Melees

[Marching Thru Georgia]

Is the auto-melee mechanic that is present in the current game also in the new one?

[con20or]

Yes - but not for squares obviously. We looked at reducing the auto-charge distance but to be honest I cannot remember if it was included - I would need to check with Mitra

[Marching Thru Georgia]

Reducing the auto-charge distance just means that opposing battalions can march through each others lines. That's why it was set to 40 yards in the current game.

The problem is the melees themselves. Very few ever took place. The great majority of charges resulted in one side or the other falling back. Most of the rest ended with the attacking side stopping and shooting it out with the defenders.

Is this a 'feature' of the game that can be modded?

[RebBugler]

I think most folks will be pleased with the way infantry vs infantry plays out now regarding melees. Bottom line, they are few and far between. In general units maintain respectable engagement distances and only make small wheeling adjustments when engaged, relying more on lateral, forward or back movements. So, no longer will you see the big units wheeling and bumping the enemy, unless the player forces it.

Oh, and the thanks go out to NSD's Italian connection for this new sans melee play

OOPs, didn't answer your question, yes, pretty sure this will be modable, like most factors with the new engine.

[mitra76]

Reducing the auto-charge distance just means that opposing battalions can march through each others lines.

No luckily this cannot happen, for the melees the autocharge distance is not relevant, there's a melee every time a unit "surface" enter in contact with "surface" of another, the first unit to be processed starts the melee and other reply at the moment it's processed (the engine makes a continous loop over every single unit\officer processing his AI code in sequence, the number of units processed for the time unit is defined with AIcount like in SOWGB), it can seems a charge if the two units are not perfectly overlapped and part of sprites have to run to reach a enemy sprite but for the engine is a melee state not a charge state. Squares which enter in melee with infantry broke their square formation first.

Regarding the charge and the morale the game works with a numerical morale which is reduced in a progressive way mainly in relation with the losses with a high impact of morale bonus on hold it high, only at low levels (from broken to below) you can have a sudden rout, at superior level, a check is done every loop in order to see if the unit have to fallback or retreat (the first two columns of unitattributes.csv for the checking rate). This is the original schema of Gettysburg which we maintained because if it is true sudden retreat and regroup was the historical standard and hard wargamers (and Alberto he baptized the concept "dancing morale" ) can appreciate it, the biggest part of players could find it uncontrollable.

Despite this, I introduced in part the concept in particular contextes in order to have a more napoleonic effect, so particular situations can have a sudden effect, without touching the morale counter, in the active\passive charge and melee decisions in unfavourable ratios, in particular the cavalry charge on the infantry not in square is the more common to see, but also the decision of assault column to form in line before the target or continue the assault in column until the melee or if a unit in melee give up immediatly or continue the melee.

[7thGalaxy]

Are the units fully aware of their frontage? So if you order a brigade to line next to another brigade, will they scoot up to form a single line? Or will they overlap still?

[mitra76]

The AI division commander deploys his brigades choicing one between a list fixed schemas at the moment one of division brigades engage the enemy, so the AI never try to overlap brigades, but the player division commander in theory can try it, brigade is not a physical block but a officer + his battalions, the overlapping is checked at single battalion level. Differently from Gettysburg now there is more checks when near to enemy in order to avoid to collide with a friend between me and the enemy, if this happen correction movements to place troops in reserve if they cannot shot because the fire range is blocked, more space requirements in order to do lateral or flanking movement. So the general result is that to make mass with the brigades never pay, because only the frontal units fight

[Marching Thru Georgia]

Despite this, I introduced in part the concept in particular contextes in order to have a more napoleonic effect, so particular situations can have a sudden effect, without touching the morale counter, in the active\passive charge and melee decisions in unfavourable ratios, in particular the cavalry charge on the infantry not in square is the more common to see, but also the decision of assault column to form in line before the target or continue the assault in column until the melee or if a unit in melee give up immediatly or continue the melee.

Thanks for responding Davide. If I understand correctly, there is a special morale check before any melee takes place. The result may force the defender to retreat or the attacker to stop and form line or the attacker can continue to advance in assault column. Is that correct? If so that is a good way to do it.

[mitra76]

Thanks for responding Davide. If I understand correctly, there is a special morale check before any melee takes place. The result may force the defender to retreat or the attacker to stop and form line or the attacker can continue to advance in assault column. Is that correct? If so that is a good way to do i

Yes there's a "bayonet" situation check and if the enemy has a 3:1 advantage as result of what I called "fearcheck" the other break away; because is a simple number check the modders eventually could reduce it or change the factors in the fearcheck

[Saddletank]

That sounds like a huge improvement. Melees were rare in this period so this mechanism sounds like it could replicate that well.