Quick bits of feedback after about 100 hours of play

[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.

[IKerensky]

Well, historically keeping your men from pursuing fleeing foes was one of the hardest task and I fear that unless the XXth century no commander ever manage to succeed at that efficiently.

So I will rule out the no pursue order, basically.

Some example of commander having suffered thus move ( expecially from his cavalry ) : Caesar, Scipio, Alexander, Darius, François Ier, Napoleon, Wellington,... and many more ( basically every middleage commander ).

[diamondspider]

Originally posted by IKerensky:
Well, historically keeping your men from pursuing fleeing foes was one of the hardest task and I fear that unless the XXth century no commander ever manage to succeed at that efficiently.

So I will rule out the no pursue order, basically.

Some example of commander having suffered thus move ( expecially from his cavalry ) : Caesar, Scipio, Alexander, Darius, François Ier, Napoleon, Wellington,... and many more ( basically every middleage commander ).

So 2 horsemen ride up and my unit of 50 breaks them, that unit then pursues the one remaining horseman (on foot no less) the entire length of the battlefield while ignoring the 50 other troops they pass unless they are directly in their path?

Even you must admit that the troops didn't pursue fleeing units forever, right?

So, I have no problem with pursuit, the question is for how long and past how many other close enemies.

For sure, what happens on the screen is absurd at times

I don't doubt that it would be impossible for the units to do this "efficiently", as you said, and just make a quick change to another target the moment the first one flees, but as it stands, inefficient in Dom2 seems pretty arbitrary based on the distance to the end of the field that a unit happens to be at the time.

Maybe have it be 2-4 rounds...

[ January 29, 2004, 09:43: Message edited by: diamondspider ]

[diamondspider]

Originally posted by General Tacticus:
QUOTE]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.

Really? It will switch if I say attack none? Wow! Usually I don't give infantry orders at all and I assumed that would let the computer pick.

I'll try out Attack none, but I'd be surprised if that allowed the computer more reason to switch than giving no orders at all...

Sure hope you're right!

As for the missle fire, I am 100% sure that my commander was singled out by a Pythian crossbow unless he chose a totally random unit and happened to pick that commander from about 15 choices. It certainly didn't happen ever time by any means, but I did see it happen at least once.

How can I be so sure? Because while there were other troops around him (mostly skeletons he was summoning) he got hit twice over 3 turns and at times he was the only one near, yet the bolt kept hitting his square. Finally, there were many commanders in that battle but the vast majority of my army was tied into the one commander that got shot. A brilliant move if the archer had known who my commander was, that he was the main commander, and could see over 100+ troops!

I should have saved the file and will in the future when I see it.

[ January 29, 2004, 09:59: Message edited by: diamondspider ]