Pike-and-Shot and overlapping units

**General Malaise** · 07-09-2010, 18:33

@Gregoshi
This thread: http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?t=310118
explains how to use pike and phalanx, perhaps better than I am, although one can extend the logic to mixing/overlapping other types of units.

A clarifying quote from the above:

Battlefield Deployment: Pikemen are the most synergistically-dependent of all available unit classes, and should never be employed alone on the battlefield. Pikes achieve synergy with other, overlapping units of pikemen in double-stacked square formations (refer to my discussion of the Pike Square) or Heavy Infantry (as examined in the Tercio).

STW's defense penalty for overlapping units only makes sense in certain circumstances. For instance, I think No-Dachi and Naginata should generally (at least of overlapping them with each other) take a penalty to attack/defense if double-stacked or more, because they need space to swing. Honestly, I always thought they ought to be used in loose formation myself, but that's another issue. Spears and pikes though are *meant* to be crammed together as tight as possible, and later on, with guns amidst them.

If they ever make Renaissance: Total War I can't see how they could do it without allowing what I'm talking about above, and have it accurately simulate the period, unless they do a cheap cop-out of having you recruit pre-formed "pike square" mixed units. Although I realize it's too late for them to implement it in S2TW, towards the end of the Sengoku Jidai warfare actually looked a lot like renaissance europe so it would really be good there.

My suggestions don't really disrupt the basic rock paper scissors thing at all, they just allow you to 1) more easily mix rock and paper or paper and scissors etc for some more tactical options, or rather, to make said options less of a micro headache and 2) allow you more control and options with your rock, paper, scissors; for example, allowing you to order a 4 line formation of spearmen, with the front two facing forward and the back two backward, or alternating lines of swords and pike without having to spin the whole unit around in the case of the former or drag lines out manually for the latter.

I don't know, maybe a formation-heavy tactics would be better suited to a turn-based game, but most people already pause like hell in SP and you've always had to be sharp-eyed and fast of hand in MP already, so I don't really see all the supposed overwhelming complexity.

edit: ...not to mention most of formation doing is done during pre-battle deployment as I've said before.

**Gregoshi** · 07-09-2010, 18:52

Thanks for the additional information GM. I'll just add my cavet to all the cool/interesting ideas suggested for S2TW so far - if the AI can handle it well, then fine. If it can't, then it will end up another frustrating "feature" to complain about.

Originally Posted by General Malaise

@Gregoshi
I don't know, maybe a formation-heavy tactics would be better suited to a turn-based game, but most people already pause like hell in SP and you've always had to be sharp-eyed and fast of hand in MP already, so I don't really see all the supposed overwhelming complexity.

In M2TW/ETW SP, could you pause and still issue orders? I didn't think that was an option in the earlier games, hence I never paused unless I had to take my attention away from the game. And the sharp-eye/fast hand of MP is why I always sucked so bad at it - something about my brain forming a tactics committee and holding hearings on how best to proceed in the current battle situation and then delivering the final decision to the last men routing off the map.

**ReluctantSamurai** · 07-10-2010, 16:10

I've been lurking this topic a bit and decided to toss in my 2koku worth.

I am only a novice at programming, so I could not say whether the coding for using overlapping units as a group is unduly difficult. Also, if the AI cannot utilize this, then it becomes a "cheat", if you will. I can see it has great bearing on MP, however.

Merging units, not way too complex. But giving orders to subsections of a formation consisting of two or more units, yes, that is way too complex. I don't see why you should have to do that, rather than having the merged units make use of their subsections on their own discretion.

Subsections on their own have different movement rates, and as I understand GM's premise...being able to single-click and have this formation move as-one, is vastly better than having to continuously 'micro-draw'.

But anything beyond that is micromanagement that you simply do not have the time to do in larger engagements, and it would only distract you from the bigger picture. While you are busy controlling the individual units in one group, you will be neglecting the rest of the army.

The way I personally micro-manage in TW games, having a system like what GM is proposing would probably save me time. And in any case, I'd like to be the one to decide to use such a feature or not.

What's wrong with letting the AI officer of each unit decide which group tactic is best at any given time?

Because I am one of those micro-management fools who likes to control every little detail I can

No, it's not about realism or historical accuracy. It's about making, largely already existing, tactical options more useful and easier by making them simpler to perform with the game's control set.

This is what sells me on the idea. Making life on the battlefield easier......in a game sense, literally

something about my brain forming a tactics committee and holding hearings on how best to proceed in the current battle situation and then delivering the final decision to the last men routing off the map.

@Gregoshi

**Galvanized Iron** · 07-10-2010, 19:47

I sincerly hope they make it impossible for 2 units to share the same spot unless one of them are in loose formation. The stacking that occurs, especially during siege assaults, in other TW games looks horrible and causes lagg too...