|
|
|
|
January 31st, 2004, 10:39 AM
|
Corporal
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 197
Thanks: 8
Thanked 4 Times in 2 Posts
|
|
Routing armies and friendly fire
Do you think it would be possible (or rather: not too difficult to implement) to either make it an automatic default or a check-box you can click in the "set battle orders" part to not attack routing squadrons and / or routing armies?
I mean, if you see they are routing, it is often not only better but perhaps ethically sensible to not slaughter them.
Well I'll stick to the "better" (functionally).
- If squadrons are routing but the entire army isnt, it would make more sense to concentrate on the enemy that is still there.
- If the entire army is routing and they are Independents, they have no where to flee and hence are no worry anymore. Why attack?
- If the entire army is routing and they are an enemy nation, it might make sense to attack so that no one survives, but could often involve heavy losses through friendly fire. It would be interesting to be able to toggle "attack routing units" here on and off.
What do you think? Desirable and doable (without too much resources for the developers)?
|
January 31st, 2004, 10:48 AM
|
|
General
|
|
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 3,013
Thanks: 17
Thanked 25 Times in 22 Posts
|
|
Re: Routing armies and friendly fire
Quote:
Originally posted by onomastikon:
I mean, if you see they are routing, it is often not only better but perhaps ethically sensible to not slaughter them.
|
Ethics has little to do with medieval warfare.
Quote:
- If squadrons are routing but the entire army isnt, it would make more sense to concentrate on the enemy that is still there.
|
As other have said, if given a choice between chasing a guy who's running away so you can kill him and loot his armour and weapons, or going after someone who is still trying to kill you, most people will go for the loot.
|
January 31st, 2004, 11:56 AM
|
|
First Lieutenant
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Bordeaux, France
Posts: 794
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
Re: Routing armies and friendly fire
Quote:
Originally posted by Graeme Dice:
quote: Originally posted by onomastikon:
I mean, if you see they are routing, it is often not only better but perhaps ethically sensible to not slaughter them.
|
Ethics has little to do with medieval warfare.
Quote:
- If squadrons are routing but the entire army isnt, it would make more sense to concentrate on the enemy that is still there.
|
As other have said, if given a choice between chasing a guy who's running away so you can kill him and loot his armour and weapons, or going after someone who is still trying to kill you, most people will go for the loot. If the units had a "Regular/Elite classification, it might make sense to give the "Elite" (more disciplined) units a better chance of going on with their proper jobs. In the absence of such a classification, morale level could be used instead, though not as a perfect approximation ("fanatic" units should not become more disciplined; take Vanheim Maenads, for example).
But then, implementing this would probably require a complete overhaul of the tactical battle AI; I'm not holding my breath.
|
January 31st, 2004, 10:15 PM
|
|
National Security Advisor
|
|
Join Date: Dec 1999
Posts: 8,806
Thanks: 54
Thanked 33 Times in 31 Posts
|
|
Re: Routing armies and friendly fire
I was pretty sure the ranged AI was already programmed to switch to non-routing targets, once their current target routs...
PvK
|
January 31st, 2004, 10:23 PM
|
Major General
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 2,425
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
Re: Routing armies and friendly fire
With the exception of archers, I haven't noticed that units tend to persistently chase routing units, to the point of ignoring active threats, even when being attacked by another unit: If they become engaged with another unit, they usually start fighting again and ignore the routing unit.
This may have something to do with my thinking: In Medieval: Total War, for instance, I'd often deliberately keep a unit of fast cavalry in reserve SPECIFICALLY to chase and slaughter routing units, just to slaughter them so I never have to fight them again.
|
February 2nd, 2004, 10:04 AM
|
|
Lieutenant Colonel
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 1,276
Thanks: 0
Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts
|
|
Re: Routing armies and friendly fire
I noticed that I have actually killed some communion slaves when casting overkill spells on large routing but slow-moving independent armies. (Of course I am new to this and used too few slaves, but still....)
It would be nice if the AI recognized "routing" as a factor and decided to de-prioritize those units. I hate killing my own units when I dont have to.
|
February 2nd, 2004, 12:08 PM
|
Sergeant
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 201
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
Re: Routing armies and friendly fire
Quote:
Originally posted by PvK:
I was pretty sure the ranged AI was already programmed to switch to non-routing targets, once their current target routs...
PvK
|
It does, if you let the AI choose the target (no orders, or attack/fire none). But if you tell it to attack a specific target (attack closest), it will stay on that target until it's completely destroyed, even if the target is fasster and routing... Hey, it's obeying order, like a good soldier should, isn't it ?
|
February 2nd, 2004, 01:10 PM
|
Colonel
|
|
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Near Paris, France
Posts: 1,566
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
Re: Routing armies and friendly fire
BTW did someone figure what are the targeting priorities of "targetless" firers ? Don't they always go for closest ?
|
February 2nd, 2004, 09:22 PM
|
|
Re: Routing armies and friendly fire
If you don't put an order the units default are:
Ranged (Including Javelins) = Fire Closest
Non-Ranged = Attack Closest
Commanders = Stay Behind Troops
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is On
|
|
|
|
|