DEVELOPMENT PLAN #77 — Commanders Who Reread the Battle: Counterattacks and Pursuit

This is a development plan article about something we would like to build next. Nothing described here is implemented yet; the ideas are still under consideration and may change before they are built.

This morning's article (#76) showed how regiment commanders, adjutants and platoon leaders can now be appointed from the platoon window. Each candidate card shows lean bars for Attack↔Defense and Mobility↔Conservation. This plan (improvement item BTL-012) would let those leans and each person's personality (one of 16 types) show up as decisions during a battle, not only at its start.

The regiment commander candidate window today (captured for verification in a development debug build; the window title row and the map are cropped). Each card shows Atk↔Def and Mob↔Cons as a bar extending toward the side the person leans to. People and numbers come from a verification setup.

Today: the tactic is chosen once, at the start

Today, when a battle starts, the commander on each side (the person with the highest initiative score, from rank, experience and merit) picks a tactic once. The attacker picks Assault, Maneuver or Conserve; the defender picks Hold, Maneuver or Conserve. Each option is scored by the person's lean weight multiplied by a personality factor (0.8-1.2): extraverted (E) and thinking (T) types lean toward Assault, sensing (S) and judging (J) types toward Hold.

The chosen tactic stays until the battle ends. It affects which platoons are put on the front line and how often the front is reorganized. A battle is decided when the attacker breaks through by holding a route with no defender for 3 hours, or when one side can no longer fight; the loser retreats to an adjacent province of its own.

What we want to make more interesting

The situation changes over the hours, yet commanders keep their first decision to the end. A defender that has worn the attacker down never goes on the offensive, and the winner never chases a retreating enemy. A commander's personality shows only in the first moment of a battle, so there is little sense of "this commander would strike here".

We would like commanders to reread the battle as it goes and judge when to strike and when to hold back. In the same situation, an aggressive commander would counterattack early while a cautious one would preserve strength. The goal is that who you appoint as regiment commander shows up as a different course of battle.

Plan 1: a situation review every 6 hours, and "Counterattack"

We are considering having both commanders review their tactic every 6 hours of battle (hours 6, 12, 18 and so on). Each option's score would be today's "lean weight × personality factor", multiplied by a "situation factor".

• Situation factor: the ratio of own to enemy effective strength (the sum of troops × organization of platoons that are not routed), kept within 0.5-1.5. Assault and Counterattack are multiplied by the ratio, Conserve by its inverse, and Hold and Maneuver stay at 1.
• When to switch: only when the best option scores at least 1.15 times the current tactic, so small swings do not flip the tactic back and forth.
• Counterattack: a new tactic for the defender only. It becomes an option when the strength ratio is 1.2 or more and average organization is at least 50%. A counterattacking defender that holds a route with no attacker for 3 hours wins by "pushing back".

For example, a defending commander who is introverted, sensing, thinking and judging (ISTJ) scores Hold highly. They keep holding as the ratio rises to 0.95 and 1.12, then switch to Counterattack at hour 18 when it reaches 1.32.

Concept mock-up (under consideration). The battle information would show both commanders and their types, the current tactics, the score breakdown of the hour-18 review and a log of the 6-hourly decisions. Names and numbers are illustrative, not master data.

Plan 2: pursuit by the winner

We are also considering a one-time pursuit decision when a battle is decided and the loser retreats. If the pursuit score (attack weight × Assault factor × strength ratio) beats the hold-back score (conserve weight × Conserve factor ÷ strength ratio), the winner pursues.

• Only platoons with at least 40% organization that are not routed join the pursuit.
• They deal one hour of damage with today's damage calculation, and the retreating side does not fire back. Losses are capped at 10% of the retreating side's remaining troops.
• Pursuing platoons lose 10 organization and do not enter the province the enemy retreats to. Platoons with a move or retreat order do not join.

The losses would be settled once, with the same inputs as today's battle result (loss settlement and retreat). Each decision keeps an operation ID so that replaying the same battle never doubles a decision or its losses.

Concept mock-up (under consideration). A battle ends with the defender pushing back from a counterattack, and its commander chooses to pursue. A platoon below 40% organization stays behind, and the losses stop at the cap. Names and numbers are illustrative.

Steps, and how it fits with other systems

It reuses today's way of choosing a tactic (lean weight × personality factor), so no new ability values are added. The current rule that personality only changes how likely a tactic is chosen, and never adds directly to attack, defense or win chance, would stay. The order we have in mind: (1) the 6-hourly review and its log, (2) Counterattack and winning by pushing back, (3) pursuit, (4) the battle information display. Since this adds a new way to win, the related specifications would be revised together.

Once the regiment commander's Command and the adjutant bonus (improvement item MOB-015, the "work still to come" mentioned this morning) are in, we will decide whether the reviewing commander should always be the regiment commander. The plan to let personality decide whether damaged equipment goes back for repair (BTL-014) would use the same table of personality factors.

Tell us what you think

How much of a commander's mid-battle reasoning would you like to follow on screen: the full score breakdown, or just a log line saying "switched to Counterattack"? And should you be able to stop a pursuit, or is it more fun to leave it to the commander? We would love to hear your thoughts.

Image 1 was captured for verification in a development debug build; images 2 and 3 are concept mock-ups (under consideration). Names and numbers are illustrative, not actual game values.

This morning: DEVELOPMENT SNAPSHOT #76 — Appoint from the Platoon Window: Candidates Shown by What the Post Needs

The unit window: DEVELOPMENT SNAPSHOT #49 — Formation Beside the Map: A Compact Platoon Window

Previous plan: DEVELOPMENT PLAN #75 — Trust in Your Officers: How You Answer Shapes Their Next Proposals

Check the download page for currently released files and development status