Scouting anomaly?

[garymann]

Just been playing a single match against the AI. If I move a single LI up to a wood I can see if anything is in the wood hex. If not I can undo turn and choose another hex. Rinse and repeat until whole wood is scouted without even moving my LI? Obviously if someone in hex, then LI move ends. Is this an acceptable move?

[rbodleyscott]

Just been playing a single match against the AI. If I move a single LI up to a wood I can see if anything is in the wood hex. If not I can undo turn and choose another hex. Rinse and repeat until whole wood is scouted without even moving my LI? Obviously if someone in hex, then LI move ends. Is this an acceptable move?

Not really, but I am struggling to see what the logic would need to be to prevent it, without preventing normal Undos in terrain. It would seem to me that the only way to prevent it would be to disallow Undos for any moves in (or within 2 squares of, because that is the reveal distance) potentially concealing terrain.

Whether that is a price worth paying I am not convinced, which is why we have not "fixed" this anomaly before.

[Paul59]

I thought Undo becomes impossible if a previously unseen enemy becomes visible? I get that a lot when moving LC forward and revealing enemy that was previously concealed behind hills.

[MVP7]

I thought Undo becomes impossible if a previously unseen enemy becomes visible? I get that a lot when moving LC forward and revealing enemy that was previously concealed behind hills.

Yeah but if you don't spot an enemy you can undo and repeat until you spot an enemy. Knowing that a forest has no enemies in it is almost as valuable as knowing that there is an enemy in it.

[Paul59]

I thought Undo becomes impossible if a previously unseen enemy becomes visible? I get that a lot when moving LC forward and revealing enemy that was previously concealed behind hills.

Yeah but if you don't spot an enemy you can undo and repeat until you spot an enemy. Knowing that a forest has no enemies in it is almost as valuable as knowing that there is an enemy in it.

Oh silly me! I see what the OP was referring to now. I had just woken up when I read it, and was half asleep!

[Jagger2002]

Someone did that to me once in a pickup game. Only time I have seen it. Didn't particularly like it.

[Athos1660]

Is undo such a great feature ? Is it worth it from a gameplay point of view ?

[MVP7]

In my opinion undo is very important. I often use undo when I want to see what angle an unit would take after movement or what their odds would be in attack. The exploit mentioned in here is of little consequence to single player.

[76mm]

In my opinion undo is very important.

+1, and I only play MP. I haven't seen this tactic in the wild yet, hope that I don't, it is pretty cheesy...

[Paul59]

Maybe Undos should be disallowed if the move reveals any previously hidden tile, whether it contains an enemy unit or not? It would disallow a lot of Undos in the early part of a battle, when the armies are advancing into contact in broken terrain, but it would also stop this sort of dodgy tactic.

[SnuggleBunnies]

Maybe Undos should be disallowed if the move reveals any previously hidden tile, whether it contains an enemy unit or not? It would disallow a lot of Undos in the early part of a battle, when the armies are advancing into contact in broken terrain, but it would also stop this sort of dodgy tactic.

I could get behind that. It's a simple fix. I've seen this sort of thing a little bit in MP, but not too much; still annoying, though.

[MVP7]

Almost every move will reveal some tile somewhere and there's no sensible way to tell it to the player which would basically cripple undo function.

I don't think there's any clean solution that wouldn't involve basically redesigning the current movement system into some kind of preview-and-confirm system, and that wouldn't be great either.

[TheGrayMouser]

Almost every move will reveal some tile somewhere and there's no sensible way to tell it to the player which would basically cripple undo function.

I don't think there's any clean solution that wouldn't involve basically redesigning the current movement system into some kind of preview-and-confirm system, and that wouldn't be great either.

A possible solution would be getting rid of the ability to do partial moves, do other things with other units, then come back and move said unit again. One touch and done. The ability to do this leads to all kinds of gamey things ( like blocking break offs in the same turn as the charge).

[Paul59]

Almost every move will reveal some tile somewhere

Maybe, but it might be possible to script a range limitation, so that only revealed tiles within a certain distance cancel the Undo. That could limit the damage to the Undo function. It would certainly need testing in a beta to check for issues. Two other possible problems are if it is too difficult to write a script for it, and if it would have a negative impact on pc processing capabilities.

[markwatson360]

I'm not sure the undo function needs to be altered. The way I see it, if you had a unit of 120 light horse scouts and wanted to recce a wooded area, they could split up into smaller groups and not all have to stick together in one mass anyway. This is quite well simulated by using the undo feature in this way.

[garymann]

I was thinking along the lines of mark. You could conceptualise as small groups of LI breaking up into small groups to recce the woods ahead If nothing there fine, if contact is made ( ie LI reveals ambusher) then contact has been made and rest of LI have closed up to engage. Certainly makes scouters more powerful if good or bad thing? Maybe limit undo within 2 hexes to 2 or 3 turns?. As long as all players understand and are aware of the mechanism. Otherwise by new coding it might break the game somewhere else.

[Paul59]

I'm not sure the undo function needs to be altered. The way I see it, if you had a unit of 120 light horse scouts and wanted to recce a wooded area, they could split up into smaller groups and not all have to stick together in one mass anyway. This is quite well simulated by using the undo feature in this way.

That is a good way of justifying it.

[TheGrayMouser]

I'm not sure the undo function needs to be altered. The way I see it, if you had a unit of 120 light horse scouts and wanted to recce a wooded area, they could split up into smaller groups and not all have to stick together in one mass anyway. This is quite well simulated by using the undo feature in this way.

That is a good way of justifying it.

No, it’s not a good way. Why give a player carpal tunnel syndrome if that was the design intent? It’s an exploit., and because the game allows partial moves without ending said units turn, it likely isnt fixable.

[Paul59]

I'm not sure the undo function needs to be altered. The way I see it, if you had a unit of 120 light horse scouts and wanted to recce a wooded area, they could split up into smaller groups and not all have to stick together in one mass anyway. This is quite well simulated by using the undo feature in this way.

That is a good way of justifying it.

No, it’s not a good way. Why give a player carpal tunnel syndrome if that was the design intent? It’s an exploit., and because the game allows partial moves without ending said units turn, it likely isnt fixable.

Well it still seems like a fair way of rationalising it to me, given (as you say) that it is unlikely to be fixed. Although the fact that you could still do this "trick" with heavier cavalry, although not quite as effectively given their less manoeuvrability, is a bit more dodgy.

I'm not sure what Carpal Tunnel Syndrome has to do with it?

[TheGrayMouser]

That is a good way of justifying it.

No, it’s not a good way. Why give a player carpal tunnel syndrome if that was the design intent? It’s an exploit., and because the game allows partial moves without ending said units turn, it likely isnt fixable.

Well it still seems like a fair way of rationalising it to me, given (as you say) that it is unlikely to be fixed. Although the fact that you could still do this "trick" with heavier cavalry, although not quite as effectively given their less manoeuvrability, is a bit more dodgy.

I'm not sure what Carpal Tunnel Syndrome has to do with it?

CTS: a repetitive use injury , often from clicking and then undoing mouse actions in order to game a system Jokes aside it is an exploit and imho justifying it by any means just might encourage more to use.