Alternative Gameplay Mod v1.3

[Schweetness101]

I actually think the rules as originally published in 10.3 are better (and much simpler) for our purposes. Command benefits should exist in all parts of the command area whether the general is in combat or not. The command structure of a contingent is not just the general, although for game purposes it is abstracted to that figure. A section of a line would not be more likely to anarchy just because another part of the same line (where the general was situated) had started to fight.

so you would have something like:

Bonus AP: if within 4 tiles of general if that general is NOT in combat
Anarchy/Refuse considerations: if within 4 tiles of general, whether in combat or not
+1 to CT: if within 1 tile of general if that general IS in combat
cohesion check for general death radius: ?

If I just done a play test and I can see this "Bonus AP" everywhere. What does it actually mean? The free 45 degree turn?

or simply get bonus ap, +1 to ct, and avoid anarchy/refuse penalty if within 4 squares of your general regardless of whether they are in combat?

Yes, it is just dead simple. And all you need on the UI is "In Command" and "Out of Command". You won't need "Can Rally" and "No Rally" as well because they are a key part of being either in or out of command, so players will learn that aspect very quickly. You won't need "No Control" for fall backs, a unit will either be in or out of command at the start of a turn. You will need "Pursuing" and "Routed" as per vanilla. Personally, I think the 4 square command radius should still operate in these last two states and should only stop if the commander of that contingent is killed or routs over the baseline.

I would say that Command and Control is a very big part of this mod, maybe 40% of it, so I think our labelling on the UI has to be crystal clear. Things like having +1 CT , Bonus AP etc showing look odd to me and clutter things up unnecessarily. I also think the Refuse Orders Test takes up too much space on the UI. It spreads across 3 lines when really it could do with being on 1 line, just the % chance to refuse orders. Everything else should really show in the Combat Log, if possible, like the Anarchy Tests. They are discreet and they look very good in the mod and we should use them as our template.

I also noticed that the command radius tool facility normally shows the 4 square radius when you click on a leader unit, but if they are in combat it switches to the area for the +1 CT modifier. I don't think it should do that. It should stay on the 4 square radius throughout.

Other points from the play test (Seleucids v Antigonids on Governor gives a good game)
- elephants pursuing are running past charge targets (sometimes they only need to turn 45 degrees and initiate a new melee)
- pikes are catching evading skirmishers too often (twice in this game). Skirmishers should always escape from pikes unless trapped, I would think.
- had another weird situation where a pursuing cavalry unit charged a new target and got a "rear" attack (automatic cohesion drop) even though it hit the side of the new target and was not behind it when it was fighting in its original melee. There are still some anomalies with this so keep an eye out.

Bonus AP does mean free 45 degree turn (for units outside of combat and within the 4 tile command radius of a general in their line of command who is also outside of combat). Is there a better phrase for that? "Free Turn" perhaps?

what do you think about increasing radius of ct check on general's death? it's 2 and 1 right now, perhaps 3 and 2? if any change.

so it is no longer a 100% chance to take targets of opportunity now on pursuit to charge because of the added complexity with the units sometimes stopping if facing from the front an unengaged non light inf while pursuing. What was the charge target? picture of it?

I have not changed evading chances or ap at all for light infantry, so I think you are seeing just a low chance anomaly there that sometimes happens in the vanilla game as well with the lights caught by pikes, but I could add something to evasions that would make it harder for lights to be caught by non light infantry, not sure I have not thought about all of the balance implications of that. Were they only able to get away like 1 tile before being caught? Could do like a minimum evasion distance for light inf of 2 tiles so odds of being caught by non light inf are very low, dunno. It does seem like light inf being caught, at least by unmaneuverable non light inf should basically never happen? Not sure, it is in vanilla and perhaps for a reason?

do you have a picture of the rear attack from pursuit? what path did it take and did it get any other breaks or pursuit switches in before getting to the final target? I forget the details exactly but from vanilla there's something like a reset to what the original position is considered to be for rear charges if the pursuer like broke an enemy or changed targets or something like that during pursuit.

I do like the refuse orders tooltip having all the details for now because it lets players get familiar with the new mechanic and why they might have a refuse charge chance before they actually execute the charge (combat log of course only populates after executing the charge) so I would like to keep that for now, but if there is a general consensus that it is too much clutter later then I will remove it.

"No Control" is for the same situations as in vanilla, it's just in vanilla it's called "No CC," but with all of the new CC changes, the "No CC" label is now too ambiguous and vague. Specifically what that refers to is a unit that the player can no longer control (ie you can't give orders anymore to a unit that has fallen back or is pursuing etc...), so I changed it to be more clear.

The 1 tile radius is reflecting that in the mod right now it's a 1 tile radius for ct and refusals and anarchy and rallying etc...if the general is in combat, so we would need to resolve that question and then change the visible range accordingly. For the discussion of why I don't think it should just be just in or out of command if in or out of the 4 tile radius always, see my edit to my previous combat (everything after "One distinction which vanilla makes...")

thanks!

[stockwellpete]

With the addition of charge refusals and anarchy and rally changes, those seem like more equal choices that the player would really have to grapple with. But, if you just get all the bonuses and anarchy reductions if within 4 tiles of the general, regardless of whether the general is in combat, then why bother doing anything other than committing the general to combat as soon as possible (which is what tends to happen in vanilla as well). That is, you would just end up with some more complex underlying mechanics than vanilla, but without adding much to decisionmaking, if it was still just always best to commit the general.

There are a number of reasons why you wouldn't always put the general straight into combat including . . .
1) he could get killed very quickly and then that contingent would suffer serious handicaps for the rest of the battle
2) he would immediately become a target for the other side and his unit could be forced to auto-rout relatively quickly if it suffered 2v1 attacks
3) you had already lost one commander so that your C-in-C was operating much nearer the front line than at the start
4) you assess that your contingent is superior to the enemy and you do not need to risk your commander at an early stage of the battle
5) if he was a cavalry commander you would need to keep him alive if you were eventually hoping to mount a flank attack on the enemy centre

So there is still plenty of decision-making to be had even with the very straightforward system I am advocating. Just routinely committing a general to combat without thinking about the consequences would not really be a good option, although sometimes it would be successful.

I think we are very far apart on this section of the mod. But you are in the box seat as you are writing the code so you will have to proceed in the direction you prefer. I am opposed to the extra layers of complexity that you are adding because it breaks with the "simple to play, hard to master" character of the game. I think a lot of players might find it very complicated and I don't think it needs to be.

Regarding light foot evading pikes - yes, they only moved 1 square and were not trapped yet the pikes still caught them. So a minimum of 2 squares evasion might be better. No, I don't have a picture of the cavalry pursuit that ended in a bogus "rear" attack on another unit. It just happened too quickly and it involved 3 pursuing cavalry units. But the charging unit definitely did not start behind the unit it ended up attacking. You will come across it in your own playtests as it happens once every 2-3 games.

[stockwellpete]

what do you think about increasing radius of ct check on general's death? it's 2 and 1 right now, perhaps 3 and 2? if any change.

Should be 4 squares for S-G and C-in-C with my "simples" idea. Not sure otherwise.

so it is no longer a 100% chance to take targets of opportunity now on pursuit to charge because of the added complexity with the units sometimes stopping if facing from the front an unengaged non light inf while pursuing. What was the charge target? picture of it?

Elephant routed enemy cavalry unit which had thurephoroi next to it. Instead of pursuing elephant unit could have turned 45 degrees and attacked thureophoroi diagonally from the same square or it could have just stayed where it was (instead of pursuing) in the way that cavalry do now.

[Schweetness101]

the vanilla for CT check for seeing a general die is 1 and 2 tiles depending on type, I am suggesting 2 and 3, but would you increase it all the way to 4 tiles for all general types for the mod? that might be justifiable, but would certainly be a huge increase to the morale potency of the general's death, perhaps called for though.

You may very well be right about the simplicity. I am still on the fence. How about this: I release a version as is (because the existing vanilla stuff plus what I'd added up to this point was already like that with the 1:4 tile situations) and the community tests it out and if the feedback is generally negative then I can rewrite to make it just 4 tiles across the board for everything.

In part I would like to try out the more complex way first because it is already written like that, and in part because undoing it would not just require undoing a few versions of mod updates, but also re-architecting a lot of vanilla stuff (like in vanilla bonus ap is only if out of combat and 4 tiles, but bonus combat ct from adjacency is only if in combat and within max command radius divided by 4, typically 1 or 2 tiles) and it would actually be quite complex to code in the simpler idea.

[Schweetness101]

one other really important question to ask, at least important for technical reasons, is whether the UI and actual ability to rally, reduce refuse and anarchy chances etc...should be updated dynamically as you move units around during a turn (like how you get +1 to ct if you move a general into combat on this turn for other combats resolved adjacent to it this turn), or only be dependent on having been within command radius at the beginning of the turn like with the free extra turn (you only avoid reduced cc by being within the general's command radius at turn start, regardless of it you move the general closer to you during the turn. If you move it closer during this turn to be within command radius then it counts as within command radius only for the next turn).

I know that it is a bit confusing, but for UI purposes it would be confusing (even with the simple in or out of command version) if it shows out of command but you can see that you are within the general's command radius because you moved the general closer during this turn and then you don't know why you are getting out of command radius for rallies and anarchy charges during the rest of the turn.

I hope that makes at least some kind of sense...it's kind of a confusing thing to try and keep track of why you are out of command even though you see you are within the general's radius. Probably keep it like vanilla for ct and bonus turn? but I was thinking that for:

rallies: they only happen during your next pre turn, so should show that you can rally if you move a general into radius where there was none during the turn, because it is only relevant for the next preturn.
anarchy charges/refusals: these can happen during your turn, so should you be able to reduce anarchy charges/refusals for moves you make later in a turn because you moved a general in closer earlier in the turn? or should it only be if you were within command radius at the beginning of the turn?

[desicat]

one other really important question to ask, at least important for technical reasons, is whether the UI and actual ability to rally, reduce refuse and anarchy chances etc...should be updated dynamically as you move units around during a turn (like how you get +1 to ct if you move a general into combat on this turn for other combats resolved adjacent to it this turn), or only be dependent on having been within command radius at the beginning of the turn like with the free extra turn (you only avoid reduced cc by being within the general's command radius at turn start, regardless of it you move the general closer to you during the turn. If you move it closer during this turn to be within command radius then it counts as within command radius only for the next turn).

I know that it is a bit confusing, but for UI purposes it would be confusing (even with the simple in or out of command version) if it shows out of command but you can see that you are within the general's command radius because you moved the general closer during this turn and then you don't know why you are getting out of command radius for rallies and anarchy charges during the rest of the turn.

I hope that makes at least some kind of sense...it's kind of a confusing thing to try and keep track of why you are out of command even though you see you are within the general's radius. Probably keep it like vanilla for ct and bonus turn? but I was thinking that for:

rallies: they only happen during your next pre turn, so should show that you can rally if you move a general into radius where there was none during the turn, because it is only relevant for the next preturn.
anarchy charges/refusals: these can happen during your turn, so should you be able to reduce anarchy charges/refusals for moves you make later in a turn because you moved a general in closer earlier in the turn? or should it only be if you were within command radius at the beginning of the turn?

If I read this correctly Vanilla completes the In Command test at the beginning of the turn. Seems like this should be how all the tests are completed in the Mod as well. This makes it easy to understand (turn on the command range color shade to see) and provides consistency across the board, for all tests (rally, Anarchy/Refusal, combat).

[Schweetness101]

...

If I read this correctly Vanilla completes the In Command test at the beginning of the turn. Seems like this should be how all the tests are completed in the Mod as well. This makes it easy to understand (turn on the command range color shade to see) and provides consistency across the board, for all tests (rally, Anarchy/Refusal, combat).

yes that would seem to be the most consistent and to make sense. The issues are that
1) I don't think that is how it is done in vanilla for the +1 to ct for being adjacent to a commander in combat, so it's kind of either/or from vanilla rather than consistent in the first place
2) it would be confusing for rallies because you could end the turn with it saying a given unit can't rally when in fact it can (because rallies happen in your next pre turn, so if you move a general into the radius of a less than steady unit, you would want the ui to say 'can rally' because it would be able to rally the next turn when rallies happen.
3) it would be confusing to have such a wide variety of effects from being in or out of command radius only be applied at begin turn, and then you are moving lots of units around and asking yourself 'why can this unit visibly in command radius still have out of command radius charge refusal chance, and why does this unit visibly out of command radius not have the increase in anarchy charge chance?' Part of this difference is that +1ct, refusals and anarchy charges can happen during the turn rather than in pre turn like rallies, or rather than being a pre turn modifier affecting free turns for that move.

[Schweetness101]

Version 1.2

v1.2 download:

https://www.dropbox.com/sh/et4ogve5nkat ... lqKDa?dl=0

change list:
1) fixed display for anarchy and refuse chances that could show above 100 or below 0 %
2) special rules for light troops refusals made only for ranged light troops, ie light lancers not refusing to charge now just because they are light
3) increased chance to test to rally from broken to 60 (from 30 in prev mod version and 20 in vanilla), and to rally from not broken to 60 (from 40 in vanilla)
4) changed refuse order values and math to be accumulative
5) change african spearmen and phoenician african spearmen from 25 to 5 anarchy, and changed Bedouin light horsemen exempt to 25 anarchy, and prodromoi
from exempt to 5 anarchy
6) added anarchy charge test on turn
7) added anarchy charge test on fallback
8 ) decrease chance to refuse charge if at significant combat advantage
9) integrated pikemod, and also added +200 poa for charger and -2 CT for pike on flanks against occupied pikes (still no autodrop), plus the pikemod army list changes for hellenic factions
10) put charge refusal information into charge tooltip
11) scythed chariots stick around in melee so long as enemy it is in combat with is not steady, rather than if just not broken
12) added CC stuff to refusal chance considerations (with general, cinc dead, inside command radius)
13) added indicator if unit has already anarchy charge tested this turn in ui (replaces anarchy chance after testing)
14) can now rally if within 4 tile command radius of general outside of combat, or if adjacent (within one tile) of general in combat, rather than
just the former as it was before, with updated unit ui and general's command radius image to reflect this
-unit ui has complex changes explained below
15) your lights now being near enemies do not remove group move from your side, and they cannot direct group move either. Because auto assigning
lights to teams in the mod, they will be in the group by default, because you do want them assigned to teams for rally and cc, but you would not want your lights
to be used for group move, so now they can be both assigned to teams and moved independently of their team while not causing their team to lose group
move when they are near the enemy. A bit confusing to write all out but makes sense when you try it. Opponent's lights still impose loss of group move
on your units like normal if within given distance. UI (blue bits) for group move changed to reflect all of that
16) altered Pursuit_ChanceOfCharging calculations, changed chance to pursue to charge quite a bit, among other things if you are a light horse at disadvantage in the charge against non light foot or cav and it would not be a rear attack or against an occupied enemy then stop rather than continue pursuing or charge. Some similar changes for non light cav. Also added guaranteed chance to take charge from pursuit if it would autodrop target. Again, a bit confusing to write out but makes sense when you try it. Needs more testing and is kind of a work in progress
17) changed to count as rear from greater than 100 to greater than 95 degrees to hopefully fix some shallow rear attacks not counting as rear attacks
18) modified per extra unit in combat with effectiveness from 20 to 25, still max at 50, ie 2v1s and 3v1s are a bit more effective now
19) various alterations to casualties between different units types to speed up/slow down combat in different places to try and get the right feel for the mod
20) outside of command range for charge refusals and anarchy charges also taking into account if adjacent and general in combat (ie does not increase anarchy
or refuse chance if adjacent to general in combat and/or in radius of general out of combat, in contrast to before where it was only the latter)
21) show no command radius if general is routing, 1 if in combat or pursuing, 4 otherwise, so that the visual matches the effects
22) increased radius in which units take ct check on general dying from 1 and 2 for SG and CinC respectively to 2 and 3

Done casualty changes:
1) melee and impact combat between light cav casualties increased 33%
2) melee between lights and non-lights: 33% more inflicted by all non-lights on all lights
3) impact between lights and non-light cavalry: 33% more inflicted by non-light cav on lights, unless the lights are light lancers then its mutual
4) damage reduced 25% non light foot vs steady pikes (this is from the pike mod)
5) damage reduced 10% between all other non light foot vs non light foot combat
6) non light inf vs non light inf casualty decrease only 10% now
*these also have indications in the combat log but will probably be removed later to reduce clutter

Unit UI changes:
in the unit ui where it normally just tells you reduced cc or pursuing etc...there will now be indications for if a unit:
1) can or cannot rally on the next preturn based on its current access to command
2) has the +1 to ct if in close combat adjacent to general
3) has the free turn for this turn based on their command access at the beginning of the turn ie like for getting the free turn from being in command radius in vanilla
4) free turn or not
5) No Control instead of No CC, because CC is a bit ambiguous now.
*these are complex changes that are not yet bug free and you may end up seeing some weirdness with the messages, but on the whole the ui stuff should be accurate and give you a good idea of the command situation for any given unit.
*it remains to be seen if these exact changes will be kept, so it is worth paying attention to see if you like these radii and effects for command or if you would prefer an across the board 4 tile radius for everything

there are enough changes on here I felt I should upload a new version before I got so far that testing out all of the differences from the previous version became impossible. Give the new Unit UI stuff a chance and see how it is and get back to me with any evaluation if you are interested in testing. And, of course don't forget to take a look at everything else, there are way more than just the ui changes.

[stockwellpete]

the vanilla for CT check for seeing a general die is 1 and 2 tiles depending on type, I am suggesting 2 and 3, but would you increase it all the way to 4 tiles for all general types for the mod? that might be justifiable, but would certainly be a huge increase to the morale potency of the general's death, perhaps called for though.

You may very well be right about the simplicity. I am still on the fence. How about this: I release a version as is (because the existing vanilla stuff plus what I'd added up to this point was already like that with the 1:4 tile situations) and the community tests it out and if the feedback is generally negative then I can rewrite to make it just 4 tiles across the board for everything.

In part I would like to try out the more complex way first because it is already written like that, and in part because undoing it would not just require undoing a few versions of mod updates, but also re-architecting a lot of vanilla stuff (like in vanilla bonus ap is only if out of combat and 4 tiles, but bonus combat ct from adjacency is only if in combat and within max command radius divided by 4, typically 1 or 2 tiles) and it would actually be quite complex to code in the simpler idea.

Yes, OK then. I think one of the problems is that I am having trouble keeping up with the furious pace at which you are developing this mod.

In terms of the "command and control" part of the mod I am still pondering how we might make contingents a bit more autonomous (if that is the right word) from vanilla where units can transfer from one commander to another at their leisure really. Calibrating things to focus much more on contingents is not straightforward, and there will be a number of ways of doing it, but I think it is incumbent on us to find the simplest way.

Logically, if you are going to give bonuses across the contingent (provided the units stay within the command radius) then penalties should apply in the same way. Or, at least, that should be our starting point and we can adjust from there if necessary. So that is what my "simpler" approach is aiming for.

I am actually still thinking about the unit anarchy values we have and the various modifiers. I think we are getting much closer to a good balance, but I am wondering whether disciplined troops should be rated zero instead of +5, just to contrast anarchy prone and disciplined troops a bit more. I will do a couple of playtests this week with an adjusted squads file to see. Players should be able to expect a line of shield wall units under command to hold for at least one complete turn in charge range of the enemy before discipline starts to break down).

[Schweetness101]

the vanilla for CT check for seeing a general die is 1 and 2 tiles depending on type, I am suggesting 2 and 3, but would you increase it all the way to 4 tiles for all general types for the mod? that might be justifiable, but would certainly be a huge increase to the morale potency of the general's death, perhaps called for though.

You may very well be right about the simplicity. I am still on the fence. How about this: I release a version as is (because the existing vanilla stuff plus what I'd added up to this point was already like that with the 1:4 tile situations) and the community tests it out and if the feedback is generally negative then I can rewrite to make it just 4 tiles across the board for everything.

In part I would like to try out the more complex way first because it is already written like that, and in part because undoing it would not just require undoing a few versions of mod updates, but also re-architecting a lot of vanilla stuff (like in vanilla bonus ap is only if out of combat and 4 tiles, but bonus combat ct from adjacency is only if in combat and within max command radius divided by 4, typically 1 or 2 tiles) and it would actually be quite complex to code in the simpler idea.

Yes, OK then. I think one of the problems is that I am having trouble keeping up with the furious pace at which you are developing this mod.

In terms of the "command and control" part of the mod I am still pondering how we might make contingents a bit more autonomous (if that is the right word) from vanilla where units can transfer from one commander to another at their leisure really. Calibrating things to focus much more on contingents is not straightforward, and there will be a number of ways of doing it, but I think it is incumbent on us to find the simplest way.

Logically, if you are going to give bonuses across the contingent (provided the units stay within the command radius) then penalties should apply in the same way. Or, at least, that should be our starting point and we can adjust from there if necessary. So that is what my "simpler" approach is aiming for.

I am actually still thinking about the unit anarchy values we have and the various modifiers. I think we are getting much closer to a good balance, but I am wondering whether disciplined troops should be rated zero instead of +5, just to contrast anarchy prone and disciplined troops a bit more. I will do a couple of playtests this week with an adjusted squads file to see. Players should be able to expect a line of shield wall units under command to hold for at least one complete turn in charge range of the enemy before discipline starts to break down).

I would be ok with disciplined being 0 instead of 5, and then you know they will only anarchy under extenuating circumstances.

were you thinking of some additional penalties for being outside of your SG's command? to incentivize keeping contingents together? or are you just referring to the existing ones (rallying, refusal and anarchy chances, etc...)?

[stockwellpete]

I would be ok with disciplined being 0 instead of 5, and then you know they will only anarchy under extenuating circumstances.

were you thinking of some additional penalties for being outside of your SG's command? to incentivize keeping contingents together? or are you just referring to the existing ones (rallying, refusal and anarchy chances, etc...)?

Referring to existing ones. I have nothing new to add.

[travling_canuck]

Thanks for continuing to work on this! I haven't had any time to fire up FOG2 recently, but when I do, I'm looking forward to trying out this mod.

[Schweetness101]

Here are two versions of the current mod that together encompass the two visions for what should be done with command radius, UI, and being in and out of command currently:

https://www.dropbox.com/sh/qba332ffxctr ... HsdOa?dl=0

where mod A is version 1.2*, and mod B is version 1.2 with a distinct version of what counts as in and out of command, and how that is shown in the UI. The idea is to get two version of the mod out there for whatever people are willing and curious to test and see which type of command radius and UI feels better.

=====================================================================================================

Version A:

This is basically the above version 1.2. There is a much more complex series of Unit UI information strings than in Version B. Including:

-Can Rally
-No Rally
-, +1 CT
-Free Turn
-No Free Turn
-Pursuing
-No Control

And the rules are more complex:

-The Radius for a general is 4 tiles if out of combat, and 1 tile if in combat, and 0 if routing.
-Free turn functions like in vanilla where you get it if in command range (4 tiles) at the beginning of a turn of a General who is not in combat and you are not in combat.
- +1 to CT is also like vanilla where you get it if within 1 tile of a General who is in combat, and you are in combat
-Rally is dynamic throughout the turn, and you will see yourself come into and out of 'Can Rally' and 'No Rally' as you move generals around. Because rallies happen during your next pre-turn based on command access during that next pre turn, knowing whether a unit is in rallying distance from the beginning of the current turn is not necessarily useful, and in fact might be a bit deceptive. Instead, the more useful UI indicator potentially is if you have maneuvered generals to be within rallying distance during this turn, so that you have an indication if a unit might rally sometime after you click end turn (and that's not just the UI, the logic for the rallies being allowed is actually happening dynamically as well, unlike B below where you have to have been within command radius at the beginning of the previous turn to get a rally in the next pre turn, ie the UI and logic match for both A and B, but are both distinct). This is more like +1 to CT in vanilla where you get it if you move into combat next to a general during this turn, even if you did not start out the turn that way. And, as per above, you get it within 1 tile of a General in combat, and within 4 tiles of a general out of combat.
-Charge Refusal and Anarchy Charge chance reductions are also like Rallies and +1 to CT in this sense, ie a unit with increased chance of anarchy during a given turn will have its anarchy reduced during that same turn if you move a general over to it before charging/moving the unit in question (and thus taking a refuse/anarchy test). Not sure even for this version if that should be this way, but that's how it is for now. Similarly, you get this reduction if within 1 tile of a General in combat, and within 4 tiles of a general out of combat.

Version B:

this is a simpler version of the command and control and UI stuff:

1) Command radius is always 4, whether the general is in or out of combat, or even if it is pursuing (the only exception being if the general is routing, in which case the radius is 0, and all it can do is rally itself)
2) Units only count as in command for all purposes if in command from beginning of the turn (which would now just mean within 4 tiles of your SG or the CinC, regardless of the condition of that SG or CinC, excepting a routed general)

So being able to rally, getting the +1 to CT, getting the free turn, getting the reduction in anarchy and refusal chances are all determined the same way: if, at the beginning of the turn, you are within 4 tiles of your SG or the CinC who is not routed. This means, unlike vanilla, that you get the +1 to CT even if the general is not in combat, and the free turn even if general is in combat. This is to keep things simple and understandable at a glance. As a consequence, the only thing command wise you see in the unit UI should be "In Command" or "Out of Command". ("Pursuing also still shows up, but may not be necessary).

=========================================================================================================================

*both also have a tweak to light foot evasions, and a bug fix in pursuit to charge chances, and so A is not identical to v1.2

Note: both versions may have some bugs in their UI, or when a unit is or is not in command, but are more than usable enough to be able to compare what they are trying to compare.

It may be asking for too much to get people to compare these to this level of detail, but if you are interested in the mod's development, we'd love it if you'd download and install both versions, and maybe just give each one a brief, custom battle singleplayer game to help get a feel for the distinction between them. Just reading the above is extremely confusing I suspect, but once you are in the game and looking at the general's visible radii, the Unit UI messages and the chance to charge/refuse stuff, you should pretty quickly get an intuitive feel for how they play differently and which you prefer.

Thanks for any help to anyone who is up for it!

[stockwellpete]

Simples (Version B) all the way for me.

I think if you are adding things in a mod incrementally it may not seem that you are changing too much, but if you are adding things over a longer period then things can become a lot more complicated without you realising it. So that is why I have started to become a bit concerned about too much complexity in recent weeks and this Version B is a way to try and remedy it a bit.

To recap, both Schweetness101 and myself felt that "Command and Control" was very undeveloped in the game and we wanted to see if we could make it a bit more interesting. In vanilla units can move all around the map, be transferred backwards and forwards between generals, and the very generous command radius of the C-in-C meant that units usually stay "in command" to get the free 45 degree turn (where appropriate). Instead, in the mod, S-G's now only give command to units in their own starting contingent (as allied generals do in vanilla) and all commanders have a command radius of just 4 squares. These are very significant changes in themselves.

Then, in addition to this, we have added the "anarchy" rules, which again we have tried to keep as simple as possible. There are only two basic types of troops for anarchy purposes now - disciplined and anarchy-prone. And there are various modifiers including for superior/elite and raw, for being "out of command" (the most important one) and for the loss of your C-in-C. So there is quite a bit of complexity here already before you consider the implications of these changes for each of the army lists i.e. what is the balance between "disciplined" and "anarchy-prone" in this list and how does this influence my army selection?

To me, this seems quite enough, particularly when you put it with the melee re-balancing part of the mod. This includes the following - automatic cohesion drop for flank attacks has gone; pike combat has been modified; cavalry combat has undergone a major overhaul to reduce atomisation drastically; routed units disperse more quickly; and the army rout threshold has been reduced to 50%. There are other minor tweaks as well.

I think we will need to produce a proper guide to the mod when we have finished. If we have done a good job I think most players will grasp the basic concepts quickly and will be able to enjoy their games with the mod. The subtleties will obviously take much longer to grasp.

[stockwellpete]

I have done a Play Test with Version B this morning against the AI (Antigonids v Seleucids). Very interesting dilemmas for myself in terms of "Command and Control". On the left flank my cavalry attempt to get round behind the Seleucid army but was only partially successfully as a combined infantry and cavalry opposed me. In the end I had a decision to make - withdraw my cavalry completely together and abandon the attack, or split my contingent and let 2 cavalry units harass the rear of the AI's army even though they would be "out of command", while withdrawing the other 2 cavalry units (one had the S-G). I chose the second option knowing full well that the "out of command" cavalry units would be more likely to experience anarchy, would lose the free 45 degree turn, would lose the CT bonus and would not be able to rally.

In the centre where my pikes were I had put my S-G in a Veteran pike unit in the front line with my C-in-C in a pike unit a few squares behind the fighting. My S-G got killed very early on so I had to decide whether to put my C-in-C in the front line in his place or continue with him in the rear. Again, I chose the second option.

On the right flank where I had a combined force of elephants, cavalry and thureophoroi, I was faced with 4 light horse (I had no light horse), cavalry and a great mass of irregular foot. I decided to charge straight at the enemy cavalry and irregular foot and ignore the enemy light horse. Once I had made contact with the enemy where my elephants were running riot, supported by my cavalry commander and thureophoroi, I started to suffer heavy casualties to my other cavalry units from the enemy light horse. So, again, I decided to split the contingent with the 2 armoured cavalry units moving "out of command" to draw off the enemy light horse, again knowing that the "out of command" cavalry units would be more likely to experience anarchy, would lose the free 45 degree turn, would lose the CT bonus and would not be able to rally.

So, for this first playtest with the "Simples" version, I had plenty of extra decisions to make that I would not have had in the same way in a vanilla game.

[kronenblatt]

Simples (Version B) all the way for me.
In vanilla units can move all around the map, be transferred backwards and forwards between generals, and the very generous command radius of the C-in-C meant that units usually stay "in command" to get the free 45 degree turn (where appropriate). Instead, in the mod, S-G's now only give command to units in their own starting contingent (as allied generals do in vanilla) and all commanders have a command radius of just 4 squares. These are very significant changes in themselves.

Interesting stuff that I'm happy to try out: I too would prefer a simpler version (B), I assume.

But the C-in-C still gives command to all units within the 4 square command radius? What else in the mod distinguishes the C-in-C from the SG's?

Also: what do you mean with "be transferred backwards and forwards between generals"?

Also of interest is how the AI manages to deal with the two respective versions (A and B, respectively)?

[stockwellpete]

Simples (Version B) all the way for me.
In vanilla units can move all around the map, be transferred backwards and forwards between generals, and the very generous command radius of the C-in-C meant that units usually stay "in command" to get the free 45 degree turn (where appropriate). Instead, in the mod, S-G's now only give command to units in their own starting contingent (as allied generals do in vanilla) and all commanders have a command radius of just 4 squares. These are very significant changes in themselves.

Interesting stuff that I'm happy to try out: I too would prefer a simpler version (B), I assume.

But the C-in-C still gives command to all units within the 4 square command radius? What else in the mod distinguishes the C-in-C from the SG's?

Also: what do you mean with "be transferred backwards and forwards between generals"?

Also of interest is how the AI manages to deal with the two respective versions (A and B, respectively)?

Yes, the C-in-C can still give command to any unit in the army, just the command radius has been halved. The death of the C-in-C does give a negative anarchy modifier to the whole army. No other changes so far.

At the moment S-G's can give command to any unit in the army (except allies) so you can move units from one flank to another where another S-G will then give them command. You cannot do this in the mod. A unit only gets command from the S-G in whose contingent they are placed at deployment. If they move away from that S-G then they are out of command unless the C-in-C can give it to them.

[kronenblatt]

1 anarchy rules, with only two basic types of troops for anarchy purposes now - disciplined and anarchy-prone, with various modifiers including for superior/elite and raw, for being "out of command" (the most important one) and for the loss of your C-in-C.

2. automatic cohesion drop for flank attacks has gone;
3. pike combat has been modified;
4. cavalry combat has undergone a major overhaul to reduce atomisation drastically;
5. routed units disperse more quickly;
6. the army rout threshold has been reduced to 50%.

Are all of these 1-6 in both versions A and B?

And what do you mean by atomisation?

[stockwellpete]

1 anarchy rules, with only two basic types of troops for anarchy purposes now - disciplined and anarchy-prone, with various modifiers including for superior/elite and raw, for being "out of command" (the most important one) and for the loss of your C-in-C.

2. automatic cohesion drop for flank attacks has gone;
3. pike combat has been modified;
4. cavalry combat has undergone a major overhaul to reduce atomisation drastically;
5. routed units disperse more quickly;
6. the army rout threshold has been reduced to 50%.

Are all of these 1-6 in both versions A and B?

And what do you mean by atomisation?

Yes.

Atomisation is when cavalry units from both sides pursue routed enemies out of the same general area of melee and end up spread out all over the map - and then have to turn round and come back again to melee (which can take 5-6 turns). The mod reduces all this considerably.

[Athos1660]

And what do you mean by atomisation?

I think it is the opposite of 'contingentisation' or 'battlelisation'.

(edit)
Too late, Pete gave the answer meanwhile.