Recent Change to Generals

[Anaris]

For example, if a general treats his marshals as drones they will do as drones do. This means if you have them become addicted to General issuing orders every turn, then they will lose themselves when he is not around. General setting goals to his marshals for certain time period is better than holding them by the hand through the entire process. There is no point in marshal being just a messenger, he needs to be independent in giving orders but still follow the goals the general sets.

Biggest issue with this is that there are indeed few good marshals in the game. In my opinion being a good marshal is one of the hardest jobs around, and it takes a lot of time and effort. People probably just think that it's not worth it.

I think it's important to note that while both your first point (treating good people as drones is bad) and your second (there aren't that many good Marshals in the game) are true, we shouldn't mistake the second as being caused by the first. Yes, some people who are good Marshals have been treated poorly by a General who doesn't understand the competence of the people under him and thinks it's his job to pass out orders to everybody every turn. (I was one of those Marshals, in Fontan a couple years ago—though now I'd make a lousy Marshal, as my activity has dropped.)

More often, though, you've really only got one person in a realm who can meet both the strategic and time-related requirements of being an active military leader. That means that every roadblock to getting relevant information to that one person is another step towards defeat—and, more importantly, is one more piece of frustration for that person, with too much frustration leading quickly to burnout.

[Indirik]

I want the General position. But do you really think that Sun Tzu bothered himself with the equipment quality of every squad within his army? I've actually read him, and everything he says is rather general and abstract. Absolutely no micro-management anywhere in sight.

These RL analogies are cute, but they always fall flat. Sun Tzu had hundreds, or thousands, of people to do the micro-managing for him. People who's entire life revolved around filling the one duty that they had assigned to them. We don't have that, and we're not going to have that. We have a couple people trying to lead their armies and have some fun, with the little bit of time and information they have at hand.

I can see why we've tried to segment information, and tried to spread out power. But I think what we've actually done is concentrate power, but in a different person. Now it's Marshals who issue orders, instead of "anyone in the MC". Put all that power and responsibility in the hands of the marshal, and you burn out the marshal. If the marshal isn't there to give the orders this turn, what happens? Orders don't get sent out, and the army dies. Why? Because we're all conditioned that only marshals can give orders.

And finding marshals is really, really, really, friggin' hard! It's a !@#$ job. It's the worst possible job in the game. It's even worse than general. No one wants to do it, because they have to be able to be available to give orders twice a day, every day, reliably. Because they're the only ones who can give orders. Sure, you have vice marshals. But when the general gives orders to "All marshals", the Vice Marshals aren't included. (Why not? I've tried to get this fixed several times, but no one ever listens.)

I have seen so many times lately where we've been begging for people to be marshals or vice marshals, and no one ever wants to be general. Probably because they've been neutered and turned impotent. "Marshal Kepler, go deal with the enemy." What fun is that? Why do you even need a general to do that? And if the general's job is to coordinate with other realms, then yes, the general does need to be able to give orders per turn sometimes, because you're trying to coordinate attacks. And when you do that, you can't afford to be off by half a day. You can't afford any uncertainty.

Some of the best times I've had in BattleMaster, way back when I first started playing, were the military strategy discussions. 10 or 12 people in the military council discussing what we were going to do this turn to counter the enemy's moves. Ideas flying back and forth, and then whoever was there at the required time issuing the orders. It's wasn't necessarily the marshal, or even the general. It could have been the duke, or the banker, or even just a member of the Military Council. But it was a cooperative effort of people working together to address a situation and a problem, and overcome it. We were a team.

We don't seem to be able to get that kind of feeling anymore. Everyone has their assigned roles, and heaven help anyone who tries to step outside the borders of their clearly defined territories. But what if we don't want to run our armies that way? What if we want to do something different, because the way that you want us to do it just doesn't work for us, for our situation, or for the people we have at hand to run the realm? We only have a certain number of people to do it, and those people may not include those with the time and/or talent to run that way.

And if I sound frustrated and angry, it's because I am. Very frustrated, and very dismayed. What used to be one of the most fun parts of the game for me, the military campaigns and warfare, has become a long series of additional frustration, irritation, and annoyance. These changes which don't seem to make sense, or don't seem to have any clear purpose behind them. It's gotten to the point where I think I'll just give up on being any kind of Marshal/general at all.

Tom, I'd like to suggest that you try to run an army, and perhaps the armies of an entire realm, the way you envision them to be done. See if you can do it, and if the way that you want them to be done is something that realistically *can* be done. Make a new secret account and do it. I can pretty much guarantee that if you walk into a realm with a new account and claim to be a returning player, that you'll get a marshal position pretty quickly. And then just try and be a marshal in whatever realm you want. But do it from the perspective of a player trying to get it done. See how these changes that you've implemented affect the way that people play the game. I really don't think it's doing what you think it's doing.

[Zakilevo]

The only way to win a battle in BM is by overpowering your enemies with much stronger CS. You can't do anything about that. Maybe you can overcome 1k or even 2k if you have a superior setting but once you have difference of over 5k you have to either rely on a fortification or run like hell. There is no point on letting only marshals have the information that generals need. This change to me like people said, is only trying to split power to lower ranks unnecessarily. If you want to do that so badly why not disable the same information to marshals and vice marshals then make people be in charge of even smaller groups within their armies and only let them have the information? As you know well things like that won't work. We don't have that many people who are willing to actively dedicate themselves to marshal/VM positions. I thought BM was a game where people structure the game not GMs structuring the game for the players.

[Anaris]

The only way to win a battle in BM is by overpowering your enemies with much stronger CS. You can't do anything about that. Maybe you can overcome 1k or even 2k if you have a superior setting but once you have difference of over 5k you have to either rely on a fortification or run like hell.

This is true, but the dev team has been brainstorming like mad this morning coming up with ways to make it so that you can prevent your enemies from being able to have superior CS.

[Zakilevo]

Hope we get more than one strategic option soon. There are so many ways to improve the game except I can only imagine how those will meet a giant wall called 'coding' and stop.

[Chaotrance13]

And finding marshals is really, really, really, friggin' hard! It's a !@#$ job. It's the worst possible job in the game. It's even worse than general. No one wants to do it, because they have to be able to be available to give orders twice a day, every day, reliably. Because they're the only ones who can give orders. Sure, you have vice marshals. But when the general gives orders to "All marshals", the Vice Marshals aren't included. (Why not? I've tried to get this fixed several times, but no one ever listens.)

This. This a thousand times.

First of all, I get tired of the bull!@#$ saying "it's hard to find a *good* Marshal". I am Marshal of two armies - one in Westmoor (yeah, yeah, get the laughter out now, I know several posters in this thread consider them a laughing stock) and one in Old Grehk. I generally work my arse off in those positions. If I don't issue orders within five hours of a turn change - not twelve like someone else said before - I get bitched at ICly and OOCly for it. The inalienable right to play when I want really does not apply to me, it seems. In the case of Westmoor, I started out as a VM and learned the ropes from the current General, who was the Marshal back then. In some cases, I'm still learning. You want a good Marshal? Help out by teaching them the basics, and letting them learn through experience. Things won't always go to plan - but we learn from when things go right and wrong.

Anyway, onto my main point. The leadership styles of the Generals in those realms are very different. In Westmoor, the General tends to micro-manage a little bit. For example, some Undead spawned in Evora. He tells me to send a couple of nobles down to deal with them. I choose who I want to go based on my knowledge of activity rates and what I know of how to fight NPCs. All being well, the orders are executed, the Undead are beaten, and we rally in one of the cities and do whatever it is we need to. In my eyes, that works fine for me. I don't mind being given the free reign to execute my orders as I see fit. However, I prefer not to be constantly told "move here, do this" because I'm not a drone.

Old Grehk is the reverse, generally. Okay, we're fighting against Tom essentially via his daimons, so it's kind of fighting one man rather than, say, twenty. But as the Marshal there, I pretty much have free reign at this point in time. I haven't given orders out for the last couple of turns because I'm dangerously close to suffering from burnout. It also doesn't help that the Banker from that realm is an insufferable dickhead towards me OOCly which has made me consider quitting the game for good. Having to tread on eggshells to do my job is not a good thing. But that aside, I enjoy the freedom to give orders, assess the situation and devise tactics to deal with the threats we or our allies encounter. An example is this, all the recent losses in Verdomite against the Flesh-eaters were planned. I gave the order to hold the line against them for a good three or four turns. I did this because I acted on intel from Rob (interestingly enough) that told me what their special ability was. I decided that based on that, I would try my best to whittle the enemy forces down enough to make them less of a threat if they then went on to use that ability of theirs.

Being Marshal can be a very tough and punishing job. Like I said before, if I don't issue orders quick enough, I get berated as a character and as a player for it. I have to deal with people insulting me - again as Ravier/Malos or as Ryan, the player behind them as well. Rob is right, it's unforgiving. The problem is that everyone holds a different view on the role of the General and his Marshals, if applicable. And that won't change. Personally, I'm fine with the General, Minster of War or what have you giving me a basic instruction, and I implement it in my own way with my knowledge and experience. How this whole rant ties in to the original topic is this: I have no qualms about letting a General see what I see in the Army Information screen. But I would prefer they can see it so they can discuss with their Military Council about the best course of action. But I don't honestly see any kind of compromise between the various views here.

(Note: I am aware that people will come along and say "Oh, well, that's not representative, it's all hearsay. Frankly - stick it. I don't give a rat's arse or a flying monkey's whether stating my experiences as a Marshal in two armies is subjective. It's supposed to be. And secondly, I'm sorry if this entire post comes off as a rant, but it is in part. I'm just tired of people thinking it's an easy role in your realm, and wondering why it's hard to find a good candidate.)

[Geronus]

Problems with multiple Marshals:

1. One Marshal issues orders substantially later than the other, resulting in botched movements, or they issue different orders due to misunderstanding.

2. Two or more Marshals use different command staff settings in the same battle, which is generally a recipe for total disaster.

3. Each Marshal feels less able to make independent decisions since he only controls a portion of the friendly forces in a given area; as he has no authority over the other portion, his making a decision to move could result in split forces and defeat in detail. Thus even if one Marshal realizes the force in Region A is about to get pounded by a concerted enemy attack, he may be reluctant to order a retreat since he doesn't have any authority over the other army in the region and doesn't want to hang them up to dry.

All of these things happened in the waning days of Ibladesh and contributed substantively to turning what might have been victories into disastrous defeats.

[Indirik]

If I don't issue orders within five hours of a turn change ...

Five hours? Five hours?! Damn... my general rule is if you can't send an order within two hours after the turn change, you don't send the order at all, unless it's a do-or-die emergency. Back in "the day" in Perdan, our standing policy was one hour. Give the MC one hour to issue orders. If you don't get orders by then, you're pretty much free to do whatever you want. We knew that for every hour you waited, you lost somewhere around 10% of your army to non-movement. And when your army is 80 characters (if not more) then that's easily 3K CS per hour you delay.

But yeah, I know what you mean with most of your post. I tried the "give the marshals an objective and some general guidelines" thing with my latest general. It was a flop, and I was told that I should take a more hands-on approach, and give orders myself. With the things going on in RL, I can't really do that. In fact, I'll probably have to give up General soon, and let someone else take over. I'm sure that will be fun. No one else at all has run for the past two months. I only ran the first time because after three days no one else was running.

Overall, you really do need to tailor your command style to deal with the people that you have to work with. If you have a go-getter marshal, like Herulcamo in Darka, you give them the objective and let him run with it. But you don't always get that. Many times (not always) you get a marshal who expects to be told what to do. And that's really hard to do when you lack the information to do it.

[JPierreD]

In Westmoor, the General tends to micro-manage a little bit. For example, some Undead spawned in Evora. He tells me to send a couple of nobles down to deal with them. I choose who I want to go based on my knowledge of activity rates and what I know of how to fight NPCs.

Old Grehk is the reverse, generally. Okay, we're fighting against Tom essentially via his daimons, so it's kind of fighting one man rather than, say, twenty. But as the Marshal there, I pretty much have free reign at this point in time.

But that aside, I enjoy the freedom to give orders, assess the situation and devise tactics to deal with the threats we or our allies encounter.

In both examples you've given the Marshal seems to be doing everything. In the first one the General seems to say "hey, undead/monsters spawned in region X, deal with it", which makes him utterly irrelevant, since you already know where rogues have spawned. In the second one I don't even see a single task for him to do. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

[GoldPanda]

Most realms these days (in other words, the ones that are still alive) tend to field one or two armies per front. And realms that are forced to fight on multiple fronts tend not to live for very long, except the big and powerful ones.

I see a thread on the blobbing effect. I shall try to contribute some ideas there. But ultimately, ideas are cheap and programming time is expensive, yes?

Summaries, especially CS totals, by army AND by region would be fine. I could work with that. But, Tom, please keep in mind that, most of us are not micro-managing because we like it. We are micro-managing because the combat system encourages it, and we like winning in a pvp game.

Seriously. I do a happy dance when my General char gets to send off an army on its own mission. That means I don't have to worry about that army until it has to refit, and I realize that the Marshal's player probably enjoys it as well. If there was a way to do that all the time, without getting the whole realm killed, I would do it. Unfortunately, most of the time, the optimal strategy is to blob up, and if I try to pass orders through the Marshals, I get asked questions like "Why don't you just send orders to everyone directly? Everyone got the same orders anyway."

[Indirik]

FWIW - GoldPanda has been running CE's war machine for, what, 2.5 years now? This guy knows what he's talking about.

[Chaotrance13]

In both examples you've given the Marshal seems to be doing everything. In the first one the General seems to say "hey, undead/monsters spawned in region X, deal with it", which makes him utterly irrelevant, since you already know where rogues have spawned. In the second one I don't even see a single task for him to do. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

I may have over-simplified in the first example, to be honest. What I was trying to get at was very much a case of "This army go here and do that, that army moves over here and does this" on most turns if there is any kind of battle being fought. We don't have that issue on EC right now, but when we do then he usually takes control.

Five hours? Five hours?! Damn... my general rule is if you can't send an order within two hours after the turn change, you don't send the order at all, unless it's a do-or-die emergency. Back in "the day" in Perdan, our standing policy was one hour. Give the MC one hour to issue orders. If you don't get orders by then, you're pretty much free to do whatever you want. We knew that for every hour you waited, you lost somewhere around 10% of your army to non-movement. And when your army is 80 characters (if not more) then that's easily 3K CS per hour you delay.

The problem there unfortunately is I'm in the UK, so turn change is 5am. Unless it's critical that I'm on to give the order at the right time, I think I'm staying asleep. However, I did like having turn changes at 12pm and 12am when I was staying with my fiancée in Rhode Island, so when I make the move over there, that'll change. But I don't really want to do what I had to be doing with Cybernations - having to get up at 5am during a big war to attack my opponents. Now if other members of the MC who were in America issued orders on the Sunrise turn, whereas I could issue them on the Sunset turn, there's an idea.

[Zakilevo]

That is why you get a VM living in a different time zone  ;)

[Tom]

Ok, I gather that it would help immediately if vice marshals had roughly the same options as marshals?

[egamma]

Ok, I gather that it would help immediately if vice marshals had roughly the same options as marshals?

Yes.