My Poorly Armed Rabble is stronger than it should

Field of Glory II is a turn-based tactical game set during the Rise of Rome from 280 BC to 25 BC.
Post Reply
pinwolf
Corporal - 5 cm Pak 38
Corporal - 5 cm Pak 38
Posts: 40
Joined: Fri Jan 27, 2017 9:32 pm

My Poorly Armed Rabble is stronger than it should

Post by pinwolf » Tue Jun 18, 2019 6:34 am

20190618082232_1.jpg
20190618082232_1.jpg (472.14 KiB) Viewed 704 times
Ok. It's only one point above the maximum, but I would like to know the explanation for this.
Is this a bug or the result of some occult number crunching of the rules system?

rbodleyscott
Field of Glory 2
Field of Glory 2
Posts: 22237
Joined: Sun Dec 04, 2005 6:25 pm

Re: My Poorly Armed Rabble is stronger than it should

Post by rbodleyscott » Tue Jun 18, 2019 7:05 am

Possibly a rounding error.
Richard Bodley Scott

Image

PDiFolco
Senior Corporal - Destroyer
Senior Corporal - Destroyer
Posts: 109
Joined: Sat Aug 25, 2007 2:08 pm

Re: My Poorly Armed Rabble is stronger than it should

Post by PDiFolco » Tue Jun 18, 2019 12:16 pm

Well these units don't stay at full size for long😁

pinwolf
Corporal - 5 cm Pak 38
Corporal - 5 cm Pak 38
Posts: 40
Joined: Fri Jan 27, 2017 9:32 pm

Re: My Poorly Armed Rabble is stronger than it should

Post by pinwolf » Tue Jun 18, 2019 2:01 pm

Actually it's their purpose to stay at full size in the rear far away from the frontline all the time.
In this way they add to the percentage share of all the forces commited to the battle at a low cost.
When units at the front are routing it has now less effect on the army morale at whole.

PDiFolco
Senior Corporal - Destroyer
Senior Corporal - Destroyer
Posts: 109
Joined: Sat Aug 25, 2007 2:08 pm

Re: My Poorly Armed Rabble is stronger than it should

Post by PDiFolco » Tue Jun 18, 2019 5:33 pm

pinwolf wrote:
Tue Jun 18, 2019 2:01 pm
Actually it's their purpose to stay at full size in the rear far away from the frontline all the time.
In this way they add to the percentage share of all the forces commited to the battle at a low cost.
When units at the front are routing it has now less effect on the army morale at whole.
I was assuming that rout % was calculated using unit value not nr of men.. they don't count much then!
Plus if any enemy cav catches or fire at them they're lost....

rbodleyscott
Field of Glory 2
Field of Glory 2
Posts: 22237
Joined: Sun Dec 04, 2005 6:25 pm

Re: My Poorly Armed Rabble is stronger than it should

Post by rbodleyscott » Tue Jun 18, 2019 7:40 pm

PDiFolco wrote:
Tue Jun 18, 2019 5:33 pm
pinwolf wrote:
Tue Jun 18, 2019 2:01 pm
Actually it's their purpose to stay at full size in the rear far away from the frontline all the time.
In this way they add to the percentage share of all the forces commited to the battle at a low cost.
When units at the front are routing it has now less effect on the army morale at whole.
I was assuming that rout % was calculated using unit value not nr of men.. they don't count much then!
Plus if any enemy cav catches or fire at them they're lost....
It is based on the size of the unit rather than the points value, otherwise it would be viable to use cheap units as suicide troops to buy time with little adverse consequence. (You can of course still attempt to buy time with cheap troops, but not with impunity).

This is a deliberate design feature.
Richard Bodley Scott

Image

PDiFolco
Senior Corporal - Destroyer
Senior Corporal - Destroyer
Posts: 109
Joined: Sat Aug 25, 2007 2:08 pm

Re: My Poorly Armed Rabble is stronger than it should

Post by PDiFolco » Wed Jun 19, 2019 6:28 am

rbodleyscott wrote:
Tue Jun 18, 2019 7:40 pm
PDiFolco wrote:
Tue Jun 18, 2019 5:33 pm
pinwolf wrote:
Tue Jun 18, 2019 2:01 pm
Actually it's their purpose to stay at full size in the rear far away from the frontline all the time.
In this way they add to the percentage share of all the forces commited to the battle at a low cost.
When units at the front are routing it has now less effect on the army morale at whole.
I was assuming that rout % was calculated using unit value not nr of men.. they don't count much then!
Plus if any enemy cav catches or fire at them they're lost....
It is based on the size of the unit rather than the points value, otherwise it would be viable to use cheap units as suicide troops to buy time with little adverse consequence. (You can of course still attempt to buy time with cheap troops, but not with impunity).

This is a deliberate design feature.
Ok, I had all wrong and stand corrected now!
But don't they then mostly create a cheap Rout buffer instead of being grindmeat? it's a bit gamey as well..

rbodleyscott
Field of Glory 2
Field of Glory 2
Posts: 22237
Joined: Sun Dec 04, 2005 6:25 pm

Re: My Poorly Armed Rabble is stronger than it should

Post by rbodleyscott » Wed Jun 19, 2019 6:59 am

PDiFolco wrote:
Wed Jun 19, 2019 6:28 am
rbodleyscott wrote:
Tue Jun 18, 2019 7:40 pm
PDiFolco wrote:
Tue Jun 18, 2019 5:33 pm


I was assuming that rout % was calculated using unit value not nr of men.. they don't count much then!
Plus if any enemy cav catches or fire at them they're lost....
It is based on the size of the unit rather than the points value, otherwise it would be viable to use cheap units as suicide troops to buy time with little adverse consequence. (You can of course still attempt to buy time with cheap troops, but not with impunity).

This is a deliberate design feature.
Ok, I had all wrong and stand corrected now!
But don't they then mostly create a cheap Rout buffer instead of being grindmeat? it's a bit gamey as well..
True, but on balance we feel that is more realistic than the alternative.
Richard Bodley Scott

Image

MVP7
2nd Lieutenant - Elite Panzer IVF/2
2nd Lieutenant - Elite Panzer IVF/2
Posts: 732
Joined: Sun Aug 02, 2015 3:40 pm

Re: My Poorly Armed Rabble is stronger than it should

Post by MVP7 » Wed Jun 19, 2019 7:04 am

To me rout buffer seems more realistic than throw-away infantry. At least some "barbarian" armies had non-combatants acting as cheering squad and spectators. Some high medieval peasant infantry probably had pretty much similar role in practice. When there have been very low quality units in ancient/medieval armies they have typically not been used as cannon fodder but reserves. The sight of low quality troops getting routed would probably have very harmful effect on morale of the rest of the army.

PDiFolco
Senior Corporal - Destroyer
Senior Corporal - Destroyer
Posts: 109
Joined: Sat Aug 25, 2007 2:08 pm

Re: My Poorly Armed Rabble is stronger than it should

Post by PDiFolco » Wed Jun 19, 2019 11:03 am

MVP7 wrote:
Wed Jun 19, 2019 7:04 am
To me rout buffer seems more realistic than throw-away infantry. At least some "barbarian" armies had non-combatants acting as cheering squad and spectators. Some high medieval peasant infantry probably had pretty much similar role in practice. When there have been very low quality units in ancient/medieval armies they have typically not been used as cannon fodder but reserves. The sight of low quality troops getting routed would probably have very harmful effect on morale of the rest of the army.
IMHO it should have been the reverse eg troops were demoralized when they saw their elite corps rout, not much when it was crap rabble...

rbodleyscott
Field of Glory 2
Field of Glory 2
Posts: 22237
Joined: Sun Dec 04, 2005 6:25 pm

Re: My Poorly Armed Rabble is stronger than it should

Post by rbodleyscott » Wed Jun 19, 2019 1:09 pm

PDiFolco wrote:
Wed Jun 19, 2019 11:03 am
MVP7 wrote:
Wed Jun 19, 2019 7:04 am
To me rout buffer seems more realistic than throw-away infantry. At least some "barbarian" armies had non-combatants acting as cheering squad and spectators. Some high medieval peasant infantry probably had pretty much similar role in practice. When there have been very low quality units in ancient/medieval armies they have typically not been used as cannon fodder but reserves. The sight of low quality troops getting routed would probably have very harmful effect on morale of the rest of the army.
IMHO it should have been the reverse eg troops were demoralized when they saw their elite corps rout, not much when it was crap rabble...
Troops were potentially demoralised if they saw any friends routed, regardless of the quality of those troops. Fear is infectious.

That was why it was exceptionally rare to put the worst troops out in front as cannon fodder.
Richard Bodley Scott

Image

Geffalrus
Master Sergeant - U-boat
Master Sergeant - U-boat
Posts: 522
Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2019 3:06 pm
Location: Virginia, USA

Re: My Poorly Armed Rabble is stronger than it should

Post by Geffalrus » Wed Jun 19, 2019 1:59 pm

I feel like it's not completely based on size since a unit of 20 elephants definitely contribute more than 1% score.

rbodleyscott
Field of Glory 2
Field of Glory 2
Posts: 22237
Joined: Sun Dec 04, 2005 6:25 pm

Re: My Poorly Armed Rabble is stronger than it should

Post by rbodleyscott » Wed Jun 19, 2019 2:56 pm

Geffalrus wrote:
Wed Jun 19, 2019 1:59 pm
I feel like it's not completely based on size since a unit of 20 elephants definitely contribute more than 1% score.
It is based on UnitSize, not TotalMen, Elephants have a UnitSize of 400. They then (like cavalry) get a 3/2 multiplier.

This means they are the same % for rout purposes as a 600 UnitSize infantry unit (480 men) - or a 400 UnitSize cavalry unit (240 men).

i.e. For rout % purposes: 480 infantry = 240 cavalry = 20 elephants.
Richard Bodley Scott

Image

Post Reply

Return to “Field of Glory II”