Recent Change to Generals

[Tom]

Then someone please put it into the bugtracker as a feature request so it won't be forgotten.

[Chaotrance13]

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

Can you elaborate please, Tom? What options are you thinking VMs should have?

I'll pop it on the bugtracker in proper format in a bit, but I was just wondering what you felt they should have access to.

[egamma]

Can you elaborate please, Tom? What options are you thinking VMs should have?

I'll pop it on the bugtracker in proper format in a bit, but I was just wondering what you felt they should have access to.

1. access to set formations
2. member of "all marshals" message group
3. access to the army information page that the marshal sees (might have this already)

[Chaotrance13]

1. access to set formations
2. member of "all marshals" message group
3. access to the army information page that the marshal sees (might have this already)

One question about the formations, then. Assuming that the Marshal and VM cannot agree and keep changing the formation settings to their preferences, what would you do about that? I'm just thinking if that happens, it can be seen ICly as insubordination or something like a power play of sorts. Which could be quite fun, depending on your perspective of it.

Don't get me wrong, I can see the advantages of that being available to a VM. Just trying to make sure all angles are covered, though.

[Indirik]

Each would be set independently. If the marshal is there in the battle, he takes charge and his formation is used. If not, then the VM takes charge and his setting is used. There would be no "change it back and forth" type power struggle.

[Chaotrance13]

Each would be set independently. If the marshal is there in the battle, he takes charge and his formation is used. If not, then the VM takes charge and his setting is used. There would be no "change it back and forth" type power struggle.

Yeah, that was the solution I was thinking of. Just wanted to clarify. With that in mind, I'll go and post it up.

[fodder]

...actually.. if you are going that way... on the marshal screen, there should be a bit that says what settings the vice marshal has.. and vice versa. (you can't change it.. but at least you can see it)

[Indirik]

Why would we need that? No one can see what formation the Marshal has set.

[Tom]

Nope, can't set it indivually, because the database stores it on the army level.

[Anaris]

Nope, can't set it indivually, because the database stores it on the army level.

Then we can add a SecondFormation field.

[De-Legro]

The issue I see isn't so much that Generals the way Tom envisions them can't work. Its that when a realm that plays that way comes up against a extremely dedicated and capable micro-managing general, they are at a disadvantage. Thus in the interest of winning conflicts their is extreme pressure for everyone to follow this path.

I am trying something different, and I will admit it helps that I have some of the best military commanders in my realm to rely on, even though that means I've got lots of competition for the General position. I'm trying to set the army up something like the Dorsai mercenaries from the Childe Cycle books. Under this system part of being a good Marshal is making sure that armies that will be affected by YOUR decisions are notified, and that you take their actions into account as well.

For example people worry about armies getting left behind if one Marshal decides to pull back, turning what could be a close fought battle into a significant loss. Now I'm not going to fall into the trap of being online for every turn change to make decisions. I have no interest in ruining my family life just so I can be online within a hour of the turn. The important thing is SOMEONE makes the decision to pull back and that everyone is notified. I empower the Marshal to do this. I'm under no illusion that I am somehow more capable to make the decision, so long as the armies understand how system works, then orders provided by any appropriate source will have the same effect.

I will stress though, that this system creates LOTS of paper work for the general. I need to communicate in detail the plans and strategies to the military council so that everyone has the information to make appropriate decisions. Hopefully a side effect of this will be that the good Marshal I have will actually feel like they have something more to do then parrot my orders, and that players that aren't experienced in the military side of the game will be able to jump in and really learn.

[GoldPanda]

I will stress though, that this system creates LOTS of paper work for the general. I need to communicate in detail the plans and strategies to the military council so that everyone has the information to make appropriate decisions.

How long does it take you to do this? Is your realm in a war right now?

[De-Legro]

How long does it take you to do this? Is your realm in a war right now?

Yes it is, but the war has quietened down quite a lot, so right now very little is required. It tends to be sporadic too. Given that the plan shouldn't be changing too often there is generally a requirement for a fury of letters in the turn the plan is laid out and then things are more more manageable.

In the end the system hasn't removed the need to "micro manage" its just changed who is responsible for that. Marshals are responsible for ensuring that the units of there armies are where they need to be, and informing the military council if a significant amount of CS has been delayed somewhere. The biggest hurdle is again with multiple armies, since no one has access to anything like the old General view. I don't see that as a major problem though, in most cases where that is needed a lot of the required data is available for those in region (ie what are our forces like after a battle, how much of our force has rallied). Marshals NEED to co-operate well under these conditions, which frankly is one place you can have problems. People will follow a Generals Order were they may argue with and debate against a Marshal. But like Tom says, a realm that can't pull their !@#$ together deserves to take some knocks, just like a realm that has Marshals working against the General would have

Of course there are advantages to de-centralising as well. I've seen realms do nothing when a General misses a turn and get destroyed cause everyone is waiting for "the man" to show up and issue orders.

I still think the largest problem is the feeling that the game requires military orders to be issued close to the start of the turn. I'm not sure what we can do to slow down the system, but so long as this is the case I agree that a well run realm with a single point of command in the General is probably going to have the advantage over a well run realm that has placed the General in a long term strategy role only.

[Peri]

Marshals NEED to co-operate well under these conditions, which frankly is one place you can have problems. People will follow a Generals Order were they may argue with and debate against a Marshal. But like Tom says, a realm that can't pull their !@#$ together deserves to take some knocks, just like a realm that has Marshals working against the General would have

I don't understand this. Just as I, humble troop leader, click the travel button confidently because I know my fellow nobles will do the same having received the order from the marshal without waiting them to read it, I, when one of the marshals, can confidently order my army to attack because I know the other marshals will do the same, having heard it from the General.

The army works fine because there is a single person which commands a bunch of people on a similar hierarchical level that would otherwise waste ages arguing. Marshal over nobles, General over Marshals.

I can agree that if a realm can't pull it together the moment a General is not around it deserves a beating. But the purpose of the game should not be to make this whole process harder by removing useful tools.

This does not meant the General should micromanage but that when the situation requires it, namely when different armies collaborate closely, he should have the tools to perform his task as chief of the entire armed forces. Because that's what he is tasked with: to make the war machine efficient and well oiled, and if that needs a sudden order to be done, well, be it.

This said, I still believe every general should be instructed by the ruler that his position is first and foremost a political one, the term minister of war being pretty fitting, such as assuring gold flows from the rich to the troops, dealing with allies, keeping nobles motivated and so forth. But it's not by removing the chance to act as leader of the Marshals that the latter side of the general's play gets developed.

[fodder]

Why would we need that? No one can see what formation the Marshal has set.

easier to look things up on the spot than talk and wait for replies that might not be given within the turn.

to be honest, there's no reason to hide it from anyone in the army anyway.. it tends to be mentioned in orders.. or at least the orders tend to include a load of settings... and i've yet to see someone give out orders and use a different formation for the purpose of anti espionage

--
anyway.. nothing in the game currently stops any tom, dick and harry issuing orders. whether refusal to follow that order will exact any retribution is down to the players