Strategic and tactic ambushes

[Nowake]

Just a couple of questions.

Indulge me when I ask you to picture in mind the following situation in Rome Total War: on the campaign map, the roman enemy army marches through the dark forests of the Carpathians. As one of the dacian tarabostes, you mobilised the tribes and have set up an ambush - the developers stated that these are possible. The legions reach the projected battlefield and your whole army attacks with ferocious warcries. The battlemap is loading and then ..

.. you stand face to face with the well-deployed legionaries (they are the defenders, no?).



Second situation, already happening on a regular basis in Medieval, so I'll use the actual game as an example: .. your in the middle of a bloody battle on the hills of Milan (not that it would be of any importance, I just thought to stimulate your imagination). Now, a host of your soldiers, made up of italian infantrymen, engages the enemy pedestrian warriors in a ferocious melee. At this moment, the enemy cavalry outflanks them and charges from the rear. Your general (metaphoricly speaking) does not observe this new threat; the last rows of your infantry, being such decent soldiers, wait their turn while the first two rows continue the fighting. The charging cavalrymen chop their heads off. You have some nice words for your girlfriend who distracted your attention. Fate or lack of common-sense?

Because I insist that it would be logic for the soldiers of the last row to look for their own arse and form a fashionable shield-wall. And this goes on in any situation. Curently, your soldiers will turn only after the charge, when individual melees are engaged.



Opinions regarding the manner in which these situations should be rethinked? Or have you considered an understatement that CA will have them solved?

[desdichado]

Nowake,

I remember the second situation you presented was debated quite a while back but I don't think we reached a satisfactory conclusion. There is an argument that yes, soldiers would turn to face the new threat and another that as the rear ranks would be involved in shoving & pushing the front ranks forward they might not notice the threat behind them.

The ambush situtaion you presented could perhaps be resolved with the Carpathians having a much bigger are to deploy in and the Romans perhaps being in a marching column formation, facing the wrong way etc. This way you could simulate the element of surprise. I',m pretty sure this has been heavily debated as well.

[RisingSun]

CA said ambushes would make for "a completely new type of battle". So I assume they have something up their sleeve...

[Catiline]

The Republican legion at least had a formation that allowed it to march in column in hostile territory nad turn to be deployed if attacked so that fundamentally it was in the correct three lines.

So yes, you should face well deployed legionaries, so long as they were well generaled and well scouted.

[Omar Mena]

Quote[/b] (Nowake @ Feb. 15 2004,13:42)]Just a couple of questions.

Indulge me when I ask you to picture in mind the following situation in Rome Total War: on the campaign map, the roman enemy army marches through the dark forests of the Carpathians. As one of the dacian tarabostes, you mobilised the tribes and have set up an ambush - the developers stated that these are possible. The legions reach the projected battlefield and your whole army attacks with ferocious warcries. The battlemap is loading and then ..

.. you stand face to face with the well-deployed legionaries (they are the defenders, no?).



Second situation, already happening on a regular basis in Medieval, so I'll use the actual game as an example: .. your in the middle of a bloody battle on the hills of Milan (not that it would be of any importance, I just thought to stimulate your imagination). Now, a host of your soldiers, made up of italian infantrymen, engages the enemy pedestrian warriors in a ferocious melee. At this moment, the enemy cavalry outflanks them and charges from the rear. Your general (metaphoricly speaking) does not observe this new threat; the last rows of your infantry, being such decent soldiers, wait their turn while the first two rows continue the fighting. The charging cavalrymen chop their heads off. You have some nice words for your girlfriend who distracted your attention. Fate or lack of common-sense?

Because I insist that it would be logic for the soldiers of the last row to look for their own arse and form a fashionable shield-wall. And this goes on in any situation. Curently, your soldiers will turn only after the charge, when individual melees are engaged.



Opinions regarding the manner in which these situations should be rethinked? Or have you considered an understatement that CA will have them solved?
The same EXACT thing you posted on Totalrome.com. How about those "hills of milan." Last time i checked there werent many. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif

[Nowake]

Hello Omar Mena, I congratulate you on your excelent spirit of observation.



I remember the second situation you presented was debated quite a while back but I don't think we reached a satisfactory conclusion. There is an argument that yes, soldiers would turn to face the new threat and another that as the rear ranks would be involved in shoving & pushing the front ranks forward they might not notice the threat behind them.

The ambush situtaion you presented could perhaps be resolved with the Carpathians having a much bigger are to deploy in and the Romans perhaps being in a marching column formation, facing the wrong way etc. This way you could simulate the element of surprise. I',m pretty sure this has been heavily debated as well.

desdichado, they should be able to observe a cavalry charge. After all, the sound of hundreds of horses at galop is quite powerfull. As to the second situation, this was my ideea as well.



The Republican legion at least had a formation that allowed it to march in column in hostile territory nad turn to be deployed if attacked so that fundamentally it was in the correct three lines.

So yes, you should face well deployed legionaries, so long as they were well generaled and well scouted.

Well, Catiline, I agree with a standard formation for ambushes at the start of the battle, but not with one made in complete knowledge of the surprise attack.

[Kraxis]

Nowake/pr, I understand your second point (the first has already been discussed). It is only logical, right?

But I feel there should be a penalty for not seeing this risk. I will support a change if it will be only graphical, but not in terms of gameplay.
We are after all not a general, but more like the omnipresent intelligence of our troops, so our action or inaction should be reflected by the troops' behaviour, and this is one of them.

[Nowake]

Where's that bloody thread where you discused the ambushes? Doesn't anyone has a link?


Kraxis/Tarrak, well, I disagree. Troops should be granted limited autonomy on the battlefield. We are talking about realism, and when you see a warband of bloddthirsty barbarians coming at you, your soldiers should attack them as well. Think of the charge without orders command. Now, you should set some behaviours for your troops.

Agressive: attack everyone as far as 20 yards.
Neutral: attack/charge if you're attacked on a 20 yards area.
Defensive: engage only when the enemy is bashing your skull.

Not very hard, and it would help a lot.

[biguth dickuth]

Quote[/b] ]Nowake/pr, I understand your second point (the first has already been discussed). It is only logical, right?

But I feel there should be a penalty for not seeing this risk. I will support a change if it will be only graphical, but not in terms of gameplay.
We are after all not a general, but more like the omnipresent intelligence of our troops, so our action or inaction should be reflected by the troops' behaviour, and this is one of them.

yes, we're probably more like sauron, using his strong will to guide his orcs and trolls into battle. however, when he turned to talk to his girlfriend, he was sly enough to press the "pause" button first....
lol http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-jester.gif (hehe, no offence meant whatsoever...)

anyway, about the "penalty" thing, i do agree that your soldiers should definitely get a morale penalty (which they do get) as they are stuffed between two enemies, but in they game the enemy charging from behind chops their heads off singlehandedly i mean they should at least stand a little better than they do.
to be ohnest, i wouldn't go that much for stances like "aggressive" or "defensive" but i would like to have a few more choices in formations. hopefully, we will have some in RTW, if i'm not wrong.

[Nowake]

Well, indeed, agresive and defensive stances are too much. What in fact I'm militating for is:

Neutral: attack/charge if you're attacked on a 20 yards area.

[Kraxis]

I'm still for the current state.

It would ruin the chances of cavalry actually charging spearunits. Flanking and attacking the rear of units wouldn't give enough benefit for the job done. Well that is my oppinion.

[Nowake]

IT won't give enough anyway http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif The cavalry charge will be much more weak in RTW, or at least it should be.

[Kraxis]

Cavalry would hit infantry in the rear back then, if not from the front. So with the already weakened cavalry I think spearinfantry with good morale wouldn't have to worry about rear attacks by cavalry. Basically they would become walking fortresses concerning cavalry, and it wasn't like that.

[The_Emperor]

Quote[/b] (Kraxis @ Feb. 19 2004,16:45)]Cavalry would hit infantry in the rear back then, if not from the front. So with the already weakened cavalry I think spearinfantry with good morale wouldn't have to worry about rear attacks by cavalry. Basically they would become walking fortresses concerning cavalry, and it wasn't like that.
Indeed, Cavalry could hit a Spear unit from the rear and they would be able to take a few heads before the Spearmen were able to turn to face them and fight back... With a Good Sized Spear, you wouldn't be able to turn too quickly or you'd probably knock a couple of your own guys off their feet

[Spino]

Here's my take on the Ambush situation in RTW. I posted this answer in the Legiontotalwar forums a few weeks ago:


Quote ]Does anyone know what exactly will happen in the real time battle if one army ambushes another in the campaign map. Will you be able to set your troops up around the enemy? Will the enemy army be disordered as you are in ordered formation right in front of them? Will you get some kind of ambush bonus for your troops?

I think it will begin on the strategic map with a simple check to see whether the ambush is successful or not. One of two things might happen; if the general in charge of the army being ambushed has a lower Command Rating than the general leading the army ambushing him then the ambush will be successful. Obviously other factors like their respective Vices & Virtues and the terrain will come into play; open plains and deserts being lousy places for ambushes compared to forests and mountainous regions. If the ambush is unsuccessful then the army being ambushed will be allowed to continue on its way and may even be given the option to fight a 'proper' battle and turn the tables on its assailants.

As to who goes where on the battlefield it will probably be equally straightforward. If the ambush is successful the ambushing army will probably be allowed to place its forces wherever it wants on the battlefield map (obviously with full knowledge of the enemy's whereabouts). In contrast, the army being ambushed will not be allowed to do anything but wait for the battle to begin and react to the enemy's attacks. Furthermore the army being ambushed will probably be in some generic 'marching columns' type formation and will be given a morale penalty. Lastly, if the ambush is unsuccessful and the army being ambushed wishes to give battle then a normal battle setup would occur, possibly with both armies starting much closer to each other than normal.

Makes sense, no?[/b]

[Nowake]

Obviously other factors like their respective Vices & Virtues and the terrain will come into play; open plains and deserts being lousy places for ambushes compared to forests and mountainous regions


I don't think you should be able to ambush in the desert. You should, however, be able to loose your trace and appear unexpected. But an ambush (like in a surprise attack) should be impossible.


This, of course, raises another question: how and when can you camouflage an army, and how much it'll this depend on its size? http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-book2.gif