"Attack Rearmost"

[PDF]

Well, to me it seems the order are interpreted as such :
* Unit normally advances straight ahead for some turns
* Then *if* there are enemy units at less than range X, the closest target gets attacked
* In the end maybe "X" increases with time, or a turn limit is given, and the unit eventually attack the closest enemy unit.

It's pretty hard to use effectively indeed...

[Arryn]

I just had a flying commander, placed on the right flank and well back from the "front" line, given orders to hold/hold/attack rear do a "attack rear of the closest formation", despite having an absolutely clear path to the enemy's true rear (and various commanders there), nevermind the flying ability allowing him to reach those commanders in the same turn. IMO, the logic of this order is simply broken.

[Norfleet]

Attack rearmost just doesn't work very well for its stated purpose. Invariably I find it more effective, if I want to try to go after commanders and other people of importance, to order "Attack Archers". At least this is guaranteed to get your units in the back!

Attack "Rear" really only works for a squad placed on the wings: They'll do a very good job enveloping the opponent's center block. They will NOT, however, actually attack rearmost forces. It would work MUCH better if "Attack rear" was instead of working on odds and other such nonsense, "move straight forwards to the back of the battlefield, then turn around and attack whatever is closest".

[Arryn]

Originally posted by Norfleet:
It would work MUCH better if "Attack rear" was instead of working on odds and other such nonsense, "move straight forwards to the back of the battlefield, then turn around and attack whatever is closest".

Indeed. And that shouldn't be too difficult to code, probably even less complicated than the "logic" which is being used now. As I said in my post, the current implementation is horribly flawed.

[PvK]

I don't think I want Attack Rearmost to be any more single-minded. It's already effective enough, it seems to me. The uncertainty of what such units will do strikes me as a good feature. Sometimes, if timed right, and the enemy has an open flank, it will work exactly as hoped. But, I don't think it should be easy to go right to the enemy rear. There is so much abstraction and lack of control in the combat already, that making Attack Rearmost extra-effective would, it seems to me, make it too easy to bypass troops which should be responding to such a move. The current system keeps it from being too easy to successfully walk around the enemy lines. If Attack Rearmost were made more effective, then the AI should also be given more effective ability to intercept flankers. Which would be a wash. Attack rear already works about as well as it should, IMO.

Friendly fire, on the other hand... should be avoided.

PvK

[PvK]

PrinzMegahertz mentioned a helpful technique, which is sending multiple squads on Attack Rearmost. The first one or two may get distracted, but later ones may manage to get around (or not). I think I have a 60% or so success rate unbalancing the enemy, if not in catching the enemy mages and commanders alone (which would stink if it were too easy to do anyway, IMO).

Whole units of fliers work even better than ground-based flankers. Yes, sometimes some of them don't arrive at the farthest rearmost units, but again, the unpredictability is, I think, a good thing. Especially against AI and Independents, this could easily become way too good, and it's already quite good. Making the Attack Rearmost more effective would create a dire need for more effective defensive AI, creating a lot of work for Illwinter to solve a problem that isn't currently there. Seems to be it'd be better to live with the abstraction and uncertainty.

PvK

[Arryn]

PvK, effectiveness is not a valid reason for not fixing a command that fails to do what it is meant to do if you read that command in plain English. Attack rear almost never actually attacks the rear. That, alone, is reason enough to fix it. Else rename the damn command to reflect how it actually works. The current method may be excusable, and it's a stretch at that, for ground troops, but it by no means is justified for flying troops. They should be able to go to the very rear no matter where you place them at the start of a battle. For flyers to get "distracted" is hogwash. Dom doesn't model opportunity fire, so that excuse shouldn't be applied to justify a combat command that doesn't work as expected. Ask anyone who's not an "experienced" Dom player what the words "attack rear" means and no one will say "attack the flank of the nearest squad".

As for defending against a "more effective" rear attack, that's what "guard commander" is for. If someone needs more defense in special situations (assassinations), then they can make Rings of Warning. If their defenders aren't adequate, they need to summon/hire better guard troops. Nerfing features is never a good solution to anything.

[ March 16, 2004, 02:32: Message edited by: Arryn ]