There's that boogie man word again. "Random." It's not random at all, not in the least. If you tell your soldier to attack a site and you know that he will be fighting at the site and attacking the nearest enemy, you can easily plan around it. "Random" would be if the soldier suddenly, and without warning, teleported to an unpredictable location on the battlefield and attacked the nearest enemy, then teleported back to your lines, attacked your own soldiers, and then committed suicide. That's random.
But this obviously is not the case. A low discipline soldier behaves in a very predictable way, but with very little flexibility. They fight what's closest to them. When you decide to commit them, you need to think hard about where and how, otherwise they'll end up chasing peasants off the field of battle when they should be carving their way toward an enemy sovereign.
With disciple, you actually have more strategy in my opinion because you have to plan the battle far ahead of time. You can't simply just tell all of your soldiers to run around in circles.
Sorry, but this argument is filled with logical fallacies including a straw man and the fallacy of necessity. The whole thing ends up being a non sequitur.
Here's the premise: you issue an order to a unit and that unit obeys or disobeys your order based on a random number. That, by definition, is a random factor. Q.E.D.
It's a logical fallicy to simply declare that someone's argument is incorrect on authority without citing any evidence. It's also a logical fallacy to "name call" to make your point. Random has become a meaningless pejorative on these forums,, which make them about as effective at making a point as calling an idea "gay" or "socialist" or "whinner." I provide a lengthy argument and you dismiss it with 1 sentence or more specifically, one word that is generally meaningless to the point of insulting.. So watch who you haphazardly accuse of logical fallacies. Low discipline units do exactly what you tell them to do and you know exactly what they are capable of,
Low discipline units have nothing to do with Chaos. You know that if you send them against other units, they will attack those units and continue fighting until they win or retreat. They will not disobey that order and run off into the sunset for unknown reasons. So how is that random? All low discipline does is prevent you from issuing further orders until certain requisites are met. They will have a small red bar next to their health to denote that they will not take any further move orders except full retreat until they are relieved. Once that bar turns orange, they can be given new orders. There would most certainly be spells, too, like "valor" or "order" that you could cast on a low discipline unit that would allow you to raise their discipline so that they can reposition while in a maw. You could even have heros that raise discipline and allow you greater strategic flexibility in tactical battle.
Just because your opponent might come up with a strategy that mires your low discipline soldier there longer than you wanted, that doesn't mean it's chaotic. It means they out planned you. If you have a problem with units not slaying other units in one turn so that you can move them elsewhere and continue your strategies, then you should have a problem with elemental combat already, because I'm certain this isn't the case.
You are confusing randomness and limited uncertainty with Chaos. What you are concerned with is if something happens that you had no prior awareness of or ability to predict. If your low discipline unit gets mired in combat too long and you don't have any units to further your stretegy, then that's the player's fault for either A: not free them up with the help of a high discipline unit or B: you didn't keep a reserve of units or C: you just didn't plan well enough. It has nothing to do with chaos.
Units get locked up in modern warfare all the time because of poor planning, and it adds very interesting strategic landscape.
