Re: Dissapointed
 

I agree completely with the magic system actually. It's the ONLY thing in the game that actually angers me a bit. I've had that exact same problem. "Fire Shield, Fire Shield, Fire Shield, Fire Shield" I mean he only needs one ;P

I think this game only really needs two things to make it as eternal as the other classics (i.e. SEIV), and that's increased modability(but this is already in the works =), and an improved magic combat sytsem.

I'm afraid the excuse of "it's only a suggestion" or, "it's a chaotic battle, he'll do what he thinks is best" just don't cut it. It is NOT a suggestion when I tell my caster to not kill my own men. I should definatly be able to take more control over them - the AI just isn't capable of using it's magic to it's full potential. The old problem of the caster casting summoning spells when it already has a HUGE army comes to mind...

Plus, equally important - or even more so really, is that it makes it funner! =) I mean, giving the players more opportunities to play with the massive amounts of spells just increases gameplay 10 fold I think. Spells are fun, it could be really entertaining trying to find secret combinations of spells etc.

That list of 5 spells just doesn't cut it IMO. Esp how he doesn't even listen to you http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/tongue.gif

Re: Dissapointed
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Johan, you really shouldn't so readily dismiss reports by players of odd AI behavior. My pretender was alone, no bodyguards or other casters within range 5. And the AI DID cast a caster-only spell repeatedly (Body Ethereal), to the tune of six times. The only reason it stopped at six was the battle ended. I wouldn't remember the event so well if it hadn't been such outrageous behavior on the AI's part.

I really resent the attitude that because you don't understand why the AI did something stupid, that we who are doing the reporting must be wrong somehow. Enough people have been reporting this type of problem that I would expect you to sit up and pay attention. Not make excuses and cavalierly dismiss our reports. It's beneath you.

Sincerely and respectfully yours,

Re: Dissapointed
 

MY biggest issue really is that the ai will cast offensive spells that damage the caster, even when other options are available that would not harm the caster, and have a better damge/area/fatigue ratio...


This really only becomes an issue if you have a rainbow mage with lots of options available and deep evocation research...

Magma eruption was definitely the worst choice for the Ai to cast... the troops being targetted were militia so not heavily armored.

IMHO the routine should consider:
Note this is only for a caster that has meleers attacking them.

--Number of targets hurting me
--Are the troops I am about to target immune to this type of spell damage?
--How many of the attacking enemey troops will I hit with this spell.
--Will it hurt me if I am in the AOE of the spell?
--How many friendlies will be hurt by this spell?
--Armor of troops attacking me
--Is the spell I am about to use more efficient at damaging or penetrating armor.
-- how much will thi spell fatigue me? will I go unconcious if I cast this spell.

Of course the overall system is obviously very complex indeed and any kind of AI programming is a herculean task by any means. By tackling the at least the issue of offensive spell choices could be made more efficient.

Re: Dissapointed
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Thanks for listening. Alas, however much I'd love to do so, so that this bug can be squashed, I don't have a trn file from that game. It happened over a week ago, and I wasn't keeping turn-by-turn saves. Hopefully someone else will have kept their file(s) and can show you similar behavior.

I do understand that you cannot fix what you cannot replicate. I've been a programmer for almost 30 years and I can sympathize.

Re: Dissapointed
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Under no circumstances should the AI be permitted to cast a spell that will incapacitate the caster when the caster is engaged in melee combat. It shouldn't even permit it when there are enemies that can reach the caster in the enemy's next turn (regardless of bodyguards).

Re: Dissapointed
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">I am sorry, I haven't seen this reported behaviour myself. It's just that quite often people reports 'bugs' that are caused by factors that are not readily apparent, such as their commanders being out of range for their combat spells or Ermorian priest not succesfully beating the MR of all undead troops and thus casting blessings repeatedly etc. Since the systems involved are a little opaque many behaviours might be caused by 'legal'mechanisms that players are not aware of. In the case of repeated casting of non stackable spells mosts of the mechanisms ahs been around since dom 1 times and I haven't myself seen this behavoiur during the 5 or so years I have been playing various Versions of dom1/dom2. But as Kristoffer said, if there is an apparently buggy behaviour send the trn file to support@illwinter.com.

Re: Dissapointed
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">The AI does consider these things with the possible exception of AOE. Which of the above do you believe the AI must rate as more or less important a factor and in what cases?

The placement of AOE>1 is randomized and thus difficult to calculate regarding risk to your self.

Re: Dissapointed
 

Lest J & KO think that I'm being highly critical of their work, I'd like to take a moment to thank them for what I know is the monumental task they've done in creating what is arguably the best AI of any strategy game I've played (HttR has a very good AI as well, perhaps even better, but it's a different style of game and an argument can be made that it's not as complex a game as Dom 2). Sure, the AI in Dom 2 needs some work. It has its quirks. But if it wasn't already a very good AI, we wouldn't all be so fond of this game as we are. And you cannot please everyone, no matter how hard you try. If IW had the manpower and money that some other dev shops do, one can only wonder what truly incredible things they could accomplish. (As long as some idiots like Atari didn't buy them out and then kill their projects.)

Some of us also appreciate that every minute you spend reading (and replying to) our postings here is time we've taken away from your being able to enhance the game. Or having a personal life.

Once again, thank you for giving us such a fine game.

Re: Dissapointed
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">The AI does consider these things with the possible exception of AOE. Which of the above do you believe the AI must rate as more or less important a factor and in what cases?

The placement of AOE>1 is randomized and thus difficult to calculate regarding risk to your self. </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">In order ...

--Are the troops I am about to target immune to this type of spell damage?
(if the target is immune, there is no point to casting the spell)

--how much will this spell fatigue me? will I go unconcious if I cast this spell.
(if the caster is in imminent danger, making the situation more dire is a bad idea)

--Will it hurt me if I am in the AOE of the spell?
(only consider hurting self if you can destroy appreciable numbers of foes, I'll leave it to others to argue over what's 'appreciable')

--How many friendlies will be hurt by this spell?
(never cause more than, say, 1/4 remaining damage to friendlies unless you are assured of victory by wiping out the opposition. no one enjoys pyrrhic victories)

--Number of targets hurting me
(if you are being hit by six enemies, casting a spell that only hurts one of them, and won't even kill that one, is silly)

--How many of the attacking enemey troops will I hit with this spell.
(see earlier comments)

--Armor of troops attacking me
--Is the spell I am about to use more efficient at damaging or penetrating armor.

Re: Dissapointed
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">More control would be bad for SP, I believe -it would make computer opponents even weaker.

Even improvements on the spellcasting AI would not be without setback entirely -I think Magic vs. Might in Dom2 is already a little bit too much on the side of Magic.