Order cancellation

WildBill wrote: I think i read or heard a rumor some where that they may be adding fog of war.  So when your caravans get destroyed at least you won't see it coming.

At least? Some consolation haha. I love the fact this game is still in its infancy. So many new features

Cool, that seems very reasonable. I understand your reasoning, primitive communications. But if primitive communications so important, why let us see so much of what others are doing? Logically if I can see it coming or happening, I should be able to do something about it.  But I like the coming option.

I am total disagreement with most of this philosophy. By not allowing people to cancel or change orders, all you are doing is stregthening the bulllies. They know armies are trapped in place and can dispatch and kill at will. Why is it so hard to allow players that see armies aproaching their Caravans to quit harvesting and return home early. Why even let players see aproaching armies then?

This has been fairly well covered in other threads, and I think the quote of mine that was brought in here earlier came from one of them.

So I'll cut'n'paste something that might be relevant.

GM Stormcrow wrote: bow locks wrote: hmmmm, so we cant contact moving units but can contact stationary ones?  surely either type is as easy to contact, but a unit in movement can change direction much easier than an encampment set up for a few days can suddenly scarper. cos one of the few risks at the moment is the military encampment, or the stationary caravan.  you know when you give that order that that camp will be exposed for that time.  its the only real risk in game tbh. Interception has to be a major future element of tactics and strategy:  withdraw automatic notifications, set up scout fronts, detect hostile units, set up ambushes.  allow feints, indirect movement, route planning, ............ Bow I think we have the same agenda, bow - but that (with respect!) you haven't thought it through :) Moving from A to B but allowing someone to change orders halfway and go to C instead does not encourage ambushes or interception - it achieves the exact opposite. Allowing people to change orders half-way and go elsewhere instead simply means that no one would ever be ambushed or intercepted, ever, because no one would ever carry out the order they originally gave to their army; instead choosing to countermand it halfway along the route. By allowing new orders to be issued to armies once they've reached a stationary point, you allow circuitous movements and unclear ultimate objectives by the moving army, but equally allow chances for ambushes and interceptions by a third party who divines the *current* orders of the army by scouting or scrying or metagaming, or whatever.  Allowing new orders to be issued en route actually undermines this mechanic. Think of "feints, indirect movement & route planning" simply as ambush and interception opportunities at the pause during an armies' movement from A to B, pausing, then moving to C, then pausing, then moving to D etc.

ie. We will allow changing orders for:

• a) "whoops" moments within a short time period after dispatch
• b) units that are abroad but stationary, communication with the stationary unit(s) to occur via a Messenger unit

But, specifically, not changing first step mission objectives after units have been dispatched. 

Allowing this would undermine the major premise of many of the diplomatic skills (esp when combined with some of the unit enhancements being planned), the scrying school (when it arrives), but it would generally also undermine opportunities for carefully planned ambushes, as well as the purpose of the feint skill.

Best wishes,

GM Stormcrow

Thanks Crank, much appreciated.

I should add, as well, that we will be adding an "omg, I messed up" button that will exist for (we think) 1 minute after an order is given - construction, research, production or unit movement - that will allow you to cancel the order; and reimburse (a large part, but not all) of the materials used in the order.