Bug: Bug Thread: Discussion

[thejeff]

He's not saying that there doesn't need to be a mechanism to handle units that don't rout.

He's suggesting they get automatically moved to a neighboring province, as if they'd routed instead of just being killed.

[Argitoth]

The link leads to a video I created of the battle in question.

http://www.elanhickler.com/misc/batt...tle_flash.html (Flash Encoding 6.5mb)

Tartarian gets paralyzed, but can't be killed by the melee units. Tartarian gets unparalyzed, my golem dies before it can end the battle by killing the tartarian.

[NTJedi]

Kristoffer O said:
The auto kill is there as some units don't retreat. Target was paralyzed, stunned and immobile units, as other units supposedly already had been auto-routed.

What units do not get routed by autorout?
Berserkers

Beserkers, sleepers, paralyzed, immobile units are auto_killed. Here are two scenarios I experienced which display why auto-retreat works better than auto-kill.

One scenario I experienced was my beserked SC was trying to kill over a thousand mindless units such as skelletons... the enemy retreated yet my beserked SC could not kill all the remaining mindless units before being auto-killed himself by the time limit.

Another scenario I experienced was my SC was killing hundreds of different types of units. Eventually the enemy was retreating yet enemy dispossed spirits fleeing ran into my SC and paralyzed him. The dispossed spirits could not flee or harm the SC yet they had him continously paralyzed. My SC was then killed by the time limit.


I understand and agree we don't want the battles lasting forever yet a better solution is having an auto-retreat instead of the auto-kill. Auto-retreating meaning the battle ends and units/commanders flee to a friendly nieghboring province.

[Kristoffer O]

> He's suggesting they get automatically moved to a neighboring province, as if they'd routed instead of just being killed.

I'm more unfond of a sphinx reappearing in a neighboring province than a golem dying because he was too slow on killing stuff.

[Kristoffer O]

I'm more inclined to raise the limit, but I don't see the point, since it affects everyone the same. Just like starvation rate or income or whatever. It is a feature you know and have to deal with.

[NTJedi]

Kristoffer O said:
I'm more unfond of a sphinx reappearing in a neighboring province than a golem dying because he was too slow on killing stuff.

Easy solution... auto-retreat only the attackers.

[Argitoth]

NT Jedi, I hate to argue against your ideas, but how can you solve the part where immobiles attack via teleportation? For the sake of getting rid of auto-kill, I'd just say it's fair to move the immobile to a neighboring province, but Kristoffer probably wouldn't agree with me.

If Kristoffer does agree to do this, I hope he can also raise the turn limit a little bit; a one-two punch to this "problem." It would make me happy, anyway.

[NTJedi]

With regards to immobile the end result should be the same result as what happens now when using map edit commands and placing two different nations on the same province. This scenario would have the defender still owning the province and the attacking immobile sitting on top without access to anything within the province. Thus next turn results in an instant battle.

This might be too much programming... so as a second option leave the auto-kill for only immobiles and provide an auto-retreat for only attackers.

An increase for battle turns would be appreciated... as time passes it's inevitable gamers will need to upgrade their computers. The computers of today and tomorrow can handle the increased battle turns. On reflection for increasing battle turns... anytime we've seen in increase for commander and unit limits we've only seen praise and happiness in the community.

[Wick]

I'm with NT-Jedi. For me, auto-killing is worse then un-teleporting them back, or vortexing them home, or just declaring they successfully left the field, with or without immobiles. They are all arbitrary solutions to keep the game playable but killing a unit *because* it's safe from whatever it's fighting is just ugly. YMMV.

[Loren]

vfb said:
Without auto-death, it's possible that a battle could never end. You could have two fatigued armies passed out on the battlefield, neither able to kill the other, and not even able to retreat even if they wanted to.

Oh wait ... maybe I see what you're saying. When turn 100 is reached, just treat the entire attacking army as if it *had* retreated, and flee it to the surrounding provinces. Sounds like it might work.

Somebody's going to wake up and start bashing again.

I think the answer is different: Starting at turn 40 count the total hp's of the real (not battlefield summons) units in the fight. Note the highest value in the 40-50 turn range. In every subsequent 10 turn range note the highest value, compare with the saved value. If it's equal or higher it's time for a rout. If it's lower, replace the saved value with the new value. Note that since the hp's must always be declining the battle will end eventually.

If it's determined that a rout should happen look at the retreat options for both sides. If a side can retreat, rout that side. Do not rout a side that can't retreat at this point. These routs apply to *ALL* units, even those normally immune from routing.

Continue the hp checks, if they call for a rout *AGAIN*, rout both sides.

If the check hits a third time then you force everything off the battlefield. Anything capable of teleporting to the capital does so, anything else dies.

So long as the battle is making progress it will continue. If it deadlocks the guy who can retreat does so--realistically the guy who has noplace to go won't stop a useless battle.

The second case is to deal with the possibility that nobody can retreat. Two armies teleport into battle or the like. The final case removes any units that can't move.