Army move block

[Bullock]

Well it seems to be the most common forbidden game trick which can cause some drama in any game.I was wondering why they were no patching about that. But since it s certainly a problem that rise with the game there is prolly a lot of good reasons why they were no modification made about that.

Anyway i ll make a suggestion hoping it could improve this aspect of the game and maybe, in some way, some of the overall strategy too.

Actually if you send a commander, spy ... whatever, on an army who's moving into an hostile prov, you will block it.
Drama may shows up when people instead of sending only a commander will send few troops with him to get around of this rule.

My idea was to change this systematic blocking by taking in consideration the size of both armies:
If the "blocking" army represent, for instance, only the fifth or less of the "blocked" army in a matter of size then the "blocked" army should be able to move after the combat resolution.

Above the fact that this will allow people to probe with a commander, it will also add some more strategy to manage the blocking of an army. (you have to guess the minimum size of your "blocking army", you have to consider if the cost to block the army worst it, and also they will be the aspect of failure with the lost of gold that goes with it.)

[thejeff]

Last time I checked, it wasn't consistent. You might block the army. You might not move yourself. You might switch places.

Some have argued that size matters in figuring out which happens, but I don't think it's been proven.

It's still a good trick, worth doing even if it's fallible.

It's also hard to fix reliably. Remember there are some solo units that can slaughter that army. Should they also have no chance of blocking it?

[Bullock]

Yeah i also think about SC. So indeed they are too small in size to block an army but maybe we could add an other parameters like the casualties made by the "blocking army".

But it s getting maybe too complicate. So let just say SC won't block army.

[JonBrave]

What about 2 SCs, or 3.. ? :D

[Bullock]

What about 2 SCs, or 3.. ? :D

Well you stack the size and see if you reach the minimum requirement to block the army :)

[Soyweiser]

That makes no sense, then the SC's would be at risk more. The chaff could cause the SC's to flee, if the total hp left drops under 25%.

[Bullock]

That makes no sense, then the SC's would be at risk more. The chaff could cause the SC's to flee, if the total hp left drops under 25%.

I really don't get your point Soy.
Why SC would be at risk ? Why chaff would make the SC more likely to flee with my idea ?

The impact on the fight sequence is null.
You just take in consideration the size of both armies before or after the fight and then let the "blocked army" move or not.

[Samhain]

I would think the rule could work well enough if it was based on the number of turns before a route. If the battle lasts X number of turns or more, the block occurs. If it lasts X - 1 or less, the army that was attacked in its starting province still moves.

[Bullock]

I would think the rule could work well enough if it was based on the number of turns before a route. If the battle lasts X number of turns or more, the block occurs. If it lasts X - 1 or less, the army that was attacked in its starting province still moves.

I had also this possibility in mind. But i thought they were prolly too many tricks too lengthen a fight to be a reliable way.

But it can also be an other possibility indeed.

[Deathblob]

What, you run the battle in both provs? Because the time-to-rout depends a lot on whose province it is you're fighting in, because of both PD and morale (dom) effects. You could get entirely different results in the two fights, depending on who doesn't make their save, or who gets hit with a meteor.

You can't do it by total size either, or Pan/Ermor will always get priority over Vanheim/Aby, etc.

[jimbojones1971]

My opinion (offered freely, and worth what you paid for it) is that either:
* The length of the battle should give the chance that an armies move is blocked; OR
* The winning army can always continue moving (e.g. remove the ability to block an army other than by defeating it)

For the first one, I'd suggest something like battles of less than five rounds never stop movement, then a 10% chance for every round of duration after that - or maybe a "hard" cut-off at 10 turns or some such, whereby if you reach it then your move is blocked.

[Deathblob]

Well, it's a good thing you're not charging for your opinion.

There is no battle unless you move.

How do you determine the battle length without actually moving one of the armies and having a battle? Movement comes first. Then battles.

[Bullock]

@Deathblob you are totally misunderstanding Jimbo.

@Jimbo Your 1rt idea is copyrighted by Samhain ;) and the 2nd could be an easy and reliable way to solve the problem. But i m sure some vet players will have something to argue about this :)

[Deathblob]

If the battle has a length, then there was a battle. If there was a battle, then an army moved. So, where does the battle take place?

Please just run through the turn sequence for this simple example:
Army 1 is in Province (A). Army 2 is in Province (B).
Army 1 has orders to move to (B).
Army 2 has orders to move to (A).

What I don't understand about what you guys are proposing is:
- you're basing the chance for movement block on the battle outcome
- but movement, including blocking, happens prior to the battle.

Are you suggesting that the province of combat is determined as is currently done? Basically randomly A or B, or possibly the armies bypass, and there is a battle in both A and B? But if the battle was in (A), and Army 1 wins, then in the same turn, Army 1 gets to move to (B), and has to fight whatever PD is there, and whatever other armies moved into (B) that turn?

[Soyweiser]

Bollock, if you bring along more hp in chaff, it is easier to reach the 75% of total hp lost point. And if that happens, the remaining 25% automatically flees.

That is why bringing along chaff with SC's is usually a bad idea.

[Bullock]

@Deathblob

Well here is what i had in mind when exposing the problem:

Army A is what i called the blocking one
Army B is what i called the blocked one.

Army A is on land A and don't want the army B, which is on land B, to reach the land C (where the capital of A is for instance)

So army A attack territory B and block the army B preventing him to go on C.

Now with your exemple:
Army 1 is in Province (A). Army 2 is in Province (B).
Army 1 has orders to move to (B).
Army 2 has orders to move to (A).


Army1 is supposed smaller so will reach arm2 faster:
there is a fight and the scout or whatever was in army1 die.

Now instead of being blocked (randomly it seems) the army2 will then move on land A.

@Soyweiser: i m totally lost with what you are saying. Arent you describing the rout mechanic ? or any mechanics that occur in fight ?

[Deathblob]

@Deathblob

Well here is what i had in mind when exposing the problem:

Army A is what i called the blocking one
Army B is what i called the blocked one.

Army A is on land A and don't want the army B, which is on land B, to reach the land C (where the capital of A is for instance)

So army A attack territory B and block the army B preventing him to go on C.


That's not the way movement works. Army A in land A can do nothing to prevent Army B in land B from reaching land C, unless Army A moves in the magic phase (teleports somehow to B).

All non-magical movement happens in phases 12 and 13. In your example, army A moves to territory B, and army B moves to territory C. Then the battles caused by non-magical movement are resolved in phase 14, based on an armies having moved into a foreign (or indy) province. So army A fights in territory B, and army B fights in territory C.

Non-magical movement blocking only happens in situations like the example I gave.


Now with your exemple:
Army 1 is in Province (A). Army 2 is in Province (B).
Army 1 has orders to move to (B).
Army 2 has orders to move to (A).

Army1 is supposed smaller so will reach arm2 faster:
there is a fight and the scout or whatever was in army1 die.

Now instead of being blocked (randomly it seems) the army2 will then move on land A.

No. Movement happens before battles. If Army 2 ends the turn in Province A, then it fights in A, and A only (against whatever PD and armies is there). Exception regarding "A only": it's possible Army 2 also first fights a battle in phase 6 (magic battles), if something teleported into Province A in phase 5 (rituals).

Also: smaller armies do not "reach provinces faster".

[Bullock]

Mmh alright.
i thought the move block was occurring more often.

So is there anyway to do a "clean" probing without using magic ? or magic is the only way ?

btw thx for your answer, it seems that i have misunderstood what i have read somewhere about move phase (with the size of army impacting the priority for moving and so)

[Soyweiser]

Yeah, the autoroute mechanic. If you bring along more chaff, it is easier to route the SC's.

It is possible to do a clean probe. Have a scout hiding in the province attack the province he is hiding in.

Or, just let them use the army to take one province, and take it back next turn ;).

[jimbojones1971]

Are you suggesting that the province of combat is determined as is currently done? Basically randomly A or B, or possibly the armies bypass, and there is a battle in both A and B? But if the battle was in (A), and Army 1 wins, then in the same turn, Army 1 gets to move to (B), and has to fight whatever PD is there, and whatever other armies moved into (B) that turn?

Yes. This is what I would like to see. I cannot speak for Bullock or anyone else.

Mmh alright.
i thought the move block was occurring more often.

So is there anyway to do a "clean" probing without using magic ? or magic is the only way ?

btw thx for your answer, it seems that i have misunderstood what i have read somewhere about move phase (with the size of army impacting the priority for moving and so)

The Dom3 turn sequence can be found here (http://dom3.servegame.com/wiki/Turn_resolution) in the wiki, if you want a breakdown of what Deathblob is describing (it is worth a look IMO). So you have:


Friendly Movement
Other Movement
Movement Battles


For purposes of this discussion, I have left out magical movement.

What Deathblob presumably pointing to is that my preferred options DO NOT fit with the way things currently work - and would require sufficient rework that it is very unlikely they could be added into a future patch. However, if Dom4 were ever to happen ...