An idea to prevent the "maneuver column charge"

[Garnier]

That would help certainly, but would not fix this problem. It doesn't address the problem that these maneuver column attacks often spend only a very brief time exposed to enemy fire due to how fast they can run.

They also don't need to change formation as they can charge while in column. And if "being in column" was given a disadvantage in melee, one could still click the change formation button moments before the melee occurs and avoid that.

[MrSpkr]

Perhaps, then, a significant morale hit for charging while in Column formation (in addition to one for changing to line at the last moment) is in order. This would also tend to make the charging column break and run from the melee, which would activley discourage the use of the tactic.

Just thinking out loud a bit.

Steve

[Garnier]

Don't take this the wrong way, I'm not posting for the sake of argument, just that I think there are still flaws to be addressed with the other ideas being posted. Nothing wrong with having flawed ideas, and nothing wrong with pointing out flaws in ideas. Could very well be flaws with my idea, do point them out when you spot them.


Would the morale hit cause it to rout before reaching a melee? Always, or just sometimes, or?

One of the problems here is the column charge that doesn't charge infantry, but charges artillery. You can dash your column up to an enemy line, and head straight for their cannons. Even if there are infantry nearby, if you get closer to the cannon than the infantry at any point in time, you can charge and wham, you got the gun.

(to reiterate, this is for MP, there's no AI involved here)

[MrSpkr]

True as to the artillery. That is a weakness. I've used it myself against AI cannon. I have yet to dip my toes into the world of MP. I never seem to get online when others are ready to start.

I'd have the morale hit start prior to the melee taking place, which would put the formation at a disadvantage to the enemy in line formation. Whether it would cause a rout before the melee is dependent upon the charging unit's existing morale. So, it would not be a "sure thing". In other words, if the Black Hat boys charge that tiny Alabama battalion in column formation, they would still probably win the melee, but should take higher casualties and a decent morale hit in doing so (can't you just hear the troops wondering what in the hell the general is thinking charging them from column like that?).

Steve

[Willard]

PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE fix this gamey cheating tactic.

Played with less than honorable confederate players last night and ended the battle after repeated objections to them TC regiments under fire and sprinting them in double time under fire.

Please either eliminate the charge option for units in column or at the very least add the following:

#1 - Prevent units under fire from changing formation until they have withdrawn out of engagement range (beyond that 160 yards infantry range).

#2 - Increase the amount of time it takes to move from line-to-column and column-to-line formation.

#3 - Decrease the speed of units moving in column so they can't continue to sprint at such high speeds (keep the road bonus though) and increase the fatigue factor for units using the double-time command.

#4 - Drastically increase morale and casualty hits for units in column under fire from arty and infantry.

Until those changes or similar ones are made, I will now employ gamey artillery tactics that I previously refrained from employing. You will now see me use the arty retreat button and I will intermingle my guns with infantry to counteract these gamey tactics.

The bottom-line is that MP players can't have it both ways. You can't complain about gamey arty tactics and then employ game infantry tactics.

[norb]

Just to give you an FYI on how we do these things. Fact is that I'm usually coding and don't get to play much, but we have a growing QA team that plays the game a ton. They are always out there playing MP and the scenarios. These guys see the problems, talk to players, and decide whether or not an issue is big enough to be brought to my concern. If they feel that there is an issue, they will submit a bug report and then it gets to me. I will usually discuss it a little and then will propose possible solutions. We also discuss whether or not changing a game feature would upset too many players and if it is a majority of people that feel it needs to change. It's an involved process because we want to do what's best for the game.

All this feedback is great, thanks! I'm sure our QA team will take what you say under consideration. They'll have to convince themselves if these are issues that need to be fixed first.

[AP514]

I have to agree with a LINE SPEED for COLUMN if w/in a range of the enemy......


Manuver Column was to get units from one place to another quickly(Behind the lines). Once within range of the enemy the units fleshed out into (Line) battle formation.

The AI does this players should also....and slowing down units in COLUMN with in a 50-100yrd distance of an enemy unit is a great idea....
If the player wishes to keep their unit in SLOW COLUMN and risk the higher casualties while in this Column then that is their choice...


I think this will take care of this gamey move.....

AP514

GREAT IDEA...... GARNIER44

[Marching Thru Georgia]

The gamey problems that are discussed in this thread and several others, seem to originate from the fact that players do not command from the saddle, but fly high over the battlefield, taking it all in and then routing their troops based on this information. A liberal dose of TCing the troops doesn't hurt either. If MP was done from 9 feet above the ground and not hundreds, these tactics would be of no use. But when the enemy's entire position can be scouted instantly, even to the point of removing that inconvenient foilage if desired, then the issue of gamey tactics doesn't seem very legitimate.

I played napoleonic miniatures for many, many years. There, the god's eye view was standard. What prevented "non-period tactics" was peer pressure. If anyone would attempt an end run around someone's flank while under fire, the heckling would be terrific. Also, the referee would rule against it and the order to move disallowed. But SOW is annonymous and in real time, so there are no contraints.

No matter how many adjustments are made to the game to try to rein in these tactics, clever people will just come up new ones. No, that is not a viable solution. If the goal of playing is to put oneself in the boots of CW generals, then the player should be willing to command just as they did in 1863; in the saddle and via courier. The courier system does need some additional commands and flexibility, especially for MP, but I'm sure that will come.

There are two extremes in this game, historic play and anything goes. If people choose to play "anything goes" and then complain about someone not playing fair, it just indicates that they are not as clever as their opponent.

[Willard]

Marching Thru Georgia wrote:

I played napoleonic miniatures for many, many years. There, the god's eye view was standard. What prevented "non-period tactics" was peer pressure. If anyone would attempt an end run around someone's flank while under fire, the heckling would be terrific. Also, the referee would rule against it and the order to move disallowed. But SOW is annonymous and in real time, so there are no contraints.

There is not ref except for the game engine - change the "rules" the game engine enforces and it solves the problem.

There are two extremes in this game, historic play and anything goes. If people choose to play "anything goes" and then complain about someone not playing fair, it just indicates that they are not as clever as their opponent.

For the most part, players in MP do not use this tactic. However there are several players that CONSISTENTLY do it despite being asked not to.

I am no longer going to complain about it.
I will now just hit the retreat button on my arty and/or inter-mingle the guns with infantry - "gamey exploits" as well per the majority of the MP community - until this issue is resolved.

Most MP players wouldn't mind playing more historically if some of the commands worked better. The absence of a free form courier message for MP coop play is a big hinderance and the pathing of couriers also is pretty bad as well. Of course, I don't believe either Lee or Meade had Teamspeak or Vent, so that is another issue as well.

[Garnier]

@ Marching Thru Georgia

I respectfully disagree.

I think it is absolutely possible to make unrealistic tactics work less well than they do at any point. Of course there will always be something unrealistic that people do, but how significant it is can be changed. The ideal is to have realistic tactics work best so people use them. Of course this goal will never be reached, but we can always move closer to it. I've seen plenty of games and mods that had ridiculous tactics that worked, but they were changed and eventually these games and mods became better.

If the goal of playing is to put oneself in the boots of CW generals

Everyone doesn't have the same major goal, nor does everyone agree on what "in the boots of CW generals" would mean.

To say it again, I don't blame anyone who uses this tactic, almost everyone I play with uses it including myself and unless everyone has agreed to some rule, there's nothing wrong with using it. Unfortunately there's no way to make a good rule for this, since maneuver column, double-quick and charge are all commands that we use normally. Certain things like the artillery-retreat glitch we can make a rule about (and we have) and that solves that particular issue.