POSTURE concept for armies on my experience with LH .75 start ups: It’s is delivery, its my new army - served up for monster dining pleasure. Yes, I've experienced buggy tac-map placement as well –where my troops are scattered all over the place, and don’t cover one another’s flanks, and just become juicy bits for even slow opposing troops to consume. One workaround I use helps, but slows the game down ‘a bit' is to pick encounters very carefully, train a bunch of units (up to the max stack, plus a few 'replacements'), and accept losing many, many troops, and a few cities to monsters as a price of getting my domain established.

Army POSTURES to the rescue… Definitions: stack = army = one or more units (troop/hero) grouped together on big map. Troop = an individual formation of soldiers, or a hero, on the tac map. Rank = one of four groupings/lines of troops on the tac map. “<>” relative distance, front to rear, of ranks within an army on tac map (or of troops within a rank, side to side). “<>” = one empty square between. “<><>???<><>” = distance will vary depending on current postures of both armies being placed on tac map. Enemy troops [closest part] <><>???<><> Melee rank<> maneuver rank<><>forward ranged rank<><><><><><><><>rear ranged rank. Ranks named: <> MeleeRank: front - closest to enemy = heaviest armored, melee equipped<><> MobileRank [maneuver/mounted/fast-light]: just behind melee rank = mounted troops, very fast and light skirmisher types, and non-ranged heroes <><><><> Forward Ranged Rank: ranged heroes <><><><><><> Rear Ranged Rank: dedicated ranged troops (archers, catapults).

Commentary: It seems that this is already ‘mostly’ done on settlement combat/tac maps.

Ranks described: Rank closest to the enemy is the melee rank. They form a line (usually) in front of their mobile rank. Archer /ranged elements from the ranged rank, placed (since range is currently irrelevant as far back/away from enemy troops as possible. Mobile (mounted, skirmisher, [also maybe first turn charging] troops are placed just behind the melee line. Heroes, with melee weapons equipped are placed with mobile elements – not in front line. Heroes equipping ranged weapons are placed between the archers and the melee heroes / mounted troops. Troops are not generally bunched up and the forward two ranks have one square between them – forming two lines, heavier melee rank shielding the lighter, mobile rank.

POSTURE = new concept/game engine device that [further] defines relationship between army on big map, and arraignment [placement] of its troops on tac [battle] map.

Postures named: Flexible defense, defensive-dug-in, force-marching,* attacking, surprised. Army posture determines tactical placement of troops. Successfully adopting a posture requires a stack/army to expend movement points. This gives a decisive advantage to stacks on home turf as stacks currently move a max of two squares in enemy territory. Posture described: Every stack has a posture. The current posture of a stack strongly influences how its troops are placed within ranks (relative to one another - and in relation to the opposing units) on the tac map. The idea here is that an army’s troops are placed on the tac map in a formation. The formation is implemented by the game engine, and the army placed, as a group, not individually, on the tac map.

This way, posture choices have some chance to be implemented. Sometimes, opposing troops may be placed closer to one another, or further apart. But each army will have (unless surprised) some semblance of cohesion, troops will not be scattered. Instead of placing troops to ‘fill up’ the tac map, (as at appears the game engine does currently) the army’s troops will be placed on the map in formation. Fully mounted stacks may move further and still adopt many postures. Adopting a posture would consume a minimum amount of movement points on the strategic map. Thus, adopting (choosing, implementing) a posture would use some or all of that stack's movement. Armies with 'tireless march' active, or composed entirely of mounted troops/heroes could move further before choosing a posture. "base movement" = maximum number of movement points a stack with non-mounted troops has to expend each turn on big (or cloth) map. "Mounted movement" = the additional number of movement points a stack has above that of a foot stack. An army composed of mixed foot and mounted troops would only have 'base' movement. Not sure how 'tireless march' spell would interact with this. Perhaps, tireless march active on foot troops would give them the mounted movement

Posture-flexible defense means the stack expends up to one half of its movement and does not initiate an attack. Its posture is to attempt to move carefully on big map while anticipating an attack with a flexible formation. It has time to prepare for an attack from any direction so its ranks face the enemy appropriately. Enemy<<>???<><> friendly melee<>friendly maneuver<>ranged hero<>dedicated reserve. Defending army has cohesive formation, and some distance from enemy formation so as to actually attempt some tactics upon approach –ie, not get defeated in detail (destroyed piece-meal). The second rank [maneuver] will be placed behind the first rank, but also weighted towards one flank or the other. This is so the mounted troops may move past the melee in a cohesive group, and not be blocked by the slower (later moving) melee troops. Those really fast critters may get a first strike anyway… but enemy soldiers won’t get the jump. Initiative is determined as currently implemented in v0.75.

Posture – defensive-dug in: Similar to flexible defense, but pure melee troops (melee, non-mounted) are entrenched (double defense [immune to swarm attack?] – can’t change space first move, melee attack only from entrenchment if enemy moves adjacent prior to first move). As long as melee troop remains in the trench, it gets double defense (and/or immune to swarm? and or immune to bash). Melee troop may abandon the entrenchment on its second or later move. Other melee troops (including enemies) may move into entrenched square. If they skip a move while in the entrenchment, they get the double defense bonus [and/or swarm /bash immunity?]. Melee troops equipped with throwing knives are still considered pure melee troops for entrenchment purposes. Using their throwing knives done not remove their entrenched status. Ranks are closer in dug-in formations. Formation is placed on tac map from rear to front. Pure archers placed against edge of map furthest from attacking enemy. Ranged heroes are placed immediately in front. One empty line (rank) is placed to distance the Ranged heroes rank and the Maneuver rank. Maneuver rank next, and then entrenched melee rank out in front. Enemy <><>???<><> entrenched melee<>mounted<><>ranged heroes<>archers/cats. (Catapults- not felines). Attacker gets bonus to initiative on first one (or two?) rounds.

Posture – forced marching: Army uses more than half its movement. Army does not initiate an attack. If forced marching army is attacked, its formation on tac map is a spaced out column of troops. If defender has enough troops, the column may extend across the entire tac map. Placement of troops will be mounted at ends of line (front and/or rear depending on number of mounted troops). One end will have melee troops, the other archers, cats. Heroes may be anywhere in the line... doing what heroes do when off duty…. Obviously, a player won’t ‘march an army unless in relatively safe territory. Or the forced marching army may get surprised… This can also happen if you are moving thru unknown territory and run into a monster/army. –ie, don’t trust the PC to determine your army’s path, move it yourself. Attacker gets bonus to initiative on first round.

Posture – attacking: Army uses up to one half of its movement and then attacks an enemy army. Formation is similar to flexible reserve. Primary differences include: Melee rank placed within one move of closest opposing enemy rank. Mounted units placed along one ‘flank’ of melee rank. Ranged heroes placed just behind (relative to enemy) the melee troops. Archers/cats still placed as far as possible from enemy – but still behind friendly ranks. Attacker gets initiative bonus on first round.

Posture – surprised: One doesn't (usually) choose this posture - it is inflicted by the relationship between both sides postures. Defender placed as in forced marching. Attacker placed as in attacking, somewhere close to surprised troops archers or heroes (or both).

Note: *’force marching’ is not same as spell, spell (of same name) merely adds more movement points for army to use.

.(a) I haven’t quite sorted out how certain postures would relate to other postures. WIP…

.( Some options to consider, if possible:

.(1) Posture – defensive-dug- in: allow player to dismount riders and convert them into pure melee troops? Mounts lost. This might be an automatic part of adopting this posture. Or, perhaps be implemented by player /AI choice when adopting this posture for the army that turn. If army not attacked, mounted troops remain mounted. This would not apply to heroes and they keep their mounts, even if entrenched. Commentary: If LH /FE) implements a way to change the equipment of troops by adding mounts to troops originally trained as foot soldiers, then the whole thing about losing mounts is very secondary.

.(2) Posture-attack (center, left, or right): Allow the army to designate, as part of the posture chosen, left, center or right. An attacking posture of center, for example, means the attacking army’s mounted troops are placed within striking range of the enemy center (interspaced with melee troops). Attacking left means the attackers mounted troops would be massed to attack from the left side of its army’s center melee line (near the opposing army’s right flank). The melee, heroes, archer troops, etc., would be placed as normal. The mounted troops could then attempt to envelop the enemy flank and initiate swarm, etc.

.(3) Posture flexible-defense (center, left, or right): -left would place the mounted troops to left of center melee rank, as above, but a space or two further away from enemy. This is an attempt to use an enfilade type set up to counter an opponent’s attempt to envelop your flank.

.(4) ‘open’ and ‘closed’ postures: open would have a space between each troop in a rank. Closed would have troops in a rank shoulder to shoulder. This probably has little affect unless troop facing is added to the tac map, Additional tactics not requiring Postures:

.(5) Bash ideas: Troops successfully ‘bashed’ to retreat that have no empty square in which to retreat take additional damage. They may not retreat ‘forward.’ If they retreat next to an enemy troop, they take additional damage. Troops entrenched ignore successful bash results against them.

.(6) Pole arms and cavalry: Troops equipped with longer spears (pikes/etc) take less damage from mounted troops and inflict greater melee damage to mounted troops.

These suggestions, refinements posted will be edited into this space for clarity and ease of use for developers.Thanks to all who add constructive refinements to this.