Auto-routing alternatives

vfb · #1 April 24th, 2008, 11:54 PM

Quote:

Loren said:

Quote:

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.

Please continue the discussion here so we don't clutter the bug thread.

Argitoth · #2 April 25th, 2008, 01:21 AM

Quote:

Argitoth said:
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.

Quote:

NTJedi said:

Quote:

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.

Quote:

NTJedi said:

Quote:

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.

Quote:

Wick said:
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.

Argitoth · #3 April 25th, 2008, 01:24 AM

Quote:

chrispedersen said:
Many of us don't *like* SC's. So theres a game balance question between SC's and nonSC's.

One of the ways to defeat an SC is just have so much chaff that he CANT kill it all in 50 turns.

Leave as is.

Basically what you're saying is because SCs are hard to kill, there should be a feature that makes it easy to gaurantee killing SCs.

We should probably have more features that make it easy to gaurantee certain nations to win every game of dominions. Naa, that's a bad idea.

-All nations have access to SCs.
-All nations have access to ways of killing SCs.
-Infinite chaff should not be one of those ways.

I can accept the idea that chaff can be a viable way of making SCs retreat, but not a viable way of killing them.

It was MY OWN chaff that caused the death of MY OWN SC, so... you need to rethink what you are saying here.

video: http://www.elanhickler.com/misc/batt...tle_flash.html

Dedas · #4 April 25th, 2008, 03:45 AM

I do not believe SC's needs more power in any way, or we have Dom2 all over again. And yes, I know some people cry like babies when they get killed but those people just have to get over it, just like with the save game debacle. They have to understand that this is only a game where much of the fun lies in the thrill of taking risks - at least for me. I do not believe I'm alone in that feeling. So, do we really need more certainties?

I like that a vast amount of chaff can take out a power gamed SC. That way the power gamer will get even more excitement when he actually do win in such a battle, perhaps using a combination of regular units and a SC. Much more fun.

vfb · #5 April 25th, 2008, 04:08 AM

Maybe Golems should get a big red lamp on their chest, that starts blinking 'bi-gon bi-gon bi-gon' when their magic energy charge is about to run out (at 50 turns into a battle).

Dedas · #6 April 25th, 2008, 04:24 AM

YES! That is it!

Argitoth · #7 April 25th, 2008, 04:54 AM

Quote:

Dedas said:I like that a vast amount of chaff can take out a power gamed SC. That way the power gamer will get even more excitement when he actually do win in such a battle, perhaps using a combination of regular units and a SC. Much more fun.

Please watch the video I posted. I lost MY SC because of MY chaff in my army against a lone SC. You say it's much more fun to use a combination of regular units and an SC. Yes, watch the video I posted. I used an army and two SCs against a lone SC. Yet the lone SC won because of auto-kill.

video: http://www.elanhickler.com/misc/batt...tle_flash.html

Dedas, basically because of auto-kill, using SC alone or in an army can be equally dangerous as I prove in the above video. If there was never an auto-kill feature in Dominions, I don't think anyone would be requesting it. That would be silly, wouldn't it? "My enemy's supercombatant is killing all my chaff! I think that's a bug! We need an auto-kill feature so I can press a button and make it die!"

However, the situation is opposite. We are requesting to remove a feature that never should have been part of Dominions.

Endoperez · #8 April 25th, 2008, 07:05 AM

I'm not sure if I read the battle correctly, but to me it seems like:

1) your undead chaff attacks the Tartarian, and is killed, perhaps after your mages rout.
2) Your Catoblepas attack the Tartarian, and are killed.
3) Your golem, which has been casting Drain Life up until now, and the enemy Tartarian finally meet each other. Your golem has attack 13, the Tartarian has defence 20.
4) They face off, your Golem has much more hp. I'm not sure if you had the battle paused while you showed the hp total of the Tartarian multiple times, but it seems your golem managed to keep the Tartarian's regen almost under check, until
5) Your Golem died. The Tartarian went on to kill the remaining longdead.

Is this somewhat correct? The important phase is the longdead and tartarian left after your golem died. If there was still one of your longdead (mindless) on the battlefield, and the auto-rout started, shouldn't it be dead as well? If it was the auto-kill, everyone (including the Tartarian) would have died.

I don't remember how mindlessness and routing works, but to me at least it seems like something else might have happened there. Have you generated a log and checked what it says?

thejeff · #9 April 25th, 2008, 08:43 AM

I think the issue here is that golems, being mindless, die when their side auto-routs.

So it wasn't the final auto-kill feature, but the behavior of golems during the auto-rout.

Apparently mindless commanders behave like mindless units and spontaneously die instead of routing.

Conceptually, the problem may just be that mindless commanders don't really make any sense.

Argitoth · #10 April 25th, 2008, 08:46 AM

Sorry Endo, I wish you asked me to generate a log earlier. The turn ended late today. I guess now we can only speculate. HOWEVER! I was counting battle turns and according to my count, my golem *might* have died exactly on turn 50...

OH WAIT! I SAVED A BACKUP!... holy he** I NEVER CREATE BACKUPS!

I'm not sure how to generate a log, but let me post the game files: http://www.elanhickler.com/misc/funhouseserver.zip (C'tis password: dragon / Host password: dragon)

Let me know if I'm missing files.