[Discuss] Feature request (troops and the elite)

[Matt Runyon]

psymann wrote:
> Rob McDonald wrote:
>> Besides, the point of the discussion was more control within battles, 
>> so the battles take longer. And doing that would mean protacted a 
>> single batle overmultiple turns.
>
> Yes, let's get back on track, thanks Rob :-)  I'm not asking for 
> longer battles exactly.  I'm asking for more control in battles (ie 
> give me somthing interesting to do!).  Longer battles just seemed to 
> be a possible way to achieve this.
>
>
> I'll take one idea out of it, and expand on that, as I wonder whether 
> that alone would do the trick while keeping battles the same length:
>
>
> *More battle options for troop leaders, dependant on their unit stats*
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> At the moment, I can choose:
> - line/box/etc
> - rear/front/etc
> - defensive/aggressive/etc
> - % of casualties before retreat
>
> For all of these, there is a "best" setting, depending on whether you 
> are infantry, archers, or whatever, and depending on what the enemy 
> do/have.
>
> Because this is general stuff, the leader of an attack (the High 
> Marshal usually) will select which options he thinks best, and 
> instruct all troop leaders to follow them.
>
> As a lowly troop leader, I can choose:
> 1) Follow.
> 2) Do my own thing.
>
> Choosing (1) is really boring.
> Choosing (2) is dumb, because (a) it will be less good (unless your 
> Marshal picked stupid options which is unlikely), and (b) you'll get a 
> bollocking for not being able to follow orders.  Since my characters 
> are all respectable people, it also would be against their nature to 
> do such a thing in any case.
>
>
> So, what we need is *more options that Marshals can't set orders for*.
>
> The only thing that you, as a Troop Leader, know, that a Marshal 
> doesn't, is the state of your own unit.  What is needed are settings 
> where the "best" choice varies considerably from unit to unit.
>
> For example, some ideas to get the ball rolling - three general ones, 
> one for infantry/cavalry only, one for archers only, and two at the 
> end which are slightly different
> :
>
> 1) Tightness of formation: Tight/Standard/Loose.
> --------------------------
> - Tight: stops enemy from breaking through, but means you can do less 
> damage as you're a little crowded.  Good for troops with low 
> morale/cohesion, to help them stay as a unit.
> - Loose: makes it more likely for enemy to break through, but also 
> gives strong, highly trained troops more of a chance to swing their 
> swords and cause damage.
>
> So -  if you know your troops are new to battle, likely to get 
> nervous, etc, then keep them tight.  If they've got ok cohesion, but 
> are badly trained, maybe go for standard.  If their cohesion is solid, 
> and their training is good, then risk problems by going loose, and, if 
> they hold their line/box, then you'll do more damage.
>
>
> 2) Percentage of men hanging back: 0 to 25%
> ----------------------------------
> - 0%: All men are in the front line, causing damage.  Most damage 
> caused.  But troops with low morale may run in fright.  With troops 
> with low morale, the whole troop may run after the first arrows are 
> fired, and your troops are useless, and your honour not improved.
> - 25%: A Quarter of your men are dropped behind your main troops, 
> making sure that any who are frightened, and turn to run, are 
> sheparded back to the lines to fight.  Reduces the damage done, but 
> keeps nervous men in battle long enough to do some damage and win you 
> some honour.
>
> So - you keep as many men back as needed to stop your army from 
> running scared.  Based on morale chiefly, but also a little on training.
>
>
> 3) Control: 0 to 100%
> -----------
> - 0%: You exert no control on your troops.  They do what they like, 
> probably meaning they run off, plunder, and find whores as soon as the 
> battle gets underway and do nothing useful.  Their morale may go up as 
> they can choose what they like, or it may drop as they feel they've 
> missed the battle, depends on your particular troops (like which form 
> of entertainment they prefer also varies).
> - 100%: You exert maximum control on your troops.  Because they have 
> to wait for your orders to do anything, they are less effective.  
> Their morale may also fall a little if they don't like being 
> controlled so closely.  Or may rise if they love having decisions made 
> for them.
> - 50%: You exert some control over your troops.  Because they have a 
> decent level of training, you are confident you can give them a little 
> empowerment to make their own decisions, and if you get that right, 
> they do more damage.  If you give them too little control, they do 
> less, and wander off, or watch the battle going on around them.
>
> So - depending on their training allowing you to, you can reduce your 
> control and see greater damage done.  Just watch for the effect on 
> morale.
>
>
> 4) For Infantry/Cavalry: Involvement: Keep-back/Standard/Lay-into-them
> -------------------------------------
> - Keep Back: You have good weaponry, but lousy armour (based on your 
> weapons/armour stats).  So you keep back and try to use your weapons 
> without relying on your armour to protect you.  Keeping back is good 
> for untrained troops, as it helps them hold their positions, but is 
> bad for those with low morale or cohesion as it gives them more time 
> to think about their impending death and search for a direction to run.
> - Lay into them: You have good armour, but lousy weapons, so you need 
> to charge into the enemy in order to let your weapons do damage, and 
> hope your armour holds.  Laying into them is good for trained troops 
> who know how to fight and dodge the enemy, and good for those with low 
> morale/cohesion, since it keeps them involved and fighting to their 
> best ability.
>
> So - depends really - this one particularly overlaps the different 
> troop stats, so it's hard to pick which one is best for your troops.
>
>
> 5) For archers: Fire rate: Slow/Medium/Fast
> --------------------------
> - Fast: most damage to enemy, most equipment damage (broken 
> arrows/bows in their haste to use them quickly).  Trained troops can 
> do this with only slight equipment damage.  Untrained troops could 
> even do less damage to the enemy due to their fumbling, as well as 
> doing more equipment damage.
> - Slow: Take your time, make them count.  Best for untrained troops, 
> and to keep equipment damage low, but does less damage to the enemy.
>
> So - balance your training with your ability to fix repairs, and 
> choose your option.
>
>
> 6)...
> 7)...
> 8)... etc
>
> =======
>
> Now two other ideas to add, that don't have dependance on your troop 
> stats, but are other options you can pick.  If you pick these, no-one 
> knows except for yourself, so your Marshals do not know.  Unless of 
> course you are successful in protecting/killing, in which case the 
> whole battleground knows, and your honour rises as a result.  But of 
> course, you might have been there anyway, so who's to know whether you 
> were following orders or not?  (You'd have to make a small percentage 
> chance of these happening anyway, even if you didn't nominate someone).
>
>
> A) People to protect: Nominate any other troop leader in the battle.
> - If you nominate someone: You do 10% less damage than usual, since 
> you're keeping half an eye on your nominee, to make it far less likely 
> that he is captured.  If the enemy look to be defeating his unit and 
> getting close to capturing him, your unit leaves its station and runs 
> to assist.  His chances of being captured are therefore reduced by 
> half, and if he was to be captured, and you in fact do save him, you 
> gain extra honour and prestige, especially if he's an influential 
> figure (duke, king etc).
> - If you don't nominate someone: battle as usual.
>
> So - you can choose to reduce the effectiveness of your troops in 
> order to protect another troop leader (because you are good friends 
> and would hate to see him captutred, or because you are protecting the 
> king, or just because you are keen to find honour for yourself).
>
>
> B) People to attack: Nominate any enemy troop leader.
> - If you nominate an enemy troop leader, and that troop leader turns 
> up to the battle, then your troop make their best efforts to move 
> through the lines to attack that troop, and try to capture or kill 
> their troop leader.  This is therefore the opposite of idea (4) of 
> protection. Because they're hell-bent on trying to kill one particular 
> man, their efectiveness in the battle as a whole reduces by 20%.  But 
> if you succeed in killing/wounding/capturing the enemy, you may feel 
> you have won your own personal battle.  Or even got some bounty money, 
> if there is some, and a little honour if you get someone important.
>
> So - you can choose to reduce the effectiveness of your troops in 
> order to get your hands on someone your having a personal feud with, 
> or a real enemy of the realm, or just get some bounty.
>
>
> =============
>
> Hopefully all of these give you something more interesting to do as a 
> troop leader in battle.  At the moment, following orders is Deadly 
> Boring - I'm having far more fun with my adventurer where he actually 
> gets to make some decisions for himself!
>
>
> psymann
I'm not sure about the nominating troop leaders (can't think of an easy 
way to even thought-code that), but I think the other ideas are great.  
You'd still probably have Marshals issuing orders to some extent, but 
especially if nothing in the battle report indicated what you chose for 
them, I think these would be a great way to make battles more 
interesting within the current battle system. 

Another idea: Maybe have more options along these lines show up as your 
leadership increases?  It would be cool for normal nobles to be able to 
do something concrete with leadership.  I know it has passive benefits, 
but the point is to be able to do something fun with it <grins>.