First line is more fun when fighting in formation 
Then you can be the one breaking the enemy line 
(coming from re-enactment perspective… so dying is probably a lot different)
Only 1 life for me thanks then a restart at last save. the videos of it gave a good impression of what it would be like you wouldn’t be straying to far from your unit anyway if you wanted to stay alive.
2 Likes
I would like to have 1 life, but if you die you start the big battle on new. And no chekpoints system where you save in the battle, and just restart there if you die. It can be frustrating for people if they die alot, speccialt towards the end, but I guess they just have to learn from there deaths…
2 Likes
I think it would be cooler if the battle is less scripted and more random so each time you die its a new experience. That would also add a new challenge because you wouldn’t be able to win based on memory but on skill.
5 Likes
yeah that’s what I meant last save before the battle
Well I guess if you look at things from a strategic PoV, when the ordered advance of ranks break down (either due to time factors, officers being killed, or orders not being followed / received etc.) naturally the battles would have a tendency to simply turn into groups of individuals fighting off against one another. Possibly back-to-back if you’re surrounded. But that’s never going to end well unless you’re in Hollywood 
The discipline required to not break rank and hold formation, obey instructions, and implement various strategies and counters really comes down to battle handedness, and experience. The veterans are more likely to hold formation longer, than say the ranks of a line of ‘green’ inexperienced infantry… especially in what might be deemed as pivotal points in an engagement.
So I guess factors around the level of experience and professionalism of the army, and the competency of the commanders (based on historical references and accounts of the particular battles) should *all things considered, feed into how the battle mechanic works in-game. How the AI acts or reacts to various situations and circumstances on the field of battle, and to what extent you as the individual can influence those actions or reactions.
As to the question at hand, surely if you die… it’s Game Over… and you just load your most recent previous save right?! No respawn rubbish. This isn’t CoD.
1 Like
Absolutely, if battles are going to be scripted, having to start over in case you die will be frustrating and anything but fun.
Time for a Deliverance Difficulty…
You die in a great battle, Savegame deleted!
Thus why i take the cowards way ill be an archer and stand at the back!
Actually, I have a better, more realistic idea.
Hunt the Commander.
As everyone (should) know, killing the commander of the opposing army isn’t going to make your enemies want to stand and fight for longer then they have to, so one man could make a difference if he was the one to kill a commander (especially if he isn’t too well known)
My own thought on living juuuusssttttt that much longer.
Has there actually been any info on large battles stating they are a frequent occurrence? I recall one video in which Dan stated that Act I would only have one or two battles.
I don’t believe there’s been anything specific. But what we do know for certain, is that there will be at least one large scale battle within with first Act.
I wouldn’t anticipate that a large scale battle in the context of the period and the story itself, would be a regular occurrence though. It’s simply not sustainable, in terms of cost and man-power etc… So my guess is in line with your thinking, we’ll probably see no more than two big battle encounters in Act I.
I see several problems with your idea and realism. First the commander would be high ranking noble possibly a king surrounded by his highly trained well equip body guard of knights. Also these battles happened in real life and as far as i know the leaders of these opposing armies weren’t killed by a black smith.
1 Like
Well its also another one of those Hollywood myths that if you defeat an enemy leader that their whole army just collapses and the battle is over.
I know more about the English so its hard to say what would have may occurred during this time in Bohemia, but during the medieval ages rank systems did exist and so there were auxiliary leaders.
Killing the enemy command doesn’t guarantee a retreat or even a loss in morale.
Also we aren’t the chosen one in this game so who knows if our role on the battlefield would even allow us to get close enough to an enemy leader.
BACK TO ORIGINAL TOPIC
I would like to see 1 life no checkpoints, you do it in one run or you don’t do it at all.
2 Likes
losing the commander does and did have a huge effect on morale and the command of the force often causing a bit of confusion until the second in command either takes hold of the situation or orders a retreat .
but no , certainly not “DROP EVERYTHING AND RUN !”
i do like the duke of Wellington’s quote on Napoleon’s effect though
“I used to say of Napoleon that his presence on the field made the difference of forty thousand men.”`
so a great leader can win battles on that merit alone . i would imagine if napoleons troops had seen him killed one of two effects would take place .
1)their will to fight on would be shattered and they may well decide to retreat (what the French do best 
)
2) or they feel a sense of revenge and fight even harder .
2 Likes
Here is an extreme example from the middle ages.
Wow that King Peter sure was bright. Its too bad he’s dead.
Yep.
Wasn’t really until after the Napoleonic wars that commanders decided to lead from behind instead of being the first one to attack.
1 Like
They should really teach King Peters tactics at military schools in modern times. Everyone has a lot to learn from that man.
Rommel did, and he was quite successful.