Captain_Orso wrote:Stacks in PP never start battles.
I was going to disagree with this but then I decided to do an experiment before I put my foot in my mouth.
I do this often myself
pgr wrote:I went with the Gettysburg battle. Indeed, passive stacks do not start battles, and I was able to get Ewell, passive, into Yankee occupied Carroll MD without provoking a fight. (If I kept him on passive, with the Union on passive, I could extract him without a fight as well.)
This test is too extreme. You will never find this in a real game. Ewell is leading a corps? I'm going to say the Union stack is Reynolds, just to put a name to it.
Put Ewell's stack in PP and Reynolds' stack in DP and repeat. Basically there will be no difference, as long as we are only talking about Carroll MD. A stack in DP is as effective as if it were in PP, if the enemy stack entering its region is also in PP.
- So nobody does anything; everybody has become Dunkers? Well, no, not exactly. The defending stack in the region is still defending, and maintaining the MC in the region. And this has a profound affect on the enemy stack's ability to move out of that region into another enemy controlled region. Namely, it will likely not be able to do it. This is how ZOC (Zone Of Control) works in AGEod games.
pgr wrote:The weird part, is that when I attacked with him....I got fight to the finish. He was wiped out. I'm attaching the battle log in an error report post, but the key part seems to be this : "Group 1001238 Stuart Div. will retreat in same region Carroll, MD." For all the rounds the CSA rolls retreat and then retreats in the same region. (Its also a bit weird that the battle happens at all, I was using hidden activation and Ewell was in reality inactive...so if you re run the turn half the time there is no battle, but if there is a battle, it is always to the death.)
Not quite sure what to make of it, but for whatever reason the retreat pathfinding couldn't see a way out (and there was a CSA 100%MC region right next door.)
You make it sound like it would have been preferable for Stuart's division to leave the region.
I'm not exactly sure at the moment, what determines whether a stack retreats to out of a region or retreats within it. I do recall doing RC (Release Candidate - for patch releases) testing on the new retreat rules, and one of the major issues was retreating across a river, which basically, if the defending stack(s) was strong enough could easily lead to the retreating stack being completely destroyed in one turn; and I am talking about a fat corps stack.
So IIRC Pocus put some code in to not so easily throw a retreating stack to outside of a battle region.
The question which remains in my mind, as long as one side can put a stack into PP and move it across a river and into an enemy occupied region without causing a battle *cough*cough*cough*AI*cough*, what can you do to defend against this tactic?
I haven't experimented with this, but the only thing I can think, of would be to put a small stack into OP in the region, a kind of picket, so that if an enemy stack in PP does come across the river your are defending, it will get attacked by your picket.
Once the game has discovered that there is a stack in OP which is aware of an enemy stack in its region, this is when a battle starts.
Without going into too much detail, as in our example above, Reynolds' stack is in Carroll MD in DP with Buford leading a cav. in OP, when Ewell leads his stack into the region in PP. Buford's stack starts a battle with Ewell's stack, but all stacks in the region can be called up to fight. This is not like MTSG. This is BEFORE the battle starts, so any other stacks in the region picked to fight, fight right from the very first round of battle.
Since Buford's stack is much smaller than it's target stack (Ewell's stack) it check for other friendly stacks in the region, not already targeting or being targeted, and ofc finds Reynolds' stack. So now Reynolds' and Buford's stacks are fight against Ewell, who is still in PP, although Reynolds is in DP.
The biggest issue with this, is that Buford might be at higher risk during the battle of being targeted, but I'm not sure.