Re: Patch notes
 

vfb, this one would be viable too, a minor flaw is how did a maybe surrounded unit to escape (there would be plenty of angry players too because their soldiers surrounded completely the enemy Pretender and he just vanishes and appears in a sure place some miles far, as they are now because /their/ Pretender disappeared). But this is a nice suggestion, maybe to improve a bit?

Re: Patch notes
 

It's illogical units and commanders are being auto-killed because of a game turn limit. It would be nice if defenders and attackers could reorganize unfortunately the game turn limit causes an auto-kill for the golems and other mindless SCs.

I just lost another golem who was auto-killed because of the game turn limit because the enemy could not flee the battlefield in time. Illogical and frustrating to not only lose the battle where I was declared the winner, but to also have my SC killed!




50 turns is very restrictive... take a look at these battle results because of the restrictive game turn limits.

Friendly Combatants
Commanders: 2, killed 1

Enemy Combatants
Commanders: 4, killed 1
Regular Units: 91, killed 53
Magic Beings: 1, killed 1
Undead Beings: 64, killed 48


Thus my two SCs barely killed over 100 before one was auto-killed. YES, barely over 100 enemy troops killed from two SCs. All remaining enemy troops were fleeing yet I lost the battle because of the game turn limit.

-utilizing high-systems means being able to play larger maps with larger battles on a more realistic level. It's unrealistic for battle turns to end so early considering each game turn is several months!
-each game turn is several months, yet the current battle turn limit is less than one day when examining battlefield actions.
-Your third statement would make sense if each game turn was a few days instead of a few months! You haven't played the game long enough to understand the needs.

* Now the needs for the increased game turn limits:
Allows for larger battles where the attacker isn't pressured to battle against an unrealistic clock which forces retreat.
Helps prevent SCs from being auto-killed when victory was so close.
Provides a game which can better utilize the computers of today and tomorrow which won't recognize any delay from increasing the game turn limits.

You're too new(green) playing Dominions_3 to have identified the importance of increasing the game turn limit so I'll try and explain the points. The main reason is forcing an auto-retreat and auto-kill after 50_turns is unrealistic where each game turn is several months. Second SCs are being killed by not enemy units or spells but because of a game turn limitation which is illogical and painfully wrong. Third it prevents gamers from attacking some large armies knowing they will be also fighting a game battlefield clock which is not even close for matching the several months of each game turn.

Ideally a battlefield turn limit should be adjustable.

Re: Patch notes
 

This talk about increasing turn limit by some fraction reminds me of Murphy's Law. Anyone know why the lost thing is always in the last place you look into? Because you stop looking afterwards. Why some stuff appears to always happen in conjunction with something else totally unrelated? Because you only make the mental note when the conjunction happens, not when it doesn't.

My point being, if the limit would be set to 75/100 it wouldn't do much. Soon people would complain it's too little since they always remember the instances when there was only two crippled guys fleeing too slowly, or something. Seriously, if berserking thugs without a fear aura or area effect weapons kill chaff for 75 rounds, they've caused huge amounts of damage. Maybe they just drop dead from exhaustion after that, but surely they've done a lot. Killing opponent's thugs by flooding them under your own dead corpses is costly and really last-ditch effort, not something easily and cheaply done (like those blessed giants with minimal gear).

With Golems, well, their mindlessness status makes them immune to so many conventional Bad Stuff, that they might get some malus.

Anyway, my opinion in a nutshell: let the little guys accomplish also something. But people can and will disagree, it's probably just a matter of opinion.

EDIT: Oops didn't notice a new page of posts. Meza green! Anyway, given the examples, it would seem to me that there is a huge focus on defences in those thugs. Shouldn't they try to put some into, you people know, offence too? Shouldn't be a surprise they can't take big armies by themselves, they're just holding back.

Re: Patch notes
 

That's why the battlefield turn limit should be an adjustable game setting set at the start of the game.

THUS EVERYONE IS HAPPY.


Another painful point is the auto-kill which should be changed to an auto-retreat.
The game shouldn't be auto-killing mages, commanders and SCs just because of a battlefield turn limitation.

Re: Patch notes
 

Each game turn is several months? What makes you say that? I don't think we have any information at all on how long the game turns that isn't related to seasons, do we?

Re: Patch notes
 

After all 4 seasons have finished one year passes. Each season is has three game turns... roughly 1.33 months for every game turn.

Re: Patch notes
 

NTJedi,

I don't have much time now 'cuz I gotta go. I hope you will excuse this green player if he doesn't have the time to quote and comment your points one by one.

I'd just like to say that your points, about sending 1 or 2 SCs against hundreds and not being able to kill more than 100 units in one turn, possibly means that you sent a too little force, with not enough killing potential in 50 turns, against a too big army for the given amount of time for a battle, and not that the gameplay mechanic is broken. In poker I wouldn't say that a two pair doesn't beat the three of a kind because the hand of 5 cards is restrictive. I just didn't have enough "power" to beat the opponent's hand. This one is a very limited example, but just a thought about the complaining about the "restrictive mechanics" and not that maybe you got used to send not enough SCs, or not strong enough, into the battle, and not that the battle is broken.

2nd, your examples about mindless units have been discussed a bit yet by me and atul, and vfb actually talked about a possible solution for them that don't require to change the whole battle timing mechanic.

3rd, isn't a year 12 turns? 4 seasons x 3 turns each... 12 turns... no? And in this time the army does the preparatives, reaches the enemy province, reaches the enemy army, possibly after an honorful "date" of the battle a couple of days after comes the (sample of) battle, and has the time to retreat back to another province. Seems to take whole weeks to do everything. And I don't think the *sample* of a battle can tell you how much time does it take. Does Check, as a well-known *sample* of a battle, tell you that a battle took one day?

Re: Patch notes
 

I favor the changes. If there is an army of mages spamming skellies, then use different spells to targets the mages.

Or have an sc cast the spells you want to cast so he does not need to flee from skelly spam.

There are many options to using tactics that are already banned in many current mp games.

Re: Patch notes
 

My math is off, since I didn't sleep last night.


My little force of 2 SCs fought less than 200 units... and since each game turn is a month it's more than enough time to kill 200 units. The worst part was the enemy was routed and fleeing, my remaining SC wasn't even wounded chasing down the routing enemy... yet auto-killed because of a game turn I lost. This result is illogical and wrong.

Dominions_3 cannot be compared to poker... both are extremely different on multiple levels.

Re: Patch notes
 

The firing of arrows is one method of identifying the timeframe of a battle, the fatigued generated by soldiers wearing armor on the battlefield is another method, look and you'll find more.

Even KO could not justify an explanation for the auto-killing of units on the battlefield after the battlefield turn limit expires. Simply it was the decision so the battles don't last forever. I estimate the auto-retreat would have been implemented by now, however it's probably too late for the programming code.

Re: Patch notes
 

1. Why do you think they have a 16 month year?

2. How does 1.3 = several even if they do?

Edit: Seems I was lagging behind a bit here and you've already said your math was off. Question 2 still applies. I feel like you're trying to strengthen the impact of statements in support of your argument. But saying a turn is 'several months' when you thought it was 1.3 goes beyond the usual hyperbole.

Re: Patch notes
 

Discussed in previous post... it's actually 1 month per turn as pointed out by Tifone.

Night without sleep. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/smile.gif Thus I shouldn't have used the word 'several'. Again... last night I had no sleep.

-----

A game turn is one month... still a huge difference verses 50 turns on a battlefield. Literally the attacker(and sometimes the defender) are sometimes fighting against a game clock during large battles because of the 50 turn limit. Increasing the game turn limit helps remove this unrealistic variable for battlefield strategies.

Re: Patch notes
 

without a new game engine, i imagine increasing the length of battles may make the delay between turns unbearable in large games.

But that is just a guess.

Re: Patch notes
 

Depends on the computer, which is why an adjustable battlefield turn setting would work best.

Re: Patch notes
 

NTJedi,

You are obviously a much more expert player than me (really, no sarcasm, it's true) so I hope you don't mind if I say you one things about a couple of your words.

Obviously NOT, for this game's chosemn mechanics there is NOT plenty of time in one month (or better, in just the time that the movements of one month leave to the battle) to kill 200 units if your SCs (one of which died) weren't able to do so.

This is a different issue we should discuss imho in a different way than the "long battle limbo" idea. I exposed the idea of routing, defeated enemies just dying regardless of the turn if they aren't able to leave the battlefield in a given time, 5 or 10 turns. Another option -while not maybe completely realistic in some other situations, for sorrounded units in fact unable to retreat and even because you won those fight anyway - was to let your SCs retreat in another province instead of disappearing. Suggestions quite more logic than changing the gameplay of all the battles negating the possibilities of reinforcements, and huge battles lasting /more/ than just a month.

P.S. Really - this game has a very nice, interested, respectful community. So it just strikes me that people complain the game mechanics of battle because they don't find appropriate that a mindless SC, instead of retreating like the "minded" ones, just stops working after one month of fighting if he wasn't strong enough to win. Isn't sending *more* or *stronger* SCs more appropriate and tactical and "pro", instead of asking that he is given the "limbo" advantage? ^_^ The other, surely important, issues (berserkers, slow retreating units) can't be possibly treated another better way?

Re: Patch notes
 

I second NT Jedi and concur with his reasoning.
I suggest a humble increase of the turn limit to 100, and optionally (hopefully also) make it adjustable.

Re: Patch notes
 

Keep in mind when you talk about increasing things that you are talking globally. You arent talking about increasing the number of units and turns in a battle. You are talking about increasing the number of units and turns in 1500 battles.

Actually I guess its even more than the # of Provinces limit since you can have 2 or 3 battles in some provinces.

Re: Patch notes
 

Only a small proportion of battles last 50 turns, so only a small proportion would be affected. Also, the majority of the processing time is often spent on the early turns of a battle, when there are more units alive and more mages awake.

So I would suggest that the effect on the processing time of a turn would not be that large.

Personally, I would be very much in favour of including an option for the battle turn limit. I can't see any disadvantages, and I expect that the majority of multiplayer hosts would choose a higher limit than the current 50 turns.

Re: Patch notes
 

Im not sure how such things are handled in the code but if any part of it involves having to have an array large enough to handle the maxs then it would have overflowing impacts. We didnt realize all the different maxs that had to be increasd when we increased the number of provinces. It took a long time to find all the crashes that could generate.

But in general I also wouldnt mind a setting for it.

Re: Patch notes
 

Meh, this is such a non-issue.

Mindless units and leaders have a weakness that they can't retreat, so you need to deploy them with that in mind and avoid armies that they can't damage fast enough. I'm ok with that, that's a strategic decision when deploying golems. I'll also get screwed if a non-fire resistant SC stumbles upon a bunch of summer lions. It's just a weakness to keep in mind.

50 turns is plenty for most battles. One of the considerations for SC builds *should* be outputting enough damage, not just regenerating fast enough. If you're using a frost brand and your opponent spams you with undead - well you just got outmaneuvered.

I think it's kind of silly to complain that the turn limit isn't realistically modeling warfare. Come on guys, we're playing a game. Flying units teleport around the battlefield and can be attacked by melee, you die if you run away from an assassin, and its impossible to command your mages *not* to cast a specific spell. You plan your strategies around the boundaries of the game, it seems rather silly to carry on at length about reinforcements and how long the fights last. This is a turn based game, combat lasts 50 turns. Plan your strategies accordingly.

Re: Patch notes
 

It takes me ages to explain my thoughts about things. Then Baalz comes and is able to say almost everything I think better and faster than me. Life is so unjust http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...es/biggrin.gif

Re: Patch notes
 

Baalz, that was perfectly put imho. Play within the parameters set before you not play with the parameters.

Although I would bump the turn limit up by a touch as the current limit is left over from previous editions of dominions and average army size has changed a bit for the greater.

Re: Patch notes
 

Yes, and hence lies the illogical problem which needs to be fixed.

This is a different issue we should discuss imho in a different way than the "long battle limbo" idea. I exposed the idea of routing, defeated enemies just dying regardless of the turn if they aren't able to leave the battlefield in a given time, 5 or 10 turns. Another option -while not maybe completely realistic in some other situations, for sorrounded units in fact unable to retreat and even because you won those fight anyway - was to let your SCs retreat in another province instead of disappearing. Suggestions quite more logic than changing the gameplay of all the battles negating the possibilities of reinforcements, and huge battles lasting /more/ than just a month.



[/quote]
I've been asking Illwinter for awhile to provide the auto-retreat instead of the auto-killing. Increasing the battle turns was another related issue. I would hope one of these issues is addressed within a future patch so those playing SP games and MP games can less battles where the fight is against a battlefield turn clock.

I do both MP and SP games, within my current SP game I have an enemy army of 450 troops sieging and important castle which they will storm if I don't stop them. Due to its location I only have the option to teleport 3 SCs and 1 mage(Hero- Delgnat) to try and stop them, yet here my biggest threat is the battlefield turn clock which will kill my last three golems if I fail. It's illogical for the greatest threat facing my SC golems is a game mechanic.

2 SCs with a time of one month logically should be able to kill more than a 100 units during battle. Increasing the battlefield turn limit is one option for reducing this issue. If the province cannot be conquered then either they should follow instructions of the pretender who controls them and walk back to a neighboring province OR remain in limbo above the province to attack again the next turn. Nothing justifies instant death for multiple types of mindless SCs. I've even lost non-mindless SCs to a later battlefield turn limit which also kills.


Sending more SCs isn't always an available option... and SCs and armies should not be auto-killed from a game mechanic which cannot be explained if the game is later written as a story such as the AAR(after_action_reports).

Any improvement would be appreciated. Ideally an adjustable battlefield turn setting would provide the best long term satisfaction. Secondly the changing of auto-killing into auto-retreating would remove the injustice of wrongful deaths and is more logical as well.

Re: Patch notes
 

In response to Baalz:

Improperly constructed and supported armies have a weakness in that they can't deal with SCs, so you need to deploy them with that in mind and avoid situations where they are a tempting enough target to use an SC on. I'm OK with that, that's a strategic decision when deploying armies. They'll also get screwed if a non-fire resistant army stumbles upon a bunch of abysians casting Fire Storm. It's just a weakness to keep in mind.

The current SC counters are plenty for most battles. One consideration for army builds *should* be dealing with SCs, not just having enough troops to absorbs 50 turns of losses. If you're using spearmen and your opponent hits you with a high-prot SC - well, you just got outmaneuvered.

You plan your strategies around the boundaries of the game, it seems rather silly to carry on at length about what has been a hallmark of the game since the days of its predecessor (the utility of SCs, which I understand has been toned down quite a bit, in fact.) This is a game that makes extensive use of SCs. There are a variety of counters to them. Plan your strategies accordingly.

Re: Patch notes
 

Not retreating is fine, yet nothing justifies or explains the instant death of these units and commanders on the battlefield. As mentioned earlier a limbo state should occur which already exists as seen when using map edit commands and placing three nations within one province.

True and since a draw occurs between both sides either the attacker should be moved into a nearby friendly province or left in limbo on top of the province to attack again next turn.
Nothing justifies or explains the instant death which occurs.

Flying units appear to teleport because the game doesn't provide a vertical map movement, dying from an assassin by retreating is another illogical flaw discussed on the forums which conflicts with historical assassinations, and mages *not* casting a specific spell is a game limitation which should be improved possibly within Dom_4 since it's too late for the current game engine and it's been requested by many gamers.
Just because the game has illogical flaws doesn't mean they cannot be improved as seen with the current game settings verses game settings from DOM_2.

It's more with creating a more logical fantasy environment. The battlefield turn limits cause illogical and unjust retreats plus some unjust deaths. Allowing the game to evolve into a better and more realistic fantasy realm is a good thing.

Re: Patch notes
 

Unjust deaths of mindless automatons which could kill many mortals but have a finite time of activity? Come on! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/smirk.gif That's among the most easily explained and logical things - if they don't have weakness in morale, they should have something else instead of it! Actually, I know a tabletop wargame which uses similar mechanism and it's quite popular.
And if Golems wouldn't have this weakness, they should be much more costly. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/cool.gif

Re: Patch notes
 

Somehow I don't see a colossal fetish attacking into +10 dominion running out of juice on turn 50 of a battle and evaporating...

Re: Patch notes
 

In an ideal world a battle that times out would result in a pseudo-seige with both armies present in province, neither side getting income or recruiting there, PD gone, each army having access to ~50% of supplies and the battle restarting on next turn. The exact units taking part in battle would depend on its place in turn order - armies present and not ordered to move away would be considered as making a distance 0 move towards the enemy, but there could be a chance for a fast army/summon reinforcing one/both side(s).
Speaking of which: what happens when a farsummon ritual is cast during a fort seige? Do the new units attack or seige? What if the walls are broken and/or the army present is set to storm fort?

Re: Patch notes
 

These mindless automatons can survive over one thousand game turn years why the heck do you think battlefield turns would cause them to vanish from existence?
http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif

Based on their current age and old age the golem should easily survive for many many future battles.

It's not just golems which are killed. The automatic killing is illogical and unjustified considering golems and other mindless survive over a thousand game years.

Re: Patch notes
 

I exit that discussion. It's like trying to explain why a soccer match must be won within 90 minutes. Like Baalz said, this is the rule of the game, play keeping it in mind. No, let's change it! As the shoes are becoming better, players can run for 180 minutes, this will keep the game alive for years, not its flavour. If your team doesn't have anybody in attack, but everybody in defence, the match should not finish until you have done all the goals you need to win.

You can't lose a mindless SC because of the turn limit. You can even let him with just a 1dmg attack only, firepower is a useless addition. Just keep him with high regen and defense, he must fight for possibly 200 turns in just one month, if nobody is able to kill him he should never stop working - even if being mindless gives him only the disadvantage of being unable to route and plenty of advantages.

Next thing to change: the Rituals. That's "illogic" a mage casting one ritual in one month, not a rule of the game, that's a "boundary"! You can't plan your strategy around this, this has to be changed. Mages should cast as many ritual as the PC, becoming always more powerful, lets you do before imploding.

Sorry, I just became tired of this http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/frown.gif It just doesn't seem me this big problem, but for many is so, and still can't understand why, it makes perfect logic into the game mechanics.

Re: Patch notes
 

I think there is a big skill to just withdrawing from discussions once they become tiresome http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif

The way of the internet is that you will rarely persuade anyone to change their mind, so sooner or later you just have to agree to differ.

Personally, I think it would be good if the turn limit was 75 or 100 turns. I guess we'll see what takes the devs' fancy.

Re: Patch notes
 

Game Rules is one thing as these are clearly defined within a manual and when reviewed will logically make sense.
As mentioned earlier these are not 'game rules' these are game limitations causing painful and unjust results. These current game limitations exist to prevent battles from going on forever, however these limitations should be improved to provide a more realistic fantasy and more justified battle results.

You are comparing game rules with game limitations... these are completely seperate. Even KO explained the 50_turn battlefield limitation is to prevent turn processing from lasting forever. A game rule of 50_battlefield turns would be if the game manual spoke of some all powerful third entity(God_of_War?) which destroyed all things on a battlefield beyond 50 turns.

Golems already survive over one thousand game years... there's no logical reason which justifies a game mechanic killing them when more realistic game mechanics can exist.
To better understand this scenario... let's say(hypothetically) mages could only cast 5 spells during battles because the game engine couldn't handle any more spells. This wouldn't be a game rule... this would be another unrealistic game limitation. Luckily this is not the case.

A casting ritual can realistically take a month since many variables go into casting a ritual. A more complex game would allow different time variables for rituals where one ritual may take 12 game turns yet another ritual might be able to be casted 12 times within 1 game turn. This would be more suitable for let's say DOM_5.

It's not a big problem, but it's a very painful problem when it does occur since the result is unjust and illogical. I hope Illwinter has a chance to improve upon this game limitation.

Re: Patch notes
 

I know, but hey, that is you the one convincing people that several means about 7 and many about 12, llama http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...es/biggrin.gif

Re: Patch notes
 

An optional battlefield turn game setting would be the most pleasing for everyone.

Re: Patch notes
 

You're just too lazy to make a better strategic decision in placing golems... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...es/biggrin.gif ok, ok, I'm joking I swear http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif Peace NTJedi. Everybody has his own ideas. Let's just wait and see what the devs prefer. Can we just go on now? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/smirk.gif

Re: Patch notes
 

I don't agree its a non-issue, I don't think its a big issue but I would like to see the turn limit raised a bit. Frankly I don't understand the adamant objection, why would someone object to having this as a setting. If you don't like it, set it to 50 and be done with it and allow the players that like to raise it to do so.

I do agree with all the rest but I find the reasoning incomplete. Yes, I also find it silly to look for realism as justification for wanting a change to rules esp. going to nitpicks such as analyzing how many minutes are represented by a battle turn. And yes, I also agree that a player should accept and adjust to the game rules. However, and this is where I think the reasoning to be incomplete, players are entitled to have their own minds on what rules they like and what not. And also, game rules can and do change according to what the audience likes (see NBA for example).

So it all boils down to what players like. I personally would like to see the turn limit raised to 100 (as default) and hopefully be made adjustable (so that anyone who is particularly fond of the 50 turn limit can set it).

IW are probably reading this thread. No comment from them could mean they're not decided which probably means this is not going to happen. It doesn't change the fact that a lot of players find the turn limit annoying and limiting for the rare epic army vs. army battles and the SC vs huge armies battles.

Re: Patch notes
 

KO will surely read that threat, he cannot miss something with that name. The other thing is if he will dig through 6 pages of discussion.

And the most important thing that will decide if it gets changed is how hard it will be. If it's just a simple thing then we have big chances of getting it. If it's complicated we can add it to Dom4 wishlist.

Re: Patch notes
 

Well if it did get imcreased I would DEFINETLY want it adjustable. The hosting times are long enough for me now. Those of you playing on maps of a couple of hundred provinces and 4-8 players could live with an enforced increase much better than I can with 1500 provinces and 20+ nations. Keep in mind that even the independents have combats.

Re: Patch notes
 

I still suspect that very few of the AI's battles would run past 50 turns anyway. Maybe some of the very largest armies.
Even with large forces, you only tend to get the really long battles when both sides are buffed to the point of not being able to hurt each other easily, or when you've got SCs that are invulnerable to what the other side is dishing out, but can't kill fast enough. And the AI is not very good at either combining battlefield buffs or building SCs.

Re: Patch notes
 

Yes, but how many battles last more than 30 turns anyway, or 40 or 50?

I can speculate that the frequency of such battles is (probably close to an inverse right hand side of a parabola) going down towards 0 as number of turns increase. I'm not sure the change will have a big impact on turn processing time.

Re: Patch notes
 

Did read six pages.

Bored.

http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif

Re: Patch notes
 

He is the chairman of the bored.

Re: Patch notes
 

After 6 pages he's forced to retreat. If he's immobilised he will vanish after the 8th page.

Re: Patch notes
 

Are you implying my brother is mindless?

Re: Patch notes
 

I laughed! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif

You win, sir, you win!

Re: Patch notes
 

I usually do, I am a supercombatant of the internet, you are the pitiful mewling hordes that mill around me.

Re: Patch notes
 

No, no JO. If he was mindless he'd vanish on page 6.

I know it's ridiculous isn't it? UNJUST even.

Re: Patch notes
 

I'll use my moderator powers to delete his later posts, and then your pitiful quibbles will come to shame.

Re: Patch notes
 

<insert joke about sleep vines here>

Jazzepi

Re: Patch notes
 

Ummm, to clarify, the most dangerous thing facing your SC golems which exist only within the framework of this game, will always be a game mechanic.

I think the illogical part, is this sort of unstated assumption that there should be no reason that the -only- (read: single, no other options) thing you have available to break this siege, must be sufficient. Yes it's just the AI and all, but if your SCs are not built in a way that can handle an army of 450 under pre-existing and well understood game mechanics, why would you send them in there and then complain?

You routed KO, you should be able to route 450 AI chaff. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif