Combat is boring and doesn't take much strategy?

[Scrotum Scratcher]

Am I the only one that thinks this? Combat in this game seems to be just positioning your troops correctly then moving them forward to the enemy line... Once in combat, it's impossible to move as the enemy auto-attacks if you try to move out of their zone of control. Combat seems to be whoever has the best gear/luck wins. It then turns into a battle of attrition for whoever can land the most hits and absorb them. Am I missing something here?

[SleepyNarwhalz]

Later on you get perks that will make it so that all of your issues are mended. Also, if you try doing what you're describing against many of the monsters/wild things then you're going to have a bad day.

[Daergar]

Correct, you are missing a whole lot. I suggest reading a guide and maybe watching some youtube footage, should be of help.

[anaphylactic god]

i think you are wrong in so many level.
just simply having pitchforks or shield will allow you to push enemy back if you need it.

[LeftPaw]

I've finally cracked it. To be successful in combat you simply have to save-scum, keep trying until RNG falls in your favour.
This is where the dev's could improve the game amnesty by having a restart battle function, it would save us all a lot of grief.

[Deathblow]

You are not missing anything, and you are not the only one who thinks this. I would like to see a one attack per round limit for attacks of opportunity for zones of control.

[Scrotum Scratcher]

How exactly? Combat seems to be what I've described. Once the two lines collide, you just press buttons until the enemy dies. There's no maneuvering or reacting involved as leaving a zone of control gives the enemy multiple free hits until you get the rotation perk.

The only strategy involved in combat it seems is positioning, which you don't get much time with as the enemy is already on your center by the 1st or 2nd turn.

The rest is based on your gear and luck. It's all about heavy armor for absorbing hits, polearms for the extra range, and getting lucky with hit chance.

The only exception I've came across was with goblins. All I had to do was chase them or outshoot them with my own archers.

I'm not really having issues with the combat in the game. But it seems suspiciously straightforward and simple for this type of game.

[serpentology]

Well, combat is mostly about testing your positioning, your equipment and your builds. It's not like you solve a new tactical puzzle every battle or something. Figuring the positioning against different enemies, aquiring the needed equipment and choosing the right builds is the challenge. And I don't really see how BB is different from similar games in that regard.

[gungadin22000]

Just out of interest, what turn-based tactical game would you consider having excellent strategic depth?

[LDiCesare]

If you want to leave a zone of control, you have a perk for that. So you have to have made teh strategic decision of purchasing that perk and then to tactically use it.
You can also switch positions between bros. But again, you have to use a perk.
You can stun your opponent with a mace and get out of the zone of control with no damage.
As mentioned above, you can use shields, pitcforke, ... to push back enemies.
So, positioning involves re-positioning, both of your bro's and the enemies.
Putting your guys in a line may not be optimal. You may also want to use terrain to your advantage.

You can also switch weapons. So for instance, spearwall and then switch to a heavy damage weapon afterwards. Or shield/2H weapon (with adrenaline in particular).
You should also have a large back row of archers/polearms, who can not only move around, but also switch place with your front row if required.

You are correct that gear matters greatly, however.

Maneuvering when you are in melee with the enemy was never a thing. It wouldn't be realistic in my opinion. It makes some sense with firearms, but I've seen real military people question its use when under fire during military exercises because, if you do that, you usually get killed.

[Trappist]

Positioning and more importantly formation are indeed key, later game when you have specialised teams going up against high tier enemies in much greater numbers this is key to survival and sucess

[Hark]

I love the combat, plus love you Steam name Scrotum Scratcher!

[Sir Clavius]

Originally posted by Scrotum Scratcher:

Once in combat, it's impossible to move as the enemy auto-attacks if you try to move out of their zone of control.

Before getting perks you can use shield bash to push away the enemy away, or make shieldwall and try to move away, or you can use the pike/pitchforks to push away the enemy. So its hard to say its impossible.

Originally posted by Scrotum Scratcher:

Combat seems to be whoever has the best gear/luck wins.

Thats your problem...Dont fight the battles which demands luck and great gear. You cant win all battles.

Originally posted by Scrotum Scratcher:

Am I missing something here?

Yes you do. First you should show us account, how many hours did you played - that could be easier to trust with you and for us easier to say whats wrong with you. Meybe you have not enough hours in the game or meybe you dont even have a game.

[calmnesss13]

To some extent it is about positioning, but there is one thing where you are getting it wrong: it is not only about wall-to-wall attrition fighting - it is most simple tactic you can employ, but not the only one. Once the clash starts, you are not limited to attack spamming: you can shieldwall, knockback, use stuns, shield splits and other special abilties. You can choose fronts where you defend using all these defend abilities, stagger the enemies buying some time and fronts where you attack concentrating efforts of multiple mercs to land a kill. It is similar to german panzer tactics used during WW2 which relied on concentrating forces at one place to make an overwhelming strike and break enemy lines while troops on the flanks were defending and holding positions. This tactic allows me to engage and defeat enemies which are stronger than me by picking them one by one. If I have numeric advantage I use it, if I have speed/maneuver advantage - I use it. Simple wall-to-wall fight relying on attrition will lead you nowhere and is basically relying on luck as you mentioned.

As an example, I can provide tactic I use against undead parties with necromancers when I'm short on archers thus simply cannot snipe them and don't have enough killing power to just cut through their lines. Works even against large undead parties:

I create dedicated group which sole task is to get to the rear of undead formation and kill the necromancer. Usually it consists of 3-4 mercs:
- 1 merc which is "the killer"
- rest are "supporters" with the task to tie the undead and let "the killer" do his job

They start the fight by moving and enveloping the flank of undead formation. Undeads usually respond to that move and send number of zombies to intercept the party. That is the moment when "supporters" start separating from the group one by one to tie approaching zombies. Their task is to simply stay alive thus they mostly spam shield wall and chill until main party gets to them. By the time the last "supporter" gets intercepted "killer" usually gets to the necromancer which goes down pretty fast after that. The main party all this time was cutting through the mass of undeads and without necromancer support, undead lines start crumbling pretty fast. Then it gets to "supporters", helps them kill their zombies and gets to "killer" eventually.

Of course, it doesn't always happen without losses and sometimes some of the guys die. But it works and brings me victory which otherwise wouldn't be possible since undeads with necromancer are pretty good at the fight of attrition.

[Scrotum Scratcher]

Originally posted by serpentology:

Well, combat is mostly about testing your positioning, your equipment and your builds. It's not like you solve a new tactical puzzle every battle or something. Figuring the positioning against different enemies, aquiring the needed equipment and choosing the right builds is the challenge. And I don't really see how BB is different from similar games in that regard.

The actual fighting is really lackluster in my opinion. And choosing equipment is just choosing what gives the most protection. There is some variety in weapons but I think the ones that are actually viable are bows/pikes/1h and shield. I wish there was more difference in light and heavy armors. There are a lot of useless perks but I agree that the perk tree is better than most games like xcom.

Originally posted by gungadin22000:

Just out of interest, what turn-based tactical game would you consider having excellent strategic depth?

XCOM, Civ series, Total War, Breach+Clear, Sanctus Reach, etc...

Originally posted by LDiCesare:

If you want to leave a zone of control, you have a perk for that. So you have to have made teh strategic decision of purchasing that perk and then to tactically use it.
You can also switch positions between bros. But again, you have to use a perk.
You can stun your opponent with a mace and get out of the zone of control with no damage.
As mentioned above, you can use shields, pitcforke, ... to push back enemies.
So, positioning involves re-positioning, both of your bro's and the enemies.
Putting your guys in a line may not be optimal. You may also want to use terrain to your advantage.

You can also switch weapons. So for instance, spearwall and then switch to a heavy damage weapon afterwards. Or shield/2H weapon (with adrenaline in particular).
You should also have a large back row of archers/polearms, who can not only move around, but also switch place with your front row if required.

You are correct that gear matters greatly, however.

Maneuvering when you are in melee with the enemy was never a thing. It wouldn't be realistic in my opinion. It makes some sense with firearms, but I've seen real military people question its use when under fire during military exercises because, if you do that, you usually get killed.

There is no strategic decision of purchasing that perk... it's mandatory for any melee character really. And it's one of the later perks, so to unlock it, a character has to be lucky enough to survive all of the RNG that comes his way.

I shouldn't have to be forced in using a mace or shield just so my men are able to move. I should atleast be able to move around in my opponent's zone of control or be able to leave their zone of control with no attack of opportunity or make a cap on the amount of attacks of opportunity. I feel like it would open up a lot more tactics and strategy.

What do you mean it wouldn't be realistic exactly? Have you watched boxing? Medieval reenactments? People move when fighting. If a group came up to you and wanted to fight, you wouldn't just stand there and get surrounded. You would either run away or keep moving so only one person can attack you at a time. I think I might be misunderstanding you, because that was absurd to say.

Originally posted by Ulrich:

Before getting perks you can use shield bash to push away the enemy away, or make shieldwall and try to move away, or you can use the pike/pitchforks to push away the enemy. So its hard to say its impossible.

I feel like everyone should be able to move around in combat instead of favoring shields and polearms.

Originally posted by Scrotum Scratcher:

Combat seems to be whoever has the best gear/luck wins.


Thats your problem...Dont fight the battles which demands luck and great gear. You cant win all battles.

I know I can't win all battles. But I think battles should require some strategy, not just gear and luck.

Originally posted by Scrotum Scratcher:

Am I missing something here?]

Yes you do. First you should show us account, how many hours did you played - that could be easier to trust with you and for us easier to say whats wrong with you. Meybe you have not enough hours in the game or meybe you dont even have a game.

I don't know where my total hours are but I've been playing this game since early access. I don't have any dlc however.

[Something completely different]

Total War isn't turn based combat.

I think if you consider this game just gear and luck I think it isn't the game for you.
This game, much moreso then x-com where you can brute firepower your way out of poor positions, is about positioning, skill synerchy and using the right tool (weapon) for the right task. If you position poorly in BB or have the wrong weapons in the wrong place you're in deep trouble. No grenade, stealth, rocket, psionics or 100% succes skill will save your bacon.

I love X-com and Total war but those are both totally differant games with differant dynamics. Total war is RTS in battle and X-com doesn't even have zones of control but utilises overwatch to pin you down (Or rather, let you pin the opponent horribly down.)

As for medieval reinactments, I have some experiance there and people do NOT move out of a shieldwall once you're standing shield to shield or your side will be pushed down and hammered. Which is also what you want in BB, flanking. The art is to be manage that while being outnumbered.