still at loss in understanding this...
 

Well I dont know if its a feature or a bug, or whatever, but frankly I dont understand when are supposed to fire a mix of legionaries units with javelins. I just had again the example of a group of principes who refused to fire their javelin during 3 rounds( 50% of the troops engaged, and 50% just a tile behind doing nothing), and then all the sudden they fired javelins upon javelins until they had none left.

I'm not even speaking of mixing 2 kind of javelins units, none will fire, except once in a blue moon.

Seems totally random behavior, to the point where I ask if there is not a bug somewhere in a formula!

Re: still at loss in understanding this...
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Happens sometimes, but there's always a reason for this (at least, when it happened to me I always found one eventually, by looking at the VCR carefully).

Typical example:

..........................................
....P..............................F......
..............................S...........
..........................................

P = your principes
S = slow enemy squad
F = fast enemy squad

Now assume P is ordered to 'fire at closest'. P will lock on S, and will do its best to move within shooting range of S, engaging any enemy that comes in the path in hand-to-hand combat.

Result:

..........................................
..............PF..........................
......................S...................
..........................................

F, being faster, outpaced S and engaged P before P could come within shooting range to fire its javelins at S.

Now, assume for some reason, S routs - a routing enemy isn't considered as a valid target anymore if there are other non-routing enemy units on the field. As soon as it happens, P will select a new non-routing target (eg, F), and since its orders were 'fire' orders, it will be able to use its javelins again, since F is within shooting range.

That's just an example - there are many variants on this theme. Eg, if you give 'fire at archers' and there's an non-archer enemy unit in the way.

[ January 24, 2004, 15:01: Message edited by: Nagot Gick Fel ]

Re: still at loss in understanding this...
 

mmh, and so do you think that its normal that half of the group (the unengaged part) sit iddly in the rear of the formation (with 3 javelins still unused), and watch their comrades die in melee, without using their javelin? We know that its surely not the fear of doing some losses by friendly fire that can motivate them in doing nothing http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif so why are they sitting on the grass?

They are in range yes, they have javelins. They dont use it. They wait, and wait and wait. If the enemy finally rout, the whole formation resume the pursuit, and can fire (somehow). Otherwise they just fill the ranks of the killed. Dont make sense.

Re: still at loss in understanding this...
 

Seriously I think if your idle jevelin Users would fire they would kill more of you troops than theirs

Re: still at loss in understanding this...
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Maybe not "normal" (as in real life), but if their comrades are meleing unit F while the whole squad was ordered to fire at S, and S is out of range, it's certainly understandable - from a programmatic POV.

Re: still at loss in understanding this...
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">It likely is this. One addition to the battle AI in Dom2 is that it's much more careful about choosing targets that won't cause as many friendly fire problems as in dom 1. The devs have commented on this occasionally.

Re: still at loss in understanding this...
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">It likely is this. One addition to the battle AI in Dom2 is that it's much more careful about choosing targets that won't cause as many friendly fire problems as in dom 1. The devs have commented on this occasionally. </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Herrr, on that point issue is still there : my Ulm crossbowmen just shot in the back Raterik their leader (with Fire sword, Elem Armor, Charcoal Shield, and even Bracers of Prot...) http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon8.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon8.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon8.gif !!!!
And don't tell me that's normal, he was giving the Last blows to a half dozen enemy archers, with the rest of their army already routed !!!

Re: still at loss in understanding this...
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">It likely is this. One addition to the battle AI in Dom2 is that it's much more careful about choosing targets that won't cause as many friendly fire problems as in dom 1. The devs have commented on this occasionally. </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Herrr, on that point issue is still there : my Ulm crossbowmen just shot in the back Raterik their leader (with Fire sword, Elem Armor, Charcoal Shield, and even Bracers of Prot...) http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon8.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon8.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon8.gif !!!!
And don't tell me that's normal, he was giving the Last blows to a half dozen enemy archers, with the rest of their army already routed !!! </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Obviously, it's hard for the AI to decide when something it worth the risk of friendly fire.

I'd understand the request for "don't fire at a routing enemy if there are friendly units within X squares", but in what you're describing, Raterik had technically not routed the enemy yet, so his standing orders of "fire at the bastards until they rout" were still good. From what I've heard of the Ulmish military code, disobeying orders can get you in no end of trouble, but there's no provisions for accidental friendly fire - they were playing smart... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon6.gif

Re: still at loss in understanding this...
 

We in the military call this a "Fragging". It happens to leaders who are overly gung-ho. In the middle of the night, the men will arrange to have a hand-grenade rolled into your tent, since your antics are considered to severely reduce their odds of survival.

I'm sure that this is the Ulmish Version of a fragging.

Re: still at loss in understanding this...
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">I had a Troll Lord decked out with Asterik's Armor (the golden artifact one), Champion's Trident (he just and I mean JUST won the dang thing), a spirit helment, and a couple of misc stuff, can't remember. I had a wraith sword on him before he won the tourney, and forgot to change his orders and he rushed and routed the entire enemy infantry squads (about 60) by himself and had 5 hp left and he had just routed the Last squad when a volley of xbows from my fearless, and apparently blind Ulmish Xbow squad. I still weep late at night.

[ January 25, 2004, 05:59: Message edited by: OG_Gleep ]

Re: still at loss in understanding this...
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Maybe not "normal" (as in real life), but if their comrades are meleing unit F while the whole squad was ordered to fire at S, and S is out of range, it's certainly understandable - from a programmatic POV. </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">they had hold and attack closest. In this case F, unless closest is determined initially and not recomputed, but I dont even want to take into account this stupid possibility.

Friendly fire fear is certainly not a possibility, as the algorithm presiding it will still order a whole host of crossbowmen to fire on a single enemy unit just close to your men. PDF gave a good example, and I have also one from a Last turn. 25 Hoburgs Xbow men (mine) firing against a single enemy (a light inf), which happen to be adjacent to 6 abysian infantries... Dont tell me that the friendly fire algo is smart here.

Re: still at loss in understanding this...
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Sureprisingly, it does:
As soon as the whole squad is engaged in melee, they won't switch back to the "fire" order again, unless the enemy routes or is whiped out (is there any other way to become unengaged?)

I think I have seen 1/2 squads firing from the 2nd line from time to time in DOM1, but I'm not shure. I can't recall seeing this in DOM2, though. So if it was "in", the devs may have removed the possiblity.

A.

Re: still at loss in understanding this...
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">You mean you don't believe the "closest" is determined at the start of the fight? It's pretty clear to me that it is for pure "Attack closest" orders, and I wouldn't be surprised if it were the case for "Hold and attack".

The orders system has very little flexibility; I'm perpetually amazed that some people manage to get a measure of control in their battles. I typically don't, unless I'm using long-range missile troops positioned at the end of the battlefield...

Re: still at loss in understanding this...
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Funny! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

However, the request is not only that archers shouldn't fire at routing enemies when there are friendlies nearby, it's simply that no ranged unit should risk friendly fire (except perhaps in cases of extremely low risk) even against non-routing enemies. Simply put, ranged units should avoid firing at targets that risk hitting their own men. Err on the side of caution!

PvK

[ January 25, 2004, 20:48: Message edited by: PvK ]

Re: still at loss in understanding this...
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">If you refuse to accept what the dev's have said on the topic, then you aren't going to get much of an answer now, are you. AI avoiding friendly fire.

Re: still at loss in understanding this...
 

Anytime you mix shooters and non-shooters, the shooters won't shoot. You must split them up.

Re: still at loss in understanding this...
 

By splitting them up do you mean separate commanders or separate squads?

Re: still at loss in understanding this...
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">separate squads