Quote:
Chazar said:
Quote:
PDF said:
Chazar,
Sure I don't have the algorithm, but sure also ANY fighting unit (and certainly an equipped berzerk Niefel !) at 5 squares is more threatening than routers 20 squares across ... 
|
I disagree:
Consider a single militia man, gone berserk by spell, which was in his own squad, put on a rear flank with "hold and attack rearmost". Now the battle is almost over, the wounded enemy masses are fleeing into a friendly province just to heal, regroup and attack again, but your heavy infantry which has advanced to the other end of the battlefield (since it was ordered to attack archers) could easily dispatch those fleeing units. But instead, they let those fleeing units unharmed and chase after that single militia man, which they wont even reach in time!
I would rather have my infantry finish of those fleeing units, or at least I would want some of them to chase the militia man, but certainly not all of them! Different circumstances should really matter (including distance as you have already pointed out), hence my suggestion below!
|
Bah, you're taking an extreme example to show that dealing with a real threat, but a very feeble one, can be sub-optimal. Yes it is !
To be more precise I agree that the AI should only dispatch forces proportionate to a threat, not necessarily all the army vs "the" main threat. Else everyone would gang up against 1 unit/group..
But anyway I'd still prefer that to seeing a whole army destroyed by *not* dealing with a very potent threat !