Crossbowmen don't shoot adjacent SC

SurvivalistMerc · #1 January 18th, 2004, 01:15 AM

Supercombatants are very powerful. Most folks here believe that exploiting them can even be the key to MP success.

I'm not asking to bring back "fire commanders" or even "target commanders," and certainly not "target pretender."

But why do provincial defenders and even archers without orders not fire at adjacent units? Why would ulm arbalesteers, arguably the most powerful normal missile units in the game (not counting commanders equipped with magical ranged weapons), fire clear across the battlefield and ignore an adjacent PoD that has already killed a member of their squad? This sort of behavior makes SCs even more exploitable than they would otherwise be.

And anyone who tells their pretender to "attack rear" has placed that pretender in harm's way. It's not the same as asking to be able to target a pretender on the other side of the battlefield.

johan osterman · #2 January 18th, 2004, 01:34 AM

As much as people like to revile the friendly fire this is probably a case of the AI not trying to hit friendly troops.

SurvivalistMerc · #3 January 18th, 2004, 01:40 AM

Troops are allowed to move and then shoot, right? I have seen archers move and fire in the same round.

The troops do not appear to attempt to reposition themselves. They just shoot across the battlefield.

The most interesting thing is that they will often even shoot clear across the battlefield when there are armored troops closer to them (yet not so close they'd hit each other).

johan osterman · #4 January 18th, 2004, 01:47 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by SurvivalistMerc:
Troops are allowed to move and then shoot, right? I have seen archers move and fire in the same round.

The troops do not appear to attempt to reposition themselves. They just shoot across the battlefield.

The most interesting thing is that they will often even shoot clear across the battlefield when there are armored troops closer to them (yet not so close they'd hit each other).

What about move and shoot? Are you suggesting they should back off and fire? If you are suggesting this you have a skirmishing tactic that while desirable, at present is outside the AI's horizon.

Troops do close in to come into range.

Troops do not reaquire targets just because other are closer than their original target, perhaps they should, but they don't.

SurvivalistMerc · #5 January 18th, 2004, 01:55 AM

I am not suggesting that they should back off and fire. I am suggesting that they should rotate a bit...not increasing their distance but rotating as a compass rotates from a central point and then shoot such that friends would not be endangered.

Arryn · #6 January 18th, 2004, 02:20 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by johan osterman:
Troops do not reaquire targets just because other are closer than their original target, perhaps they should, but they don't.

Unless given explicit orders to the contrary (like Fire Archers or Fire Rearmost), they should target enemies that they have the best % chance to hit, which is likely to be those that are now closer.

Just a strong (but polite) suggestion for patch 2.xx

Despite all the nitpicking we do, we wouldn't bother if we didn't love this game!