"Attack Rearmost"

[PDF]

I concur to the fact that the order works as "Attack Flanks" unless the enemy has a so smallish front force that the unit don't reach it before it dies.
Anyway I've never tried to use Assassins in field battle with this order, surely they only manage to get killed this way...

[PrinzMegaherz]

I think the AI "forgets" the command when your units come to close to an enemy unit.

In my Last Ulm game, I had one of the heroes riding together with 10 knights. I placed them on the upper part of the battlefield and gave both the attack rearmost command. What actually happened is, one of the knights came near an enemy unit, and all knights in his squad turned around and attacked. My hero however continued his journey to the back of the battlefield and slaughtered the enemy mages.

Note: Trampling units with attack rearmost will most often trample trough the enemy lines towards the rear, so they seem unaffected by this problem.

[PDF]

Well, to me it seems the order are interpreted as such :
* Unit normally advances straight ahead for some turns
* Then *if* there are enemy units at less than range X, the closest target gets attacked
* In the end maybe "X" increases with time, or a turn limit is given, and the unit eventually attack the closest enemy unit.

It's pretty hard to use effectively indeed...

[Arryn]

I just had a flying commander, placed on the right flank and well back from the "front" line, given orders to hold/hold/attack rear do a "attack rear of the closest formation", despite having an absolutely clear path to the enemy's true rear (and various commanders there), nevermind the flying ability allowing him to reach those commanders in the same turn. IMO, the logic of this order is simply broken.

[Norfleet]

Attack rearmost just doesn't work very well for its stated purpose. Invariably I find it more effective, if I want to try to go after commanders and other people of importance, to order "Attack Archers". At least this is guaranteed to get your units in the back!

Attack "Rear" really only works for a squad placed on the wings: They'll do a very good job enveloping the opponent's center block. They will NOT, however, actually attack rearmost forces. It would work MUCH better if "Attack rear" was instead of working on odds and other such nonsense, "move straight forwards to the back of the battlefield, then turn around and attack whatever is closest".

[Arryn]

Originally posted by Norfleet:
It would work MUCH better if "Attack rear" was instead of working on odds and other such nonsense, "move straight forwards to the back of the battlefield, then turn around and attack whatever is closest".

Indeed. And that shouldn't be too difficult to code, probably even less complicated than the "logic" which is being used now. As I said in my post, the current implementation is horribly flawed.

[PvK]

I don't think I want Attack Rearmost to be any more single-minded. It's already effective enough, it seems to me. The uncertainty of what such units will do strikes me as a good feature. Sometimes, if timed right, and the enemy has an open flank, it will work exactly as hoped. But, I don't think it should be easy to go right to the enemy rear. There is so much abstraction and lack of control in the combat already, that making Attack Rearmost extra-effective would, it seems to me, make it too easy to bypass troops which should be responding to such a move. The current system keeps it from being too easy to successfully walk around the enemy lines. If Attack Rearmost were made more effective, then the AI should also be given more effective ability to intercept flankers. Which would be a wash. Attack rear already works about as well as it should, IMO.

Friendly fire, on the other hand... should be avoided.

PvK