Changing a unit's stance ("aggressive" etc.) also creates a new "must go back to" location setting

[krt0143]

Real simple and straightforward, easy to reproduce:

If you change a unit's stance ("aggressive", "defensive" and so on), it also creates a new origin point (don't know what your technical term is, I mean the point the unit will go back to after having finished its task) at the location it was when you made that change, making it wanting to go back to that point. 

 

To illustrate and reproduce:

1. Take any barracks far from action, set its "rally point" (destination new units move to) to some distance, and click 3-4 times on some unit, to create several.
2. Now as those new units quit the barracks and head towards their rally point, select them, and just change their stance (to "defensive" for instance). Then deselect them. Remember where the unit was when you did that. Do it at different locations for each unit.
3. You'll see those units continue to their rally point, but instead of staying there, they will immediately go back to the point they were when you changed their stance! The simple stance change also creates an unwanted new "must go back to" location setting...

[Gurken Khan]

I don't think changing the stance as such is involved, and I believe aggressive units never go back. But defensive units will, kinda like the point of that stance.

[krt0143]

38 minutes ago, Gurken Khan said:

I don't think changing the stance as such is involved, and I believe aggressive units never go back. But defensive units will, kinda like the point of that stance.

Well, I sure hope that's not that. Even if it was true, setting arbitrarily a "home" point at the moment you switch them is well, let's just call it "suboptimal"*.

Don't get me wrong, I do enjoy the "automatic return after mission end" feature, it would had been really helpful for worker management if it worked consistently*, but it is a double-edged blade, like when your units just kill one single enemy unit, and then call it a day and start going back... And no, I can't have all my units all the time on "aggressive" (especially not when they cost 100 food/400 metal apiece!). There are times for blindly attacking, and there are times for patiently waiting for the right moment. For me at least.
"Aggressive" only makes sense when you set your barracks/arsenal rally point somewhere far into the enemy territory, and hit "batch create as many units as the queue can handle" ...  For the rest you'd prefer your fragile ranged units to stay put and let the enemy come to them, and your melee units to wait till the ranged units have softened up the enemy before finishing it.
That's at least how I play, and I'm expecting to be told that I'm totally wrong and haven't understood anything about this game... The only realization dawning so far is that this game is not for me.

 

* Setting that "home" point is always a little problematic: Sometimes they simply refuse top change point of origin, and you have to run after them as they invariably start wandering back all the way across a "huge" map, despite being desperately needed where you sent them. Sometimes for some reason most units in a group accept the change, but a few don't, resulting in annoying "WTF" moments ("Weren't there 20 units? Why are there only 18 of them now?") -- till you find the lone rebels loitering somewhere far back in the hinterland...

[Gurken Khan]

Don't think there's such a thing as a home point for workers.

A while back I was also unhappy with troops wandering where I wouldn't want them, like defensive units way back. Since them I handle them differently, especially with the attack move; this actually does set a rally point for your troops, and if they can't see any enemy units they can attack they will go (back) to that point.

[krt0143]

33 minutes ago, Gurken Khan said:

Don't think there's such a thing as a home point for workers.

By "workers" I mean soldiers doing gathering/building work, and (un)fortunately they definitely do have a home point, although they don't consistently keep going back to it. I've yet to understand how/why this is. Sometimes it works marvelously well, but just as often it's utterly annoying: The expression "herding cats" comes to mind (although I love cats). 

 

33 minutes ago, Gurken Khan said:

the attack move; this actually does set a rally point for your troops

That's useful, thanks!

Still, my biggest annoyance is when a lone (eyewateringly expensive) archer goes off to face the whole enemy army all on its own, only because it has seen an enemy on the horizon, or when melee troops, instead of remaining under the cover of their artillery (ranged units/forts), just rush forward, and forward, and forward. I didn't ask for berserkers...

I've finally edited my unit templates so ranged infantry units default to "Stand Ground" (they're cover, not shock troops), and melee units to "Defensive", so they will give some chase, but not all the way to the enemy's lair! And especially they will stay under the protective cover of the ranged units unless I tell them otherwise. It's no fun trying to implement a strategy with a bunch of stubborn hotheads.
 

Edited September 24, 2023 by krt0143
corrections

[Atrik]

14 minutes ago, krt0143 said:

and melee units to "Defensive", so they will give some chase, but not all the way to the enemy's lair!

Yes but now if you make an attack move, the range at witch melee units consider attacking is surprisingly small. Add to this the fact it return to initial position sometimes and you have catastrophic outcome when fighting.

[krt0143]

2 hours ago, Atrik said:

Add to this the fact it return to initial position sometimes and you have catastrophic outcome when fighting.

Yes, I have experienced this.

Actually the current "when finished, return home, wherever this is" should only work in non-combat situations (and even then, only on demand).
In combat situations we need a simple "there is a circle with a small radius around the place you were when combat started, and you can't leave it. If no enemy is inside the permitted movement circle, immediately go back to its center". Note it's defined as a range around a fixed place and thus immutable unless you give new orders. No "there was an enemy near the one I killed, then there was another near that one, so I eventually ended in Australia"... 
A pack of infantry defending a point should have some limited mobility, so it can intercept passing enemies, but should not be able to wander away. IMHO.

 

 

[Atrik]

3 hours ago, krt0143 said:

In combat situations we need a simple "there is a circle with a small radius around the place you were when combat started, and you can't leave it. If no enemy is inside the permitted movement circle, immediately go back to its center"

How does current behavior of defensive differ from this description? I missed something here?

[krt0143]

20 hours ago, Atrik said:

How does current behavior of defensive differ from this description?

Didn't say it does, but I do suspect that the current system suffers from the same fallacy as tree chopping: When its opponent is dead, the defensive unit will turn to the closest enemy, which most of the time will pull it a little further away (given they come from the opposite direction), till eventually it ends up really far, alone and thus dead. It shouldn't, on "defensive" it should have a hard limit of how far it will venture forward.

Note I'm not totally sure about that, but I sure have noticed that left to their own devices, facing a steady stream of adversaries, my "defensive" defenders will eventually end up real far from the point they were supposed to defend.
They definitely shouldn't, the whole plan is to let the enemy come to them, under a steady stream of arrows.

 

--- Edited to add proof:

Note the unit at the red arrow. This unit has decided to chase enemies, despite being on defensive
(Situation: Enemies come from behind the camera. Main combat action is on the bottom left (where the pile of dead horses are). Some enemies run past the combat because rams are attacking a fortress of theirs, some way behind (top right).)

Edited September 25, 2023 by krt0143
add picture