|  | 
| 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
    
    
 |  | 
 
 
	
		|  |  
	
	
		
	
	
	| 
			
			 
			
				January 31st, 2004, 10:39 AM
			
			
			
		 |  
	| 
		
			
			| 
 Corporal |  | 
					Join Date: Jan 2004 
						Posts: 197
					 Thanks: 8 
		
			
				Thanked 4 Times in 2 Posts
			
		
	      |  |  
    
	| 
				 Routing armies and friendly fire 
 Do you think it would be possible (or rather: not too difficult to implement) to either make it an automatic default or a check-box you can click in the "set battle orders" part to not attack routing squadrons and / or routing armies?
 I mean, if you see they are routing, it is often not only better but perhaps ethically sensible to not slaughter them.
 
 Well I'll stick to the "better" (functionally).
 
 - If squadrons are routing but the entire army isnt, it would make more sense to concentrate on the enemy that is still there.
 - If the entire army is routing and they are Independents, they have no where to flee and hence are no worry anymore. Why attack?
 - If the entire army is routing and they are an enemy nation, it might make sense to attack so that no one survives, but could often involve heavy losses through friendly fire. It would be interesting to be able to toggle "attack routing units" here on and off.
 
 What do you think? Desirable and doable (without too much resources for the developers)?
 
			
			
			
			
				  |  
	
		
	
	
	| 
			
			 
			
				January 31st, 2004, 10:48 AM
			
			
			
		 |  
	| 
		
			|  | 
 General |  | 
					Join Date: Nov 2000 
						Posts: 3,013
					 Thanks: 17 
		
			
				Thanked 25 Times in 22 Posts
			
		
	      |  |  
    
	| 
				 Re: Routing armies and friendly fire 
 
	Ethics has little to do with medieval warfare.Quote: 
	
		| Originally posted by onomastikon: I mean, if you see they are routing, it is often not only better but perhaps ethically sensible to not slaughter them.
 |  
 
 
	As other have said, if given a choice between chasing a guy who's running away so you can kill him and loot his armour and weapons, or going after someone who is still trying to kill you, most people will go for the loot.Quote: 
	
		| - If squadrons are routing but the entire army isnt, it would make more sense to concentrate on the enemy that is still there. |  |  
	
		
	
	
	| 
			
			 
			
				January 31st, 2004, 11:56 AM
			
			
			
		 |  
	| 
		
			|  | 
 First Lieutenant |  | 
					Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: Bordeaux, France 
						Posts: 794
					 Thanks: 0 
		
			
				Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
			
		
	      |  |  
    
	| 
				 Re: Routing armies and friendly fire 
 
	Ethics has little to do with medieval warfare.Quote: 
	
		| Originally posted by Graeme Dice: 
 quote:Originally posted by onomastikon:
 I mean, if you see they are routing, it is often not only better but perhaps ethically sensible to not slaughter them.
 |  
 
 
	As other have said, if given a choice between chasing a guy who's running away so you can kill him and loot his armour and weapons, or going after someone who is still trying to kill you, most people will go for the loot.Quote: 
	
		| - If squadrons are routing but the entire army isnt, it would make more sense to concentrate on the enemy that is still there. |  If the units had a "Regular/Elite classification, it might make sense to give the "Elite" (more disciplined) units a better chance of going on with their proper jobs. In the absence of such a classification, morale level could be used instead, though not as a perfect approximation ("fanatic" units should not become more disciplined; take Vanheim Maenads, for example).
 
 But then, implementing this would probably require a complete overhaul of the tactical battle AI; I'm not holding my breath.
			
			
			
			
				  |  
	
		
	
	
	| 
			
			 
			
				January 31st, 2004, 10:15 PM
			
			
			
		 |  
	| 
		
			|  | 
 National Security Advisor |  | 
					Join Date: Dec 1999 
						Posts: 8,806
					 Thanks: 54 
		
			
				Thanked 33 Times in 31 Posts
			
		
	      |  |  
    
	| 
				 Re: Routing armies and friendly fire 
 I was pretty sure the ranged AI was already programmed to switch to non-routing targets, once their current target routs...
 PvK
 |  
	
		
	
	
	| 
			
			 
			
				January 31st, 2004, 10:23 PM
			
			
			
		 |  
	| 
		
			
			| 
 Major General |  | 
					Join Date: Jan 2004 
						Posts: 2,425
					 Thanks: 0 
		
			
				Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
			
		
	      |  |  
    
	| 
				 Re: Routing armies and friendly fire 
 With the exception of archers, I haven't noticed that units tend to persistently chase routing units, to the point of ignoring active threats, even when being attacked by another unit: If they become engaged with another unit, they usually start fighting again and ignore the routing unit.
 This may have something to do with my thinking: In Medieval: Total War, for instance, I'd often deliberately keep a unit of fast cavalry in reserve SPECIFICALLY to chase and slaughter routing units, just to slaughter them so I never have to fight them again.
 |  
	
		
	
	
	| 
			
			 
			
				February 2nd, 2004, 10:04 AM
			
			
			
		 |  
	| 
		
			|  | 
 Lieutenant Colonel |  | 
					Join Date: Jan 2004 
						Posts: 1,276
					 Thanks: 0 
		
			
				Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts
			
		
	      |  |  
    
	| 
				 Re: Routing armies and friendly fire 
 I noticed that I have actually killed some communion slaves when casting overkill spells on large routing but slow-moving independent armies. (Of course I am new to this and used too few slaves, but still....) 
 It would be nice if the AI recognized "routing" as a factor and decided to de-prioritize those units. I hate killing my own units when I dont have to.
 |  
	
		
	
	
	| 
			
			 
			
				February 2nd, 2004, 12:08 PM
			
			
			
		 |  
	| 
		
			
			| 
 Sergeant |  | 
					Join Date: Dec 2003 
						Posts: 201
					 Thanks: 0 
		
			
				Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
			
		
	      |  |  
    
	| 
				 Re: Routing armies and friendly fire 
 
	It does, if you let the AI choose the target (no orders, or attack/fire none). But if you tell it to attack a specific target (attack closest), it will stay on that target until it's completely destroyed, even if the target is fasster and routing... Hey, it's obeying order, like a good soldier should, isn't it ?Quote: 
	
		| Originally posted by PvK: I was pretty sure the ranged AI was already programmed to switch to non-routing targets, once their current target routs...
 
 PvK
 |  |  
	
		
	
	
	| 
			
			 
			
				February 2nd, 2004, 01:10 PM
			
			
			
		 |  
	| 
		
			
			| 
 Colonel |  | 
					Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: Near Paris, France 
						Posts: 1,566
					 Thanks: 0 
		
			
				Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
			
		
	      |  |  
    
	| 
				 Re: Routing armies and friendly fire 
 BTW did someone figure what are the targeting priorities of "targetless" firers ? Don't they always go for closest ? |  
	
		
	
	
	| 
			
			 
			
				February 2nd, 2004, 09:22 PM
			
			
			
		 |  
	|  |  
    
	| 
				 Re: Routing armies and friendly fire 
 If you don't put an order the units default are:
 Ranged (Including Javelins) = Fire Closest
 Non-Ranged = Attack Closest
 
 Commanders = Stay Behind Troops
 |  
	
		
	
	
	
	
	
	
	| Thread Tools |  
	|  |  
	| Display Modes |  
	
	| 
		 Linear Mode |  
	| 
	|  Posting Rules |  
	| 
		
		You may not post new threads You may not post replies You may not post attachments You may not edit your posts 
 HTML code is On 
 |  |  |  |  |