including the blockers being pushed back or evading. These solutions would be hard to implement, and could cause all sorts of new anomalies.

However, there is a much simpler solution, which already occurs when a break off that was not blocked at the time of determining the combat result, is blocked by another unit by the time it reaches the top of the queue to actually be activated. That is that the unit stays put in its current square, but is deemed to have broken off and (unless the enemy unit "follows up") the combat is deemed to have ended.

This could fairly easily be implemented as a general solution to blocked break-offs. The unit won't actually move (apart from the opposing front ranks falling back from the enemy) but the combat will be ended. In the case of a "push back" neither unit will move, and they will carry on fighting in their previous position.

This won't prevent the deliberate blocking of pushbacks, but that isn't such an issue since the removal of consecutive pushbacks.

It will prevent the far more cheesy tactic of attacking a unit in the flank with Light Horse, having blocked the Light Horse unit's break off, so that the enemy turns to face them next turn, allowing them to be attacked in the flank by the non-light unit (that they were previously facing) in your next turn. Apart from being (in our opinion) unrealistic, this tactic makes Light Horse significantly more effective than we intend.

It will also prevent cavalry fall backs from infantry from being prevented by ZOCs or light troops behind them, which will make it harder for infantry armies to swarm cavalry. I expect some people will view this as a good thing, and some as bad, but overall we feel it will be an improvement.

Thoughts?

[pompeytheflatulent]

This just replaces a mildly annoying exploit with far worse exploits.

Screen_00000005.jpg (953.25 KiB) Viewed 3018 times

In the screenshot above, the infantry will be unable to make any forward progress at all since the lancers will fall back in place after every impact, restoring its ZOC. So you can have a 36 point unit of lancers neutralize three 72 point huscarls, force the huscarls to either stand there and do nothing, or charge and roll -50 POA impacts repeatedly until they destroy the lancers.

[rbodleyscott]

Ouch. Good point.

[pompeytheflatulent]

Might as well take a few whacks at this dead horse while I'm here. Is it possible to make it so that both the blocked-in light cavalry and the blocking light cavalry take a -2 or -3 cohesion check penalty? This will result in the rapid destruction of the light cav trapped in melee, and the likely disruption of the blocking light cav when the first one routs.

[rbodleyscott]

Might as well take a few whacks at this dead horse while I'm here. Is it possible to make it so that both the blocked-in light cavalry and the blocking light cavalry take a -2 or -3 cohesion check penalty? This will result in the rapid destruction of the light cav trapped in melee, and the likely disruption of the blocking light cav when the first one routs.

True, but it is unlikely to happen quick enough to save the enemy unit from being flank charged next turn.

[Athos1660]

I must admit that, playing SP, I haven’t come across such cases and haven't even heard about such a nasty ‘tactic’. So I certainly misunderstand the ins and outs of it.

Wouldn't a broken-off unit that is blocked by a friendly unit panic unable to escape and shouldn't it be dispersed at once ?

[rbodleyscott]

I must admit that, playing SP, I haven’t come across such cases and haven't even heard about such a nasty ‘tactic’. So I certainly misunderstand the ins and outs of it.

Wouldn't a broken-off unit that is blocked by a friendly unit panic unable to escape and shouldn't it be dispersed at once ?

Well the problem with that is it can be used as an exploit against enemy units. I don't think a unit of knights would be too troubled by a unit of light horse behind them "blocking" their break off. And they would be even less troubled by a unit of their own light horse behind them.

In the tabletop game, units whose break off was blocked lost a cohesion level, but that was used as an exploit.

[Athos1660]

I don't think a unit of knights would be too troubled by a unit of light horse behind them "blocking" their break off. And they would be even less troubled by a unit of their own light horse behind them.

Do you mean the knights would be able to "pass through" the light horses ?
What I meant is that a unit that has just lost a melee might fear the next close combat, especially if the unit can't move backwards and feel blocked.

[rbodleyscott]

I don't think a unit of knights would be too troubled by a unit of light horse behind them "blocking" their break off. And they would be even less troubled by a unit of their own light horse behind them.

Do you mean the knights would be able to "pass through" the light horses ?
What I meant is that a unit that has just lost a melee might fear the next close combat, especially if the unit can't move backwards and feel blocked.

I understand the logic. That is why it caused a Cohesion drop in the tabletop rules. But it was too exploitable.

[rbodleyscott]

Another possibility would be to make it so that non-light troops do not turn the whole unit to face light troops if that would expose them to a flank attack by non-light troops next turn. (Treat the light troops with the contempt they deserve).

That would give them 3 rounds of melee to rout the light troops before they could be charged in the flank.

[pompeytheflatulent]

Another possibility would be to make it so that non-light troops do not turn the whole unit to face light troops if that would expose them to a flank attack by non-light troops next turn. (Treat the light troops with the contempt they deserve).

That would give them 3 rounds of melee to rout the light troops before they could be charged in the flank.

I like this idea! Especially since there's supporting historical evidence: Byzantines got so tired of getting cheesed by rear charges from Arab light cavalry that they turned all their units into Oreo cookies - front and back rows of spearmen/lancers sandwiching middle rows of archers/mounted archers.

[rbodleyscott]

There would still be some jeopardy because they could be flank attacked on the 2nd enemy turn after the initial attack. But it is less of a free win for the army with the light horse, as they would probably lose the light horse, and (unless they had 2 flanking units) would only get a non-autodrop flank charge and net +50 POA.

The alternative would be for non-light troops not to bother to turn to face light troops at all.

[Athos1660]

Great ideas, especially the first alternative.

If a Light cavalry is blocked by a friendly unit and falls back after flanking , couldn't it be forced to pass through this friendly unit to complete its falling back, as an exception ? That way, the attacked non-light troop wouldn't face the light cav during the next turn, right ?
(light cavalry passing through is unrealistic/unhistorical/stupid/..., isn't it ?)

[Swuul]

IMO, Light units pushed back from combat but being blocked by another friendly unit should automatically drop the cohesion level of the Light unit and leave it in place. For non-light units I do not see the need for that, as they are supposed to be able to handle themselves in melee.

[pompeytheflatulent]

The alternative would be for non-light troops not to bother to turn to face light troops at all.

Probably safer this way. I remember a few times I used the blocked light cav charge trick not to set up a flank charge for myself, but to take an enemy lancer or elephant that's about to roll up my flank and send it running away from the battle chasing my routed light cav.

[rbodleyscott]

Great ideas, especially the first alternative.

If a Light cavalry is blocked by a friendly unit and falls back after flanking , couldn't it be forced to pass through this friendly unit to complete its falling back, as an exception ?

It could, but it would be a whole lot of extra coding.

[rbodleyscott]

IMO, Light units pushed back from combat but being blocked by another friendly unit should automatically drop the cohesion level of the Light unit and leave it in place. For non-light units I do not see the need for that, as they are supposed to be able to handle themselves in melee.

In itself that would not be enough to ensure that they were routed in time before the non-light unit gets attacked in the flank.

Or are you suggesting that original suggestion of Breaking Off "in place" should apply to blocked light troops, but not to others? That did occur to me, but it seemed hard to justify the logic of it.

[rbodleyscott]

The alternative would be for non-light troops not to bother to turn to face light troops at all.

Probably safer this way. I remember a few times I used the blocked light cav charge trick not to set up a flank charge for myself, but to take an enemy lancer or elephant that's about to roll up my flank and send it running away from the battle chasing my routed light cav.

Right, but that is a separate issue from turning to face. It would require additional code logic to stop them from pursuing light troops.

However, the sacrifical use of light horse to draw off the enemy may be a legitimate tactic - I certainly don't regard it as being as cheesy as blocking the light horse's recoil so that the enemy has to face them and then get flanked by the troops they was originally facing next turn.

In the tabletop rules is was optional whether to turn the whole unit to face flankers, precisely to stop this sort of thing.

[Athos1660]

Great ideas, especially the first alternative.

If a Light cavalry is blocked by a friendly unit and falls back after flanking , couldn't it be forced to pass through this friendly unit to complete its falling back, as an exception ?

It could, but it would be a whole lot of extra coding.

How about using the current 'Pass Through' code and applying it to Light cavalry, giving them the same ability as Light foot in any circumstances ?

[rbodleyscott]

Great ideas, especially the first alternative.

If a Light cavalry is blocked by a friendly unit and falls back after flanking , couldn't it be forced to pass through this friendly unit to complete its falling back, as an exception ?

It could, but it would be a whole lot of extra coding.

How about using the current 'Pass Through' code and applying it to Light cavalry, giving them the same ability as Light foot in any circumstances ?

As I say, not a simple task, although it could be done, as not even light foot can pass through as part of a break off. And I don't want to allow Light Horse to pass through in other circumstances, they are more than agile enough already, so it is hard to justify the logic of them being able to pass through for a break off.