Comments on BI and new formations

**Sol Invictus** · 08-28-2005, 16:28

Berserkers are sick? In a good or bad way? I did notice that they are indeed a blood-lusty lot and a fire and forget unit. Once they launch into a charge you can pretty much say goodbye. They do however, get the job done on the unfortunate unit that must contend with them.

**Dutch_guy** · 08-28-2005, 17:50

I like the Idea of a shieldwall, and was a little disappointed that in RTW you didn't have a shieldwall formation - the only thing that came close was the guard mode..

looking forward to using these formations myself

**hoom** · 08-28-2005, 19:09

Does it have the normal old Phalanx too?

A bunch of this stuff just sounds like what RTW was supposed to be

**Kralizec** · 08-28-2005, 19:18

Gamespy doesn't let me download the demo, so I have some questions on the shieldwall if you don't mind.

I take it that the soldiers will stay put, line to line even if engaged, yes? Does this improve their defense from frontal attacks or something? How much is it similar to the RTW phalanx?

The thing is, I am sort of annoyed how hoplite phalanxes in RTW are portrayed. The macedonian pike phalanx seems to be mostly okay, but historicly it seems like hoplites simply would lock their shields over eachother and charge into the enemy, their spears allowing the first three lines to fight in what would would be a close melee slugfest. In RTW however, they fight like the macedonian pikes- lining up, put the spears ahead as far as possible and don't let the enemy even get close.

So if it's possible, maybe the hoplites should use the "shieldwal phalanx" instead of the "RTW phalanx", reserving that only for pikemen. Hoplites should then also get far bigger shield bonuses, emphasising the importance of flanking.

**Sol Invictus** · 08-29-2005, 05:45

If I remember correctly, the Shieldwall formation causes your men to really close up the formation to make it very tight and compact. This also serves the same purpose as the guard command and they will hold their ground and have a better defense while doing it. They can move as a Shieldwall but slower than if in standard formation. It is like the Phalanx in that respect. Schilltron is similar but is an all-around defensive hedgehog type formation. Excellent to counter swift cavalry forces. This formation can also move but takes a few seconds to reform after halting, so they are vulnerable if they get hit by a cavalry charge right after they stop moving.

edit: Just checked the demo again and maybe the units do move as fast while in Shieldwall formation. They loosen the formation up while running but return to it when they stop. Again, this can make them vulnerable if they are hit before they can get reformed I would figure. I like the new formations.

**TB666** · 08-29-2005, 09:46

Originally Posted by Germaanse Strijder

The thing is, I am sort of annoyed how hoplite phalanxes in RTW are portrayed. The macedonian pike phalanx seems to be mostly okay, but historicly it seems like hoplites simply would lock their shields over eachother and charge into the enemy, their spears allowing the first three lines to fight in what would would be a close melee slugfest. In RTW however, they fight like the macedonian pikes- lining up, put the spears ahead as far as possible and don't let the enemy even get close.

So if it's possible, maybe the hoplites should use the "shieldwal phalanx" instead of the "RTW phalanx", reserving that only for pikemen. Hoplites should then also get far bigger shield bonuses, emphasising the importance of flanking.

Download signifierone's overhand hoplite animation.
It is far better but test the unit afterwards to make sure that it behaves right(no shield going throught the leg and things like that).

I too like the new formation especially the new bloodlust for berserkers.
It capture the feeling of a berserker attack alot better then in RTW and also the feeling of commanding them.
Most of the time they rush without the order which is accurate and when they do attack they cause alot of damage(also accurate) but has the drawback that they die pretty fast(pretty accurate) so I'm happy with this.

**SigniferOne** · 08-29-2005, 15:26

Actually here's another interesting bit: when berserkers rout an enemy unit, you'd expect them to chase after it as all others would, and that there'd be nothing you could do about it, or reign them in. But in my tests, after the berserkers have made unit 1 rout, they immediately charged to raise havoc in unit 2, paying no attenton to the routers anymore. Apparently they will not chase routers while in berserk, but go from unit to unit, routing everything in their way until they are dead. So their berserking, and lack of control, is not so much of a problem as one would think.

**Orda Khan** · 08-29-2005, 18:33

Originally Posted by dsyrow1

Actually here's another interesting bit: when berserkers rout an enemy unit, you'd expect them to chase after it as all others would, and that there'd be nothing you could do about it, or reign them in. But in my tests, after the berserkers have made unit 1 rout, they immediately charged to raise havoc in unit 2, paying no attenton to the routers anymore. Apparently they will not chase routers while in berserk, but go from unit to unit, routing everything in their way until they are dead. So their berserking, and lack of control, is not so much of a problem as one would think.

Hmmm. Interesting point. I found the opposite, one of my berserkers chased the routed unit relentlessly. Perhaps it has something to do with how close they are to another unit. I personally prefer to be in control of my units. As for the formations, I think they are a great addition

.......Orda

**SigniferOne** · 08-29-2005, 19:15

Well right, I think the enemy has to be nearby for the berserkers to see him and change course, otherwise they will pursue the fleers. I wonder if, when they encounter a fresh unit of enemies on the way, they will change their course toward it now and leave the routers alone... I like CA's imagination with these things :)