Look out behind you!

Post by **George Geczy** » Nov 19 2002

I've been pondering the effects and abilities of unit facing in the game, and could use some feedback.

Right now, we assume that any unit can fire in any direction, regardless of which way it faces. But the question is should units, ESPECIALLY moving units, suffer a penalty for shooting away from their direction of travel?

I'm tempted to make it so that moving units cannot shoot beyond a 120-degree angle (60 degrees to the left and right of their direction of travel). Or at least make a game option that would allow this to be turned on/off.

Thoughts?

tkobo · Post by **tkobo** » Nov 19 2002

Rather than saying they can't shoot in the opposite direction they are traveling/facing,I'd like to see a large negative modifeir to their damage/hit ratio instead when doing so.

Hellfish6 · Post by **Hellfish6** » Nov 19 2002

I believe that there should be some penalty. If you're battalion is attacking north and you're meeting an enemy on your left flank, not all the forces in your formation will be involved in the battle. The guys in your formation's right flank will continue to be on the right flank until you reorient your battalion to meet the new threat.

I think that this is something where playtesting would determine the right decision. It's not easy to determine the best idea when you can't actually try it.

Will there be bonuses for attackers who attack an enemy unit on their flank/rear?

Post by **Balthagor** » Nov 19 2002

Having played a number of Hex based paper RPGs I'm of mixed opinions on this. I feel that facing can be a big issue but when we're dealing with a batallion of 48 tanks and a full day of movement, it is fair to say that they may have half the tanks falling back while the other half stop to fire then trade places. I think the best question is, in the real world, during an organized retreat, how much damage can the retreating units really acheive, and how about a rout? I don't feel that units your pulling back from the front should suffer but have no trouble with retreating units paying a penalty...

tkobo · Post by **tkobo** » Nov 20 2002

Ive always heard that withdrawing under fire was one of the most difficult manuveers to pull off.Keeping the troops oranized and orderly and preventing the situation from degenerating into a rout
has got to be hard.

I do beleive that there should be different penalties for withdrawing under fire and routing.
But imho both should have large penalties.

If you want to look at it game mechanics wise,it really makes sense.
The str of a unit it based on its numbers (bascially).So if half the unit it firing while retreating and half the unit is covering them,there should be a reduction in str becuase half the unit is firing under very negative conditions.This should be a temporary reduction and can be best shown i beleive in 1 of 2 ways.
Either reduce the str of the unit directly while it performs so or use a secondary modifier to achieve a str reduction,again while it is performing said action.

To make things even more difficult the penalty should be based on the unit type.
Infrantry or older tanks(for instance)should suffer a large penalty but newer vehicles that have advanced fire control should have less of a penalty.

Post by **George Geczy** » Nov 21 2002

The situation does make sense for the two-flank attack situation and the retreat situation (we already give a penalty for retreating units).

The situation where this is a bit more difficult is that of something like artillery, which right now can move and be shooting behind it without penalty. This seems wrong, and I'm thinking I'd like to change it and only make moving artillery shoot forward, but this may seem a bit "artificial" considering a stop/shoot/go situation that mobile artillery can accomplish.

-- George.

Post by **Balthagor** » Nov 21 2002

I'd like to know if they can be moving forward with the turret pointing backwards...?

SeaMonkey · Post by **SeaMonkey** » Nov 21 2002

Shouldn't bonus/penalty be adjusted for the formation/mode the unit is moving in? Facing could be dependent on how much caution, type of moving doctrine the unit is employing at that time.

tkobo · Post by **tkobo** » Nov 22 2002

Why cant they simply back up and fire as they go ?
Now im not sure mobile artillary can move and fire at the same time,but if they can why would they have to face one way and fire another ?
If a mobile art unit could move and fire at the same time wouldnt it have to constantly recalculate the trajectory,etc... ?Seems to me this would greatly lower its acuracy.

Post by **George Geczy** » Nov 24 2002

>Shouldn't bonus/penalty be adjusted for the formation/mode the unit is moving in?

This is a good idea, making the penalty & possibility of move/fire dependent upon the exact orders and formation the unit has.

It's still a bit odd from a player's perspective to have a unit fire in a different direction than what it is facing. It doesn't give good "feedback" to the player.

Hmmmmm.

-- George.

tkobo · Post by **tkobo** » Apr 02 2005

What was the final decision on this ?

Post by **Balthagor** » Apr 03 2005

Unis fire any facing. Limited firing arcs will be considered for Gold edition.

red · Post by **red** » Apr 03 2005

Is damage greater, or an attacker's effectiveness greater, when a unit is attacked off-center?

Post by **George Geczy** » Apr 03 2005

There is a benefit to attacking a unit from the side - the defender has to turn to face you (ie face the direction he is firing), and that turn is considered 'movement' - ie, you get a 'fire while moving' penalty for many unit types.

-- George.

RCBricker · Post by **RCBricker** » Apr 04 2005

Just a quick point. In most Tactical games that I have played and AFAIK in RL routing units do not fire at all. They are in disorganized flight.

Retreating units should not be firing much either. If you want units to fire while moving away from combat then use a Fall Back command which, if I remember the explanation in the Army Handbook my uncle lent me a billion years ago, is an organized withdrawal from a field of battle using staged movements of squads leap frogging each other. This is the preferred manner to disengage as it is organized and keeps the enemy form being able to place undue stress on the flanks and rear.

that is IIRC. (this is not an exact qoute as it was something close to 20 years ago that I read this handbook, however, does Clausiwitz and Tzu also suggest organized withdrawl using rear guard actions? Man i have got to go back and reread all those books lol.)