Best Number of Ranks for Melee

[Fatboy]

Does anyone have any recommendations how many ranks are best for units in hand to hand combat?

Apart from the fact that units with less frontage manoeuvre better - Is it really worth setting up my infantry 4 or 5 ranks deep for defence? Or am I better to go for 2 or 3 ranks & a broader frontage?

[Catiline]

I don't know about the maths of the formations and the relative bonuses accrued through them, but there are other tacticalissues you should take into consideration. Firstly of course the greater frontage your unit has the less likely it is that it will be flanked by enemy forces. A Yari Sam unit spread out with only 2 or even one ranks can be enough to break an initial charge and pin down a lot of enemy assault units, but you need to have reserves for a counterattck closeby if you try this, else the Yari Sam unit wqon't have many mouths left to feed at the end of the day. If you need a unit to seriously fight for itself rahter than fulfil a special role like that then deeper formations are better. Generally I like 3 deep in defense and 4 in attack, but that's just perssonal preference

------------------
It's not a bug, it's a feature

[This message has been edited by Catiline (edited 04-25-2001).]

[Ii Naomasa]

What Catiline describes is quite accurate game-wise. It's a shame that a single thing line can do such wonders against charges (especially cavalry). In real life, cavalry would laugh at a single line of spearmen. The wall of spears would be wide, but hardly dense at all and you could easily punch through a single or double line and exploit rears and flanks (hence the design of the square formation in Europe, which not only covers all four sides, but has a nice cavalry kill zone for any horseman that breaks through a side). The best spear walls in reality were at least two and upwards of four deep (with long spears, you could have all four lines having their pointy-sticks out in front).

Alas, the breakage of lines is something we'll have to wait for better computers and programs to handle.

As Catiline points out, though, while single lines work remarkably well in Shogun, the whole scheme of 'wait until the guy in front of me dies before moving up' does tend to give strength to having units three or so deep when they're going to be engaged in a drawn out encounter with another unit.

[Hiroshi-O'Duff]

I like one row of two-deep shielding multiple sets of archers, with flanking/defending groups of four or five deep next to them (on each side). It's about the same coverage area as three sets in three-deep formation, and allows some additional spanking if the enemy comes in soft to the center.

Duff

[Obake]

The true issue that you'll need to determine for yourself Fatboy is "how long can you wait before they rout?" While what Catiline and Naomasa-san say is absolutely correct, there is another point that they missed. The fewer ranks you have, the faster your unit will rout as the enemy penetrate your line.

Remember that even though the game is unit-based, each individual soldier within a unit has its own AI. Which means if the guy next to him is killed, there is a strong chance that a particular soldier is going to get flanked and will have to make a morale check. If this happens enough times in a 1-2 rank deep formation, that unit is going to rout much faster than a 3-4 rank deep formation.

The advantage you will have though is that if the attacking unit has a smaller frontage than your defending unit the opportunity for your unit to surround the enemy unit and get the flanking bonus is greater (assuming you are set to "engage at will" and not "hold formation" or "hold position").

Speaking only for myself, I like to run monks 3-4 deep, No-dachi the same. Yari troops I run 3-deep only and put the on hold formation till I know what they're up against, then I'll either leave them or switch to "engage at will". Archers are always 2 deep till their arrows are gone, then 4-5. Guns are either 3 or 4 deep, that way there is a solid level of gunfire coming. The trade there is the number of guns firing vs. the rapidity of that fire. 2 ranks leaves too much time in between and 5 ranks doesn't give enough firepower (for me). Cav depends on the situation and I'll modify formations as needed. The only hth unit that I'll consider running 2 deep are Nags on defense. Their armor gives them the ability to hold out much longer than any of the other units, especially if they are also set to "hold position".

But then again what the hell do I know? My guys run almost as fast as Elmarks!

------------------
Obake

I warned you, but did you listen? Ohh, no...it's just a harmless little bunny, isn't it?

[Puzz3D]

Fatboy,

Everyone has given good advice here, but you might want to check out this thread for more info: http://www.totalwar.org/ubb/Forum1/HTML/000072.html

Longjohn2 may be someone closely connected to the development of STW. His third post in that thread speaks directly to your question.

MizuYuuki ~~~
Clan Takiyama ~~~

[ShaiHulud]

It varies depending on whether I'm attacking or defending, and against what.

Ashi are usually a block 5-6 deep, either way. I use them to a. flank units already in combat or b. rush archers when the rst of the enemies line is committed. They are never in the line but as support on the flanks. (Rarely more than 2) 'Hold' formation until pursuit or charging archers.

Yari. If in the center of the line I have them 4-5 deep. On the flanks 3-4 deep. Center units are expected to survive til reinforced or win alone. Flankers are to secure the flanks, and are thrown in only if their flank is otherwise secure. These are the pivot points of flanking ashi or cavalry and can be retreated behind if those are over-matched. In 'Engage' formation unless facing cav or monks.

Monks.. On defense, sometimes only 3 deep. The wide front, when it attacks (never receive an attack with monks, I say) should throw fear into more than one enemy unit this way. On defense, once my monks go in the battle it is usually decided, too. I don't expect them to have long battles after contact. Another nice feature of 3 deep.. they quickly overlap enemy's flanks. Always in 'Engage' formation. Keeps their killing power undiluted.

NoDachi.. Base formation of 5-6 deep needed. They take too many losses from arrows. I hold them back from the line to avoid such hits til committed. Even victorious ND typically take 33% losses. 66% is not uncommon and a tough battle leaves but a corporal's guard.

Archers.. Two deep, they are the front line. They can shoot unobstructed, as samurai can receive the enemy's charge stoically. Usually they needn't take many losses as I counter-charge to meet the oncoming foe. On offense they absorb the enemies arrows, rarely in long duels. Almost always in 'Hold' formation, unless I want to allow them to withdraw from a melee they are stuck in.

Cav... I'm not much on attacking with cav. As pursuit I use 'Engage'. I'll leave them to those more experienced to give suggestions.

Naginata... Rarely use these, but then in 'Hold' formation. They don't kill well to begin with so I maximize their staying power.

One useful aspect of a charge while in 'Engage' formation is that the unit usually gets spread out. This, while diluting the initial impact of a charge, makes them harder archery targets. Misses don't have nearby individuals to hit by mistake.


------------------
Wind fells blossoms, rain
fells steel,yet bamboo bends and drinks

[MajorFreak]

hmmmmmm...intriguing situation, using a 1 rank depth unit...and the 3 rows for monks is a wicked idea i hadn't even thought of. whole bunch of cool tips.

I'm more of a 3 rows for archers and about 4 for the other types. (i'm not that good yet, so wide formation maneuvers tend to show their flanks to the enemy as they lumber about)


here's my rule of thumb: I almost never make any formation have more depth than width
(I tend to shy away from 5+ units deep unless im short on terrain - bridge or plateau - or im trying to piss the AI off by hiding on the other side of a cliff. heh. alright, i know it's cheap, but we've all tried that once)

[TheWay]

Oh dear

am i the only one who uses wedges around here? I use it for all my hand to hand soldiers, and find it works very well for single player.

Just got a new *big* monitor! WAHAHAHAH! technology rocks!

[ShaiHulud]

TheWay... I used to use wedges a lot in online play. I don't against the AI cuz I have to minimize losses. ND in wedge are great for dealing with monks (they lose, but they kill more monks) but few ever return from such a battle. I've read of others who recommend wedges when hitting a flank or rear, for maximum impact.

------------------
Wind fells blossoms, rain
fells steel,yet bamboo bends and drinks

[borisus]

I don't like the wedge,the "bonus" it gives to the attacker is not so big,and when i try to charge my men in the wedge formation thay make less kiles than in the regular one!

tip-
use a unit of YS in 2 rows HF HP,when the SA bhiend them run out of ammo,charge them in 2 rows(EAW) at the enemy that is attacking the YS.
that way you can stop a large force with a very small force.

------------------
"A WISE MAN ONCE SAID,LETS KICK THAIR ASS!"

[MajorFreak]

didn't think the topic was about wedges, or other formation types

*shrug*

(once my archers run outta ammo i put them in wedge/engage...they benefit from this because i think it looks cool...hehe)