Online users
- Bill Otis
- kman
Squares in evade mode?
July 29, 2010 - 9:52am — Nicholas Grenier
I have discovered during the Spring Games that if you contact an infantry unit in evade mode with cavalry and they successfully form square they fight at full strength, not reduced strength from being in evade mode.
To me this doesn't make a lot of sense.
My understanding of evade is that a small fraction of the unit is standing and fighting in order to cover the retreat of the rest. So if only 10% of the force is involved in the fight, they should form an itty bitty square and still be subject to the strength reduction, right?
If the argument is that the evaders see that they are in trouble, so the stop evading and fight to the last man doesn't seem to follow, since when an evading unit is attacked from multiple angles forcing a shatter they don't revert to attack orders. Or defending fortification and subject to surrender or anywhere else as far as I know.
Thoughts?
This site is intended for the sole purpose of supporting the Players Guild an activity sponsored by the Historical Online Learning Foundation. It exists solely to provide a discussion forum for the members of the Guild and to provide an outlet for announcements of other services offered by the Foundation. Any other activities involving this site are prohibited. All rights reserved.
Who's new
- joequ1oeil
- koolguy66
- Sakkal
- David Adams
- rkimler
Overall evade effectivness
This conversation has gotten me thinking about the overall effectiveness of evade.
The thought that the colonels leading the evading troops has perfect situational awareness that causes him to form square when being attacked from the rear led me to the realization that these colonels are also flawless in their ability to evade the attacking forces. The enemy never breaks through the skirmish line to threaten the retreating forces.
I am thinking that if evaders are attacked by a large number of enemy that they might be forced to "step up" (?) to skirmish mode, much in the same way that people are currently forced to back down under overwhelming odds. If the enemy breaks through the skirmish line the evaders are either going to have to turn and fight or else run for the hills, the orderly redeployment option is off the table.
attacked from multiple sides
How difficult would it be for the code to recognize when an evading unit is being attacked from more than one side. Perhaps this could be changed to reflect higher losses as the evading force wouldn't just be setting up a forlorn hope rear guard.
Von Gottes Gnaden König von Preußen
Not too easy
That information is generated to work out the battle line length, but not stored. That could be changed, but a revision of that sort is probably not going to be a high enough priority to make my list of before-NWOL-4 revisions (there are much bigger issues elsewhere).
Steve
I am a wizard. I make things using magic. SJS
NWOL4
Since you brought it up. I have heard rumors that there will be an ACW simulation before NWOL4. What are the present plans for the running of these simulations ? Is startup planned right after the summer games? If the ACW comes first, when is NWOL4 slated to start?
Thanks,
Carl
Rumors are treason
These matters are under discussion but final plans have not yet been made. Both a larger ACW simulation and NWOL-4 will occur, but in what sequence and at what time is not yet know. Something will start up in September, we hope it will be one of those two things but cannot commit. Readers of this forum will probably be aware that I have not gotten as much work done on code thus far this summer as I had hoped I would. :(
Steve
PS. 10 VPs will be awarded to the Guild member who identifies the source of the phrase "Rumors are treason".
SJS
I am a wizard. I make things using magic. SJS
Rumors are treason
Sounds like the book 1984. or possible any of the last four or five presidents US but my official guess is "1984".
Sam
Rumors are treason...
"Would you prefer to restate your question, or simply be sent to Research and Development for Mandatory Extra Bonus Fun Duty?"... Taken from Paranoia the RPG, Westend Endgames ...
Arch Duke of Austria
Duke of Roma
Angel of Sweden
General-Oberst Kaiserlich & Königliche Armee
Premier of Austria
- Austriae est imperare orbi universo -
Die höchste Form des Glücks ist ein Leben mit einem gewissen Grad an Verrücktheit. Erasmus
10 VPs for David
Please report to the food vats to collect your prize.
SJS
I am a wizard. I make things using magic. SJS
Jeeehaaaw
Jeeehaaaw
Arch Duke of Austria
Duke of Roma
Angel of Sweden
General-Oberst Kaiserlich & Königliche Armee
Premier of Austria
- Austriae est imperare orbi universo -
Die höchste Form des Glücks ist ein Leben mit einem gewissen Grad an Verrücktheit. Erasmus
Nick's second point
The difference to me is that when a unit is in square, it's under command of the brigadier who knows what the situation is, and is in position to control his units. When a unit is being attacked from multiple angles, it's in a rather more confused combat situation where it's much harder for the brigadier to get his men to change orders and stand.
I concur, however, that units in forts, which are also under control of officers who know the situation, should not use evade mode, and should switch to defend mode. If it's not like that already (it probably isn't) I can make it so.
Steve
I am a wizard. I make things using magic. SJS
Nick's second point
The difference to me is that when a unit is in square, it's under command of the brigadier who knows what the situation is, and is in position to control his units. When a unit is being attacked from multiple angles, it's in a rather more confused combat situation where it's much harder for the brigadier to get his men to change orders and stand.
I concur, however, that units in forts, which are also under control of officers who know the situation, should not use evade mode, and should switch to defend mode. If it's not like that already (it probably isn't) I can make it so.
Steve
I am a wizard. I make things using magic. SJS
Tactically impossible
I will dare say that it would be tactically impossible for a force on the retreat to be able to both recall its skirmishers and convince a force with their back to the enemy to form square in time to be effective. The skirmishers at the very least would be run down as the ran away from the cavalry to join up with the square. Convincing the main body not to shatter when being attacked from the rear would be very difficult.
If I was coding the situation the infantry would lose 10% of its forces off the top (the skirmishers). If they pass the square check they form square and fight the combat as normal, probably driving off the enemy. If they fail the square test they shatter automatically.
-nick
skirmishers might be better off
Well trained skirmishers were taught to lie down or take cover behind obstacles when attacked by cavalry as a prone infantryman is difficult to hit with a sword when riding by. So against sword mounted cavalry, the skirmishers might actually be the troops that stood the highest chance of surviving a cavalry attack while attempting to evade as long as the cavalry was not armed with lances.
Von Gottes Gnaden König von Preußen
Better survivability yes...
Robert,
That works out well for the individual skirmishers, but it tends to have the effect of reducing their melee strength to closer to zero than increasing it by 2.5x, which is what happens to them now.
-nick
Probability of forming squares
Maybe what should be different here is the probability to form the square. When in evade mode you are trying to avoid combat and therefore it should be harder to form squares vs. when you are prepared to fight.
One way or the other, if you manage to form the square then I am ok with the idea that the brigade commander saw that he could not evade combat and mobilised the whole brigade, not only the skirmishers, in the square.
Marcelo
That could be done
The chance to form square does not presently depend on combat mode, but it could easily be made to do so. Only problem I see here is that much of the time people who are trying to evade will not wish to form square. Perhaps we should argue that if you are in a position where there is enough enemy cavalry around that you are trying to form square, then you cannot evade anyway. If you get into square you should be put into Defend, if you fail to get into square, then into Skirmish.
Steve
I am a wizard. I make things using magic. SJS
evade and square
An itty bitty square isn't going to be able to stop the cavalry unit from pursuing the rest of the unit. The problem with squares is that they're highly immobile and, because they're relatively dense formations, they don't cover much front either.
The code was written on the assumption that in such a case, the whole infantry unit was in square and, since squares automatically get surrounded by their attackers, they stop attempting to evade once forced into square.
One effect of this is that it gives a side with cavalry a big advantage in pursuit of a defeated enemy, since it is very difficult to corner a unit in evade mode, but if you have cavalry you can force the enemy's units out of evade mode and put a good whacking on them.
Steve
I am a wizard. I make things using magic. SJS
square
I think this makes perfect sense. If only part of the unit formed a square while the rest tried to run, the cavalry would just ignore the small square and run everyone else down.
If the infantry fails to form a square, will the code still recognize them as being in evade mode?
Von Gottes Gnaden König von Preußen
Yes
They only get out of evade mode when they make it into square.
Steve
I am a wizard. I make things using magic. SJS