SP - UI Why was Old Troop Assignment System removed?

[MakinTorf]

oh wow. enlightment!
is there any possible way to make a formation with companions only? i guess the best way is to give them bows with horse so you can put them there, because i dont have any yet...

 

[RozBritanicus]

Yeah i always used my companions as Body guards . Its good to assign them to a troop too but i think having both options would be better . Also the squish companions it would be good to assign them a none combative so they don't take part in the battles but
there as a doctor afterwards . Its silly sending your top Doctor into the meat grinder.

 

[MRay]

IF the design gets approved, the process would be,

• Create a new formation
• Set its slider to 0(there needs to be another formation of the same type)
• Assign all unassigned(non-captain) heroes to that formation

Now you have an only-hero formation.

 

[XDaron]

better than nothing, aproved, proceed.

 

[IloveMBVet]

IF the design gets approved, the process would be,

• Create a new formation
• Set its slider to 0(there needs to be another formation of the same type)
• Assign all unassigned(non-captain) heroes to that formation

Now you have an only-hero formation.

Majorly improved, of course ill admit it's not what we all want however would certainly solve my issue about us not being able to have bodyguards or hero only formations. Bodyguards are a big part to me, I just can't enjoy battles without them.. I haven't come back and wont until we can have them. Any update ont he status if was approved or still being etc? Thanks

 

[xTITANx]

Having just come to M&B, I wuld like to applaud you Devs on a tremendous game. It is fantastic. I'm completely hooked, which is why I'm here making posts.

However, I am a bit baffled that I cannot assign specific troops to units I desire. I understand you have put a lot of work into your current design, but it seems restrictive. I can only hope that it is a precursor to other enhancements. As a dev myself, I completely understand having basic functionality and then building on those components, but please build on the current foundation.

Here are some suggestions I think should be addresssed. I say should, because any commander would be able to do these things.

A) Assigning specific troops to a formation. Yes, this should be possible. If I want to create group of only Sturgian Heavy Spearmen, I should be able to do it. That's precisely what commanders have done for years, for good reasons. I would think it would be a pretty simple act of creating a new filter for your list, like archer, or infantry, but instead an Icon for the troop type.. Simply allow us to choose other things from that list.

B) We should be able to train our troops/formations on an empty Battlefield. Creating and assigning groups would be done here. Formations saved and templates created to use during actual battles. If you let us create a formation by using the party window, dragging units to the left from a party from the party to a "Formation," then having us assign an ICON for it, you could select that Icon in the filter list and those specific troops would get assigned to the formation.

C) While training your troops you could create a starting formation, and save it as a template. Create templates that can be applied through a new dropdown during the prebattle planning stage.

D) Allow us to create hotkeys for things we use a lot. I rarely use the majority of the formation keys. I would like to create a single key that does Follow me, or Form a scain. Instead of pressing unit -> line-> formation, I could create a macro to do this in a "Favorites" command window on our training field.

 

[MRay]

A) Assigning specific troops to a formation. Yes, this should be possible. If I want to create group of only Sturgian Heavy Spearmen, I should be able to do it. That's precisely what commanders have done for years, for good reasons. I would think it would be a pretty simple act of creating a new filter for your list, like archer, or infantry, but instead an Icon for the troop type.. Simply allow us to choose other things from that list.

I replied to this suggestion before, I'll find it.

This becomes impractical for big parties and armies. Out of thousands of troops, both spawned and not spawned(reinforcements) players would see too many troops for a dropdown. For example worst case for cavalry is 52 different troops, for Infantry it is 422(granted not all are recruitable but even half is 200+). So 200+ possible troops in a dropdown is not feasible. I'm not even going into modded in troops that would need to be supported.

Or combined formations like Infantry+Archers and Cavalry+HorseArchers.

---

B) We should be able to train our troops/formations on an empty Battlefield. Creating and assigning groups would be done here. Formations saved and templates created to use during actual battles. If you let us create a formation by using the party window, dragging units to the left from a party from the party to a "Formation," then having us assign an ICON for it, you could select that Icon in the filter list and those specific troops would get assigned to the formation.

Having an empty field to "train" your troops is a separate thing and can be brought up as a suggestion. Using the party screen to create formations are still a problem though since with the introduction of OoB we let players control AI troops in AI battles. The changes made in the party screen, without AI troops that will be present in the next encounter, will create problems. Something will get overridden and somethings will need to be taken out of players' hands. (Like not letting player set custom filters for all formations since not-assigned troops need to go somewhere, disabling captain assignments since the player probably assigned their companions through the party screen etc.)

---

C) While training your troops you could create a starting formation, and save it as a template. Create templates that can be applied through a new dropdown during the prebattle planning stage.

We already save the previous selections made in the OoB between battles and saving only one formation's values as a template would be a problem since it's not just changing one formation, it'll effect other formations with the same type since they share the same type of troops.

---

D) Allow us to create hotkeys for things we use a lot. I rarely use the majority of the formation keys. I would like to create a single key that does Follow me, or Form a scain. Instead of pressing unit -> line-> formation, I could create a macro to do this in a "Favorites" command window on our training field.

Customization of the hotkeys for the order system was planned but it has been put in the backlog. Other features took precedence and it would require a refactor of how we do hotkeys in the order system.

 

[xTITANx]

I replied to this suggestion before, I'll find it.

Hey Thank you for your reply. It's actually really refreshing to see a developer respond.

Using the party screen to create formations are still a problem though since with the introduction of OoB we let players control AI troops in AI battles

Sorry for being new to the game. I assume you mean out of bounds for OoB. What is the issue with AI Troops in AI battles that having me set formations would cause? Saying it will cause issues but not explaining doesn't really help discussion as we as fans might be able to help.

I want to stress to you how important making the in game battle system fun to play. It's a core part of the game and it's currently INCREDIBLY frustrating. If the problems cannot be fixed in the current system, that is a really big problem and it should tell you that the system you chose is not a good one. Players are going to expect fine tuned troop deployment and I can already see on reddit everyone HATES the new system and are going as far as skipping battles because it's that annoying.

Please understand this all comes out of love for this game. I want to help not just criticize since you've made a tremendous game, but as I get farther into the game and play bigger and bigger battles, this issue is making me want to turn off the game. The issue is that I'm being beaten when I should not be because of the bad formations of my troops. They become completely disorganized and impossible to order around.

The way you are handling troop reinforcements is not great either. There needs to be a better system for it and something the player can understand and use good tactics to create an advantage. Perhaps creating a planning screen where you can create your starting force and then divide the rest of your forces up into resupplies of 100 units. It's really not cool when I start a battle and my best troops are gone but the enemy AI gets all of its horse archers and Calvary then runs circles around me while I get 2-3 horse archers every 10 min. They just get destroyed.

We already save the previous selections made in the OoB between battles and saving only one formation's values as a template would be a problem since it's not just changing one formation, it'll effect other formations with the same type since they share the same type of troops.

Saving groups of INFANTRY, ARCHERS, HORSE ARCHERS, CALVARY is not what I mean. Those are groups. Not formations.

Formations are Infantry standing in a line, or in a scain, or defending my archers. I should be able to create a formation where I can surround my archers with my infantry or tell my calvary to defend my archers and NOT RUN OFF. I should be able to create complex formations and hotkey those.

Customization of the hotkeys for the order system was planned but it has been put in the backlog. Other features took precedence and it would require a refactor of how we do hotkeys in the order system.

Fair enough. Your game definitely needs some TLC in the hotkey area. I would also consider allowing a Activation window for orders to use a mouse, like an xbox wheel. It would save keybinds if we could turn something like that on. I totally understand a backlog and keybinds aren't usually a priority

Thanks again for your remarks and please take everything I said here from a place of love. Bannerlord is tremendous and I am only posting to hopefully draw attention to things that I'm afraid will hurt it.

 

[MRay]

Sorry for being new to the game. I assume you mean out of bounds for OoB.

It's "Order of Battle". It's what we call the deployment phase, where you adjust formation placements and composition.

---

What is the issue with AI Troops in AI battles that having me set formations would cause? Saying it will cause issues but not explaining doesn't really help discussion as we as fans might be able to help.

I gave examples:

(Like not letting player set custom filters for all formations since not-assigned troops need to go somewhere, disabling captain assignments since the player probably assigned their companions through the party screen etc.)

---

It's really not cool when I start a battle and my best troops are gone but the enemy AI gets all of its horse archers and Calvary then runs circles around me while I get 2-3 horse archers every 10 min.

You should check out the gameplay option we've added that controls which troops will spawn first and which will be moved to the reinforcement waves.

Added an option under the Gameplay tab that allows you to determine the order in which troops should spawn.

• Default: Troops spawn according to their position in the roster.
• High Level: High level troops will spawn first.
• Low Level: Low level troops will spawn first.
• Homogeneous: High and low level troops will spawn in equal ratios.

This should help you somewhat if you're not aware.

---

Saving groups of INFANTRY, ARCHERS, HORSE ARCHERS, CALVARY is not what I mean. Those are groups. Not formations.

Formations are Infantry standing in a line, or in a scain, or defending my archers. I should be able to create a formation where I can surround my archers with my infantry or tell my calvary to defend my archers and NOT RUN OFF. I should be able to create complex formations and hotkey those.

You mean template of "orders" and not "formations"(which include troop composition). I personally don't like the idea. Order of Battle(pre-battle stage) is already complex enough from adjusting troop composition, creating new formations, assigning captains, placement on the battlefield... and more(in sieges, siege engine control), applying order templates wouldn't really help us. And a system of executing more than one order on a button click is not something we plan to support currently.

But certainly a mod can implement a system that lets the player do these things.

---

I also want to make this clear, we don't have any plans to bring the old system back for the reasons I've mentioned before in this thread and other threads. We're planning improvements on the current system like "being able to assign heroes as troops to formations" and "a new filter that prefers low-high level troops". If you have any suggestions on how we can improve the current system, I would love to hear it both here or in the UI feedback subforum.

 

[Ling*]

---

I also want to make this clear, we don't have any plans to bring the old system back for the reasons I've mentioned before in this thread and other threads. We're planning improvements on the current system like "being able to assign heroes as troops to formations" and "a new filter that prefers low-high level troops". If you have any suggestions on how we can improve the current system, I would love to hear it both here or in the UI feedback subforum.

Would it be possible for us to select specific troop types to add to a formation, rather than using sliders? For example if I wanted to make a group of just crossbowmen, It is not possible with the current slider system as it identifies any ranged unit as "archers" and so you end up with a mixed bag. In the old system we were able to assign specific troops in the party menu to a numbered formation I,II,III,IV, V, VI, etc. I would like to see that functionality return where I could say for example: assign my mercenary cavalary to one formation, and another formation where I have all my aserai caravan guards, and not a combination of both. Another example would be to assign all my spear infantry to one formation, and all my sword infantry to another, allowing me to have more control over the positioning of these troop types on the field of battle where they would be most beneficial.

 

[AnotherExhaustedCustomer]

But certainly a mod can implement a system that lets the player do these things.

It certainly can https://www.nexusmods.com/mountandblade2bannerlord/mods/1531 (more recent version here if anybody is interested 1.7.1 https://www.nexusmods.com/mountandblade2bannerlord/mods/2552?tab=files)
Another modder also already got a hotfix (or maybe a permanent solution!?) and succesfully combines the old system with the new one:

Partyscreen Formation Assignments

Hybrid implementation of the 1.6 party screen formation assignments alongside the current Order of Battle formation slider widget things. The mod lets you pre-assign any troops you want to a specific

www.nexusmods.com

I dont know what you guys have in mind with that system as finding taleworlds statements in mid of all that comments works like a round of paper chase but the second mod is maybe something you could consider implementing yourself.
It would also be great if there was an "autoassign captains" button that assigns the most qualified companion/lord for the related formation type (good melee skills -> infantry, good bow skill -> archer, etc.).
The captain assignment in Sieges (or the OoB in general) doesnt really work out as well. If i use 8 formations, 4infantry and 4 archer formations, to assign fitting captains to them only the first 4 (preset)formations work as intented but all other formations will start with 0 troops and everybody regardless of the unit type is crapped together in the 9th (manually not creatable) formation without captain which renders the 5 minutes i spent micromanaging them useless.
Lastly.. im not sure it happens already but i think not. If there is a formation without any Captain wouldnt it make sense to do the same thing you do with party roles? Just assigning it to the party/army leader if unset. Thats preference of course and nothing necessary.
In my opinion the old system needs at least to be adapted to the new one (like in the second mod above) but removing the superior old system nobody complained about is beyond my understanding. Maybe i just dont understand the reason behind that decision but it changed my gameplay to the worse.

 

[MRay]

Would it be possible for us to select specific troop types to add to a formation, rather than using sliders?

Showing every possible (or in the encounter) troops in the OoB is not sustainable.

This becomes impractical for big parties and armies. Out of thousands of troops, both spawned and not spawned(reinforcements) players would see too many troops for a dropdown. For example worst case for cavalry is 52 different troops, for Infantry it is 422(granted not all are recruitable but even half is 200+). So 200+ possible troops in a dropdown is not feasible. I'm not even going into modded in troops that would need to be supported.

Or combined formations like Infantry+Archers and Cavalry+HorseArchers.

---

and succesfully combines the old system with the new one:

Well not really though. In the modpage itself it says

However, if you have pre-assigned troops in the party screen, they will stay in their assigned units regardless of what you do with the slider.

This is a big, big problem. It would mean some formations will become unusable for AI. Meaning if I assign a cavalry to formation I and set that formation as Infantry, the placement decisions for that formation is now messed up. Not even going into tactics AI that would determine things like ranged or not range assault, or mounted or not mounted assault. We've went over this. I don't think I need to explain why this would become a problem.(You could do this with the previous system, but that was a problem as well. And AI battles weren't affected)

I dont know what you guys have in mind with that system as finding taleworlds statements in mid of all that comments works like a round of paper chase but the second mod is maybe something you could consider implementing yourself.

Not in the way that the mod is implemented, sorry.

It would also be great if there was an "autoassign captains" button that assigns the most qualified companion/lord for the related formation type (good melee skills -> infantry, good bow skill -> archer, etc.).

Maybe we can look into implementing "auto assign captains" to the "auto deploy" button on the OoB. Sure.

The captain assignment in Sieges (or the OoB in general) doesnt really work out as well. If i use 8 formations, 4infantry and 4 archer formations, to assign fitting captains to them only the first 4 (preset)formations work as intented but all other formations will start with 0 troops and everybody regardless of the unit type is crapped together in the 9th (manually not creatable) formation without captain which renders the 5 minutes i spent micromanaging them useless.

These values should be saved between encounters, siege and field battles separately. If you've created formations 5 through 8, they should show up with the same values in the next encounter. This sounds like a bug.

Lastly.. im not sure it happens already but i think not. If there is a formation without any Captain wouldnt it make sense to do the same thing you do with party roles? Just assigning it to the party/army leader if unset. Thats preference of course and nothing necessary.

I think that's what happens. Afaik. They are assigned to the encounter leader if there is no captain assigned.(showing the encounter leader faded out in the captain slot might confuse players but we can look into it)

In my opinion the old system needs at least to be adapted to the new one (like in the second mod above) but removing the superior old system nobody complained about is beyond my understanding. Maybe i just dont understand the reason behind that decision but it changed my gameplay to the worse.

I personally wouldn't call it "superior". It lacked control for key situations. Captain assignments, troop control in AI led battles and players had less control the more their troops were homogenous.

Not saying the new system is perfect by any means. But we're trying to improve it. Players gave feedback on not being able to assign heroes as troops, we're adding that. Players gave feedback on "want to separating low tier troops" so they can focus on training them, we're implementing a feature to achieve that.

 

[AnotherExhaustedCustomer]

Well not really though. In the modpage itself it says

This is a big, big problem. It would mean some formations will become unusable for AI. Meaning if I assign a cavalry to formation I and set that formation as Infantry, the placement decisions for that formation is now messed up. Not even going into tactics AI that would determine things like ranged or not range assault, or mounted or not mounted assault. We've went over this. I don't think I need to explain why this would become a problem.(You could do this with the previous system, but that was a problem as well. And AI battles weren't affected)

I understand that but the ai sticks with formation 1-5 (except for sieges) so probably having 6-9 as custom formations (without the ability to let the ai take over by pressing f6) in field battles where the player is in charge could be a compromiss? In Sieges where all formations are needed or as part of an army where you cant control those formations it could be overwritten by the new behaviour.

Maybe we can look into implementing "auto assign captains" to the "auto deploy" button on the OoB. Sure.

Thank you! Btw there is no "auto deploy" in field battles just "reset deployment" and i think it should be a seperated button anyways to dont mess with the placement of the siege engines in siege battles. Even better when we get an "assign all Captains" button at the bottom but also one for each formation so we can combine manual placement with lazyness.

These values should be saved between encounters, siege and field battles separately. If you've created formations 5 through 8, they should show up with the same values in the next encounter. This sounds like a bug.

Actually im not sure if i modified the slider so i probably just reserved 4 empty formations which led to unassigned troops in the 9th formation.. I will watch that again when im playing and make a bug report when im sure its not just a user error.

I think that's what happens. Afaik. They are assigned to the encounter leader if there is no captain assigned.(showing the encounter leader faded out in the captain slot might confuse players but we can look into it)

I dont see how it would confuse players in the OoB screen when we have the same visual representation in the clan parties screen. It would be more consistent and understandable. Right now im a confused player that wonders whether or not his cavalry gets a buff when the ai split it into 2 formations.If the greyed out picture really leads to confusion you could make it clear by adding a tooltip when the cursor is on the assignment button that just clarifies that unassigned = assigned to party/army leader. Thanks for looking into it!

 

[xTITANx]

Hey Thanks for the feedback I will definitely use those settings you mentioned. I had no idea.

(Like not letting player set custom filters for all formations since not-assigned troops need to go somewhere, disabling captain assignments since the player probably assigned their companions through the party screen etc.)

I find this arguement a little obstructive. It seems like an easy solution to tell the player the must assign everyone to a formation or to have any unassigned troops go to a reinforcement block. This should be possible. It's whether you think it's worth the effort. It seems you do not, but I disagree with the importance of these issues.

You could also create dedicated formations that cannot be changed by the player. They would be the "dump" containers for each unit type, and then during play the player could take units out of those groups when needed to reinforce his troops. It would actually be a way better reinforcement tactic for the player, as they could decide what groups get reinforced and when.

I also want to make this clear, we don't have any plans to bring the old system back for the reasons I've mentioned before in this thread and other threads

I have no idea what the old system is as I just bought the game and have only been playing 1.7.2. If I am making statements that make you think I am trying to bring back a system you already had, you may want to consider you made a mistake with the new system. Admitting you made a mistake is something Devs should actually do, instead of just forging ahead with a bad design. But, it's your game and your time and effort.

I personally don't like the idea.

That's fair. It's your game. I'm simply trying to help you improve on things I personally don't like. However, my biggest arguement for these features is that any battlefield commander should be able to do these things. I should be able to raise a checkered flag, and every commander knows to order his troops into a specific formation. That's how armies work and armies are broken up into specific units/types. Your game should do that as the battlefield is the core of the game.

Showing every possible (or in the encounter) troops in the OoB is not sustainable.

Why? There are plenty of games that have UI that can go through large lists.

Having a menu type UI like:
Kingdom -> troop type( archer, infantry, etc ) -> rank -> units

That should be doable. If you have the troops in sorted lists like they are in the party window, that should a easy implementation.

 

[MRay]

I find this arguement a little obstructive. It seems like an easy solution to tell the player the must assign everyone to a formation or to have any unassigned troops go to a reinforcement block. This should be possible. It's whether you think it's worth the effort. It seems you do not, but I disagree with the importance of these issues.

It's easy to tell that to the player. It's also easy to not let the player select templates that would put troops out of a formation. Ability to do it is not the issue. The issue is, that would create a bad experience. You have an indetermined number of formation templates, some affecting infantry, some affecting cavalry and horse archers... and any combination of these types. Players selecting and unselecting these, trying and failing, without being able to change what's in them, just to be able to press "Ready" is a not a good experience.

Disabling captain assignments is also easy. But why should we? There should a be very good reason for it. This doesn't seem worth it since it's going to remove a lot of control from the player.

I have no idea what the old system is as I just bought the game and have only been playing 1.7.2. If I am making statements that make you think I am trying to bring back a system you already had, you may want to consider you made a mistake with the new system. Admitting you made a mistake is something Devs should actually do, instead of just forging ahead with a bad design. But, it's your game and your time and effort.

No mistakes were made don't worry. I declared that in the spirit of the forum, to let you and other readers know what I'm thinking and what our plans are regarding this feature.

That should be doable. If you have the troops in sorted lists like they are in the party window, that should a easy implementation.

Not every troop in the battle is under a kingdom(minor faction troops for example). Not every troop is ranked(story mode troops for example).

Mods can and will add troops times over the vanilla. Only in the vanilla, there are 400 infantry troops defined. Forcing or expecting users to scroll through a 400 troop list is really, really bad design. And doing this for every formation...

If players want to split the same troop type between formations, that means sliders are still at play. Since giving direct troop numbers will mess things up(players can get some, lose some troops during and after the battle). That means current slider rules will apply to the individual troops. That means just for infantry, 400 sliders. Every formation.

---

I understand that but the ai sticks with formation 1-5 (except for sieges) so probably having 6-9 as custom formations (without the ability to let the ai take over by pressing f6) in field battles where the player is in charge could be a compromiss? In Sieges where all formations are needed or as part of an army where you cant control those formations it could be overwritten by the new behaviour.

I mostly meant, lower level AI. AI that handles how to place troops when you give an "Advance" order for example. Because of this change, there is a big possibility of a cavalry running around in an infantry formation. So that "infantry formation" will space out like a cavalry formation. This is just one example. It'll mess things up really quickly.

 

[AnotherExhaustedCustomer]

I mostly meant, lower level AI. AI that handles how to place troops when you give an "Advance" order for example. Because of this change, there is a big possibility of a cavalry running around in an infantry formation. So that "infantry formation" will space out like a cavalry formation. This is just one example. It'll mess things up really quickly.

ffs could you please stop popping my bubbles!?? Just kidding.. mostly.. thx for all the answers!

 

[xTITANx]

It's easy to tell that to the player. It's also easy to not let the player select templates that would put troops out of a formation. Ability to do it is not the issue. The issue is, that would create a bad experience. You have an indetermined number of formation templates, some affecting infantry, some affecting cavalry and horse archers... and any combination of these types. Players selecting and unselecting these, trying and failing, without being able to change what's in them, just to be able to press "Ready" is a not a good experience.

Development is not easy. I do understand that. It takes time and effort to solve these problems. But IMO, they are solvable in a way that makes you happy and gives the players the functionality they clearly want. It's easy to tell the player that they must assign all troops available in the planning window and it will only create work for the players who want to work towards better control.

They will start out with all of their troops allocated based on the basic templates you have already developed, thus anyone not interested in any fine tuning will likely not trouble themselves with changing the basic filters. Thos who want to do so will be less likely to get frustrated with working towards what they desire because they are already in the mindset of detailed troop dispersal.

Again, this is about whether you think it's worth spending the time to make those features for the players who are willing to put in the effort to distribute their troops according to their own wishes. I do not agree it would be a bad experience. I would be happy to spend all the time to work through menus to get exactly what I want so that, when I actually battle, I'm not pissed off at the lack of control over my units.

Disabling captain assignments is also easy. But why should we? There should a be very good reason for it. This doesn't seem worth it since it's going to remove a lot of control from the player.

I don't know about captain assignment and I barely care about it. I'm still learning but I have very few companions as they are separated into other parties. Maybe I should?

Not every troop in the battle is under a kingdom(minor faction troops for example). Not every troop is ranked(story mode troops for example).

Mods can and will add troops times over the vanilla. Only in the vanilla, there are 400 infantry troops defined. Forcing or expecting users to scroll through a 400 troop list is really, really bad design. And doing this for every formation...

I have seen mods do this fairly easily for other things like garrisons. The mod Improved garrisons does a really good job of this and it's not a pain to use. My question is why are you just passing this off to mods to fix your game? If a mod becomes mandatory for the majority of players isn't that a reflection on your design?

If players want to split the same troop type between formations, that means sliders are still at play. Since giving direct troop numbers will mess things up(players can get some, lose some troops during and after the battle). That means current slider rules will apply to the individual troops. That means just for infantry, 400 sliders. Every formation.

Are you saying the only way to distribute troops in the final release will be sliders?

If I had two formations for infantry, and one had Sturgian Heavy Spearman selected and showed I had 100 troops I could just use that to pull as many as I wanted from Infantry into the Sturgian formation. How would that generate 400 sliders? The menu for selecting the filter would be large, but worth it IMO, which is why you should do categories but the final selection would be a single filter, not a combination like Archers+Infantry+Khuziat Khan's Guard. I don't think anyone expects complex combinations like that.

 

[CrazyElf]

IF the design gets approved, the process would be,

• Create a new formation
• Set its slider to 0(there needs to be another formation of the same type)
• Assign all unassigned(non-captain) heroes to that formation

Now you have an only-hero formation.

I know this wasn't added into release, but I still think that being able to lock certain units into formations and to have only hero formations is something that the game really needs.

It would have to be optional rather than mandatory, with a default being the player can customize with the current system.

 

[MRay]

lock certain units into formations

This is not added for the reasons I mentioned previously.

to have only hero formations

This is already added internally, and will be live in the next version.

 

[Lord Ferdinand]

Please, bring back the subclasses for infantry and cavalry (heavy/light), also create new ones (customizable).
And please, do something for this too: link