[Suggestion] Putting more tactical in tactical battles.

bumping once for visibility.

Stupid ideas. This isn't the Forgotten Realms and that stupid combat engine "attacks of opportunity". Tactical battles are nice the way they are now. Don't need to go mucking them up with silliness or making them more complicated or long and drawn out.

Tactical battles are not nice at all yet. They need a lot of improvement.

I like the line of sight idea.

I would like to see range factor in archery accuracy.  Better bows would improve accuracy at range.

Agree with those points; but there's one more thing that I think is needed: the battlefield should be bigger. Right now an infantry unit can reach the enemy in two turns! that makes most of the positioning and ranged attacks pointless. Larger maps with different terrain and special tiles may make battles a bit longer, but I'd take longer and tactical rather than short click-fest any time. Add AoO and long range penalties and you have tactical bonanza. At least make it optional.

another thing is more passive and active abilities. Right now, apart from spells there isn't much you can do other than simply attack. Defensive, offensive stances, special attacks than stun, push, slow, curse, fire breath, thrown, gaze attacks in melee, paralysis, teleporting, retaliating units, charge, etc. etc. Just look at Master of Magic and Age of Wonders - there are hardly any units without abilities (even basic swordsmen in MoM gave Large Shields which protect them from missiles, and that's 1993).

I'd like to see these three or some variation on them. However, others enjoy faster and simplistic tactical battles. I doubt we'll see something like this unfortunatly.

Then make it a toggle, or an option, or at the very least make it easy to mod. After all, it is impossible to totally avoid combat in Elemental, and simplistic = boring in the long run.

In the long run there will be another expansion. The devs have indicated that there will be no LOS in this version. 

Reading this post might give you some more information:

https://forums.elementalgame.com/415575

I think these are very good ideas and i would like to add:

Spears should inflict + 50 % damage against mounted units instead of ignoring 66 % of the defense

Flanking melee attacks should inflict + 50 % damage

Daggers should increase the initiative and ignore 50 % of the defense

Bows should get 50 % of the strength bonus to improve the ranged damage in the late game

Bows should inflict only 50 % damage at melee range

Mounted archery should require special bows

Mounts should not increase the carrying capacity, but they should increase the melee damage by 10 % per square the unit moves before the attack

Bows should inflict only 50 % damage at melee range

In fact, I think bows shouldnt work at all at melee range.

okay, so no LoS. No biggie. There are still several ways of improving tactical combat, here and in other threads.

You could have the best ideas in the world, but I would choose to ignore them due to your poor attitude.

People have been asking for more tactical depth since the WoM beta. FE is a huge step forward and I enjoy it so far. I would like to see things like placement matter more.

Agreed. I just want to make sure we are more organized about what we ask for. 

I think special attacks and defenses could be expanded greatly. It should be about equal to the options from spells IMO. 

I would really like to have some heroes that can help the stats of the units around them.

Ex: Rebel Yell - Gives all units within earshot (2 tile radius) a boost to attack (+3 attack, +1 for every 4 points of Charisma) for three rounds. 

Ex: Command - All units within earshot receive unified orders from hero (+3 to defense, +1 for every 4 points of Charisma) for three rounds.

Charisma is a hidden stat, but it should be unhidden and used for this kind of trait. 

If they just added facing and flanking, I think that would add a lot on its own.  Also, maybe like in Warsong/Langrisser Champions could give off spatial auras of combat effects.  It might negate some of the issues people have with not using champions in combat, while also adding some tactics to the tactical combat.

The current tactical system is so much better than in EWOM.   I like the feel of it - there is a mixture of fast action and concern for the fate of units built up over time that makes for fun.

We need to be careful not to make it so complex that it loses the fun factor.   Having said that I think some additions that do not add to much complexity might add to the expereince.   

Examples:

1, Better visuals on the spells. 

2. Rout after a certain % of units lost

The effect of number 1 is already present, you can lock down enemies quite easily. An enemy in melee range is a significant movement drain that pretty much stops the AI from trying to move anywhere.

I like the ideas about flanking and more diverse unit abilities but I want to see some option to flee combat. Give me a % chance to lose some % of my units (based on difficulty) so that when my scout gets waylaid by a golem he has at least a shot of fading into a nearby forest. I also think that units that successfully flee combat should be receive some small amount of experience, especially if you at least try to fight it out before pissing yourself and heading for the hills.

wow really? you like the battles the way they are now? i admit that it is an improvement but there just isn't alot of strategy in battle. its too predictable as is.  weak vs strong, dodge vs high damage, high armor vs low attack, magic vs everything balanced.  there needs to be a way to beat a more powerful army through tactics alone.  i get you don't want to spend much time in tactical, that's your opinion. no offense but i hope your in the minority. just one of these would go along way to making things better.

I'm all for improving tactical battles, but they can't become too slow due to fiddly detail, or large games become sloooooowwwwwwwwwwwwww.

Ideally, smaller skirmishes are resolved through auto-battle, important small fights or medium size fights are finished quickly, and very important fights or large fights take a bit longer.

Tricky target to hit.

I think all armors should have a defense bonus or penalty against some types of damage. For example leather armor could increase the crushing defense by additional 2 points.

That's the sort of thing I don't want to see. To take advantage of that, you'd have to check the armor type of every single enemy on the battlefield to ensure you're maximizing your offensive potential - and there wouldn't be any real choice involved, how do you plan for what enemy types you're going to face?

You'd end up either occasionally receiving a bonus, occasionally receiving a penalty, or constantly checking enemy stats to determine what armor they have vs your weapon.

I don't mind checking on a single strong monster or a powerful hero unit to see what attributes/resists it has, but checking every troop and monster I encounter would be annoying and tedious.

Hmmm, good point, but i think such a system worked very good in Galactic Civilizations II with three different kinds of damage and armor. Perhaps it would help if the bonus is only applied if the unit uses a complete set of the armor.

GC2 didn't have tactical combat, and research/war strategy revolved around building to counter your opponents choice - vastly different game situation than FE.

Too much detail in tac combat in a game like this bogs it down to the point where you dread getting into wars in the late game (unless you _really_ love fighting), because you can't always rely on the auto-battle to handle medium size fights efficiently.

Not jumping on you repeatedly, just stating my view on the matter

Well, there just needs to be more of other kinds of units and attacks besides melee. Too much melee, and ranged-capable player units are too powerful because of this.

I have to say though that I've found there is room for tactical placement of units. My units with high defenses try to block the enemies on most sides while leaving a single side open for my my higher attach units.

That said, yes, there needs to be more tacticalness in tactical combat, but including more ranged units, and compensating for this by having ranged units  available far earlier to the player, at the very least would rectify this quite a bit.

• Attacks of opportunity I see as a must. To simply be able to walk past a unit is unrealistic ...UNLESS you do it all in one move.

For example: If at the end of your 1st turn you end up adjacent to an enemy and then on turn 2 you try to walk away from them, THEN you are subject to a AoO.  BUT, if you walk past them all in one turn without ever being stopped next to them, you should be able to avoid AoO.  That way there's more tactical choices to be made,... which is good.

Then you could introduce a unit perk that allows them to attack someone even if they pass them all in one turn.

See how this all adds tactical spice?

• Bigger maps also good for me.
• Terrain bonus/negatives is important to me. Archers should get range bonuses on hills.
• Defenders should get defense bonus on top of hill.
  Should also get attack bonus if attacking from a hill if you're a Cavalry unit (chaaaaaaaaaaarge!)
• Tactical deployment of your units should be allowed. Or, at the very least the ability to set up your units before they come into contact (a la Dominions 3) should be allowed that way they enter battle already deployed in a reasonable formation.
• Range of archers should affect accuracy (maybe even damage) and damage should be ZERO at melee range.. or at the very least their defense should incur a penalty if you're in melee range of an enemy.

Age of wonders had those, and it worked. D&D invented the name, not the concept. I don't see what's stupid.