Thats a very gd question Spark... I would have thought however *hopingly* that they made it so that a 180 degree arc is put into effect for two handed units... After all, that seems the common sense route?
Thats a very gd question Spark... I would have thought however *hopingly* that they made it so that a 180 degree arc is put into effect for two handed units... After all, that seems the common sense route?
All great things are simple, and many can be expressed in single words: freedom, justice, honor, duty, mercy, hope - Sir Winston Churchill
It would also explain how two-hander units with relatively low defense can hold up so well against sword+shield infantry. "skill" defense is often higher than "shield" defense, so the two-handers would be better protected everywhere except from the front (assuming in the absence of shield, that skill applies in 180 degrees).
Personally if I'm going to flank, I enfilade from both sides... That way they can't afford to turn to face either or they start getting hit in the back. And if they do turn, I can charge the melee troops... Who will now be on a flank.
Fear nothing except in the certainty that you are your enemy's begetter and its only hope of healing. For everything that does evil is in pain.
-The Maestro Sartori, Imajica by Clive Barker
You should certainly flank both sides. The AI got smarter and now turn to refuse flanks. However, just having horse archers sit there is enough threat. You can tell just a few of them to fire for maximal efficiency.
Bookmarks