Battle tactics and formations (indepth idea).

[Balor]

I'll use 'orders' interface as description of my idea.
It should be, like this (IMHO):

1 -> to footman:
1.1 Hold position. (1.1 means press 1, then 1 again, 1.2 - 1, then 2... so on).
1.2 Follow me.
1.3 Come to my position. (Move to your position, face where you are facing and hold it).
1.4 Toggle aggressive/defensive mode (aggressive - will attack when enemy is sighted. Defensive - only when fired at, or enemy comes real close. Also prefers blocking and parrying to attacks.).
1.5 Mount (should only work if the footmen are dismounted riders)
1.6 Line formation at my position (forms a line centered at your position, facing where are you facing. Should be unlocked with a certain tactical skill. Will not move no matter what.)
1.7 Shield wall formation (all those with shields form a line, and use their shields exclusively. Those with two-handed weapons and polearms will stand right after them (second line), using their weapons (with superior reach) to batter at enemies while they are busy bashing at first line. Also will not move no matter what. Should be unlocked with even higher tactical skill)

2 -> To archers (both mounted and those afoot, I guess).
2.1 Hold position.
2.2 Follow me.
2.3 Come to my position. (Move to your position, face where you are facing and hold it).
2.4 Hold fire/fire at will.
2.5 Mount/dismount toggle. Dismount by default.
2.6 Line formation.
2.7 Toggle skirmish mode on/off - (Archers will flee when enemy gets close on/off.)

3 -> To horseman (excluding horse archers)
3.1 Hold position.
3.2 Follow me.
3.3 Come to my position. (Move to your position, face where you are facing and hold it).
3.4 Toggle aggressive/defensive mode (aggressive - will attack when enemy is sighted. Defensive - only when fired at, or enemy comes real close. Also prefers blocking and parrying to attacks.).
3.5 Dismount.
3.6 Charge on/off.
3.7. Line formation.
3.8 Wedge formation. (Should be invaluable in breaking shield walls)

4 - > to all.
4.1 Hold position.
4.2 Follow me.
4.3 Come to my position. (Move to your position, face where you are facing and hold it).
4.4 Toggle aggressive/defensive mode (skirmish for archers)
4.5 Mount/dismount.
4.6 Footmen guarding archers formation toggle on/off. (Each archer will be assigned (a few is misbalanced in favor of footmen) a footman. It will be set to stay close no matter what, and attack enemies that get near him. All global, non-formation orders will not interrupt this formation.
4.7. Footmen guarding two-handed weapon users (or polearm, for that matter) - same as archers. Footmen will try to protect them, drawing attention and fighting defensively, while heavy-weapon users will rain down the hurt on foes). All global, non-formation orders will not interrupt this formation.
4.8 Mixed shield wall formation. (Ultimate! Should be attained at rather high levels. Behavior: Footman - shield wall. Archers - line in front of them, skirmish, then retread behind the lines when enemy closes in, hold fire. (Return in front of the line if no enemies are close) Cavalry on flanks, waits until enemy gets close, then ride forward a few, set charge and aggressive mode.).
4.9 Update formations - will update all formations for all units (in case someone strayed away, or reinforcements had arrived)
P.S.
While I understand that formation part is not that easy to code, at least first few orders definitely worth implementing. And if you’ll imp all this... Everybody will be abandoning Rome:Total War for this game .

 

[armagan]

Generally speaking, such detailed orders and formations would be cool indeed. The problem is, they would take quite a bit of time and effort to implement. So while I'll keep the idea at the back of my head, I may not be able to implement it for this version.

 

[Balor]

Advanced formations - perhaps, and not that I was insisting on that anyway. But I think that implementing order system like I proposed will bring more 'tactical' element into the battles with two armies.
Right now, it's more of 'lead and pray'... while cool, it's not tactical at all - and ahistorical too.
But with ability to command different troops to go in different places and setting their aggressiveness settings would allow for maneuvers like ambushes, surroundings, etc. (And I'd like at least most basic line formation.) Let battles depend more on player skills as a troop leader... not sheer luck.

 

[Magnachar]

I wanted to post something along the same lines, so here is my contribution.

Formations and tactics... Without going to a full implementation, some limited changes could do a lot...

Pre battle interface : let us choose between some general setting like offense/defense. My first Order is always to Hold my troops so they don't charge to their doom, so it could be ok to choose to hold before battle starts... Or to have our troops not to charge ...

Archery/melee preference. This one would be great, and is a must-have for Vaegirs. Their guards are almost useless when they run around in mounted archery setting. And this happened to me once : all alone on foot facing the ennemy, while my fierce Guards where running away to throw some arrows... This one could be in pre-battle interface too, and as an order (Switch to melee / switch to distance)

 

[HailandKill]

How about, you implement an optional RTS screen. It could be just like your Traveling screen, apart from a little more zoomed in.

That way you could position men easily and tell them where to attack from.#

I mean, you do find that Calary bugger off in front on foot soldiers... while archers take and AGE to get anywhere.. by which time the swap to melee combat anyhow. Telling the troops to hold positions sorts this out for a bit, but it hurts when the enemy have bows.

 

[Podex]

!edit-->moved it to the other thread: http://taleworlds.com/v-web/bulletin/bb/viewtopic.php?p=9029#9029

 

[Berny]

Wow thats ingenious and would be really fun to implement into the game...

to bad it wont be as in depth if there us omething even added


but that would make the combat really intense

 

[Tzaeru]

Actually as far I know about it. would be a lot simpler to make those orders, not complety complex AI.

I do C++ a little myself, and know generally lot about computers / programming, and I think complete AI would recuire a lot work so it would be simpler just to do lot orders to give to troops, as replacing a little bit AI.

But now there is a problem! Enemy wouldnt have any change then to defeat you whitout tactics. If you put all your shield guys to line and archers behind them to shoot enemy that come one by one even if there would be alot them, they loose.
It wont help to make enemy better to fight or more of them. They still come one or two at time and get killed by direct arrow fire.

So if you make this you should also make AI which then little bit reduces help of commands to own troops. Expect.. If you make AI to enemy but not to your own troops? no, sucks. sometimes you wont see your own troops and couldnt then help them.




Okey a lot text. lets make it simpler, shall we:
Add those commands to game and little bit better AI !
Also, you could need your Tactic or Leader skill to make your troops hold defence line and not to run panically away when 2000 Knight whit horses rides toward them.

 

[Mithfindel]

Well, I like the idea of using the tactics skill to determine what can be used.
Also, the system of, say, two consecutive keypresses would work nice. Perhaps three, so that you won't need use that many keys. Serieses three keys are not that difficult to remember.

So, the functions needed would be the checks:
- If the unit is ranged
- If the unit is mounted
- If the unit has a 2-h weapon
- If the unit has a shield

And in addition to current orders follow, to me, and charge, you'd need the basic orders 'go to' and 'fall back'

Also, a random generator.

Then, give the NPCs coordinates where to go, placed like:

------skirmishers--------Cavalry
---men with shields----on the
--player & other men--right/both
--reserve/archer line--wing(s)

The player would be on the center of the formation, and the coordinates for men would be given in relation to his position:

(Example)
Center of the formation (without wings) 10 meters wide, five meters on each side.
Wings, over 5 m right and left of player

Otherwise, the formation would move with the player, and the left, right, advance, and back commands would move in in relation to the player. (So, a shield-bearing NPC would be defined to have a location (-2, +1) from the player, and stick to it - player commands advance, all step forward and the NPC moves to player's position + (-2, +2). That is doable by a vector.

And no, the lines would not be 'lines', but rather rectangular areas inside of which the coordinates where each man would be would be calculated randomly. This would make them to form rough lines, and if there were many of them (say, 90 % of your men have shields) the line would not be too long to maneuvre. (Example: The NPCs forming the 'shield wall' would be extending five meters sideways from the player's position, being one to two meters ahead of it.)

Then, formation toggle: Use formation / don't use. Also, after a percentage of men down, the formation should automatically break. ('The enemy has broken thru your lines' and formations becomes unavailable, say, after losing half of your men.) In the early middle ages, the battles were not that organized.

Also, with a (possibly internal, not player usable) goto waypoint command, we could have cavalry doing flanking maneuvres (Waypoints here would be along the center of the left and right edges of the area, or close to them).

The AI could use the same tactics. A simple analyzing of power ratios, and a random factor of choosing what tactic to use. The code would be likely the same, as the AI could use the same functions that are called when the player gives orders, only applied to the opposite side.

My suggested commands

1 - Formation moving commands (not in formation: the same as current, existing ones - so I left them without 'possible solution')

1-1 - Follow me / hold (not in formation: hold)
Possible solution: If the 'move to location' command exists, command tells the soldier to move to player's location + relative location of the soldier. Actually, this would need to reset the relative location to work, since the command would be given only after the formation is told to hold. Hold: Stop moving.

1-2 - Turn left (30 deg or so / not in formation: to me)
Possible solution: Using 'move to location', as before, but this rotates the vector telling the location in relation to player counter-clockwise by 30 deg (PI/3)

1-3 - Advance (walk forward x meters /not in formation: charge)
Possible solution: Move to location command, add some distance (say, a vector (0,5) rotated on the direction of the front) to the location vector of the soldiers.

1-4 - Turn right (30 deg or so / not in formation: mount horses)
Possible solution: As above, just rotate the other way.

1-5 - Fall back (walk backward x meters /not in formation: dismount)
Possible solution: As with advance, but the opposite.

2 - Tactical commands

2-1 Back to formation (turns formation on, available after a certain amount of ranks in tactics and / or leadership)
Possible solution: If player character has (tactics + leadership) > threshold, the NPCs fighting for him are set to their proper areas in the formation, by random (in the average, random positions will work). At this point, the every NPC requires two integers that store its position as coordinates relative to the player, and the formation requires an integer that tells what direction it is heading.

2-2 Flank enemy (send cavalry to the sides of the map, then on charge - available only after certain amount of ranks in tactics)
Possible solution: If the NPC is mounted, assing him with a 'move to location' command to head to the sides of the area (or a bit closer, riding 45 deg right and left of the heading the formation is heading) and then order them to charge.

2-3 Attack (Advance at the speed of the the slowest unit - keep in formation)
Possible solution: Check all player's NPCs, find which one is the slowest. Then, assign the formation to move towards the enemy with the speed of that unit - i.e. those fast NPCs will not run ahead to be slaughtered alone.

2-4 Skirmish line on/off (on: tell ranged units to move ahead of the formation / off: tell ranged units to fall back behind the formation)
Possible solution: If the NPC has a bow, move its relative position +10 m to move the ranged units ahead of the formation. When commanded again, the relative position is moved by -10 m, moving the archers behind the line of melee fighters.

2-5 Retreat (NPCs try to escape the battlefield, other commands cancel)
Possible solution: Find the closest edge, assign a move to location command there, and once reached, de-spawn the NPC.

3 Footman commands

3-1 Guard archers (Based on random, a melee NPC is set to follow a ranged NPC, formation off)
Possible solution: Assign a 'follow' command, with a random friendly archer as a target.

3-2 High ground (Order archers to man a hill)
Possible solution: Calculus, or just plain numerical analysis to find a local maximum and move archers there. If there is a river, determine if it is close enough for the archers to reach there, and then issue a move to command there. Once reached, command 'hold' to the archers.

3-3 Infantry charge (as the charge command now, but only applied to footmen)

3-4 Infantry fall back (tell infantry to move away from the enemy / follow the player)

3-5 Infantry retreat (as with the retreat command, but only applied to infantry)

4 Cavalry commands

4-1 Back to formation (formation off: follow infantry)
Command the cavalrymen to return to their initial positions at the wings.

4-2 Skirmish (i.e. attack and then ride away, rinse & repeat)
Possible solution: (Needs an action queue) Tell the cavalrymen to attack, then pick a location (possibly by random, or perhaps a random location, but common to all) where they regroup and then attack again.

4-3 Cavalry charge (As charge, only applied to cavalry)

4-4 Cavalry fall back (keep a distance to the enemy or perhaps follow the player)

4-5 Cavalry retreat (as the retreat command, only applied to cavalry)

5 Misc commands (All turn formation off)
5-1 Hold it! (as is now)
5-2 Mount (as is now)
5-3 Charge (as is now, mop-up command to deal with any stragglers hiding somewhere)
5-4 Dismount (as is now)
5-5 To me! (Panic button - save my butt, done like 'follow me' is now)

Looks complicated? Nope: Excluding the 'formation commands' which are arranged geometrically, 1 always calls your men to guard something. 2 is carefully offensive, 3 is charge, 4 carefully defensive, 5 is a panic command.

By default, if there's the total amount of player's ranks in tactics and leadership amount more than a certain treshold, the formation is on and will default to follow the player's movements (front to where player is heading, moves the same direction as the player). Otherwise, it is off, and the NPC's are defaulted to 'Follow me'.

How the AI would use the commands

The same commands available for the AI, if there is a character with tactics and/or leadership, it will use the same commands that are available to the player (of course, all 'location relative to player' commands will just become 'location relative to the center-point of the formation').

The commands used could be like the following (perhaps with a random factor, though). Numbers refer to the keypresses a human player would make.

If AI is on an advantageous situation (-2 to player or worse):

AI has cavalry and also infantry: Flank enemy, attack on formation (2-3, 4-3)
AI has minority of cavalry: Skirmish, attack on formation (2-3, 4-2)
AI has only cavalry: cavalry charge (4-3 or 5-3)
AI has only infantry: attack on formation (2-3)

Even situation (-1 to 1):

AI has cavalry, also infantry: Skirmish, attack in formation, charge when close (2-3, 4-2, 4-3 when close)
AI has minority of cavalry: As above
AI has only cavalry: as above
AI has only infantry, has ranged: High ground, guard archers (3-2, 3-1)
AI has only infantry, no ranged: Attack on formation (2-3)

If AI is on a disadvantageous situation (2 to player or better):

AI has cavalry and infantry: Skirmish, attack in formation (2-3, 4-2)
AI has only infantry, has ranged: High ground, guard archers (3-2, 3-1)
AI has only infantry, no ranged: attack on formation (2-3)

How the AI could react to the events in the battle

Re-evaluate the situation once someone in killed or knocked unconcious:

If it was the player, simulate the rest of the battle (as it is now)

Was a computer side NPC, killed by ranged fire: charge (if comp has cavalry and infantry, cavalry charge, infantry attack on formation). This so that the 'puter just does not stand its troops while you shoot.

Was a computer side NPC, computer has superior numbers of men: charge

Was a computer side NPC, computer has advantageous numbers: keep attacking

Was a computer side NPC, even numbers: keep attacking

Was a computer side NPC, computer has disadvantageous numbers: fall back (if has cavalry, set cavalry on skirmish)

Was a computer side NPC, computer is getting decimated: retreat

Was a player side NPC, computer has superior numbers: charge

Was a player side NPC, computer has advantageous numbers: keep attacking (if comp has cavalry and infantry, set cavalry on charge)

Was a player side NPC, even numbers: keep attacking

Was a player side NPC, computer has disadvantageous numbers: keep attacking

...or something along those lines would be a good step forward on what we have now.

And yes: In the commands give there is very little automation. In old-fashioned military discipline, you don't even blink your eyes if you are not ordered to do so!

EDIT: To clear things a bit. Yes, vector algebra is nice and fun. And useful.

 

[Ingolifs]

I must say i don't fully understand that, but hopefully Armagan does.

 

[Mithfindel]

Edited that a bit. Hopefully makes more sense now.

The general idea is that you can't have too many commands - keeping the commands few it is simpler, as the goal is not to make a Medeival Military Simulator but a fun game. 'Keep it simple, stupid' kind of a thing.

Then, the another idea was that the AI should be able to do the same thing as the player does. And if so, it is useless to code the same thing twice, by making the commands so that they can be applied by both of the sides of the battle. This would not be that good an AI, but that is better than 'charge in a straight line in a huge mob' (though that might be realistic for early Medeival era).

So, the 'move to location' command, for example, would have the possible targets of a single NPC (as in 'if you have a bow, go to this place that seems to be high ground'), or all the NPCs (walk forward 1 m).

 

[Tzaeru]

You know why some commanders won and some lost? thats because.. they had luck! in Medieval I think even best commanders didnt really change theyr tactic from "Shoot your arrows as long they dont attack! when they move.. CHARGE!!!!!"
neh, I am sure there was some good commanders (leader/tactic skill) amongst all those stupid ones. in Rome there was quite clever leaders so why there wouldnt any in mighty Castle Age?

 

[Mithfindel]

*looks behind himself*

Even the five commands we have now allow some tactics. Now, the possibility to hold a line, flank, and skirmish in addition to charging and just standing there (or, in the case of the current AI, just charging) is an improvement.

The KISS principle just was in reference to players. At least I do find it difficult to master a gazillion key shortcuts when it gets hectic - so better to have a few and use them, that is what I did refer to. (I did suggest around 30 different commands, and that is a lot.)

 

[Balor]

better than 'charge in a straight line in a huge mob' (though that might be realistic for early Medeival era).

It may be realistic even now. Or may not. It depends on the country, army, etc, etc.
For instance, remeber Roman legions. Did they employ "charge in a mob" tactics? No. Is it Middle ages, even early ones? No, it's much earlier, several hundred years BC.
Marauding bandits may emply such tactics.
Any self-respecting army - no. Whether BC, Middle ages or now.
On the other hand, I do agree that computer-lead armies (like war parties, for instance) are bound to use some of such tactics, or the game will become way too easy.
But if we are to make tactics affect how fast and accurate your troops execute orders (also taking morale accordingly), and ability to execute some of them only at higher skill levels - then 'size adjustment' part of tactics can be taken out - this will counterbalance this.

 

[Ingolifs]

From previous experience with suggesting ideas and explaining in-depth how you would logically structure them, Most people read them and hate the idea because they haven't the foggiest clue what you're on about.

This has happened to me several times on the Valandil forums. People tend to forget even the most intuitively designed program can be amazingly complex when you look behind the scenes.

 

[InferiorBeing]

I agree. The AI should be able to use them too.