Rear Attack - No Cohesion Loss

[dave8365]

I'm playing a game of Pike and Shot against another opponent; I had a unit of unarmoured cavalry which charged a unit if disordered Veteran unarmoured cavalry (alteady in combat to its front) in the rear. Statistics were 98% victory and loss of cohesion. I charged - no cohesion loss. Minimal casualties.

How could this happen? Is it a bug?

Cheers,
Dave Lynch

[rbodleyscott]

I'm playing a game of Pike and Shot against another opponent; I had a unit of unarmoured cavalry which charged a unit if disordered Veteran unarmoured cavalry (alteady in combat to its front) in the rear. Statistics were 98% victory and loss of cohesion. I charged - no cohesion loss. Minimal casualties.

How could this happen? Is it a bug?

Cheers,
Dave Lynch

1) A 98% chance of winning means there is a 2% chance of not winning. Either the 2% came up, or the enemy lost but passed its cohesion test.
2) Your "rear" attack would not cause a cohesion drop in any of the following circumstances:
--- a) Your unit was light horse.
--- b) The enemy had already dropped cohesion this turn from a flank/rear attack. (Only one autodrop for that can happen each turn)
---c) Your unit did not start its whole move behind the enemy flank.

If the answer is 2b), then yes it is a bug, because the tooltip logic does currently not take into account a previous flank attack autodrop and reports that the unit will autodrop when in fact it won't. Also, because it is assuming the autodrop, it overrates the second unit's chance of winning the combat (although it would still be very high, just not that high - probably 95% rather than 98%).

Surprising that nobody has reported this before. Thanks for doing so. We will correct it in the next update. (It won't be corrected in the forthcoming open beta of the update, because that is almost ready to go live, but it will be corrected in the release version of the update).

[dave8365]

Thank you Richard.

To respond, my unit started behind and facing the rear of the target unit; my unit was unarmoured cavalry, not light horse; there had been no previous cohesion drop.

I understand the 98% chance means 2% chance to lose. I have suffered that many times! My real question relates to the fact that I thought the drop in cohesion was automatic; also, the "pop up" which gave the odds also indicated there would be cohesion loss.

Hopefully just a one-off; my post was more about making sure I understood the rules correctly.

Cheers,
Dave

[rbodleyscott]

Thank you Richard.

To respond, my unit started behind and facing the rear of the target unit; my unit was unarmoured cavalry, not light horse; there had been no previous cohesion drop.

I understand the 98% chance means 2% chance to lose. I have suffered that many times! My real question relates to the fact that I thought the drop in cohesion was automatic; also, the "pop up" which gave the odds also indicated there would be cohesion loss.

Hopefully just a one-off; my post was more about making sure I understood the rules correctly.

Cheers,
Dave

Well I can't explain it. However, the tooltip that gives the odds would (incorrectly) indicate an automatic drop if the enemy had already dropped cohesion from a flank/rear attack this turn. "This turn" includes the immediately preceding Melee Phase, so if the unit had been hit in the flank/rear by a pursuing unit in the Melee Phase, a flank/rear charge in your active turn would not drop it again. (Although the tooltip would report that it would - which we have corrected for the next iteration).

If that is not the answer then I am not sure what happened. I would have to see a screen shot to understand further - so if it happens again please take one.