Improved target picking system

[Chivalry]

In the current state of the game, all units in a hex will attack the same target all the time until that unit dies/retreats. This is a) highly unrealistic b) bad for gameplay because it creates unnecessary micro-management.

I can suggest many good alternatives to current target picking system but most of them would require extra codding. So, atleast for now, using a semi-random targetting would be very easy to implement and do better than the current system.

Semi-random targetting is; units would pick a random target from direct combat units first, and if there are no direct combat units exist in the hex, the attacking unit would then choose a random non direct combat (standoff) unit to attack. The attacking unit does refresh who it attacks before each shot.

[Zuikaku]

What is highly unrealistic is that all units in the hex attacks the same target and that is the weakest target every single time. If the game is to simulate combined arms use, all the units in the hex shoul'd take some damage or a random unit from the stack gets all the damage per battle cycle.

[AVP]

BLUF: I feel that this idea might be best served in improving naval combat first; in particular ship-to-ship combat.

I have no issue with the way Battle Goat decided to simulate air and ground target picking. First, if you can wipe a unit completely off the map, that's excellent. Why give them an opportunity to retreat and reorganize? I'm OK with that being the default. Second, one can justify the system as it currently works because combat rotates between various echelons. There's nothing unrealistic about this.

I believe frontline units automatically begin retreating when they've reached their loss tolerance threshold. Once out of the contact hex, the engaging forces target the next echelon. Please correct me if I'm wrong on this, this may just be anecdotal.

[Chivalry]

BLUF: I feel that this idea might be best served in improving naval combat first; in particular ship-to-ship combat.

I have no issue with the way Battle Goat decided to simulate air and ground target picking. First, if you can wipe a unit completely off the map, that's excellent. Why give them an opportunity to retreat and reorganize? I'm OK with that being the default. Second, one can justify the system as it currently works because combat rotates between various echelons. There's nothing unrealistic about this.

I believe frontline units automatically begin retreating when they've reached their loss tolerance threshold. Once out of the contact hex, the engaging forces target the next echelon. Please correct me if I'm wrong on this, this may just be anecdotal.

Current system is bad for many reasons:

1- You CONSTANLTY have to watch your fighting unit otherwise it will die in a second. You must micro manage all the time which is a bad gameplay.
2- It is highly unrealistic because lets say you have 3 tank 3 anti tank and 1 recon unit in a HEX; ALL enemy forces will only and immediately wipe the recon unit (because it is the weakest), without even touching any tank and anti tank.

Here is an example of the current gameplay:

Allied Recon 1 (%100) vs Enemy Recon 1 (%100)
Allied Tank 2 (%100) vs Enemy Tank 2 (%100)
Allied Tank 3 (%100) vs Enemy Tank 3 (%100)
Allied Tank 4 (%100) vs Enemy Tank 4 (%100)
Allied Tank 5 (%100) vs Enemy Tank 5 (%100)
Allied Tank 6 (%100) vs Enemy Tank 6 (%100)

After the first clash both recon units will almost immediately wiped out because of FOCUSED attack of opposing tanks.
After couple seconds, allied tank 2 and enemy tank 2 will be at %40 hp in which case you have to manually move it to the closest barrack (requires intensive micro management)
After couple seconds, allied tank 3 and enemy tank 3 will be at %40 hp in which case you have to manually move it to the closest barrack (requires intensive micro management)
etc.

Now imagine that you are doing this on many fronts > very tedious.

On the other hand; if you were to spread the damage a bit across units (with randomized unit targetting) you would have something like that:
After the first clash, no unit would die immediately,
After couple seconds, most of the units would be at %70-90 HP
After couple seconds, most of the units would be at %50-70 HP
etc.
And you would have better feeling of "winning/losing the engagement line".

Even when you are attacking garrisons with your infantry units; you constantly have to check your units otherwise garrisons will focus fire one of your infantry units and it will be lost.

So the main difference is, a) you do not have to CONSTANLTY watchout for units to keep them from dying. b) you have more time to check between different battle fronts, c) you do not have to micro-manage units every 5 seconds because your units are dying in seconds.

Current system is only okay IF you are using minister to fight your battles for you. If you are not, unit auto retreating is very highly unrealiable and causes your units to die (even if you select no loss tolerance).

[Chivalry]

What is highly unrealistic is that all units in the hex attacks the same target and that is the weakest target every single time. If the game is to simulate combined arms use, all the units in the hex shoul'd take some damage or a random unit from the stack gets all the damage per battle cycle.

That's almost exactly what i'm suggesting. Except, i recommend each unit picking its own target and re-picks after each battle cycle (combat time).

[Zuikaku]

What is highly unrealistic is that all units in the hex attacks the same target and that is the weakest target every single time. If the game is to simulate combined arms use, all the units in the hex shoul'd take some damage or a random unit from the stack gets all the damage per battle cycle.

That's almost exactly what i'm suggesting. Except, i recommend each unit picking its own target and re-picks after each battle cycle (combat time).

Or... units try to target the same unit type from the enemy stack or units they are supposed to fight against.
E.G. we got 2 opposing stack consisting of infantry, tanks and anti-tank guns. When the combat starts, tanks try to target enemy tanks, while infantry focus on the enemy infantry and AT guns target tanks. Once tanks in enemy stack are eliminated tanks focus on AT guns (next higher priority threat). If enemy infantry is eliminated, infantry targets AT guns.

[smygsork]

I just opened the forum in order to post the same topic, glad to see I'm not alone. In my opinion the attacker should not be able to pick and choose which unit takes the damage, for reasons Chivalry already explained. It will help the ai keep its units alive and the player will have A LOT less micromanaging to do. Both in switching units in and out of a fight and replacing that single damaged unit with a fresh one.
Another reason for the change would be that you can currently roll up a stack of tanky units to a city and then fill the rest of the hexes around it with anything else as they won't take any damage.

I think an example of a good unit value to take into account when handing out damage to a unit in a target hex is their stealth/profile or general size. That way recon and at units could survive for a few moments if there's a couple of larger infantry or tank units available to soak up the damage. Maybe the attackers spotting value could be used to pick better targets if you want to get more fancy.

This is basically what I'd like to avoid, and instead have the damage a bit more spread out so you don't need to babysit all the stacks as much.

[Chivalry]

Maybe the attackers spotting value could be used to pick better targets if you want to get more fancy.

This is actually a fantastic idea, which I don't think will make it to the game because of extra codding will be required :/