How, exactly, is it determined when a range 4 archer unit will fire? I was recently involved in a battle with other range 4 archers. Those units fired, but my unit "moved forward for better shots" My unit fired at range 2.
All units in the same line. Monsters 4 lines away. Battle occurred on a "quite windy day."
-=Mayen's Archers=- (2) fire on Monsters (1), scoring 38 hits.
McFinks (4) fire on Monsters (1), scoring 58 hits.
Fury of Ortedail (3) move closer to get better shots.
Vert Cloaks (7) fire on Monsters (1), scoring 125 hits.
Well, first you disembowel a chicken and spill its entrails on the ground in front of you. Then...
Quote from: Indirik on March 11, 2011, 06:46:37 PM
Well, first you disembowel a chicken and spill its entrails on the ground in front of you. Then...
All out of chickens, are crow entrails as accurate?
Well, since it's quite windy, it's normal to assume that your range 4 archers were actually, as it states, "moving closer to get better shots". :) That doesn't mean they cannot shoot at range 4 on a good day. You can't expect all units to perform equally in every battle, right? ;)
And sometimes they seem to think they're awesome masters of the sword.
Quote from: Artemesia on March 12, 2011, 01:03:08 AM
And sometimes they seem to think they're awesome masters of the sword.
Exactly, that's why the infantry has to keep the other line from reaching the archers, right? :)
Depends on how strapped for gold you are.
... I got me a slightly different question.
let's assume you have 2 identical archery units with the only exception being range. let's say 3 and 4.
how does that affect their damage output? ignoring the fact that one can shoot further and thus one can shoot certain enemies that the other can't.
let's say they are both 2 squares away from an enemy. will the 4 range do more damage than the 3? (on average anyway)
Quote from: fodder on March 30, 2011, 09:52:13 PM
... I got me a slightly different question.
let's assume you have 2 identical archery units with the only exception being range. let's say 3 and 4.
how does that affect their damage output? ignoring the fact that one can shoot further and thus one can shoot certain enemies that the other can't.
let's say they are both 2 squares away from an enemy. will the 4 range do more damage than the 3? (on average anyway)
No, they will do the same damage. Range is just that, the maximum distance at which they can engage enemies.
If range is the only difference, then sometimes R4 would get an extra round of shots due to the extra range. That depends on a great many other factors as well though, as I've sometimes had an R5 unit advance when they were deployed in the middle against a front deployed enemy.
I've noticed Archers getting more hits as the enemy gets closer though. Could just be the random accuracy factor, but if it is a significant trend it is likely R4 archers will do more damage at range 3 then R3 archers.
Quote from: De-Legro on March 30, 2011, 11:34:44 PM
I've noticed Archers getting more hits as the enemy gets closer though. Could just be the random accuracy factor, but if it is a significant trend it is likely R4 archers will do more damage at range 3 then R3 archers.
Again, I reiterate. Archer range is just that, range. All things held equal, R3 and R4 archers will do the same damage to enemies equidistant from them.
Is there any wind direction factor which might influence which side's archer will get an advantage?
Like if the wind is blowing behind attackers, they might gain a range while defenders will suffer losing a range (a column)
At this time, no battles observed have shown any preference for either side.
On a related note, in a battle this recent turn my archer unit made a very stupid move. On the first turn, with a range of four and enemies only three lines away, my archers moved closer to "get better shots". My unit were the only archers that moved forward. So not only did they waste a turn, they were then sitting out alone in front of the archer group and was targeted by every enemy archer unit for two turns (814 hits received first turn after the move, 1037 on the second) until my unit resembled a mound of porcupine corpses. I ask you, why did they move forward? That's just about the stupidest move they could possibly have chosen. My line settings were the same as every one else's.
Yeah, it happens sometimes. Did I ever mention how I once had a really large really strong range 5 unit that still moved forward when deployed in the middle against a small group of dug-in monsters?
Wind might play a role, although that might not always be the case. I guess sometimes sudden myopia sets in.
Even better is when they move closer to get better shots on the first round, retreat from nearby close combat on the second round, then for the rest of the battle don't shoot because the enemy is all engaged in close combat. ::)
Ah, some ranged units can fire even when there's a melee going on. I think...maybe.
The combat AI in general needs a lot of improvement. This is not news to the devs :P
Trouble is, it's not as simple as it sounds. There's a lot of different factors that go into why units behave as they do in combat.
At a certain point, one would think we're asking for sentient AI. :o
Quote from: Artemesia on April 04, 2011, 03:34:34 PM
At a certain point, one would think we're asking for sentient AI. :o
Sure. But that point is at least a parsec off ;)
Quote from: Velax on April 04, 2011, 02:54:59 PM
On a related note, in a battle this recent turn my archer unit made a very stupid move. On the first turn, with a range of four and enemies only three lines away, my archers moved closer to "get better shots". My unit were the only archers that moved forward. So not only did they waste a turn, they were then sitting out alone in front of the archer group and was targeted by every enemy archer unit for two turns (814 hits received first turn after the move, 1037 on the second) until my unit resembled a mound of porcupine corpses. I ask you, why did they move forward? That's just about the stupidest move they could possibly have chosen. My line settings were the same as every one else's.
This is a quote from Tom in the April fools joke
* Archers
Everyone knows that archers really are wimps, too afraid to face the
enemy in real combat. Archer units engaged in close combat have a
random chance of doing either of the below:
- fight
- immediately surrender
- attempt to bury a hole to hide in
- offer themselves to the enemy as sex slaves if only they are spared
(they will then act much like a baggage train)
My guess is they were offering themselves up and the enemy didn't like the looks of em ;D ;D
Quote from: Anaris on April 04, 2011, 03:28:57 PM
The combat AI in general needs a lot of improvement. This is not news to the devs :P
Trouble is, it's not as simple as it sounds. There's a lot of different factors that go into why units behave as they do in combat.
Would it be at all possible to give archer commanders an option to fire into melee, with a chance of hitting friendly forces as well?
Such a mechanism already exists, although not something under user control. I don't think it's for archers, but maybe special forces?
Also, I'm sure those who looked at the battle reports since 3rd Inv have noticed that ranged daimons fire even while in melee.
Most archer in the middle ages wasn't "sniper" style. It was mass volleys of arrows in a arcing fire pattern. Firing into melee doesn't present a "chance" of hitting your own troops, it pretty much assures it.
That makes some sense, although I can imagine some cruel strategist out there thinking "You get no weapons. Pick them off your dead comrades." He could also think "Keep the enemy in one place while we kill all of you. Then victory is ours."
In this case we're talking about some hardcore cold-blooded stuff...which is appropriate for BM. Unfortunately, I don't think such a feature would be easy to code, keeping in mind already how the current battle system works, and the added difficulty of making it a controllable decision (I'm pretty sure not everyone wants to lose infantry from friendly fire all the time).
heh, I just tried to write logic for archers, and gave up once I realized that aggressive/normal/defensive would play a role, distance from enemy, presence of friendly troops, and whether the enemy is dug in.
I know that the code is held by about 3 or 4 people, but perhaps archer move/fire logic could be posted here? I don't have a clue what it even looks like.
Quote from: egamma on April 05, 2011, 06:18:47 PMheh, I just tried to write logic for archers, and gave up once I realized that aggressive/normal/defensive would play a role, distance from enemy, presence of friendly troops, and whether the enemy is dug in.
One possibility I discussed with Tim one day was that if archers are on Defensive, they would never advance if they had a valid target to shoot at.
Quote from: Artemesia on April 05, 2011, 12:31:19 AM
That makes some sense, although I can imagine some cruel strategist out there thinking "You get no weapons. Pick them off your dead comrades." He could also think "Keep the enemy in one place while we kill all of you. Then victory is ours."
In this case we're talking about some hardcore cold-blooded stuff...which is appropriate for BM. Unfortunately, I don't think such a feature would be easy to code, keeping in mind already how the current battle system works, and the added difficulty of making it a controllable decision (I'm pretty sure not everyone wants to lose infantry from friendly fire all the time).
Would depend entirely on what age we are talking. Remember that at one stage archers were viewed as inferior since they were generally relatively untrained peasants. Some countries went so far as to view them as dishonourable to even use, similar to the controversies that formed around crossbows and muskets later on. It would be a very cold and calculating General that would consider having such rabble fire upon the melee, which would be dominated by the mounted knights, and most probably one that might struggle to hold the oaths of the knights for very long.
On top of that, the friendly units would take a lot more damage than the opposing force, unless your melee friends are carrying their shields on their backs, of course ::)
And I think it is imperative for archer units on 'defensive' stance not to move forward, and certainly not when enemy units are in range. If the wind is causing problems, those archers should simply wait longer for the enemy to move closer? What's the use of 'defensive' archers if they can decide to move forward, perhaps even in front of 'defensive' infantry? Orders should be able to make sure a formation stays put and holds it's ground, unless a panicked flight occurs... Or is this already the case?
Defensive infantry will move forward though, unless they have walls to hide behind. Pretty sure that defensive archers will not in most cases move in front of the walls in order to get better shots. MI still might, but we all know that MI are recruited from berserkers so there is no explaining their decisions.
I've gotten some mixed anecdotes about how encounter settings work. I've heard about as many claims that encounter settings (Evasive/Defensive/Normal/Aggressive/Murderous) only account for how the sides arrange in battle. That means, it determines whether your unit attacks the enemy, ally, neutral, or hides. Sometimes the encounter setting might confuse the unit into watching the battle with some popcorn in the oven.
Others claim that they factor during the actual battle, in that defensives will stay back and aggressives will run forward.
Unfortunately, battle reports don't tell us the encounter settings, or so I believe. It has been a while since I saw a battle report.
Quote from: Artemesia on April 06, 2011, 03:07:57 AM
I've gotten some mixed anecdotes about how encounter settings work. I've heard about as many claims that encounter settings (Evasive/Defensive/Normal/Aggressive/Murderous) only account for how the sides arrange in battle. That means, it determines whether your unit attacks the enemy, ally, neutral, or hides. Sometimes the encounter setting might confuse the unit into watching the battle with some popcorn in the oven.
Others claim that they factor during the actual battle, in that defensives will stay back and aggressives will run forward.
Unfortunately, battle reports don't tell us the encounter settings, or so I believe. It has been a while since I saw a battle report.
Yeah you can't see the encounter settings in most cases. You do get messages about units acting evasively or murderous, not sure about aggressive.
normal/aggressive/defensive affects how long a unit will wait behind fortifications before they leave to charge the enemy. This includes impromptu fortifications when dug in. If no fortifications are involved, I think that infantry will act the same in all three settings. I'm not sure about archers.
Quote from: Indirik on April 05, 2011, 10:02:02 PM
One possibility I discussed with Tim one day was that if archers are on Defensive, they would never advance if they had a valid target to shoot at.
That would be nice.