Pivoting battle formations

[Terco_Viejo]

Manoeuvres in oblique order + discipline =  Pivoting battle formations ​

Marching into battle, our character must always go ahead to guide the troop freely, this is well reflected in the game, however sometimes we have to pause our march waiting for the rest of the unit to reach our position with the proper loss of that sense of group cohesion.

隐藏: In Bannerlord we currently have the following formations:

Line
Formation consisting of a succession of individuals side by side.

Shield wall
(From the old Nordic: skjaldborg). Formation consisting of a body of warriors placed close enough to superimpose their shields in such a way that they protect each other forming a compact barrier
.
Loose
Individuals separated from each other to hinder the success of enemy artillery.

Circle
Defensive formation in a circle that increases the protection of a zone or element.

Square
A defensive formation formed by soldiers who dispose of themselves by creating a tight frame.

Skein
Formation in triangle, more or less equilateral, in whose vertex and adjacent sides the soldiers of more push advance.

Column
Formation where unit members stand back to back, shoulder to shoulder and looking all in the same direction.

Scatter
Formation without defined geometry where the soldiers break the formation and move freely in the same direction.

Have you had the same feeling as me of leading units in M&B but not of being part of them? If so, let me explain about "Pivoting battle formations".

The pivoting system I imagine could be a complementary action based mainly on an anchored set of truck and trailer where the first one is our character and the second one is the unit. An action (activated/deactivated) that would allow your character to take virtual control of the formation within it.

I'll give you an example with a 13x3 formation in line of an infantry unit. Applicable to all other formations
​

Our main character moves with w-a-s-d and is oriented with the movement of the mouse, right? The moment we activate the "pivot action" we would take control of the infantry unit being our character the active pivot becoming the axis center of the rectangle that forms the unit. Then that rectangle would swivel forward, back, left, right having as reference point our character (axis character).

隐藏: visual concept of pivot system

Example of flanking oblique movements in closed formation for light cavalry (javelins-mounted archery) in harassment mode:

​

​

But a function such as in Ryse that to hook/unhook pivot (click button in the middle of the mouse perhaps?) to your character inside a formation having the possibility of turn-advance-step-back-other actions as a whole (penalizing the capacity of movement of the character) is something that I have always expected.

Imagine that you are leading your cavalry unit with the command "follow me" making a pincer move to an enemy unit; then press F3 and follow an F1 (line formation) press "MMB" and the whole unit is grouped around your character keeping a line formation while it advances. When you reach the flank of the enemy unit you give the order to "charge" and after the cavalry charge you take control of the situation by pressing "MMB" unhooking you from the formation to have autonomy and when you leave the melee your cavalry unit would follow you as the "follow me" order would still be in force. Applicable to infantry, cavalry and projectiles.

I leave you a simple survey to see the general interest in the matter as a social experiment. Be free to comment your impressions, as well as pros and cons at a technical level, if it is possible to apply it to the current game, limitations, etc ... anything you can think of to enrich the debate.

Thank you for participating

---
I open this thread to discuss with you about battle formations once again. However, this time I want to transfer an idea that arose in another thread and to avoid spamming I have decided to open this one.
​

 

[lolbash]

I can already see this getting repetitive quickly having to focus on another button while in a fight or else risk losing your troops because they are too dumb to know when to break formation.

 

[Orion]

I'd rather they simply replace the "follow me" order with a system such as this, such that they pivot on you if you give your soldiers a formation order after you've issued a follow order. So if you say "follow me" and then "square formation," your troops would build a square formation with you as a starting point. Issuing any other movement order (hold position, charge, advance, retreat, move to position) would unhook the formation from you. Having the entire formation match your facing would be important, and could be used intuitively to fine-tune the facing of your formations when combined with a hold position order. This means there are no more keybindings to worry about, and (at least to me) it seems very intuitive.

 

[Terco_Viejo]

I understand your argument Orion, but what I'm talking about is complementation for specific situations.

An example of a scenario in an early stage of the game:

I'm happily travelling from Ortysia to Zeonica with a party composed of 12 imperial infantryman and 6 Imperial Skirmisher, when suddenly a wild party of 20 mountain bandits appears - I can smell a fat purse a mile away. Methinks your could do with some lightening, eh?.  But my character is riding a crippled and cheap saddle, so I wouldn't use the "pivot system" here because I want to have some autonomy.

As the battlefield is big I advance only with my horse in reccon mode to the meeting of the mountain bandits party when with very bad luck (I exaggerate) they kill my horse and I remain in the middle of the battlefield without saddle, oh boy I flee cowardly back to the meeting of my troops! - I command "follow me" all of them and they reach my position; I hear enemy projectiles passing closer and closer to me. Being in numerical inferiority I opt for a defensive position, my archers behind the infantry line with orders to "hold fire" and "hold position".  Now I activate the pivot system with the infantry unit in square formation taking shelter in it protecting at the same time as a parapet wall in front of my archers.

The clash takes place and the melee arrives; the mountain bandits begin to beat our shields. But I have activated the "pivot system" so I begin to tilt to one side making the mountain bandits start to turn their backs on my archers as they are facing my infantry unit. Archers "fire at will", deactivate pivot system, infantry "charge". DONE.

This pivot system is not intended as a substitute but rather as a temporary tactical enhancement that would work (in my view) brilliantly complementing the "face enemy" order. Learning 1 more command would not be a problem in this case  and actually the middle mouse button is my winning horse, very intuitive button for this action.

Comment freely on what you think about the main idea, but apart from this direction in the debate I would like to discuss with you plausibly its feasibility, exploring the pros and cons at the technical level for implementation through comments from people used to programming code.

 

[NPC99]

Follow me is not the only option. I suppose it has been overused in recent videos to show off TW's sword twirling animation. Troops can just as easily be moved to a flagged position ahead of the player.

Equally, pivoting can already be achieved by changing facing either with F1. to a flagged direction or F2. to face the enemy. I'd also be interested to see what would happen when the player selects a solid formation like square, moves into the centre of it and orders 'Guard Me'. When the player moves forward will it remain in that defensive formation around him? If so, the capability is already in Bannerlord.


BTW order options Width, Commander and Transfer seem to only be available in single player. Also unavailable options, such as fire for troops only armed with melee weapons, are signified by being crossed out.

 

[Terco_Viejo]

Sure mate, I totally agree with you. That option of "guard me" was very succulent and hopeful...however I say it was because in the last Gamescom builds it doesn't appear, like the Width option (plausible that is only available in sergeant mode due to the possibility of gathering squadrons on a massive scale) transfer and commander appear.

 

[John the Roleplayer]

Heavens, why did they switch the buttons for "Charge" and "Follow me"? I'm going to keep pressing the wrong one for a year at least.

 

[NPC99]

Sure mate, I totally agree with you. That option of "guard me" was very succulent and hopeful...however I say it was because in the last Gamescom builds it doesn't appear, like the Width option (plausible that is only available in sergeant mode due to the possibility of gathering squadrons on a massive scale) transfer and commander appear.

Interesting. I hope it hasn’t been dropped from the game, but was only disabled for GamesCom. I doubt that it’s availability depends on the player’s strategy or tactics skill level.

If it has been dropped, please TW, put it back.

 

[Terco_Viejo]

隐藏

Sure mate, I totally agree with you. That option of "guard me" was very succulent and hopeful...however I say it was because in the last Gamescom builds it doesn't appear, like the Width option (plausible that is only available in sergeant mode due to the possibility of gathering squadrons on a massive scale) transfer and commander appear.

Interesting. I hope it hasn’t been dropped from the game, but was only disabled for GamesCom. I doubt that it’s availability depends on the player’s strategy or tactics skill level.

If it has been dropped, please TW, put it back.

They have also apparently discarded the option of battle pace (run/walk, plausible). To pivot with battle pace walking would be the ideal thing and more at the time of combat in melee. Our troops always run... it would be nice to have both options; let's cross our fingers.

 

[Orion]

Similar to NPC99's point, what you describe is already possible with the current controls. I see no benefit beyond a system like I described in my previous post, which would integrate the player into a formation as its leader when issuing follow->formation order sequences. This may already be the case in Bannerlord.

 

[vicwiz007]

They could have removed "guard me" because it's very similar to "follow me" anyway. They sound like they'd be different but in practice (in this game at least) all your soldiers are very close to you and fighting the same guys as you either way. Maybe in "guard" they would try to keep you in the middle of the formation or something. What else would be the difference? If their goal was to attack people who target the player, it would get messy very fast with AI.

 

[Renseo]

Marching into battle, our character must always go ahead to guide the troop freely, this is well reflected in the game, however sometimes we have to pause our march waiting for the rest of the unit to reach our position with the proper loss of that sense of group cohesion.

隐藏: In Bannerlord we currently have the following formations:

Line
Formation consisting of a succession of individuals side by side.

Shield wall
(From the old Nordic: skjaldborg). Formation consisting of a body of warriors placed close enough to superimpose their shields in such a way that they protect each other forming a compact barrier
.
Loose
Individuals separated from each other to hinder the success of enemy artillery.

Circle
Defensive formation in a circle that increases the protection of a zone or element.

Square
A defensive formation formed by soldiers who dispose of themselves by creating a tight frame.

Skein
Formation in triangle, more or less equilateral, in whose vertex and adjacent sides the soldiers of more push advance.

Column
Formation where unit members stand back to back, shoulder to shoulder and looking all in the same direction.

Scatter
Formation without defined geometry where the soldiers break the formation and move freely in the same direction.

Have you had the same feeling as me of leading units in M&B but not of being part of them? If so, let me explain about "Pivoting battle formations".

The pivoting system I imagine could be a complementary action based mainly on an anchored set of truck and trailer where the first one is our character and the second one is the unit. An action (activated/deactivated) that would allow your character to take virtual control of the formation within it.

I'll give you an example with a 13x3 formation in line of an infantry unit. Applicable to all other formations
​

Our main character moves with w-a-s-d and is oriented with the movement of the mouse, right? The moment we activate the "pivot action" we would take control of the infantry unit being our character the active pivot becoming the axis center of the rectangle that forms the unit. Then that rectangle would swivel forward, back, left, right having as reference point our character (axis character).

隐藏: visual concept of pivot system

But a function such as in Ryse that to hook/unhook pivot (click button in the middle of the mouse perhaps?) to your character inside a formation having the possibility of turn-advance-step-back-other actions as a whole (penalizing the capacity of movement of the character) is something that I have always expected.

Imagine that you are leading your cavalry unit with the command "follow me" making a pincer move to an enemy unit; then press F3 and follow an F1 (line formation) press "MMB" and the whole unit is grouped around your character keeping a line formation while it advances. When you reach the flank of the enemy unit you give the order to "charge" and after the cavalry charge you take control of the situation by pressing "MMB" unhooking you from the formation to have autonomy and when you leave the melee your cavalry unit would follow you as the "follow me" order would still be in force. Applicable to infantry, cavalry and projectiles.

I leave you a simple survey to see the general interest in the matter as a social experiment. Be free to comment your impressions, as well as pros and cons at a technical level, if it is possible to apply it to the current game, limitations, etc ... anything you can think of to enrich the debate.

Thank you for participating

---
I open this thread to discuss with you about battle formations once again. However, this time I want to transfer an idea that arose in another thread and to avoid spamming I have decided to open this one.

I think about this, but to make the whole division to pivot to the commander would make the formation very messy and leave gaps, multiplayer considered.

Or rather we can make a player 'attach' to a formation,  let us say we play as a soldier in a noble army and attached to line 2nd division line formation and posted in 2nd row. We would automatically walk,  and can only rotate and move in few pace inside our 'circle of post', it makes an army can make a cohesive formation even with the player inside while leave no gaps and more roleplay element.

And it would make us able to use a whole formation consist of players by attaching themselves in formation.

If i would make a description it would be like a legionnaire in formation,  he can stab to sides,  make a parry, evade or make a shieldwall altogether.

 

[Terco_Viejo]

隐藏

Marching into battle, our character must always go ahead to guide the troop freely, this is well reflected in the game, however sometimes we have to pause our march waiting for the rest of the unit to reach our position with the proper loss of that sense of group cohesion.

隐藏: In Bannerlord we currently have the following formations:

Line
Formation consisting of a succession of individuals side by side.

Shield wall
(From the old Nordic: skjaldborg). Formation consisting of a body of warriors placed close enough to superimpose their shields in such a way that they protect each other forming a compact barrier
.
Loose
Individuals separated from each other to hinder the success of enemy artillery.

Circle
Defensive formation in a circle that increases the protection of a zone or element.

Square
A defensive formation formed by soldiers who dispose of themselves by creating a tight frame.

Skein
Formation in triangle, more or less equilateral, in whose vertex and adjacent sides the soldiers of more push advance.

Column
Formation where unit members stand back to back, shoulder to shoulder and looking all in the same direction.

Scatter
Formation without defined geometry where the soldiers break the formation and move freely in the same direction.

Have you had the same feeling as me of leading units in M&B but not of being part of them? If so, let me explain about "Pivoting battle formations".

The pivoting system I imagine could be a complementary action based mainly on an anchored set of truck and trailer where the first one is our character and the second one is the unit. An action (activated/deactivated) that would allow your character to take virtual control of the formation within it.

I'll give you an example with a 13x3 formation in line of an infantry unit. Applicable to all other formations
​

Our main character moves with w-a-s-d and is oriented with the movement of the mouse, right? The moment we activate the "pivot action" we would take control of the infantry unit being our character the active pivot becoming the axis center of the rectangle that forms the unit. Then that rectangle would swivel forward, back, left, right having as reference point our character (axis character).

隐藏: visual concept of pivot system

But a function such as in Ryse that to hook/unhook pivot (click button in the middle of the mouse perhaps?) to your character inside a formation having the possibility of turn-advance-step-back-other actions as a whole (penalizing the capacity of movement of the character) is something that I have always expected.

Imagine that you are leading your cavalry unit with the command "follow me" making a pincer move to an enemy unit; then press F3 and follow an F1 (line formation) press "MMB" and the whole unit is grouped around your character keeping a line formation while it advances. When you reach the flank of the enemy unit you give the order to "charge" and after the cavalry charge you take control of the situation by pressing "MMB" unhooking you from the formation to have autonomy and when you leave the melee your cavalry unit would follow you as the "follow me" order would still be in force. Applicable to infantry, cavalry and projectiles.

I leave you a simple survey to see the general interest in the matter as a social experiment. Be free to comment your impressions, as well as pros and cons at a technical level, if it is possible to apply it to the current game, limitations, etc ... anything you can think of to enrich the debate.

Thank you for participating

---
I open this thread to discuss with you about battle formations once again. However, this time I want to transfer an idea that arose in another thread and to avoid spamming I have decided to open this one.

I think about this, but to make the whole division to pivot to the commander would make the formation very messy and leave gaps, multiplayer considered.

Or rather we can make a player 'attach' to a formation,  let us say we play as a soldier in a noble army and attached to line 2nd division line formation and posted in 2nd row. We would automatically walk,  and can only rotate and move in few pace inside our 'circle of post', it makes an army can make a cohesive formation even with the player inside while leave no gaps and more roleplay element.

And it would make us able to use a whole formation consist of players by attaching themselves in formation.

If i would make a description it would be like a legionnaire in formation,  he can stab to sides,  make a parry, evade or make a shieldwall altogether.

Let's see if I am skillful enough to express myself correctly in English (you know that it is not my mother tongue) and that those of you who read me here can understand the explanation.

Let us speak of combat order:
There are two systems of formation that are the tactical base in the M&B franchise, order and disposition of the troops: the extensive or linear order, propitious by its extension to surpass the flanks of the opponent and to wrap it; and the deep or perpendicular order, to sink the front by propulsion or shock, or by repeated and successive efforts in the place and in the most propitious occasion of the front.

However, what option do we players have to perform oblique movements? The oblique order is the root of the pivot system which I'm talking about.

In M&B we can give different commands, move here, charge, etc (we all know them). But the system which I'm talking about you have to understand it like the function of walking or riding (I gave the example of truck and trailer  ). When we go on foot we move with wasd + oblique combinations right? and when we go riding too, right? because in a way we go in a vehicle that moves us but still we have some autonomy to attack-defend and give orders at the same time.

With the pivot system enabled we would have total control of the formation in which we are attached like if we were maneuvering a vehicle, but on the other hand, each pj within the formation would have partial autonomy (attack - defend - occupy spaces). The Ai of the units in formation with the pivot system enabled would become subordinate in this case.

​

This system of positioning and maneuvering in oblique would add a touch of magic to the epic of the battles in M&B, working in all formations for all three types of combat forces.

 

[Orion]

You want Arma's formation system, essentially. If you haven't played it, I can describe it for you succinctly.

A formation order is issued by the squad leader, which creates a set of position markers for units under his command to move into. These position markers are updated in real time to match the squad leader's facing, stance (standing/crouching/prone), and position. Wherever the squad leader goes, the rest of the soldiers try to stay in the same position relative to the leader, and they match his facing and stance. They can engage targets on their own, and unless they're in danger they'll continue following the leader.

 

[Terco_Viejo]

You want Arma's formation system, essentially. If you haven't played it, I can describe it for you succinctly.

A formation order is issued by the squad leader, which creates a set of position markers for units under his command to move into. These position markers are updated in real time to match the squad leader's facing, stance (standing/crouching/prone), and position. Wherever the squad leader goes, the rest of the soldiers try to stay in the same position relative to the leader, and they match his facing and stance. They can engage targets on their own, and unless they're in danger they'll continue following the leader.

You've got me, you've also noticed where I've been inspired, right?  I didn't aim to invent the wheel. I'm a follower of the series since Operation Flashpoint and an fan of Igitur's work with his High Command Converter.
What fascinates me is that kind of synchronization in the movement of troops in a closed order through a disciplinary dynamic and I was wondering if this kind of action could be well accepted by an M&B player and implemented in their way of playing.

What I'm talking about is mixing those synchronized movements with the wheeling tactic, with the small difference that the pivot is our character centered in the axis of the formation in a totally compact way (whatever it is).

Example of flanking oblique movements in closed formation for light cavalry (javelins-mounted archery) in harassment mode:

​

A system like this with the possibility of turning on and off, by being able to benefit the experience through the capacity to regulate spacing mechanisms (spread out - stand closer) + pacing commands + other actions with the M&B's label, yeah, I'd love that.

I hope we have an approximation; on the other hand I keep praying at night to Caba`drin and Motomataru.

 

[DtheHun]

Were these tight, marching formations a thing between the era of roman legions and 17th century grenadiers? I think, most of the medieveal soldiers were not professionals, not trained in camps like legionaries. Footsoldiers were accreted from far fields belonging to their lords, knights were in different social state, eager to make name for themself in the battlefield. Many of them didn't meet their comrades before battle. So, it would be great to see from elite footsoldiers, but would be strange to see from recruits or nomads.

To achieve both, the position should not be fixed to the leader, but to the neighbour soldier closer to the pivot. The precision would depend on the leader's skill, the actual soldier's experience divided by the group size.  That way, a loose chain could be achieved for mass of recruits and a more precise for small elite groups.

 

[Terco_Viejo]

Were these tight, marching formations a thing between the era of roman legions and 17th century grenadiers? I think, most of the medieveal soldiers were not professionals, not trained in camps like legionaries. Footsoldiers were accreted from far fields belonging to their lords, knights were in different social state, eager to make name for themself in the battlefield. Many of them didn't meet their comrades before battle. So, it would be great to see from elite footsoldiers, but would be strange to see from recruits or nomads.

To achieve both, the position should not be fixed to the leader, but to the neighbour soldier closer to the pivot. The precision would depend on the leader's skill, the actual soldier's experience divided by the group size.  That way, a loose chain could be achieved for mass of recruits and a more precise for small elite groups.

Like Jack the Ripper said, let's go by parts...

Calradia is a fantasy world, we all know it; however Taleworlds has very much in mind the historical fidelity component. Therefore "technically" Bannerlord would be placed at the beginning of the Early Middle Ages.

隐藏: Early Middle Ages Map + factions merged

In the Early Middle Ages, the two most solid power cores were the Carolingian Empire and Byzantium. In both States, as well as in the rest of the Kingdoms, cavalry was the essence of the army and assumed the protagonism of shock and initiative in the battlefield, while infantry had less presence.

Yes, it is true that battles used to result in a "melee"of dust and blood in which they mixed the clash of metals, screams, wails and neighing horses. In this environment the visibility was limited because, in addition, the helmets made the vision difficult. The confusion was such that it became imperative to identify where the respective commanders of the armies were, as well as the rear with their camps, reinforcements and supplies, where they had to regroup and rearrange.
Thus, from the 11th century onwards, coloured banners were devised which, elevated at the top, indicated this information. This identifying practice would lead each nobleman to create his own flag or coat of arms ... had appeared the Heraldic! wow Bannerlord? 

Until the late Middle Ages, infantry was almost nothing on the battlefield. Badly armed and poorly trained, it was limited to logistical tasks, reconnaissance, guarding and looting, without being a rival for knights. Even so, simple formations, lines and columns were used.

In the 14th century, a further step was taken with the appearance of the " pikemen ". These Swiss peasants with only a long pike (5 to 7 meters) demonstrated that, well trained to maintain a closed formation and control panic, they could disrupt a charge of cavalry and dismount the rider. Sticking into the ground like a hedgehog and with different angles of inclination, formed an impenetrable curtain. They quickly spread throughout Europe and in the 15th century they were already coveted by all the European armies; this weapon ended up being the backbone of the Spanish Tercios. Movements in formations of lines, rows and squares.

There is a very interesting book that I encourage you to read if you have the possibility:
Fighting Techniques of the Medieval World Ad 500 - Ad 1500

Bearing in mind that in Bannerlord we can use formations, do not deny me its use because according to your vision of medieval tactics everything was based on confrontation of men in a melee; with all due respect, mate no.

This must also be borne in mind:

And with regard to the axis, it is true that according to the formation the leader of this one was positioned in an extreme at the time of rotating. However, as our character is the pivoting center, the turning movement would be more closed improving the experience in the game by undertaking diagonal-oblique displacements (under my point of view).

There would be so many possibilities...
You will like to play in swarm shooting arrows in scattered mode, right DtheHun  ? Well I propose a Mongolian tactic that is closest to your style of play  ... making use of the system I propose next to the already established (complement)
Battlefield deployment:

You
Group 1: A group of Khuzait heavy lancers.
Group 2: Units of Khuzait archers.

Battle:
Wedge formatio! + activate the pivot system for group 1 and you become the arrowhead of the wedge. Group 2 column formation + follow me. With this the group 1 protects the 2 giving him this cover fire at the same time as it harasses the enemies. Try to make Cantabrian circles and Caracoles around the enemy. 

 

[Terco_Viejo]

I don't want to be tiresome and if the subject doesn't interest, I'll let the thread be swept away by the tide of oblivion and buried by the new ones that emerge.

One last technical doubt for the technicians ( keeping in mind the example gifs ):

It would be possible to program that the action of movement would not be controlled by the cursor through our click but that our character anchored to the formation can control it through wasd (with the system previously commented complementing the action face direction and face enemy) and obtain a similar answer?

This is hardcoded terrain?

 

[fedeita]

I'm resuming this thread since what I have to say is inherent to formations. hope nobody get offended.
I've noticed that the posture of the infantrymen is wrong, as you can see they stay relaxed with guard totally open and shield held horizontally, I would never do that if my life is somehow threatened.
This could be ok if the battlefield is huge but ingame you're facing enemy in few seconds, and it doesn't even help the AI react in time as you can see in the second screen:

here you can see how bad it is the animation:

隐藏

they run like zombies despite the cavalry charge in front of them:

隐藏

this is what I'm expecting to see:

隐藏

They are literally running in front of the enemy, that's not humans like and need to be fixed in my opinion.
Another problem is that they break formation as they move forward and totally break it when collide with the enemies, I don't know how pikemen react in battle but this is not a good sign.
Solution is to let the soldiers hold up the shield closer to the body, march orderly to the enemy (except for a "advance faster" command) and hold the formation even during combact if ordered because that's the best way to have a good and working spearmen formation.

attackers broke formation before even reaching the enemy:

隐藏

defenders immediately broke formation as they enter in contact with enemy:

隐藏

let me know what you guys think about this and thanks in advance.

 

[NPC99]

I would like to see a system capable of disciplined formations when the troops concerned are sufficiently experienced to maintain them. In Warband, ai starts at individual agent level. Given that there is always a point at which individuals will value self preservation over unit cohesion, I have no inherient problem with this. However, Warband took this so far that it undermined formations through too many random morale/other checks etc. Even green troops can maintain formation when they’re under no pressure, except Warband’s random morale/other checks operate even when inappropriate. I’m concerned that this may also infect Bannerlord, even though TW have promised better coding to reflect the fact that agents should huddle in formations for collective security. So far, I have only seen the downside of this revised coding where looters in the Gamescom demos huddled togther to form easy & stupid targets for ranged weapons. Clearly, agent based ai coding is difficult and cpu intensive, so ideals may be unobtainable with modern pcs, but I’d like to see:

1. Greater unit cohesion for all formations in the early stages of battles.
2. Green units potentially breaking en masse from hard knocks despite casualties below 15%
3. Elite veteran units potentially holding formation despite casualties above 60% (historically unlikely but M&B’s casualty levels are already low fantasy).
4. Lower unit cohesion as casualties increase.
5. Greater unit cohesion for higher level/experienced troops.

I accept that cpu processing has probably been invested in larger battles rather than formations, but hope the engine isn’t so hard coded in this area that rebalancing becomes impossible.

BTW I agree about shields being held in readiness. If nothing else, it will ensure the emblems on our troops’ shields are held upright.