Infantry In Line Formation

[Krasny]

I think I see the issue. Any infantry unit in line formation can enter an urban hex (or any other rough hex, including mud, tall grass, and so forth). For normal infantry units, this movement costs their entire movement allotment; light infantry and jager instead only pay a small cost (3, if I remember correctly). The additional cost for moving into or out-of an enemy's ZOC (+2 mp's), and for starting adjacent to an enemy (+2), can make moving into an urban hex too expensive for a regular infantry unit in line formation. We should apply the additional ZOC costs only when units in line aren't moving into rough terrain. I will change this for the next patch.

My reading of the manual (P.145) is that leaving a ZoC costs 4MP, but entering a ZoC does not.

Anyway I was right, it's bugged or badly designed.

Yay me.

Why not just allow inf units to be allowed to move at least 1 hex no matter what it costs (as long as they have their full MP remaining). I've had units stuck for ages because they couldn't move in any direction, even one hex... and they had lots of MP's available.

Why implement such a elegant and simple solution, when a convoluted and complex one will do?

[ericbabe]

We don't do this because we do want units to become stuck by enemy zones-of-control under certain situations.  When an infantry is in an enemy's ZOC, and all the hexes around it are in ZOC's, then we'd like the desired behavior to be that your unit becomes stuck, no matter how many movement points it has.

I've played battles in COG with the rule that units can move through one hex of ZOC each turn, and the result was that it was far too easy for armies simply to march through each other.

I've actually considered making the rules more restrictive, to add a rule that when a unit leaves a ZOC during its turn that it can never enter another ZOC during that turn.

[ericbabe]

ORIGINAL: Anthropoid
Eric, did you see my post of the CTD in Atlantic naval combat?

Yes; I just responded to it. I will try to take a look at your save files later today.

[Anthropoid]

Well here is a related question, and related to points I made in my Wish List post: is there any real and generalizable benefit to fighting in line formation in an urban or fort hex?

What is "the best" formation to be in for urban and fort hexes?

Eric, would it be either (a) a major game unbalancer/X-variable, or (b) too hard to code to introduce a new formation:

"Taking Cover" If used in an urban or fortress hex (or maybe/BIG-maybe in wooded hexes), this formation is overall better defensively than either column, line or square in urban or fortress hexes. Taking Cover Formation would have the same "no flank to exploit" benefit as a Square Formation, but without the penalty to attacking and vulnerability to high firepower of the Square (okay, I admit I have not read the manual, so I might be off base here . . .).

The downsides of this formation: (a) chops attack value to 1/3; (b) reduces movement to effectively zero; (c) once adopted requires higher morale to change back to column than it cost to change INTO Taking Cover in the first place, i.e., it would be 'semi-permanent for the remainder of a detailed battle; (d) is equally bad at attack, but also worse at defense in all other hexes (maybe including wooded), i.e., is really ONLY useful for putting a weak unit into a 'garrison' duty where they are expected to make a last stand defense.

ADDIT: In fact, maybe instead of "Taking Cover," the label should be "Garrison" since what I'm really talking about here is restricting its beneficial use to urban and fort hexes. Maybe it could even be coded so that it was ONLY an option when the unit was in urban or fort hexes?

The Taking Cover Formation should be available to ALL infantry units right from the start of the game. My logic here? To quote myself from my Wish List post:

I am still not clear what the "best" formation is for a unit that is in an urban or fortress hex (or for that matter a forest hex). Column to me means column, not column and every other formation besides line and square. For that matter, I doubt the "formation" that a unit would take when it moves into a town or a fort would be akin to a "column" anyway.

Why not kill two birds with one stone here: create a new formation that is specific to defensive terrain where cover is plentiful and which is beneficial in such terrain (but very unbeneficial if there is not cover in the terrain). It seems to me that the instinct to get inside a building or behind a corner or a parapet is the most basic of instincts that will come naturally to the most green or cowardly of militias, so the idea that an incompetent unit can only manage to stay rigidly in column formation foregoing the defensive benefit of ducking inside some buildings has always stuck out to me as a slight niggling annoyance with this engine. One thing that could make it even better: make it hard for a unit that has less morale or experience or whatever you call it to switch BACK to column or line once it is IN a defensive tile and in the "Take Cover" formation. It might be easy to get even the most cowardly green militia to get behind cover but then getting them back OUT of cover! That could be another story.

[Joram]

Hi Anthropoid, good and constructive questions but I don't think a 'taking cover' formation would be necessary.  Note that a village reduces casualties down to 60% so you are already getting a pretty good defensive modifier.  There's no need for a special formation to take cover.   That kind of makes the rest of your argument moot a bit except the attack part.  Since you are forced to stay in 'column', you already are being penalized to some extent (more technically, you simply aren't getting the line bonus) representing you don't get the full field of fire.   I was thinking maybe we should get a morale bonus but actually morale loss is directly tied to casualties so just the fact you take less casualties is a morale bonus. 
 
Now with light troops, by allowing them to go into line in a village, it essentially shows their superior tactical flexibility as befits a light unit by reducing casualties a further as well as allowing greater fire output.  Perhaps something worth considering is if there should be any facing, or at least flanking penalties in such a situation?  Hmm, something I may have to check but Eric, can you state what happens in that situation?
 
 
 

[Anthropoid]

ORIGINAL: Joram Note that a village reduces casualties down to 60% so you are already getting a pretty good defensive modifier. 

Ahh! Well in that case, being in Column in a village ALREADY acts like a 'Taking Cover' formation! [:D] I'm guessing it is the same for a fort?

Perhaps something worth considering is if there should be any facing, or at least flanking penalties in such a situation?  Hmm, something I may have to check but Eric, can you state what happens in that situation?

Well if a line in a town can be flanked it would seem that is not right. Also, IMHO, given the 60% defensive bonus, going into Square should either not be allowed, or have effectively no difference in effect to column.

[Krasny]

We don't do this because we do want units to become stuck by enemy zones-of-control under certain situations.  When an infantry is in an enemy's ZOC, and all the hexes around it are in ZOC's, then we'd like the desired behavior to be that your unit becomes stuck, no matter how many movement points it has.

I've played battles in COG with the rule that units can move through one hex of ZOC each turn, and the result was that it was far too easy for armies simply to march through each other.

I've actually considered making the rules more restrictive, to add a rule that when a unit leaves a ZOC during its turn that it can never enter another ZOC during that turn.

Sounds entirely reasonable that it should be difficult for units to leave a ZoC.

Units leaving a ZoC should be subject to one free fire from the unit whose ZoC they are leaving. Maybe entering a ZoC should also carry a similar consequence.

However my example did not have an infantry unit leaving a ZoC, merely entering one.