Since flank attacks are hideously buggy (knights being ignored as they attack stacks of cannon/riflemen, and killing all the cannon), is there a way to disable this dumb feature?

In the XML files, you can modify which units flank attack other units. If you remove all the flank attacks, no unit will be able to flank attack.

Since flank attacks are hideously buggy (knights being ignored as they attack stacks of cannon/riflemen, and killing all the cannon), is there a way to disable this dumb feature?

Sorry, are you annoyed that knights don't cause flank attack damage to cannons? If so, it's because knights and horse archers do it only to catapaults and trebuchets and cuirrassiers and calvary do it to cannon.

Cheers.

has seemed very random to me. after tons of war ive only noticed flank attacks occurring v v rarely! am i right in saying it only occurs in the field, not when attacking cities also.

Flank attack triggers in cities as well, but you are less likely to encounter massive stacks of siege inside a city.

I remember reading that it doesn't work when attacking cities, which would be realistic. You can hardly outflank siege units that stand behind walls ;)

No, perhaps you're not reading correctly. My stack of riflemen and cannon are sitting next to a city, preparing to bombard it, when a stack of knights attacks and kills all my cannon without hurting my riflemen.

Utter . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..

What's wrong with that? Riflemen are no siege weapons, so they aren't affected by the flank attack. But the cannons are so they are destroyed. I guess the attacker lost some knights because they would go up against the riflemen, but obviously some knights won or rather, lost and withdrew.

What's wrong with that? The idea of a midieval unit outflanking a gun powder unit with superior range, the computer getting its more than probable withdrawal chance, and doing untold sums of damage to cannons? You don't see anything wrong with that? Not just in realism, but in actual game mechanics?

What's wrong with that? The idea of a midieval unit outflanking a gun powder unit with superior range, the computer getting its more than probable withdrawal chance, and doing untold sums of damage to cannons? You don't see anything wrong with that? Not just in realism, but in actual game mechanics?


It seems you understand. Apparently the Roman Rifle Corps sat watching the huge dust cloud as the charging horsemen with armor and lances ran at the iron cannons of the Legion. I can picture the scene.

Roman Rifleman 1: Should we, ya know, raise our guns and shoot at those knights?

Roman Rifleman 2: No way, they're a flanking unit. It doesn't matter that we could actually hit them from here, we just need to let the cannons handle themselves against medieval melee units while we sit and watch.

Cannoneer: HELP HELP! SHOOT THE DAMN GUNS IN THE DIRECTION OF THE HORSES!

Roman Rifleman 1: I'm pretty sure I could hit the guy from here. Really.

Roman Rifleman 2: No way. Not allowed.

Cannoneer: <dies>

How about destroyer vs. frigate.

General 1: "Aha! A measly frigate! It shall be no match for the destroyer!"
General 2: "Indeed. In fact, our destroyer could just sail INTO the frigate and come out victorious! Unscathed!"
General 1: "Launch the attack!"

*destroyer attacks*
*destroyer wins, now at 30/100HP* (a frequent occurrence)

(The point being that even if combat odds make sense the way they are, it makes no sense that a 30 strength destroyer vs. a 9 strength frigate with >99.9% chance to win should lose so much health... and you can replace that with just about any similar scenario)

It seems you understand. Apparently the Roman Rifle Corps sat watching the huge dust cloud as the charging horsemen with armor and lances ran at the iron cannons of the Legion. I can picture the scene.
*amusing story... no, I'm not being cheeky, it actually entertained me*

The point of the flank attack is that if the cavalry wins or withdraws successfully, they manage to use their superior speed to do some damage against the siege units (although why ALL of them I have no idea) before moving back to their original square.

So in your example, some cavalry managed to break through and damage some siege units before retreating (and could only do so against siege units because they're hard to mobilize).

How about destroyer vs. frigate.

General 1: "Aha! A measly frigate! It shall be no match for the destroyer!"
General 2: "Indeed. In fact, our destroyer could just sail INTO the frigate and come out victorious! Unscathed!"
General 1: "Launch the attack!"

*destroyer attacks*
*destroyer wins, now at 30/100HP* (a frequent occurrence)

(The point being that even if combat odds make sense the way they are, it makes no sense that a 30 strength destroyer vs. a 9 strength frigate with >99.9% chance to win should lose so much health... and you can replace that with just about any similar scenario)

This one really bugs me. I think some types of units need to, maybe not immune, but certainly damage capped against other types. Like wooden ship vs a metal ship. No way in hell is a wooden ship pewpewing it's cannons is going to put a dent in a modern battleship/destroyer/whatever.

Don't even get me started about Gunships and Melee/Archer/Early Gunpowder units...

Think abstract, people.

lol - yeah, could be worse.... remember the spearmen vs tank legendary battles, or the days when losing a battle cost you the whole stack of units... :) I agree, the current system has bugs, but overall I've been impressed with the evolution of combat in the series.

remember the spearmen vs tank legendary battles, or the days when losing a battle cost you the whole stack of units... :)

Geez, I used to hate that. As for knights attacking cannon, think of it in terms of the mounted units ambushing batteries. The roman riflemen don't shoot the cavalry because they are attacking the cavalry aren't attacking the main battle line, but the support trains.

An excellent strategy -if you have numerical superiority- is to create a wall of riflemen in front of your advancing support groups, rather than just putting everything in one stack. The wall usually needs to be five wide, and you can drive it right up to the enemy cities.

The real problem I have with flanking is that it should not work when you are either defending or attacking cities. Cavalry (or knights) attacking cannons down a narrow street would soon be introduced to an unpleasant thing called grapeshot. I also don't see how cavalry could attack through walls.

the flanking is only succesful if you win the battle or withdraw I think, so it's not like your unit is ignoring the horses, they just couldn't stop them.

An excellent strategy -if you have numerical superiority- is to create a wall of riflemen in front of your advancing support groups, rather than just putting everything in one stack. The wall usually needs to be five wide, and you can drive it right up to the enemy cities.

an excellent strategy is to pull a monty and have a million obsolete units around. knight have flank attack vs cats and trebs but not cannon. when you upgrade them to cuir-thingies, they get flank attack vs cannon but all of sudden they forget everything they ever knew about flanking cats and trebs. so now monty's inferior troops are superior in a way. :crazyeye: i guess it's a consolation prize for being an era behind, so you don't get thrashed too hard or something?

This is is the really weird thing about flanking - i see how horse archers do not flank cannons - they just dont know what that is. But why does Cavalry dont flank old Siege ?!?

The point of the flank attack is that if the cavalry wins or withdraws successfully, they manage to use their superior speed to do some damage against the siege units (although why ALL of them I have no idea) before moving back to their original square.

So in your example, some cavalry managed to break through and damage some siege units before retreating (and could only do so against siege units because they're hard to mobilize).

Not cavalry. KNIGHTS. Cavalry I can accept. Knights.

The best fix would be to make it so siege units always defend last if equal.

ie: riflemen should take priority over cannons to defend.

From all i know they do. You should really provide a save - it would a) help pinpoint the bug and b) reduce the amount of ''never seen this happen" posts here.

I think they shouldn't kill. The cavs should be able to heavily damage the cannons though.