AGEOD Forums

Do you use the battle planner, do it work, makes it sense?

I am not convinced of the battle planner.

I do not know if it makes a difference to use the battle planner and on the other, you usually do not know if your army is attacking or defending.

So I would, of course, when I defend in a forest area, select a different tactic than if I attack in a forest area.
Also, usually you don't know what troops my fighting unit includes.
Because here I would choose a very different tactics if there is i. e. predominantly cavalry in my army.

So I wonder if the battle planner has a benefit.

I'm not using it in my AAR, but I may give it a try in my next game.

I wish I had a spreadsheet with all the possible permutations somewhere. Then I could understand precisely what advantages/disadvantages it gives according to terrain and makeup of armies (including that of the enemy). We can probably read this stuff in the files...

I leave those individual battles up to the commander on the ground. While I have TEA!

TrenchFoot wrote:I leave those individual battles up to the commander on the ground. While I have TEA!

I do the same. But I prefer my coffee.

(of course I'm joking, the plans seem very effective once they succeed and counter the enemy's plan)

I use them. I'm not sure what impact they have - whether I'm helping or hurting myself - but I use them.

Templer wrote:...you usually do not know if your army is attacking or defending.

Glad to know I'm not the only one who can't tell if my guys are attacking or defending. The entrenchment star (if I'm right about what that is) is helpful, but it would be nice to have some more consistent visual cue that makes that clear.

I have been using them. I think they are useful. It gives you a lot more control of the troops on the ground.

Battle plans are amazing! I think I will start being very detailed about them - who fought, where, what were the options, why did I choose and what, etc - in my AAR to help other players.

Use it and enjoy it very much. Gives more control and it also adds a bit of excitement when you aren't sure what the AI will pick.

It doesn't matter whether you're attacking or defending, really. If you're defending, you'll usually see the withdrawal plans are available to you. The options available depend on force composition, so if you have lots of cavalry, for example, you'll probably get some cav-specific battle plans to use. Leader skill also plays a huge role. The OFF and DEF ratings determine how many general plans and what specific plans are available to you as well as your ability to see your opponent's general plan. The most important factor by far is your general's STR rating. The higher his STR, the less chance your plan has to fail, and failure almost always hurts badly.

It's a fun, elegant tool, and hopefully we can get predetermined plan choices (sort of like posture and ROE) patched into MP games some time in the far future.

Kensai wrote:I wish I had a spreadsheet with all the possible permutations somewhere. Then I could understand precisely what advantages/disadvantages it gives according to terrain and makeup of armies (including that of the enemy). We can probably read this stuff in the files...

Yep, I'd love something like that too. Right now I try to pick setups according to logic, but don't really know how logical the engine behind this is...

It is logical. I know, I filled in the data. But to show all data battleplan effects would mean a gigantic tooltip. There is xls file with all its effects. I can post it later on, but beware combat in Teaw is not simple attack 3 vs defense 5 multiplied by some factor as in some other games. It is much deeper.

caranorn wrote:Yep, I'd love something like that too. Right now I try to pick setups according to logic, but don't really know how logical the engine behind this is...

Catching Athena with a counterplan is rare, and I think a waste of time. It's far better to understand what best suits your own ends and whether or not you can accomplish those ends given the available command talent. For instance, if you're attacking an entrenched enemy, have a talented general, and access to a plan which ignores entrenchments, pick that plan regardless of what Athena might do. If your general is a fool, go with the most basic plan available.

I switched it off immediately. Generally not interested in making a choice without understanding the consequences. The game asks me "I have a little game for you .. in order to increase your chances, do you want A, B or C"? Afterwards it tells me nothing how that that influenced the outcome. What am I supposed to do, statistically analyze the outcomes or believe it was A instead of B? If it is nothing but deciding wether the roll of the dice is left, right, up or down, I leave that to the game itself.

An explanation of the battle plans and how they interact with each other would be most welcome, otherwise they are just a black box with no real clue as to what's going on.

This feature is useless in my opinion. I hope they did not lost too much time coding it

And all thing considered, the battle planner is not active in PBEM, which is the best way to play Ageod games.

GlobalExplorer wrote:I switched it off immediately. Generally not interested in making a choice without understanding the consequences. The game asks me "I have a little game for you .. in order to increase your chances, do you want A, B or C"? Afterwards it tells me nothing how that that influenced the outcome. What am I supposed to do, statistically analyze the outcomes or believe it was A instead of B? If it is nothing but deciding wether the roll of the dice is left, right, up or down, I leave that to the game itself.

Where's the option to shut it off? Can't find it!

The way I see it is just an option to increase the stakes by an unknown amount. Like roulette, higher odds but also more potential if your amount of money is low. If you have a small force and you want to try a risky strategy it could pay off.
But that could be implemented without going into so much detail. A simple switch "conventional tactics" vs "attempt surprise maneuver" and a certain probability based on the aggregate tactical rating of all available commanders, so that the best general combos like Jackson/Lee could benefit from it.

It's not useless, but it can definitely become better. For starters, there are explanations of what a deployment and a plan will do, but they are of little help if you don't recall WHERE exactly you fight and WHAT forces are implicated. Yet again, it's better than nothing as long as you:

• get a green reaction plan and hopefully no red
• remember for example you have a lot of artillery and you use a plan which bombards a lot or a lot of cheap infantry and you select one that increases frontage, etc.

Not using it here, I don't understand it, and the "turn resolution" last long enough I don't want to stay in front of the screen.

For all those players who like numbers and odds, here are mayor battle-plan effects (I erased some to not overwhelm you with numbers):

Be warned, there are lot of numbers here:

[ATTACH]31109[/ATTACH]

I really like using it. I find it especially helpful when you have the superior commander and you get a heads up on whether the opposition is planning to fight or withdraw. You can then craft your tactics to match what they're planning.

I wonder how it plays out in a MP game. Or is it not active then?
(never tried it)

Kensai wrote:I wonder how it plays out in a MP game. Or is it not active then?
(never tried it)

It doesn't work in MP, though I've often wondered if a preset system, much like posture/ROE, could be created. Yet another mod idea I have no time for.

Kensai wrote:It's not useless, but it can definitely become better. For starters, there are explanations of what a deployment and a plan will do, but they are of little help if you don't recall WHERE exactly you fight and WHAT forces are implicated. Yet again, it's better than nothing as long as you:

• get a green reaction plan and hopefully no red
• remember for example you have a lot of artillery and you use a plan which bombards a lot or a lot of cheap infantry and you select one that increases frontage, etc.

That helps, because before my thought process was, "I've never commanded troops in battle, so how do I know what is the best battle plan?"

Narwhal wrote:Not using it here, I don't understand it, and the "turn resolution" last long enough I don't want to stay in front of the screen.

Are we going to get a Narwhal vs. Loki AAR for this game?

Ace wrote:For all those players who like numbers and odds, here are mayor battle-plan effects (I erased some to not overwhelm you with numbers):

Be warned, there are lot of numbers here:

[ATTACH]31109[/ATTACH]

Interesting, thanks Ace. Is the Battle Planner the finished article now or still a work in progress ?

As far as I know Battleplaner is finished and working unless Pocus says otherwise.

The battle plan you pick applies to all rounds however the AI can vary it's battle plan per round, not sure it matters but WAD ?

The planner is working, thanks in no small part to the help of Ace who debugged the data and spotted issues. Now, it can be improved, this is certain. There is a lack of infos about 'meaningful choices' to start with.