please remove the change that ends movement after combat.

This change has slowed down the game too much.  It's really frustrating to quickly kill one unit and then have to wait to kill the next one. 

Frustrating --> boring --> playing less.
Suggest chopping off moves depending on how quickly the battle goes.  If I can kill the enemy with one tactical move, I should not be penalized more than one strategical move.

I see the point behind this limitation (preventing uberstacks from rolling over several smaller stacks in 1 move) but I really think they should make it so that the moves after combat are reduced to ONE and not Zero... this way you retain some limit but can still enable stacks to move into a lair after killing the monsters in it.

What's wrong with that?  It's called blitzkreig.

In real time, even in blietzkrieg, there would be some time for the enemy to respond and adjust. In turn-based environments, doing several battles in 1 turn is like moving in frozen time (no chance of reply from the enemy) and therefore is rather unfair...

Blitzkreig was usually conducted with the co-ordinated move of several army units and not one super-unit "simultaneously" killing all enemy forces, which is what the single-turn sweep seems like to the enemy in a turn-based game.

Hope that makes sense

A simple change that would make more sense (to me) would be to make attacking a city use up all your movement points.  All other battles would take 1 movement point.  That would effectively slow the stack of doom, but wouldn't make gobbling up stray units as much of an exercise in tedium.

Additionally, if the unit attacked has no attack power then it should be a free move to attack them.  So that attacking a caravan or settler wouldn't use any movement points.  Not sure if that sort of thing is possible or simple to accomplish, but it's silly that killing a caravan on the road takes an army a full season to accomplish.

I agree with FuzzyGold. In other TBS games in which units move a lot more tan just 1 or 2 tiles per turn this "frozen Blitzkreig" happens and there is no problema with that. See HoMM as an example, but there are many more.

I'd be behind the initial step of:

city attack uses all, all others leave 1 movement point

or

each attack consumes only 1 movement

I would lean towards the first as the player would seemingly have a massive advantage with the 2nd scenario -  Its not abnormal to make up a 5 move stack of doom.   It would be rare for the AI to be able to optimize a stack in such a way that a) it had a bunch of moves and powerful enough that it coudl survive 5 combats without undue loss.

Blitzkrieg seems to be all player advantage.

A simple-ish way to deal with the 'multi attack blitzkreig' is to only allow one attack per turn. 

Of course, then you would withdraw after combat if you had MP's left, but then isn't that supposed to be the advantage of a a faster unit?  To balance that, I'd say that combat costs 50% of your total MPs (round up).  That way, 5 MP stacks would have used 3 MPs in combat, so they might be able to move in after combat, and then retreat one square/advance an additional square.

I still say that if you attack a stack, you've essentially moved into the enemy square to attack said enemy (note the intermingling of units during combat), so by attacking, your stack should be moved on top of the enemy stack before combat begins.  This would solve a few issues...

So why not just make combat eat 2 strategic movements such that if an army has 3 movement it has 1 left and if it has 4 initial movement it has 2 left.  This way it balances moving into an area, one movement value, the fight itself, another movement point, that leaves the remainder for where you are standing.

A agree this needs to be changed.   I understand the reason it was implemented (to slow down the human players) but it slows down turn to turn gameplay so much and turns into more of a grind that is not fun.   Simply using all movement for any stack for any battle is oversimplified.   If the human must get slowed then this needs to be re-thought and a more elegant approach used. 

The only problem with not being able to move after combat is the AI stealing treasure from lairs. That is the problem that needs to be solved.

Agreed it has to go. A stack of one-unit armies can hold a key choke point this way for as many turns as it has these one-unit armies. It's silly IMO.

Actually, attacking units adjacent to cities with a stack formed within the city moves your stack on top of the city, so it isn't available for defense, and this can be rather hard to spot on the map.  Those are two of the other issues that result from not moving into the square you are attacking.

.85 talks about merging units back into city at the end of your turn if they do not have a path declared, but I'm not sure if attacking an adjacent stack counts as a 'movement path' or not.

+1

This issue needs to be addressed. Also the city militia only being available for one attack (attack a city with 2 stacks and only the first one will have to defeat the militia).

I for one like the limitation. It involves more strategic planning on my part and that is quite enjoyable.

I really do not understand the reasoning behind this change. I was hoping LH was about Heroes.

Instead, the devs seem to be doing everything in their power to nerf them.

This limitation makes the game incredibly slow as well. I usually pick 'dense' monsters. Now the lairs around my capital spawn faster than I can fight the monsters.

...so stop choosing dense monsters?

I like the fact that you can only attack once with a unit. It requires more army planning and prevents one stack from steam rolling everything (or at least slows it down). I have no problem with being able to attack once per stack, I just wish you could move afterwards. That would let you collect items, and retreat from difficult situations after combat.

At the very least attack must equal movement. It does not make sense attacking a monster lair and then waiting outside the lair for a full season...

This is a very good change. You can't og arround and do everything with one stack.

I played yesterday and finally I had huge problems when the AI attacked my land With 3 huge stacks. Now more armies are needed earlier, not just one super army, or at least there are trade-offs and rewards to both strategies.

This change improves strategical planning with your armies a good notch.

And perhaps the most important point: Cavalry and infantry balances better out after this change. Especially after next patch where cavalry units will be more expensive as well.

Why? Because one costly superstack pure cavalry army will also have to end it's turn after combat, making it's movement bonus mean less compared to infantry then it used to. + Having more armies being important will lead to more importance/usefullness of pure infantry armies since they are more affordable (or infantry combined with the expensive cavalry in support roles only).

All this ties together in the greater design of the game.

How huge a problem is this really? Far from game breaking and you can use it the same way vs the AI. It's a part of thinking forward.

That is exactly my opinion, too.

I like the idea of more armies if I was rewarded for the effort of defeating them properly but that is a separate issue from the one here.  A highly mobile force, should be able to at least advance to the place they just won at and claim what they won instead of losing it to someone who was sitting on the sidelines until the fighting is done.

Once again, I think the best solution would be to limit the movement of the armies after combat just as it happens now - only instead of zero moves the limit should be to ONE more move (for those armies which would have it anyway). This would provide some small reward to more mobile armies and allow the stack to choose between:

- moving into the space occupied by the losing army

- attacking another adjascent army (which would use up their last movement point and therefore would leave them at zero after a second fight) or

- flee in the opposite direction

You are right, it isn't a huge problem. I merely meant that, in terms of the OP's post, the only downside I see from having combat use all of a units movement is that you can have lair items taken from you. It just frustrates me to see an enemy take something I feel I earned. You should be rewarded for clearing lairs and defeating tough opponents. And it seems like such a simple change: have an attacking force move to the tile it attacked if it is free (and not a city).

Very good points.

Overall, I appriciate the change to limit a single attack per turn as well.

However, I do think that not being able to collect loot during the same attack is a real downer and needs to somehow be addressed.