This little game has recently exploded in popularity, about time we had a thread about it
>What is lines of battle?
Its a (deceptively) simple online game about Napoleonic warfare, you try to build an good army with the points you're given and fight your opponent in simultanious turns. Basically its an online version of a 19th century Kriegsspiel.
>Why should you play this?
The game is free and requires no download
The matches are short and sweet
It has an active multiplayer community (max 1 minute to get into a match)
Its very addictive once you get the hang of it and suprisingly complex
The dev is rapidly improving it, he just added some new units and 2v2 matches are coming soon.

Also, for the guys that already played: is there a way to make cavalry centered builds work? Whenever I run into a good opponent with cav only he sits on the nearest hill/forest/town and just wins.
I guess its realistic that cav eats dirt vs a good defence but it would be fun to see more wacky builds
vid related (srry for potato quality, I suck at WEBM making)

Looks fun but registration doesn't work

>>1974251 (OP)
Kriegspiel is like dungeons and dragons in the sense you have a limited view or pov and roleplay your military actions. The umpire/DM decides what happens. So I wouldn't say it's like kriegspiel. But the look is the same.

>>1974606
Alright I managed to register, I played an offline game before and it was fun, had to restart three times to understand there were other orders than "move" and win

I'll play more tomorrow

>>1974251 (OP)
>The standard Line Infantry, Hussars, and Foot Artillery are unlocked from the start, while rest can unlocked in the store using in-game currency
"No!"

>>1974251 (OP)
I'll take another look when 2v2 is implemented. Looks promising so far. Skirmish with AI was interesting.

Controls like absolute ass

>>1974649
The dev wants to add a fog of war mechanic later down the line, making it more like a kriegsspeil... But he wants to add a lot of stuff, for now its 2v2 that will be the main thing he works on.
>>1974766
Oh yeah, forgot about that. Dont know why every game feels like it NEEDS a progression system nowadays.

To be fair: you get the most important units from the start. Basic inf HAS to be in every list due to how the points work, hussars are a great support unit that also goes in most lists and the basic cannon is arguably the best arty in the game.

Still, my games would feel kinda dull without the guards (my beloved) to charge right into the toughest fights.

>>1975786
>Dont know why every game feels like it NEEDS a progression system nowadays.
So it can sell you quicker progression.

>>1974269
Where is your artillery bro, throwing rocks farther and more accurately is the main point of the warfare, it seems like you HAD to engage because there was no other option.
t. played the game once

>>1976107
I was trying to scientifically determine how much cav was too much cav... turns out you're right: Nothing screams "GET INTO A SQUARE NOW!" like fielding 5 lancers 5 hussars and no arty.

I have found more succes with elite cav builds... you still bring some arty and have fewer (but better) cav so its less obvious what you're doing. People still come forward to contest the middle and then get flanked by lancers and die. (good players still see though it though, they will always sit back with more arty)

>>1976314
I went with a cav-heavy no-arty army and rolled what is probably the most oppresive map for cavalry and managed to scrape out a win somehow despite making several heavy mistakes. It was a pretty fun game.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OGdAT2Gl-xs

Convince me that light infantry isn't a useless meme.
>same meele as line infy
>only slightly higher morale
>utterly insignificant 1/17 faster than normal infantry
>thair main advantage is that they're better at shooting, but infantry fire doesn't really matter and it's charges to the flank that actually break the lines and win battles.
Any advantages they have just aren't worth 50% higher cost.
I'd much rather have 3 line companies than 2 light ones.
Is there something I'm missing?

>>1977046
They seem to absolutely shred my line when they go up against my mix of guards and basic inf. Better shooting = better in melee in this game. Just shoot through units in melee and deal massive damage to the entire enemy line.

>>1977046
harass lines with them to create unequal morale balances in engagements when lines merge, then hang them out for free shooting. they're for efficiency/long term plays

started playing yesterday, got stuck in a 3 hour long slogfest on my third battle
great game
if you choose to play the grand battle mode make sure you don't tick higher than 2 minutes

>>1978662
how the fuck do you finish ordering that many units in under 2 mins?

>>1979080
you get good at it pretty fast

>>1975028
yeah it's the only thing that stops me from playing more

Anyone want to play a game to the very end together? It sucks getting matched with quitters who rout faster than their own troops.

>>1979080
The same way Nappy did it in his day: Don't move individual units, move larger standerdized divisions around. In the early stages of manouvering around and picking positions this helps a ton... when armies clash it still gets chaotic and overwhelming but who cares if a unit misses their turn? Its already in place shooting in the general direction of your enemy.

(Picrel: 5 inf 1 guard is the perfect standard division and any anon that claims otherwise is lying on the internets)

Also the hotkeys help a lot.

>>1981020
What hotkeys do you recommend?

>>1981028
The ones you automatically get. 1: move, 2: attack, 3: shoot, 4: does anyone even use this one? and 5: retreat.

Also you can hold shift to select multiple specific units, doubleclick to select all of the same type, that kind of stuff also helps

Some of you are so damn slow. I play on the 1 minute option and still the other guy will run out his clock every turn. Why play on the fast option if you're too slow?

>>1974251 (OP)
I might only need 1 min to match with someone but then half the time they don't bother playing the game and I get booted back to matchmaking without having played a game. wtf

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-vi8qgIFsfo
new update: 2v2 and multi-turn orders: so now you dont need to remember to chase fleeing enemies every turn

>>1977046
I played some more and withdraw all my criticism about light infantry.
All it took was learning about "retreat" button.
t. >1350 ELO shitter and climbing

>>1975786
Fog won't make it kriegspiel either. But confusingly kriegspiel and what is typically called a "wargame" in tabletop are two different things, so much that in germany they use "planspiel" instead of "kriegspiel" to mean the same thing, because it's mostly used for simulating plans of disaster response nowadays.

>>1988554
Fuck, forgot my main point, the fact that this game is a wargame and not a kriegspiel and that's fine, I love wargames and don't enjoy the loosey-goosey/roleplaying nature of kriegspiel that this game lacks.

Dragoons when?
I want my mounted infantry to compliment lance charges

>>1990199
Infantry called "Dragoons" are coming in the next patch but they're just a slightly more expensive/slower/tougher hussar. Boring.

>>1990475
Not infantry, I meant cavalry.

>>1974269
>surround enemy and smash into his already engaged troops
>lose
Total war is better than this

>>1993695
To be fair, he just yolo'd his troops into a waiting bayonet wall (after being shot to pieces by artillery and musket shots first). Play like a retard, lose like a retard.

>>1993695
Cavalry charges only work against arty or troops below 70% morale. (For best effect look for 50% morale or less) Because even when charged from the back, when they have >80% morale they still have their charge resistance up,
Therefore turning a charge into nothing more than "engaging in meele" which makes cavalry lose due to their negative resistances to everything.
Thats why you use artillery to soften the infantry up. Arty does more damage the higher the morale of the target, which means it's great for quickly weakening fresh squads, but not so good at finishing off the nearly broken.

>>1974251 (OP)
wtf i saw this in my dreams as a kid.
i like this. I wish I liked napoleonic era warfare more since I would be like a kid in a candy shop with this.

>>1990475
>just hussars but 5% different stats
Disappointed.
Was it really that gamebreaking to infantry unit (guns and meager charge bonus), give them cavalry debuffs and artillery movement style?
By that I mean slow on first turn, accelerates to cavlary speed on another, but only when using "move" command. They can still use "fire and advance" and "retreat" commands but get no movement bonus.

It's a bold strategy Cotton, lets see if it pays off for em...

>>1995026
I'm pretty sure they still use their normal movement values when in open terrain.

>>1995854
I also played a yolo-er just now. That they weren't <1200 ELO means it probably works on some people.

>>1995026
I wish that was how it was too, anon. Alas, fun shall not be allowed.

>>1981060
>4: does anyone even use this one?
I find it good for uncertian situations
Usually when defending arty against cav.
Is he going to commit into the charge or peel away? I'm not sure, so let's use this. If he moves in, he'll eat some shots on the way and my guys still get to where they need to be. if not, then they just walk a bit faster. Were I to use normal walk, they would have arrived faster, but still not fast enough to catch them in meele and I need that extra damage.
Another good place to use this is in cities, where I can never tell when do they have line of fire and when not and I don't feel like charging in just yet.
If anything, 3 is only really usefull for designating specific firing lines for these collaterals, but sometimes it's better to leave a squad without a target. I:E; when you have someone in the line of fire of your cannons and they need a moment to clear away as to not get a backfull of shrapnel. All units will automatically shoot as soon as they got clear line of fire, so this one is rather situational.

Changing the topic, does anyone else feel like their matches are unsatisfying, as if the other side quits way too soon?
The dude I just fought still had enough men and opportunities to turn this whole thing around and yet he pussied out like a little bitch.
I often feel like I don't really win over then, but rather outlast my opponents, who simply give up before I do.

>>1999185
>I often feel like I don't really win over then, but rather outlast my opponents, who simply give up before I do.
I feel you, anon. Maybe we could do some games together.

2v2 when

>>2000497
In two days

>>1999402
i can think of a few games, i often play lo
l but i'd prefer a multiplayer shooter more, what do you play

this game really needs attack move instead of requiring me to right click on every single unit on every single turn

>>2002676
oh you can tell units to attack? i assumed they did it automatically when theyre in range so i just moved into enemy units

>>2002676
You have "fire and advance" as well as "seek"
What other orders do you require?
>>2002693
They automatically shoot enemies in their cone of fire if there are no friendlies in the line of fire, but you can also tell them to fire manually, by chosing a target (they will rotate to fire at it if they have to) or a direction (they will continue to fire down that line even if there's nobody there)
If a unit touches the enemy they automatically engage in meele and cannot shoot.
Routed enemy units can prevent you from shooting, even if they don't fight back. They can also absorb charges so keep that in mind when pushing with cav.

Guys, I'm getting destroyed by horse archers spam. How do I counter them?

After the last rework is 12pdr still worth it compared to 8pdr?
The difference is one infantry squad and a little bit of range advantage.

>>2004959
I'd say it depends on your skill level and that of the opponents you wish to match with. The value of the 12-pdr over the 8 is in the amount of map control it gives you. This only really matters for opponents that appreciate the significance of map control and most new players will just as happily walk into the range of 12-pdr as 8-pdr guns, so their significant cost may be a strong downside.

So you pretty much have to go for the village if there is one, right?

>>2007475
villages are the true victory points. even if your opponent wins the battle, what does it matter if he doesn't control the village?

>>2007475
On this map I often find myself ditching the village and setting up my arty on the hills to the right. Some light infy and dragoons to quickly secure the right side and the rest of the infantry to catch up and form some lines.
If they have arty in the rear line I just hide behind the hills and wait for them to come. They either have to cross open ground or assault through the river, both of which put them at a disadvantage.
If I do decide to duke it out in the village, then (on larger battles) I often send some arty across the river and onto these hills to get some flanking shots.
Artillery crossfires are what wins infantry clashes.

Did the last update change how charges work?
It seems way harder to pull off a successfull charge now than it was before.
Do forests now offer some extra protection, that they didn't before?
Or is effectiveness of a charge now tied to current movement speed and not just the whether you were moving for half a turn or not.

>>2008236
Were you trying to charge into rough terrain? Apparently they give charge resistance.

Fucking "snap to the road" order/option when? I'm tired of having to trace every single line of every unit in the column along the road, just to avoid traffic jam.
>just use follow command
It doesn't work. The following squads don't follow the path, they just move in the shortest way towards the leading element. So on every turn they cut corners and end up slowing down the entire advance, fucking up the cohesion of the corps.

>>2009634
I gave up on roads myself and just had the first unit use the road to garrison the city fast and everyone else swims through the river in battle line.

>>2009634
i fucking know right
doing a 2v2 with some friends right now and i'm trying to get somewhere quick with like 12 cavalry using a road and it takes 7 minutes out of my day every fucking morning

>absolutely tearing some retard a new asshole
>suddenly connection timeout
>refresh
>magically his entire army that was routing now comes back and turns things around
Hate these cheating little nigger faggots

>>2011412
get ddos'd, fag

Fuck random 2v2s.
When your 1000 ELO teammate brings in half an army worth of militia and charges it into a gunline, ignoring the mass cuirassiers on a flank, then leaves you with 2v1 and -35% org regen due to losses.
The fuck you want me to do here, game?

>>2014631
It's really stupid that the dev implemented a team mode without adding in-game team chat at least.

>>2014777
Checked
And yeah, there really isn't a point to teamgames if you cant even blame your godawful team for losing (or call for help, or celebrate victory together, ect.) dev should really ad a chat first or 2v2 will die a slow death.

>>1977046
>light infantry is just line infantry but shoot better
lame.
Why not this:
>lower HP and org than regular inf
>-50% charge resistance and increased vulnerability to meele because of loose formation
>increased resistance to all ranged attacks, for the same reason as above
>rifles have less range modifiers (close range gives less bonus and long range reduces less)
>overall longer shooting range because rifles were a thing
>give them artillery style diminishing org damage (deal less org dmg the less organized the target is.) to represent sniping the officers but not having that much volume of fire as a blob of muskets do.
>maybe give them increased projectile absorption when hiding in the woods or buildings, as they are more likely to actually use these features instead of forming a neat line like regular units do.

won my first battle, good fight

>>2016911
another battle

>>2016911
He really pissed about in the early game and let you get a positional advantage.
>>2017042
Same here. It seems the transition from low to mid elo is realizing the losses in troop organization from taking artillery fire are minor compared to the advantage gained from grabbing a large part of the map and arranging your army in a desirable formation.

>>2018022
Here's a recent battle in which I'm matched against someone with nearly 200 more elo than me (even with the fight similar skill settings on)
Stalemated until he withdrew, I think he could've won but I'm clueless on how to proceed from this

>>2018072
In retrospect, I should've been more aggressive in either sides, taking the entire town would've been a good way to control the west of the map
I think I've forced myself into a battle of attrition by leaving free building terrain for them
I got too timid because of their artillery in the city
Still haven't come up with a plan for attacking the right side though, two river crossings is hard

>>2018121
Anyway, latest battle
My usual plan of "seize good defensive terrain then pivot the rest of the army around it" seems to have worked, is there an actual military term for this? Oblique order?

>>2018121
I'd move my artillery more aggressively. Taking one or two batteries to the left flank across the bridge could've helped to dislodge the enemy from the city faster. Also notice how your opponent moves multiple units in more cohesive line when attacking.

>>2018141
>I'd move my artillery more aggressively.
I'd definitely do that if I had horse artillery unlocked, but alas they are still behind a lot of ecus

>>2018150
All batteries can be moved aggressively, if so desired. 8-pounders are particularly good when deployed very close to the front.

>>2018212
Are they not slower than infantry/affected more than them in bad terrain?
Still, I prefer a mix of quick moving artillery for assaults and heavy artillery to pound enemies down which I don't yet have with 8-pdrs

>>2018219
Depends on artillery type. Howitzers are exactly the same speed as line infantry when moving limbered (moving continuously for at least 2 turns). 8-pounders are only very slightly slower than line infantry when limbered (same speed as militia). 12-pounders are the slowest, but even they are fast enough to keep up with the pace of the front if you're diligent with moving them.

>>2018219
Once limbered, 8pdrs move about as fast as infantry, so they don't slow you down as much.
Horse arty can actually outrun infy, which can lead to hilarious results when fighting lower ELOs.
>heavy arty to pound
keeping 12 pdrs back on the hill and letting them fire on the nemy from a distance is not a bad idea, but you got to remember that long range gives -75% dmg rate. Spending a couple of turns moving the cannon to a better position, especially when you don't need it to sway the engagement in your favour (because you have other means like flank cav, number advantage, terrain on your side) and especially if you can get those sweet sweet flanking shots.
It's always tempting to keep the guns back because often times 12pdrs can touch everything on the field, but you need to consider, how much is it actually worth?

I often try to put artillery on the flanks, so that it's easier to get enfilade fire going once infantry in the middle is engaged.

>>2018219
>>2018234
Here is a video demonstration of a match I played a while ago featuring aggressive artillery positioning of even 12-pounders in the right flank.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5XrPL4Qq1nk

>>2018212
One big advantage of moving artillery together with infantry is that you don't have to keep desiganted artillery defenders in the reserve to fend off potential cavalry leakers.
I always try to sneak one or tw ohussras behind enemy lines. Even if they can't get to enemy arty, they can threaten it, usually keeping seeral infantry squads away from the front. If the enemy decides to chase me off with their own cav, then that's always one or more squads that are not threatening my flanks or pushing my lines.
And if they don't, then you can always use hussars to harass and prevent reorganization of routed troops, which can be huge in protracted engagements.

>>2018238
Funnily enough I've actually already watched this video before actually trying out Lines of Battle, I had doubts on whether the average nip would play the games that you've displayed on your channel but this explains it.
Maybe I should try a grand battle instead of sticking to just battles

>>2018283
I only play Grand Battles out of personal preference. I just like bashing a lot of toys into each other. Strategies and tactics should be more or less applicable at all battle sizes.

>>2018241
Yes, this is also a big advantage. Some less patient players also tend to be provoked into attacking an artillery piece within movement range even when it's heavily defended, and such a mistake has decided many a match for me, even if I lose the one artillery they attacked.

>>2018212
>>2018238
Finally unlocked horse artillery and won a battle with them, lost my first match with horse artillery on Mediterranea Nucum to someone with 33 infantry, 6 militia, and a staggering 13 howitzers which is the first time I've encountered such an army
I've also taken some inspiration and used artillery more aggressively whilst also using militias to dish out ranged damage instead of using better infantry, this time there is no stalemate at the river

>>2018467
Horse artillery is the absolute worst if you're just going to use them as static batteries. To maximize your investment in them, you need to always make sure they're firing within their 2 nearest cones, and ideally, sideways into infantry, or into blobs of cavalry. Their mobility should let you do that. I suggest exchanging a handful of horse artillery for some bigger static artillery to sate your thirst for long range bombardment (if you really can't help it) and then use your smaller horse arty force as a focused group, walking side by side with your infantry/cavalry and then shooting at medium to close range only.

This will break you into the next tier of tactical dilemmas, present in mid-elo play, and that is how to then defend your artillery at the front from being overwhelmed by infantry and cavalry charges.

>>2018467
>>2018508
Oh wait, you were blue, weren't you? Never mind. You used the horse arty well.

>>2018510
Yeah, that's where I won with horse artillery, this is the one where I lost

>>2018513
Ah, I see. I see. When my opponent has (overwhelming) artillery superiority, I tend to try and use the terrain to undercut their firepower advantage. In this match, if I was facing this army using yours, I would simply sit back on the northern ridge and concentrate most of my troops on the left flank, with the high ridge protruding on the left side. Using that ridge as cover, push their flank hard and then roll their army from one end to the other with your cavalry superiority.
With your chosen strategy of spreading your army out, you allow them to play to their strengths. I presume they are also more or less capable in protecting their artillery with their infantry, since they're rolling with an army with no cavalry. This would cut into one of your winning strategies.

>>2018517
I didn't think of that because I thought howitzers fired in a high arc that could aim/hit at units behind a tall terrain, which is why I felt that I had to assault

>>2018518
They can shoot above terrain 1 tile higher than other artillery. But compared to the floor of the valley and the height of the ridge on the left - they still can't shoot through that, so it will still provide hard cover for your troops.

>>2018519
I'll definitely need more experience fighting an army that's not "standard" composition, that howitzer spam definitely threw me off balance

>>2018523
It can be pretty amusing. I once went against an army with nothing but hussars. In grand battle. I took it as a challenge to my also large cavalry contingent made up almost entirely of cuirassiers and what happened was a huge, retarded cavalry fight blob. I just stashed my sizeable infantry force inside forests out of the way of the real fight but my opponent still tried attacking them rather than duelling with my cuirassiers.

My fewer cuirassiers won, handily, by the way.

>>2018532
I haven't unlocked cuirassiers but I've always put them as a high threat along with lancers, definitely wouldn't engage them 1-on-1 with my limited variety of cavalry, would much rather force them into a staring contest for as long as possible

>>2018535
That's a good idea, yes. The best way to deal with Cuirassiers is to shoot at them with artillery. Otherwise, you want a combined force of infantry and cavalry. The cavalry should take the cuirassier's charge, then fall back behind infantry who can win in a prolonged melee against them (anything but militia).

Of course, the best place to be is to have cuirassiers of your own, to stare right back at them and fight on even terms if they attack you.

>>2018535
any infantry (that is not militia) can beat cuiraissiers in 1v1.
Cuirassiers beat dragoons and absolutely demolish hussars (-60% received dmg, deal 35% dmg extra, not to mention stat difference) but trade only marginally better with lancers, especially if the latter can get a charge off.
The main threat is them tying up your cav in a brawl.
>>2018513
You were too clumped up. Howitzers love big blobs of infy.
You had 12 and 6pdrs, you shouldn't have attacked, but force him to come to you. Your horse arty should have been circling around the flanks and pour enfilade fire into his line.
In this formation, keeping some cav mixed into the middle of your line could potentially allow you to do some breakthroughs and maybe tap some of these guns.
He had no cav whatsoever, so the mobility was on your side. Trying to use forests or towns against howitzers is pointless (they get 4% absorption, compared to other arty 60%)
BUT, howitzers get no enfilade fire (except when firing grapeshot), so you don't have to worry about turning sideways to them
t.1700 ELO shitter who got his ass handed to him by Ecu

>>2018628
just how insane is ecu, there's like a gap of 100 elo between him and the next player

>>2018634
he's just really good at the game. micro, mechanics, etc

I was proper spooked when I saw I was up against ecu but thankfully he failed to submit any moves