Alternative Gameplay Mod Tournament

[Schweetness101]

Well, if they have all finished their matches they must be enjoying the mod!

let's hope so!

LOL to be consistent I think it needs a tweek here and there

haha it needs many tweaks, I look forward to feedback from the players!

[ianiow]

2) Andalusian (756-1049 AD) vs Frankish (751-887 AD) w/ Croatian allies. North European Agricultural

I cannot set up this game. Each time I select the Andalusians as the enemies of the Franks, the Frankish option for Croatian allies disappears.

[stockwellpete]

2) Andalusian (756-1049 AD) vs Frankish (751-887 AD) w/ Croatian allies. North European Agricultural

I cannot set up this game. Each time I select the Andalusians as the enemies of the Franks, the Frankish option for Croatian allies disappears.

Sorry to intrude - please adjust your Geographical filter.

[batesmotel]

2) Andalusian (756-1049 AD) vs Frankish (751-887 AD) w/ Croatian allies. North European Agricultural

I cannot set up this game. Each time I select the Andalusians as the enemies of the Franks, the Frankish option for Croatian allies disappears.

Sorry to intrude - please adjust your Geographical filter.

Turn off the Geographic filter button. Andalusia is a different neighborhood than Croatia.

Chris

[ianiow]

Thanks, I will try it when I get home.

[batesmotel]

Pursuers charging into enemy should probably should be modified based on their chance against the enemy they'd be stopping pursuit to charge. I just had two mounted units who broke an opposing enemy mount ceased pursuit so they could both charge an enemy light foot in woods that the routing enemy mounted passed which seems wrong. Maybe a little less wrong but still dubious is I've had mounted unit breakoff pursuit to charge frontally into enemy heavy foot spearmen and hence essentially impale themselves.

Chris

[stockwellpete]

Pursuers charging into enemy should probably should be modified based on their chance against the enemy they'd be stopping pursuit to charge. I just had two mounted units who broke an opposing enemy mount ceased pursuit so they could both charge an enemy light foot in woods that the routing enemy mounted passed which seems wrong. Maybe a little less wrong but still dubious is I've had mounted unit breakoff pursuit to charge frontally into enemy heavy foot spearmen and hence essentially impale themselves.

Chris

It was me rather than Schweetness101 that was pressing for the more aggressive behaviour of cavalry when pursuing. I think you are probably right about pursuing into woods, but regarding the charge head first into HF spearmen then I think that is OK. Presumably the cavalry just bounced off, did they? That sort of incident does reward defence in depth a bit more, I feel.

[Schweetness101]

Pursuers charging into enemy should probably should be modified based on their chance against the enemy they'd be stopping pursuit to charge. I just had two mounted units who broke an opposing enemy mount ceased pursuit so they could both charge an enemy light foot in woods that the routing enemy mounted passed which seems wrong. Maybe a little less wrong but still dubious is I've had mounted unit breakoff pursuit to charge frontally into enemy heavy foot spearmen and hence essentially impale themselves.

Chris

this is a relatively simple change to implement (in fact I already have done so as a test on my local machine), but the question is more from a design perspective of whether it should be done. IE, is the elan of pursuing cavalry supposed to be tempered by terrain or other extenuating circumstances? or are they supposed to be pursuing with such wild abandon and impetuosity that that just charge into any enemy they see?

What circumstances would be justifiably preventing pursuit-to-charges?

-mounted into any disordering terrain? only severely disordering? only if at disadvantage?
-heavy foot into any disordering terrain? or only if at disadvantage?
etc...

You have to balance the logical decision-making of what the player would prefer his units do, with the irrational and highly emotional state of pursuing ancient warriors that commonly led victorious units to pursue to their own detriment. I'm not sure what the right answer is exactly.

[batesmotel]

Pursuers charging into enemy should probably should be modified based on their chance against the enemy they'd be stopping pursuit to charge. I just had two mounted units who broke an opposing enemy mount ceased pursuit so they could both charge an enemy light foot in woods that the routing enemy mounted passed which seems wrong. Maybe a little less wrong but still dubious is I've had mounted unit breakoff pursuit to charge frontally into enemy heavy foot spearmen and hence essentially impale themselves.

Chris

this is a relatively simple change to implement (in fact I already have done so as a test on my local machine), but the question is more from a design perspective of whether it should be done. IE, is the elan of pursuing cavalry supposed to be tempered by terrain or other extenuating circumstances? or are they supposed to be pursuing with such wild abandon and impetuosity that that just charge into any enemy they see?

What circumstances would be justifiably preventing pursuit-to-charges?

-mounted into any disordering terrain? only severely disordering? only if at disadvantage?
-heavy foot into any disordering terrain? or only if at disadvantage?
etc...

You have to balance the logical decision-making of what the player would prefer his units do, with the irrational and highly emotional state of pursuing ancient warriors that commonly led victorious units to pursue to their own detriment. I'm not sure what the right answer is exactly.

At a minimum I doubt that mounted should charge into severely disordering terrain, certainly not just to get at some scruffy light infantry lurking behind the rocks and trees. They quite possible would if there are mounted in the severely disordering terrain but that's less clear. Seems relatively unlikely in general that they would ignore enemy mounted in the open that they are pursuing to go into severely disordering terrain. Not so sure about heavy foot in good order frontally. At a minimum it should reduce the chance. In the case where my bounted did it this morning, they did bounce off but were fragmented inthe process.

Chris

[batesmotel]

Round 2 - game 1

batesmotel (Andalusian) beat morat (Frankish with Croatian allies) 40-13

Thanks for the game.

Morat 13, batesmotel (50+27=77)

Chris

[Captainwaltersavage]

Captain Savage (Franks) defeated tmac11 (Andalusian) 50:35

But!

tmac11( Franks) defeated Captain Savage (Anadalusian) 57:37

Both actually very close games. I brought a lot more cavalry to both battles and in both cases it was very much - can the cavalry on either flank come to the aid of the central battle of the spears. No was the answer in both cases as the numbers slain on the flanks and in the centre mounted up before any cavalry advantage was significant in the centre. Equally the spear battle went on long enough that any spears committed to the centre battle were no factor in the battles on the flanks. In that respect our organisation was equivalent to the puzzle posed by the opposition. Both great games that required a lot of thought and quite a few surprises. Lots more refusals to charge in these battles rather than anarchy charges. They still happened - just less often.

Points

Captain Savage 65 + 37 = 102
tmac11 70 + 35 = 105

[hscic]

Just a suggestion for this MOD. During a match a cavalry unit charged an infantry unit that was positioned in a wood. The charge was not requested but it was a so called "Anarchy Charge".
... I agree that a cavalry unit could charge an infantry unit without orders if the troopers can be led to think there is a good chance of success ... but never ever a cavalry unit will charge in the direction of a wood because the trunks would represent an obstacle for the horses and because there would be no space to reorganize after a charge. I believe it would be better to correct this aspect.

[Schweetness101]

Just a suggestion for this MOD. During a match a cavalry unit charged an infantry unit that was positioned in a wood. The charge was not requested but it was a so called "Anarchy Charge".
... I agree that a cavalry unit could charge an infantry unit without orders if the troopers can be led to think there is a good chance of success ... but never ever a cavalry unit will charge in the direction of a wood because the trunks would represent an obstacle for the horses and because there would be no space to reorganize after a charge. I believe it would be better to correct this aspect.

do you have a screenshot for this? units already shouldn't anarchy charge into disordering terrain in the mod. I've tested it again to make sure, and it should be working. I'd like to see the exact terrain matchup that led to that anarchy charge so I can make better tests.

[ulysisgrunt]

Ulysisgrunt (Andalusians) defeated Cunningcairn(Franks 47-53.
Score shows the closeness of the game... Interesting when a light unit refuses to charge...nothing like good old commonsense.

[gamercb]

gamercb (Franks) defeated wmpryor (Andalusian) 41-16

The Franks avoided the Andalusian infantry and concentrated on wiping out the Andalusian cavalry with their own cavalry. The early loss of an Andalusian general helped in the route of the cavalry.
Thanks for the game.

[hscic]

Just a suggestion for this MOD. During a match a cavalry unit charged an infantry unit that was positioned in a wood. The charge was not requested but it was a so called "Anarchy Charge".
... I agree that a cavalry unit could charge an infantry unit without orders if the troopers can be led to think there is a good chance of success ... but never ever a cavalry unit will charge in the direction of a wood because the trunks would represent an obstacle for the horses and because there would be no space to reorganize after a charge. I believe it would be better to correct this aspect.

do you have a screenshot for this? units already shouldn't anarchy charge into disordering terrain in the mod. I've tested it again to make sure, and it should be working. I'd like to see the exact terrain matchup that led to that anarchy charge so I can make better tests.

No I haven't. Anyway an Andalusian infantry unit (or a massed archers unit...I am not sure) was positioned at the edge of a wood down hill and it was anarchy charged by a Franks Lancers unit.

[wmpryor]

Round 2 Game 2

wmpryor (Franks) defeats gamercb (Andalusian) 50-40

I brought what I thought was a balanced force consisting of a line of dismounted lancers in the center with supporting cavalry on each flank. My left flank cavalry was dominated by
MC lancers with 'above avg' morale while my right flank was mostly armored HC lancers. Gamercb brought a cavalry heavy army with some 'avg' HI spearmen and massed archers in
in his center. Gamercb had me outnumbered with cavalry and he used that advantage with skill and great effect. My left flank cavalry was obliterated. I had advanced my infantry line
to engage his spearmen and they were fully engaged while he was annihilating my left flank cavalry. My right flank cavalry held up well but was too widely dispersed to reach the crisis
point in a timely manner. I pressed my attack with my dismounted lancers and managed to defeat enough there and routed some massed archer units on his left flank to pull off my victory.
My dismounted lancers left flank and rear were wide open. I had no defense in depth. If we were playing under the vanilla (default) mod gamercb would have had more time to complete
his enveloping attack on my left flank. I was 'saved by the bell'! Good game gamercb! Thanks

[batesmotel]

Round 2 - game 2

batesmotel (Franks w Croatian allies) beat morat (Andalusian) 53-48

Thanks for the game.

Morat 48, batesmotel (50+5=55)

Chris

[edb1815]

Round 2 Game 1

edb1815 (Andalusian) defeated MikeMarchant (Franks) 44%-18% Points: 76 - 18

Game 2

edb1815 (Franks) defeated MikeMarchant (Andalusian) 54%-40% Points: 64 - 40

Interesting match up. I think the Franks have to dismount some lancers to counter the Muslim vet spearmen to be competitive. Well played games from my opponent. The second game was very close and I only won because his lancers were off chasing my cheap cavalry while I surrounded his foot.

A couple of points on the mods. I think both of us have a concern that LF and LH punch above their historical weight in FOG. Blocking a retreat or evade comes to mind. Charging a formed unit with non impact LH as well. So having said that I really like the charge refusal rules. I had several Andalusian LH refuse to charge the rear of formed units. Frankly I think the % change of refusal should be higher for missile armed horse ( it may be I don't know). Secondly I think LF should give way to HI or MI without the formed unit having to charge. You should be able to simply push them aside - in clear terrain of course.

Lastly I have not decided on the removal of the auto cohesion drop for flank attacks. This mechanism is such an integral part of the FOG system. If you think in terms of a line of HI being flanked was deadly. I am not sure there should be a difference between a flank and a rear attack for cohesion purposes. Cavalry might be a different matter and of course doesn't drop if hit by infantry anyway.

[SawyerK]

In Round 2 Game 1 between SawyerK and Nyczar: the Andalusians under SawyerK won by 43-14. Points: SawyerK - 79; Nyczar - 14.

In Round 2 Game 2 between SawyerK and Nyczar: the Andalusians under Nyczar won by 40-11. Points: Nyczar - 79; SawyerK - 11.

In both games Nyczar chose more lights and archers and greatly benefited from the resulting missile fire against opposing troops. Also in both games the Frankish attempted cavalry sweep around their left flank failed miserably. A third corollary was the relative ineffectiveness of the dismounted Frankish lancers against the veteran Muslim spears.

My appreciation to Nyczar for two good games.