Fall back through Button?

[Gfran64]

Hi all,

Getting used to the new unit pathing and I have to say that I like it. I was playing the Devil's Den scenario last night, Ward's Brigade I think, I had a hard time getting a unit that was getting tired and low on ammo to fall straight back through the fresh unit I put behind them to take their spot in the line. Now I tried to have that unit fall back through the fresh unit like you could in TC2M but the pathing kept taking it in front of 2 other enemy units even when I TC'd it I couldn't get it to come straight back. I didn't want o retreat it because it was already tired but the morale was really high. I couldn't put the fresh unit in front of it because there was not enough room to get them in their without a charge happening. Eventually I put them in column and made a hole in my line and slid them through.

I would be nice have a "fall back throught" command that would have a unit just come back through the unit behind them and maybe have the pathing turned off for the unit falling back until they reached a point behind their relief and them have the pathing back on for them.

Regards,

Greg

[BOSTON]

Hi Greg!

The reg. behind the reg. in fallback, was it in line formation or column? I do notice that it makes a difference in pathing.

"fall back throught"; What is that?

One other thought; It might not be good, is to have the backup reg. in skirmish formation which allows gaps, so maybe a reg. in fallback could pass through it.. Have'nt tried it myself yet.

BOSTON

[Kerflumoxed]

BOSTON wrote:

Hi Greg!

The reg. behind the reg. in fallback, was it in line formation or column? I do notice that it makes a difference in pathing.

"fall back throught"; What is that?

One other thought; It might not be good, is to have the backup reg. in skirmish formation which allows gaps, so maybe a reg. in fallback could pass through it.. Have'nt tried it myself yet.

BOSTON

My thoughts, exactly! (WHOA! That is scary!) Have done the same thing only put my "back-up" units in column and then retrograd the front unit back past the column. Sometimes I will TC the front unit and move them back in column as well.

Don't think it would be correct to have one unit retro through another unit. Can only imagine the confusion that would have caused!

J

[BOSTON]

Kerflumoxed wrote:

BOSTON wrote:

Hi Greg!

The reg. behind the reg. in fallback, was it in line formation or column? I do notice that it makes a difference in pathing.

"fall back throught"; What is that?

One other thought; It might not be good, is to have the backup reg. in skirmish formation which allows gaps, so maybe a reg. in fallback could pass through it.. Have'nt tried it myself yet.

BOSTON

My thoughts, exactly! (WHOA! That is scary!) Have done the same thing only put my "back-up" units in column and then retrograd the front unit back past the column. Sometimes I will TC the front unit and move them back in column as well.

Don't think it would be correct to have one unit retro through another unit. Can only imagine the confusion that would have caused!

J

If Greg's Front reg., is in poor condition, then hits retreat, there's no stopping them and would likely rout (excess fatique/morale declines) because the pathing issue for they would be taking the same path as fallback as he originally explained.

[Gfran64]

BOSTON wrote:

Hi Greg!

The reg. behind the reg. in fallback, was it in line formation or column? I do notice that it makes a difference in pathing.

"fall back throught"; What is that?

One other thought; It might not be good, is to have the backup reg. in skirmish formation which allows gaps, so maybe a reg. in fallback could pass through it.. Have'nt tried it myself yet.

BOSTON

Hi Boston,

The back up unit was in battle line. It was very tight in Devil's Den right up on top. Didn't have room for skirmish formation as I was getting pressed in from 3 sides. Just a thought really. I know in TC2M that is how I cycled in fresh units. Have the tired unit withdraw and have the other unit move forward and replace it on the same spot. With the pathing it gets tough to do that the same way. I might need to consider doing it differently.

Regards,

Greg

[Gfran64]

Kerflumoxed wrote:

BOSTON wrote:

Hi Greg!

The reg. behind the reg. in fallback, was it in line formation or column? I do notice that it makes a difference in pathing.

"fall back throught"; What is that?

One other thought; It might not be good, is to have the backup reg. in skirmish formation which allows gaps, so maybe a reg. in fallback could pass through it.. Have'nt tried it myself yet.

BOSTON

My thoughts, exactly! (WHOA! That is scary!) Have done the same thing only put my "back-up" units in column and then retrograd the front unit back past the column. Sometimes I will TC the front unit and move them back in column as well.

Don't think it would be correct to have one unit retro through another unit. Can only imagine the confusion that would have caused!

J

What would be the proper way for a fresh unit to relieve another unit that was under fire without making a great big hole in the line?

Thanks,


Greg B)

[Jim]

This will require careful management but will work.

Put the fresh regiment in column by division, have the tired reg fall back to even, then advance the fresh unit 10 yards while forming into line at the double. Form the tired unit into col x div and move them back to rest and resupply.

Replacing a unit under fire was and continues to be one of the most difficult tasks to accomplish on the battlefield.


-Jim

[BOSTON]

Greg B)

I think instead of putting a fresh reg. in line directly/close behind a tired reg. in line is a tactic of the past now. Maybe a ?(yds) of distance behind is the key, or offset the fresh reg. to one side/and back to let the fallback reg. pass by, then one or both do the new side shift command simultanously to a desired position. It's a maneuver a player would not want to spend much time with during a large battle. I can't say that I have seen the AI do it. I'd like to see if others have any suggestions. I've seen where if you use that sideshift command in double quick, the reg. line get's all squirrely, which sucks while under direct fire.

BOSTON

edit; just saw Jim's post after submitting

[Gfran64]

Jim wrote:

This will require careful management but will work.

Put the fresh regiment in column by division, have the tired reg fall back to even, then advance the fresh unit 10 yards while forming into line at the double. Form the tired unit into col x div and move them back to rest and resupply.

Replacing a unit under fire was and continues to be one of the most difficult tasks to accomplish on the battlefield.


-Jim

Thanks Jim.

Greg

[RebBugler]

Gfran64 wrote:

Hi all,

Getting used to the new unit pathing and I have to say that I like it. I was playing the Devil's Den scenario last night, Ward's Brigade I think, I had a hard time getting a unit that was getting tired and low on ammo to fall straight back through the fresh unit I put behind them to take their spot in the line. Now I tried to have that unit fall back through the fresh unit like you could in TC2M but the pathing kept taking it in front of 2 other enemy units even when I TC'd it I couldn't get it to come straight back. I didn't want o retreat it because it was already tired but the morale was really high. I couldn't put the fresh unit in front of it because there was not enough room to get them in their without a charge happening. Eventually I put them in column and made a hole in my line and slid them through.

I would be nice have a "fall back throught" command that would have a unit just come back through the unit behind them and maybe have the pathing turned off for the unit falling back until they reached a point behind their relief and them have the pathing back on for them.

Regards,

Greg

The 'getaway' command does pretty much that, no pathing, no fatigue gained. You can assign it on your keyboard or mod it on the toolbar. I have it modded on the B&F toolbar as 'Short Retreat'.