Units overlapping and operational areas

[Brucaliffo]

I just bought the game and i'm starting playing it. I played the previous Gettysburg game and i love it, although i think there is some thing that needs to be improved and i hoped to see such improvement in the new game.

Probably the most important thing that i still do not see applied and that IMHO absolutely need to be so it is a fixing on units overlapping.

In real military 19th century history, units ABSOLUTELY AVOIDED overlapping each other because doing so would transform military units in a mass of men completely out of command and control. I think that this thing NEEDS to be improved in the game because too often brigades overlap each other and create a mess of lines one over the other all firing together. I think that each brigade should occupy a space that other units should not overlap. Or at least overlap just by moving in colum if neither is fighting, otherwise their morale should drop.

That's my opinion, i really would like the developer will fix this.

Edited November 24, 2016 by Brucaliffo

[JJPettigrew]

Mostly agree with you (though I would add the "pass of lines" maneuver as an example of units allowable overlapping) as for the game  by my (limited) experience on it it does enforce this strictly BUT is not UG:Gett, units try by themselves to avoid being "stacked"... there is still occasions that seems quite odd (i.e. charging cavalry unit from the same direction you just charged with your own infantry

[z4ys]

Yes it annoys me too. And that canons can shoot canister through your own lines without friendly fire.

[Paul_KT]

The new, select multiple units and draw a line helps to avoid overlap, I'd like to see a major penalty to both units when overlapped which would discourage players blobbing.  You'd have to work out a way to prevent the AI doing it though.

[JJPettigrew]

15 hours ago, Paul_Kingtiger said:

I'd like to see a major penalty to both units when overlapped

maybe it even exists... the lack of even a draft manual (that I have been able to find at the least!) is kind of disgusting... I would like to see tham having a severe malus to its order penalizing melee and impeding fire.

BTE the draw a line efature is really a great feature, that will realy shine if/when we are able to play with live opponents...against the AI pausing and micromanaging positions to better benefit from terrain is tempting as more effective

[z4ys]

I would like to have  something similar to total war were stacked units shoot each other. ( canon shooting canister behind your own infantry line killing most of them in front. Or shooting into a Meele result in own and enemy losses) at the moment it's like command and conquer or starcraft. Just one big mess with no drawbacks.

Isn't stonewall killed by his own men's?

[Koro]

For the most part, we have to remember that the units onscreen are representative and unit formations that would have been on the field are "hidden" to us. We just see brigade placement (roughly).

Units that are stacked shoot with less power take increased splash damage as a note.

I think the reasons the cannons can shoot through is partly due to the host of complaints about difficulty of artillery in the first game. With the "representative" thinking, I imagine a gap or something else in the line that would have been there to allow the cannon to shoot.

Friendly fire apparently exists in this game though not in large amounts and I have not noticed it really. Due to it's scale and the size of the brigades, I think having more friendly fire would make the game very punishing for small mistakes and end up being more about which army kills itself than how many the enemy kills. IMO it would make the game near unplayable for anyone except expert players.

[Lincolns Mullet]

Right. The only way friendly fire would work is if brigade behavior and movement never overlapped, which could create a host of new problems. The devs could create invisible "boxes" around units so they cant overlap, but that will open up all new programming issues with pathing, control, and targeting. Without significant changes to the engine, like Koro said it would create many more possibilities of frustration and gameplay issues. And what would the benefit be? More realism? That just means you have to be even more of a micromanager to make sure your units dont kill each other on accident. And if you make it so brigades simply wont fire because it could cause friendly casualties, you lose more control and increase the frustration factor. Just my opinion anyway.

[sukha]

Blobbing is ridiculous. When attacking you can select as many brigades as you want and tell them to attack 1 enemy and they will all clip through one another forming this insane blob with crazy firepower. Same thing can be abused on the defensive by using Hold Ground command. Friendly troops shooting through one another in general is strange in how it works. As far as I have figured out its if at least a portion of the brigade has clear line of sight with no friendlies in between them and the enemy then the whole brigade can fire. Those mechanics allow for some really cheezy play and nullifies any significance on positioning since you can maximize firepower at will, any time any place. Funny enough AI does this on occasion too. There should be more uniformity to how this works, either allow to shoot through at all times or ban it completely.

A quick example how to abuse blobbing to steamroll AI on attack or defense. Establish a long thin line using skirmishers and some real brigades. Then take like 5 brigades +1 cav to a flank, gg WP. You can now single out every enemy in your path with superior firepower going 5v1 against enemy brigades you encounter. You don't really need the cav, but you can use it to capture or destroy the enemy brigades completely.

Friendly Fire is a no no. Unit overlap should be addressed tho, my personal opinion enforce no overlapping harder. No Hold Position Overlap, no multiple units attack 1 target overlap. Force units to always arrange them selves according to free space at all times except melee or when walking through one another of course. With this in mind some maps need an adjustment to how defensive positions work. Having this long ass fence that houses 1 Brigade is very bad for the defender, now this 1 Brigade is being focus fired by 3 enemy brigades +Arty that's unfair... There are a couple defensive positions that are as compact as when the brigade is standing by itself, and thats how it always should be imho.

Cover needs to be nerfed as well. 100% is insane, on Hard difficulty I sometimes strugle to dislodge 1 AI vet2+ brigade from 100% cover by blobbing 5+ brigades focus fire +arty and it just sits there forever. Now idk if its the cover or Morale of Vetted units that is the problem here, either way a brigade going 1v5+arty should be shitting its pants no matter the cover or Veterancy lulz.

[Koro]

54 minutes ago, sukha said:

Blobbing is ridiculous. When attacking you can select as many brigades as you want and tell them to attack 1 enemy and they will all clip through one another forming this insane blob with crazy firepower. Same thing can be abused on the defensive by using Hold Ground command. Friendly troops shooting through one another in general is strange in how it works. As far as I have figured out its if at least a portion of the brigade has clear line of sight with no friendlies in between them and the enemy then the whole brigade can fire. Those mechanics allow for some really cheezy play and nullifies any significance on positioning since you can maximize firepower at will, any time any place. Funny enough AI does this on occasion too. There should be more uniformity to how this works, either allow to shoot through at all times or ban it completely.

A quick example how to abuse blobbing to steamroll AI on attack or defense. Establish a long thin line using skirmishers and some real brigades. Then take like 5 brigades +1 cav to a flank, gg WP. You can now single out every enemy in your path with superior firepower going 5v1 against enemy brigades you encounter. You don't really need the cav, but you can use it to capture or destroy the enemy brigades completely.

Friendly Fire is a no no. Unit overlap should be addressed tho, my personal opinion enforce no overlapping harder. No Hold Position Overlap, no multiple units attack 1 target overlap. Force units to always arrange them selves according to free space at all times except melee or when walking through one another of course. With this in mind some maps need an adjustment to how defensive positions work. Having this long ass fence that houses 1 Brigade is very bad for the defender, now this 1 Brigade is being focus fired by 3 enemy brigades +Arty that's unfair... There are a couple defensive positions that are as compact as when the brigade is standing by itself, and thats how it always should be imho.

Cover needs to be nerfed as well. 100% is insane, on Hard difficulty I sometimes strugle to dislodge 1 AI vet2+ brigade from 100% cover by blobbing 5+ brigades focus fire +arty and it just sits there forever. Now idk if its the cover or Morale of Vetted units that is the problem here, either way a brigade going 1v5+arty should be shitting its pants no matter the cover or Veterancy lulz.

I've said the same things about cover, it's too powerful as it is now.

Perhaps the damage reduction of having friendlies block LOS should be increased to discourage blobbing further. Pretty sure this can be done and is the only real way of stopping it. Also increased splash damage of course.

[Hitorishizuka]

1 hour ago, sukha said:

Cover needs to be nerfed as well. 100% is insane, on Hard difficulty I sometimes strugle to dislodge 1 AI vet2+ brigade from 100% cover by blobbing 5+ brigades focus fire +arty and it just sits there forever. Now idk if its the cover or Morale of Vetted units that is the problem here, either way a brigade going 1v5+arty should be shitting its pants no matter the cover or Veterancy lulz.

It's actually kinda realistic, you do read about units managing to hold the line against silly odds in the Civil War being in great defensive positions. If you were all shooting them from the front-ish then they may be able to hold out for awhile if they're just not taking large casualties. If you need to dislodge them you have to flank or rear shot them or, frankly, just charge them.

[Demodletc]

A lot of the overlapping and lack of  friendly fire will be to help the AI fight effectively.

If the AI can't negotiate the situation it'll just fall over and everyone will complain about the braindead ....  etc

[sukha]

12 hours ago, Demodletc said:

A lot of the overlapping and lack of  friendly fire will be to help the AI fight effectively.

If the AI can't negotiate the situation it'll just fall over and everyone will complain about the braindead ....  etc

The AI can keep the Overlap mechanics as they are, it rarely benefits from it that hard anyway. A player on the other hand can abuse the crap out of it.

15 hours ago, Hitorishizuka said:

It's actually kinda realistic, you do read about units managing to hold the line against silly odds in the Civil War being in great defensive positions. If you were all shooting them from the front-ish then they may be able to hold out for awhile if they're just not taking large casualties. If you need to dislodge them you have to flank or rear shot them or, frankly, just charge them.

While I can accept real defensive structures like a fort etc having 100%, woods and a single building in the middle of a field yielding 100% is a bit dicey.

I think Artillery should at least somewhat counter 100% cover, as it stands melee is the only true option. On Hard when all enemy units are Vet3 on some heavily forested maps melee is the only way to play. Artillery is heavily under performing as an attacking unit. Takes ages to get into position, when it gets into position it starts deploying for half an hour then it needs to load and only then fire.... A regular squad would have already put like 5+ volleys down range. And what was my incentive for bringing that arty into position? Its not any better at countering cover anyway.

Edited December 7, 2016 by sukha

[Don't Escrow Taxes]

Well look cover is cover and I think the cover system is pretty good as it is, but I agree that Artillery in general needs to be more effective, easier and faster to deploy, and there needs to be in-game advice on best practices. 

[JaM]

yeah, stacking units on top of each other is a bit too much, i think if you do that, only one unit should be firing, not both.

[GeneralPITA]

Re: Stacking units

Why is the width of a brigade fixed? This should be adjustable so you can make better use of cover, or tighten up your lines without being short on firepower. I don't understand this limitation, maybe it's a technical or balancing concern? 

It's frustrating that brigades strafe apart when they barely overlap, sometimes strafing in the same direction, meaning they'll both move endlessly in one direction, or one brigade may shuffle directly into close range flanking fire. This mechanic needs work.

[chinalz]

6 hours ago, GeneralPITA said:

It's frustrating that brigades strafe apart when they barely overlap, sometimes strafing in the same direction, meaning they'll both move endlessly in one direction, or one brigade may shuffle directly into close range flanking fire. This mechanic needs work.

I would rather prefer the unit fall back when overlaping than strafing along the front line.

[GeneralPITA]

On 1/5/2017 at 0:30 AM, chinalz said:

I would rather prefer the unit fall back when overlaping than strafing along the front line.

There'd need to be a priority system, can't have them both fall back, the brigades would never separate and they'd fall back indefinitely. Same problem as before. 

Also, fall back from where? They won't necessarily have a target to flee 180 degrees from, which is how the F command works.