The Shield Problem(s)

[JeromeGrasdyke]

I play HA too (Parthian/Sassanid/Byzantine fan here), and I think I can say that there are more uses to outflanking than just shooting at vulnerable rears. Units seem to take morale hits just from having their line of retreat cut off in M2TW. Units also take morale hits from getting charged in the rear by the tougher types of HA. At the very least, running behind allows you to catch his routers more easily and divide his forces so your lancers can deliver the killing blow. It's not a completely lost cause. Half the shield bonus is around +3 for melee units and +2 for cavalry. This translates to around 15-20% less losses on average.

In fact there should also be a small, direct bonus for attacks on the flanks or rear, independent of the armour / defense / shield mechanisms, if the Rome model holds true. That was intended to model differences in armour quality around the body, dodge chance due to perception from the 'corner of your eyes', and a greater kill chance due to being able to pick your exact strike location with less obstruction and interference. Which would mean that even with a straight armour modifier instead of shields, you should still see some direct kill-rate bonusses from missile flank and rear attacks on the altered units, on top of morale modifiers and the secondary benefits from catching routers.

And the more I think about it, the more I'm inclined towards the opinion that some sort of bonus to defense on top of the half-shield bonus to armour would be best. It's mainly because the bulk of combat in the game is front-on, face-to-face, and so higher armour rating in the rear is unlikely to compensate fully for lower frontal defense, even with the greater per-attack impact of rear/flank attacks.