Quick bits of feedback after about 100 hours of play

[Arryn]

Originally posted by diamondspider:
I have to disagree with you here. The range of crossbows makes it VERY easy to just put them behind serveral melee unit close to the front and do MANY hits on my commanders by the 2nd round of combat.

There is no defense against this except getting high air blessings, using magic to lower the power of missile fire, or giving crazy amounts of protection to all commanders. Also, I suppose that IF I had fliers I could tell them to hit the archers and hope they selected the same unit that was targeting my commanders.

However, the MAIN issue is that the computer is CHEATING!

I agree that the real issue is that the AI cheats since humans cannot target commanders. That said ...

I haven't been having this sort of problem, even in the rare battles when the enemy has crossbow (rather than regular bow) units. Of course, since my preferred nations are Jotun or R'lyeh that may have more than a bit to do with why I haven't seen what you describe. It may be that in the AI's targetting priority scheme it looks for "closest large enemy" in preference to "enemy leader" and almost all my units are "large", so they shoot the guys in the front. Which is more than fine by me as they can take the hits (well, the guys in the back can too, and even more so as they have more HPs than common troops).

What nation were you playing as when you were being victimized by the nefarious snakes? And what sort of leaders were you having killed (their HPs, magic types/levels, etc.)?

[diamondspider]

Well, suffice it to say that anything is possible.

However, it happened to me several times in one session of C'tis vs. Pythium and really annoyed me.

Here is the quote from Kristoffer O in a post regarding this issue (or a very similar one) that he answered in the List Game Bugs Here sticky on 1/10/04:

"It might be that the AI still remembers how to give the order 'fire at enemy commanders'."

If it was some sort of strange luck deal, it was still unrealistic for a single crossbowman to pick out one commander from literally 100+ troops and kill him in 2 shots from the start of the battle. If it is a bug, it is one that made that game very unfun.

[ January 29, 2004, 04:06: Message edited by: diamondspider ]

[LordArioch]

About the starting positions...you can set that in maps, but whereas you view starting in a corner as an advantage, I think it's a disadvantage. Starting near but not touching a corner would probably be optimal, but in one limits nearby provinces too much for my liking. I remember one game where I started in the one spot in the map with only one adjacent land province. Let's just say my capitol's admin didn't help much.

And about the AI firing at commanders...thinking of it I have seen that at least once from the troll archer, who targets my leaders and kills them one by one. Can't think of anyone else doing it, but if we bother the developers they'll probably fix it in the next patch.

[ January 29, 2004, 04:46: Message edited by: LordArioch ]

[diamondspider]

Originally posted by LordArioch:
About the starting positions...you can set that in maps, but whereas you view starting in a corner as an advantage, I think it's a disadvantage. Starting near but not touching a corner would probably be optimal, but in one limits nearby provinces too much for my liking. I remember one game where I started in the one spot in the map with only one adjacent land province. Let's just say my capitol's admin didn't help much.

Agreed. When I typed that out, I realized that it was a vast oversimplification.

I could only tell what positions are good and bad in the Aran map by playing the first 40 turns about 30 times and still, of course, there were some exceptions.

However, if it true that the map editor allows one to restrict starting placement, this is really no big problem. Ideally, fixed starting positions and all of their parameters should be preset (in my view). The rest of the luck seems harsh, but bearable in Dominions II.

I'll say one thing for sure, no way would I attend an MP game using the Aran map

[ January 29, 2004, 04:54: Message edited by: diamondspider ]

[Breschau]

Originally posted by diamondspider:
2) Target switching. This was talked about in another thread. In that thread it was noted that when a faster unit closes on a unit that if firing the firing unit won't switch to the newly close unit but instead keeps trying to attack the unit that was closest at the time the battle started.

I do find that annoying, but even more annoying, and similarly, I really hate when a huge unit of mine breaks a small and fast one early in the battle and then tries to pursue it all the way off the board instead of changing targets.

This should be very easy to fix in that it could just, maybe, pick a random number between 0 and 3 and pursue for that many rounds then switch to the closest target at that point.

How about a morale check, or a check on their commander's leadership, every turn to cease pursuit and find a target that's still fighting?

I'm thinking of the GW tabletop Warhammer Fantasy Battle where, if memory serves, a leadership check was required to cease pursuit. This was representing the fact that on the battlefield it's the natural instinct to chase down a foe you've just caused to rout. It's harder to be rational and see that there's others you should be attacking when you're in the chaos of battle. But a good leader and/or disciplined troop would be able to curb that and let the enemy go if there were still more relevant targets.

[diamondspider]

Originally posted by Breschau:

quote:

---

Originally posted by diamondspider:
2) Target switching. ...

How about a morale check, or a check on their commander's leadership, every turn to cease pursuit and find a target that's still fighting?

...

---

Nice idea

I said random 0-3 only because chasing the enemy is only natural for a small distance. The question becomes how long does it take to realize that they are gone for good?

Certainly chasing them until they are off the field is too much in many cases, but immediately switching would also be too fast.

So, sure, linking it with leadership would make a lot of sense. Just be harder to code a more sophisticated system, and if they broke off from 1-3 rounds even, it would make a huge difference to both realism and fun I think.

[ January 29, 2004, 06:56: Message edited by: diamondspider ]

[General Tacticus]

Originally posted by diamondspider:

2) Target switching. This was talked about in another thread. In that thread it was noted that when a faster unit closes on a unit that if firing the firing unit won't switch to the newly close unit but instead keeps trying to attack the unit that was closest at the time the battle started.

Try the orders "Attack none" and "Fire none" for archers. This lets the AI choose your targets for you, and it will switch when your first target routs.

As for the AI targeting enemy commanders, I can't remember seeing it. Sure, I have had commanders die from missile fire, but it seemed more like a stray arrow meant for somebody else went their way. Anyway, I try to have at least two commanders in every battle (even if the second is just a scout or cheap priest), just to be on the safe side.