A NIfty Trick... (using Groups)

Al Amos · 03-12-2010, 07:00 AM,

Tim,

The foot leader isn't too much of an issue with many of the other designer's scenarios since they prefer to have the leader deployed one hex back to begin with.

In this time leaders lead from the front I believe the leaders should be stacked with the units in the front line, and so they risk running ahead. I'll mention it to Paul, and see what he thinks. I'll definitely be building more scenarios along that philosophy, so we'll see.

You and others are welcomed and encouraged to drop a line to Paul through the HPS support desk. He's very good at responding to customer suggestions to improve his game engine.

Titus · 03-15-2010, 12:39 AM,

Thinking on why Foot Leaders did not need changing -
Foot leaders only have 60 action points so they will not be running ahead of their main body of troops. Before any one action phase the unit occupying the same hex as the leader at the start of the turn will have caught up with the leader and therefore he will not be on his own and suffer casualties.

TJD · (This post was last modified: 03-15-2010, 02:46 AM by TJD.)

Thanks, Leonidas. Al's Tribune scenarios are good test cases for leader issues because he's included so many of them. Here are two in particular:

-- In cases where an engaged enemy unit falls back or the Roman unit goes Uncontrolled, the Roman unit will advance but his accompanying leader does not. As a result the leader is left alone and vulnerable to melee.

--Conversely, where an infantry unit and leader are stacked together and issued a movement order, the infanry unit will stop when contacted by an enemy unit but the leader can continue on through the enemy ZoC and thus wind up alone and vulnerable to melee.

It would be nice if the leaders could be made "sticky" and more inclined to stay with a protective unit.

Tim

Titus · 03-16-2010, 09:52 PM,

Making a leader stick to a non-leader unit for protection - this is an interesting idea. I will look to see if we can introduce an option for this.

Al Amos · 03-16-2010, 11:06 PM,

That would be nice. I could have each centurian attached to his century. Me likey! :-)

Dog Soldier · 03-17-2010, 10:03 AM,

(03-16-2010, 09:52 PM)Leonadis Wrote: Making a leader stick to a non-leader unit for protection - this is an interesting idea. I will look to see if we can introduce an option for this.

This might lead to unintended consequences.

1. What happens if the unit goes berserk and charges?
2. What happens if the unit is routed?
2a. Is the leader "dragged" along with the routing unit?
2b.Is the leader left vulnerable in the hex when the unit routs, including getting himself surrounded?
3. Is the leader assumed to be in front of or behind the unit he is stacked with?
3a. If behind the unit, what happens if the hex is attacked from the rear?
3b. Is the leader hit first by missile fire or does he become immune to missiles?
3c. Where is the leader if the unit is on line formation and attacked from the flanks?
4. Can a leader not associated with a group, or out of range of his group be / become "stuck" to the nearest group?
5. Will this really slow game play if the "stick" is a command to be assigned to leaders?

Hope I brought up some good points, or at least showed how little I understand the under lying mechanics of this system. :conf:

Dog Soldier

Al Amos · 03-17-2010, 11:29 AM,

Dog Soldier,

"This might lead to unintended consequences."

Maybe not....

"1. What happens if the unit goes berserk and charges?"
Could be possible that lesser leaders say Mediocre and Experienced lose their head and go along. Legendary could influence the troops and prevent this reaction.

"2. What happens if the unit is routed?
2a. Is the leader "dragged" along with the routing unit?
2b.Is the leader left vulnerable in the hex when the unit routs, including getting himself surrounded?"
There are several documented occurences in history of leaders being swept away in a routing torrent. I think he should be carried along and be exposed as the units are.

"3. Is the leader assumed to be in front of or behind the unit he is stacked with?
3a. If behind the unit, what happens if the hex is attacked from the rear?
3b. Is the leader hit first by missile fire or does he become immune to missiles?
3c. Where is the leader if the unit is on line formation and attacked from the flanks?"
I believe this question is already answered in that leaders are not attacked if stacked with a unit. (I hope I have that rule correct.)

"4. Can a leader not associated with a group, or out of range of his group be / become "stuck" to the nearest group?"
I would hope it would be an option to the players the same as forming new groups, and not something that automatically happens.

"5. Will this really slow game play if the "stick" is a command to be assigned to leaders?"
I don't think it would, as the designers would probably be doing the majority of the 'sticking'.

All good questions, and I'm anwering from my opinion only, not Paul's. He may see each issue compeletly differently than I do. :-)

We're all learning the engine thanks for coming along and chiming in. The more input (usually) the better. ;-)

Titus · 03-19-2010, 09:59 PM,

1 - A Leader is assumed to be behind the combat line unless the unit it is with has a strength less than the leader unit. This stands irrespective of where the attacking unit comes from - front or rear.
2 - At present Leaders do not become 'Uncontrolled' or 'routed' even if the unit it is with goes 'Uncontrolled' or 'routed'. However, this can be changed and will be considered as Al suggested.
3 - A leader can only become 'stuck' to one single unit not a Group but a leader can be part of a group as this is already in the game.
4 - This option should not have any impact on the speed of the game.

TJD · 03-20-2010, 12:55 AM,

(03-19-2010, 09:59 PM)Leonadis Wrote: 2 - At present Leaders do not become 'Uncontrolled' or 'routed' even if the unit it is with goes 'Uncontrolled' or 'routed'. However, this can be changed and will be considered as Al suggested.

Actually, with all due respect to Al, the sticky leader idea was mine, see above. But I wanted to address the issue of leaders going Uncontrolled or berserker. They don't in the current rules, and that's fine, but I wonder if some exceptions might be made. I'm thinking of Crastinus and his group at Pharsalus. He was primus pilus and it's arguable that his amazing sally had a decisive effect on morale. Caesar certainly gave him ample credit. I can't come up with other examples at the moment but, on the off-chance that Pharsalus is ever duplicated in the AW series of games, I certainly hope Crastinus is allowed to go "Uncontrolled" and given a big Ferocity bonus :chainsaw:

Tim

Al Amos · 03-20-2010, 03:00 AM,

Sticky leader idea was Tim's! Yes, yes.

I was thinking of Crastinus as well, that's funny. The Gauls had Gaesatae which are sometimes described having beserk behavior. Thier leaders should go 'battle mad' with them, wouldn't they?

Perhaps another level of leader? or a different level of leader?

Crastinus was performing some sort of religious act, a devotion or something. So, maybe a leader with a 'zealot' level could be somewhat unstable?