-
Destek Kuvvetin Savaş Alanının tam içinde spawn olması ve yapay zekanın error verip ölmesi
Yapılmışı var zaten hem de bir yıl önce ( Link )Block reis seni yakalamışken sormak istediğim bir şey var. Warband'da haritayı şehirlerini yerini rahatça değiştirebiliyorduk hatta kendi çapımda şehirlerde eklemiştim ama Bannerlord'da nasıl yapılacağı hakkında bir fikrim yok. Warbanddaki gibi gerçek dünya haritası olması ve yeni şehirleri eklenmesi mümkün mü böyle bir mod seni zorlamaz diye düşünüyorum.
Modlarla uğraşmıyorum artık ki zaten böyle bir modla uğraşmazdım çünkü Modding Tools zerre kullanışlı değil indirmeye değmez. Ama LOTR modları vs zaten çoktan başladılar bunlara ve bazı GOT modlarında da harita çoktan değişti.
Buna şöyle bir örnek vererek destekleyebilirim. Bu dün yaptığım bir savaştan:
Bizim ordular ilk olarak Yeşil çizgide spawn oldu, sonra komutan tepeyi tutmak adına askerleri Mavi tepeye kaydırdı. Uzun bir süre o tepede durduk, destek ekipler pembe uç sınırda spawn olup sürekli olarak tepeye katıldılar, düşmanın destek ekipleri uzaklarda doğduğu için sürekli saldıramıyor ve ara ara turkuaz noktada askerleri topluyordu önce. Ama sonra bizim komutan öldürülünce AI dümdüz saldırı moduna girdi ve askerler tepeden indi, sonra da savaşı kaybettik zaten.
Şimdi normalde eğer spawn sistemi değişmemiş olsa, ilk doğduğumuz alan Yeşil kısım olduğu için destek dalgası Pembe noktada değil mavi noktada doğacaktı. Yani bir diğer deyişle, zaten savunmak için bizim birliklerin durduğu noktanın içinde pat diye doğacaklardı. Bu ne deme? Bu düşman saldırırken zaten dezavantajlı konumdayken bir anda dibinde veya arkasında bizim destek ekibin doğması ile daha da dezavantaja girip durup dururken yok olması anlamına gelecekti.
Şimdi bu senaryoda bu olsaydı biz savaşı kazanırdık, ama düşündüğün zaman zaten savaşı kazanmamış olmamız doğru olan çünkü avantajlı konum bırakıldı moraller düştü vs. Yani sistemin saçmalığı yüzünden dengesiz bir durum yaşanmadı. Tabi verdiğim örnek her zaman bu kadar savaş anısı gibi işlemiyor ama yine de uçlarda spawn olunması şu an için tek çare gibi.
Öyle god mode olarak değil ama gelecek patchlerden birisinde emir verirken zamanın yavaşlaması özelliği gelecek ( şuradan görebilirsin https://drive.google.com/file/d/1_DZ-drVbC4r8pPpJLbrHb1I1x8xFwKxj/view )
Bu bahsettiğin RTS modu. İndirip oynayabilirsin ama oyunun genel şeması içinde olmaması gerektiğini düşünüyorum ben de.
Bu normal bir şey zaten. Yani düşündüğün zaman gerçekte savaş yönetsen de aşağı yukarı aynı soruna sahip olursun. Düzgün yönetebilmek için tepeyi ele geçirmen gerekir bu da tepeleri önemli kılar.
Ama Warband içinde olup Bannerlord içinde olmayan bir şey var. O da Minimap. Bahsettiğin sistem yerine, ana-komutlar içinde "haritayı aç" tarzı bir komut olabilir ve sen mini haritadan hangi askerin nereye gitmesi gerektiğine karar verebilirsin. Böylece ne god-mode gibi oyundan kopuk olur, ne de senin taktik yapma kabiliyetini sınırlar. Hatta bunu da "Taktik" skillerine bağlayıp oyundaki skillerin de doğru düzgün bir işe yaramasını sağlayabilirler. Ama işte komiktir ki minimap Warband içinde varken bilmem kaç yıl sonra çıkan Bannerlord içinde yok- Bloc
- Post #46
- Forum: Bannerlord - Tek Oyunculu
-
Destek Kuvvetin Savaş Alanının tam içinde spawn olması ve yapay zekanın error verip ölmesi
Bu zaten askerleri sıralamana göre ilerliyor olması lazım. Bir ara boş anıma gelirse koda bakarım ama hatırladığım kadarıyla üstten başlayarak ekliyordu askerleri. Yani eğer ilk dalganın atlı olmasını istiyorsan ve atlı sayın total sayıyı geçiyorsa, kendinden sonra atlıları üste eklediğin zaman ilk atlılar savaş alanında doğacak. Fakat bu "asker çeşidi" şeklinde de ilerliyor olabilir, yani Vlandian Knight sayın başlı başına 100 ise o zaman Vlandian Knight içinden bir yüzdeyi alıp sonra ikinci unitten alıyor başka bir yüzde olabilir.
Devlet yerine ordu demeliydim orada karışıklık olmuş. Başka bir "ordu" diyeyim.
Senin verdiğin örnekte kuşattığın yerde birisi var - ana garnizon veya içinde bir ordu - bir de çevresinde bekleyen ve çevrede olduğu için savaşa dahil olan bir ordu. Total War seni ve ilk savunanı oyuna girdiğin an TÜM unitler olmak üzere savaş alanına koyuyor. Yani 2000 askerin varsa 2000 doğuyor, karşının 1000 varsa 1000 doğuyor. Bölmüyor senin veya karşı tarafın ordusunu.
Diğer yardımcı orduyu uzaktan ve sonradan getiriyor - yani onu Bannerlordda olduğu gibi orduyu tamamlamak adına ek olarak getirmiyor, daha çok "bak senin savaş yaptığın yerde şu ordu da vardı, ben bunu pat diye savaşta başlatmak yerine biraz sonra ekliyorum savaş alanına ki senin eğer hızlı manevra yapacağın ordu varsa bunu yapabilesin diye"
Burada iki şeyi karıştırıyorsunuz. Birincisi "Savaşa destek olan başka bir ordu" ve ikincisi "Savaşta hali hazırda savaşmakta olan ordunun sistem tarafından bölünmesi ve dalga dalga gelmesi" işte ikinci durum Bannerlordda mevcut Total War'da hiç mevcut olmadı. Total War o an savaşta olan tüm unitleri anında spawn ediyor. İlk durum ise Total War içinde gerçekçi bir şekilde ayarlanmış iken Bannerlord içinde sana veya düşmana destek olan ordular sanki hep oradaymış ve bir bütünmüş gibi savaşa başlıyorlar ( ve sonrasında buna göre dalga sistemi ile bölünüyorlar ikinci kısımda olduğu gibi )
O yüzden Total War ile karşılaştırmak yanlış bu durumda. Bence askerlerin sınırlarda doğması tek çözüm Bannerlordun bu olayı için. Sınırda doğmaları da sıkıntılar yaratıyor ama dediğim gibi, askerin yanına doğmasından kat ve kat daha iyi - ben savaş hattını kaydırmışken yerin altından 20 düşman süvarisi çıkması hiç güzel bir olay değil. Ben kendi değiştirdiğim askerlerin sınırdan doğduğu şekli oynuyorum, hatların hızlı oluşturulamaması dışında bir sıkıntı görmedim. O hat olayı da kişiye kalmış bir şey zaten. AI genelde hattı tekrar oluşturmak için geri çekilecek kadar akıl yürütüyor çoğu zaman.
Bu arada, Total War içinde bir ordunun alabileceği maksimum unit card sayısı 20idi yanlış hatırlamıyorsam. Rome Total War döneminde maksimum bir unit içindeki asker sayısı da 120 idi. Bir savaşa dahil olabilecek maksimum ordu sayısı 5 v 5 olabiliyordu. Yani oyunun ayarları ile oynanmamış hali bir ordu için (120*20)=2400 ve bir savaşta maksimum olabilecek asker sayısı olarak ise 24,000'i maksimum hardcoded limit olarak ekliyordu. Yine asker sayılarını modifiye ederek falan 40000 asker görenler oldu ve sanırım çoğu 55000 askerden sonra crash vermeye başlıyordu oyunun yapay zekası baş edemediği için.- Bloc
- Post #37
- Forum: Bannerlord - Tek Oyunculu
-
If only taleworlds choosed another timeline.
Not that I advertise my own mod ( would be pointless anyway since it's discontinued ) but I already created a mod that adds plagues and diseases to Bannerlord. You can check the overall idea in here - https://forums.taleworlds.com/index.php?threads/plague-and-diseases.438312/
And even though they appear based on chance, it also gives flexibility to players and AI to invest their money and time to prevent such things from hitting them hard. So it's not an unfortunate event that randomly wipes your progress but rather a possibility that can wipe your progress if you don't think ahead and ignore signs. Because it's also giving players a chance to fight with it and turn a disadvantageous situation in their favor. And keeping some things in check meanwhile - such as snowballing. I was planning to bring more interaction that player and AI could take to make it less random and more logical too, so once you go in that path, it's not always a single direction.
Example:
In the mod, when an outbreak happened, I was able to turn this to my advantage because my perks were all medicine-related and I had two doctor-like companions in my army. While enemy army slowly decimated and retreated(natural AI behavior to get more recruits), I was able to advance - normally both of the armies would suffer greatly if I didn't invest my money in proper companions.
But do I think it would be nice to have this in Bannerlord natively? Yes, but only if it was optional. Because I know not many people enjoy these things and it could very much be optional that you can select in the start of your campaign, just like death feature.
About OP's initial comment, I think the timeline is perfectly fine for Bannerlord. It's a timeline that is rich in terms of culture. The implementation itself, however, is quite weak. I mean, they could at least try to bring some form of difference between Empires and different units to certain cities with hybrid cultures.
Like, it would be nice to be able to recruit certain unique units from certain towns so that they would have some form of lore-specific backstory.- Bloc
- Post #53
- Forum: The Citadel - General Discussion
-
Destek Kuvvetin Savaş Alanının tam içinde spawn olması ve yapay zekanın error verip ölmesi
Oyun zaten şu an savaş alanındaki asker yoğunluğuna göre iki taraf arasında dinamik bir uzaklık belirliyor. Bunu zaten 100vs100 ile 10vs10 savaşlarda görebilirsin rahatlıkla. 10'a 10 olanlarda taraflar çok daha yakında başlıyor, savaş alanı/harita aynı bile olsa.
Oyun da, bu "spawn" alanlarını baz alarak "destek" ekiplerini bunun X kadar arkasında oluşturuyor. Buradaki X'de yine ilk baştaki dinamik uzaklık ile orantılı.
Şimdi buradaki sıkıntı, çoğu haritada, haritanın şekli sebebiyle zaten bu spawn noktalarından farklı bir yerde duruyor iki taraf. Mesela örnek vermek gerekirse, bazı haritalarda savunan tarafın defansif olacağı nokta/tepe zaten spawnın arkasında kaldığı için askerleri arkaya çekiyor, haliyle ikinci dalga geldiği zaman aksiyonun hemen dibinde ve hatta bazen normal defansif safın bile önünde doğmasına sebep oluyor. Bu da malum sıkıntıları çıkarıyor işte.
Senin dediğin versiyonda bu "aksiyon" noktasını bir şekilde yoğunluğa göre bulsan bile yine sıkıntılar çıkar. Mesela 30v30 piyade savaşırken senin 15lik atlılarının düşmanın arkasından geldiğini düşün. 30v30 aksiyonun orta noktası olur yoğunluk sebebiyle. Bu da destek ekibin aksiyon noktasının arkasında doğmasına sebep olur, ki bu da tam senin atlıların olduğu yer olabilir. Yine taktiğin bir anda saçma bir spawn yüzünden bozulmuş olur - oyuncu olarak bunu öngörme şansın da yok.
Zaten oyunun ilk saldırı sistemi bu şekilde. Mesela düşmanın 1000 askeri var senin 500, ve senin maksimum savaş alanındaki asker limitin 300 diyelim, bu durumda ilk spawn dalgasında senin 100 düşmanın ise 200 askeri deploy oluyor. Sonrasında gelen destekler de bu şekilde bu orana göre geliyor. Senin bahsettiğin şekilde tek dalga yapmak Bannerlord gibi bir oyuna uyacak bir şey değil. Çünkü senin ilk spawn olan 100 askerin belki Recruit olacak ama belki senin T5 100 unitin daha var ve eğer o 100lük adamlar savaşa girmiş olsa o zaman belki ilk dalgada kazanacaktın - fakat bahsettiğin sistemde bu imkansız. Eğer ilk üst limit askerler doğsun dersen bu sefer de gariplikler oluyor çünkü T1 bir atlı bazen duruma göre T3 piyadeden daha efektif olabiliyor vs gibi.
Fakat Total War oyunlarında destek ekip savaşa dahil olan ekstra bir devlet varsa o zaman oluyor. Oyunun asker limiti zaten settings kısmında seçiliyor. Yani sen ne yaparsan yap, ne kadar asker savaşa dahil edersen et, o üst limiti geçemiyorsun. O yüzden oyun hiçbir zaman senin ordunu bölmüyor, her zaman campaign haritasında ne varsa o spawn oluyor.
Settings kısmı sadece formasyon içindeki asker sayını azaltıyor veya arttırıyor bunu da performans için yapıyor ve herkese yapıyor. ( Bir atlı formasyonunda 64 adam da seçebiliyorsun 16 da gibi )
Yapı olarak yakın gözüküyor olsalar da aslında dinamik olarak farklılar baya. Bannerlord/Warband tekil askerlere önem veriyor, Total War olaya birlik olarak bakıyor.- Bloc
- Post #29
- Forum: Bannerlord - Tek Oyunculu
-
Destek Kuvvetin Savaş Alanının tam içinde spawn olması ve yapay zekanın error verip ölmesi
Bunun ticket ile çözülecek bir durumu yok çünkü bu "bug" olarak görülmüyor bence Taleworlds tarafından. Dizaynı bu şekilde oyunun. Dizaynın bu şekilde olması tahminimce orduların hızlı toparlanmasını sağlamak açısından yapılmış. Yani ilk dalga dağıldığı zaman destek ekiplerinin ona hızlı ulaşması için yakında doğması lazım çünkü haritanın köşesi çok uzak olabiliyor bazı durumlarda. Fakat şu anki çözüm de gayet saçma çünkü bahsettiğin gibi, resmen aksiyonun içine doğuyor askerler ve bu büyük denge sıkıntısı yaratıyor.
Bunun düzeltilmesi çok basit bu arada. Bugün küçük bir versiyon yaptım kendime, modülü hazırlamak, kodu değiştirmek vs dahil yarım saatte bitti. Destek ekipler savaş alanının ortasında doğmak yerine haritanın köşesinden olaya dahil oluyorlar. Bunun çıkardığı "formasyon" sıkıntısı oluyor, AI ve oyuncu için safları tekrar oluşturmak uzun sürüyor ama bu zaten sanırım kaçınılmaz bir şey oyunun bu savaş dizaynı içinde.- Bloc
- Post #26
- Forum: Bannerlord - Tek Oyunculu
-
SP - General footsteps
Turns out this was actually a side effect/bug from my mod lol (
) I thought they released it as a feature.. But at least this can show how nice and atmospheric it can be if they add it.
And now I know why it was concentered on single points. They are only making noise when bannermen is around and when they are high morale. Since I have total control over code now - I will change some stuff for it to make it sound more natural. Although still kudos to TW since apparently they fixed a bunch of issues on audio playing because in earlier versions of the beta, playing this many different sounds at the same time would cause trouble on my CPU.- Bloc
- Post #46
- Forum: Suggestions
-
What happened to "building a criminal empire"?
You can't refund the game because of this. Game does have "crime" system in it and you can gain criminal points by doing one single quest (this stolen goods thingy) or by robbing peasants/caravans(*see below)
And they can very much claim that this is what they meant with criminal empire. They don't have to deliver everything they mentioned in previous videos and blogs since they are subject to change. As a consumer, you can find this hypocrite and decide not to buy anything from that company though - that part is up to you. Or you can give bad review if that matters.
Nevertheless, as I said previously, it's not hard to predict what they will implement just to make sure that no one can complain about that. Although even right now dev says "The crime system largely works as described" so perhaps they are already okay with it and have no interest in properly implementing it.- Bloc
- Post #52
- Forum: The Citadel - General Discussion
-
Beta Patch Notes e1.6.5
QoL changes are welcomed but calling any of these "a lot of work" seems like an exaggeration. Which particular "small" improvement do you think would take a lot of work?
I'm 95% sure that it's not based on renown. It's probably either checking if character is Hero or not ( any non-soldier character considered as hero ) or it's checking first if it's Hero and then checking if it's in any clan/kingdom ( which makes wanderer companions that are not hired considered to be non-noble )
As far as I know, no. Perhaps they added with this patch- Bloc
- Post #14
- Forum: The Citadel - General Discussion
-
SP - General footsteps
Something like this might be good:Nope, can't comment more for now, sorry
from 1.6.3 ( ignore the crackling sound - recording software is causing this, not happening during actual gameplay )- Bloc
- Post #43
- Forum: Suggestions
-
SP - World Map The uncertainty principle
They had this in the 2015-2016 version - which you can also see in here ( slow it down or stop the video to see it clearly )
I agree that seeing the exact count is weird but I think they choose to not include it because of AI. And they probably thought if they exclude AI then AI being able to see everything and player not being able to will create balance issues and/or too complex for new players ( which is their target audience )- Bloc
- Post #5
- Forum: Suggestions
-
What happened to "building a criminal empire"?
They can simply say "It wasn't fun" and announce that they won't add it ( but they have to announce that )
They don't have to add it just because some video showed it ages ago, game is still in "EA" and features can change in this ambiguous state. All you can say is "I won't buy anything from this company again" so that you can skip pressing the "buy" button when in 2065, Taleworlds release MBIII from their new studio in Mars.
But I personally think that they will just add something like the following and be done with it:
"Beat gang -> Shows a pop up -> Want to put your companion? -> Yes -> Get some 50 gold coins each week and get some negative relationship based on some random value" Shallow enough for kids to understand, basic enough for devs to implement in 6 more months, vague enough to claim they added it so it's not a lie.
He can know stuff, but he can't know the exact plans/decisions/decision making/voting unless he is working on that personally or works as a game designer. I also know things about TW and Bannerlord which I can't share with you all. And in my case, it's a moral thing rather than a legal obligation. So he can't even say it unless he gets an "OK" from someone top and apparently, he didn't get OK since he is choosing the be vague. And in either way, that's not his job. Duh doesn't have to waste his time in the forum answering all these questions. They allegedly have community managers to do this exact stuff - yet, I don't see that community manager(s) in that thread where five bucks compiled every missing feature's fate.- Bloc
- Post #31
- Forum: The Citadel - General Discussion
-
What happened to "building a criminal empire"?
Not sure what is your intention. Were you expecting them to hover over on screens and track these numbers in a short time of demo? They didn't show it in detail so you are also not able to speculate that it was "just a workshop". But I do consider it as more than just workshops when an official Taleworlds representative, who happens to be Community Manager at that time, says all these details. If you are saying that he lied just to do a PR stunt, that's another debate and should be discussed carefully.
Where do we see this? Because it doesn't seem to be inside the Security Calculation
DefaultSettlementProsperityModel also doesn't have anything related to "gangs". CommonAreaCampaignBehavior ( which handles the gang fights ) also doesn't have anything that effects the security.C#:public override ExplainedNumber CalculateSecurityChange( Town town, bool includeDescriptions = false) { ExplainedNumber explainedNumber = new ExplainedNumber(0.0f, includeDescriptions, (TextObject) null); this.CalculateInfestedHideoutEffectsOnSecurity(town, ref explainedNumber); this.CalculateRaidedVillageEffectsOnSecurity(town, ref explainedNumber); this.CalculateUnderSiegeEffectsOnSecurity(town, ref explainedNumber); this.CalculateProsperityEffectOnSecurity(town, ref explainedNumber); this.CalculateGarrisonEffectsOnSecurity(town, ref explainedNumber); this.CalculatePolicyEffectsOnSecurity(town, ref explainedNumber); this.CalculateGovernorEffectsOnSecurity(town, ref explainedNumber); this.CalculateProjectEffectsOnSecurity(town, ref explainedNumber); this.CalculateIssueEffectsOnSecurity(town, ref explainedNumber); this.CalculatePerkEffectsOnSecurity(town, ref explainedNumber); this.CalculateSecurityDrift(town, ref explainedNumber); return explainedNumber; }
Winning is also not changing anything directly apart from changing some relationship with the people in town
C#:private void settlement_alley_after_battle_won_on_consequence(MenuCallbackArgs args) { if (this._currentCommonOwner.IsAlive) ChangeRelationAction.ApplyRelationChangeBetweenHeroes(Hero.MainHero, this._currentCommonOwner, -4, true); foreach (CommonArea commonArea in Settlement.CurrentSettlement.CommonAreas) { if (commonArea.Owner != null && commonArea.Owner != this._currentCommonOwner) ChangeRelationAction.ApplyRelationChangeBetweenHeroes(Hero.MainHero, commonArea.Owner, 4, true); } if (Settlement.CurrentSettlement.OwnerClan.Leader != null && Settlement.CurrentSettlement.OwnerClan.Leader != Hero.MainHero) { ChangeRelationAction.ApplyPlayerRelation(Settlement.CurrentSettlement.OwnerClan.Leader, 2, true, true); } else { foreach (Hero notable in Settlement.CurrentSettlement.Notables) { if (notable != this._currentCommonOwner) ChangeRelationAction.ApplyPlayerRelation(notable, 2, true, true); } } if (this._currentCommonOwner.IsAlive) this._waitedCommonArea.RestoreAlleyOwnerStateAfterBattle(this._currentCommonOwner); this._currentCommonOwner = (Hero) null; if (this._waitedCommonArea.CommonAreaPartyComponent != null) this._waitedCommonArea.ClearArea(false); this._waitedCommonArea = (CommonArea) null; if (Hero.MainHero.CurrentSettlement.IsTown) GameMenu.SwitchToMenu("town"); else GameMenu.SwitchToMenu("village"); }
There is no need to stretch this. What they said and announced and even still written on their Steam page is not in the game. They have to implement this or man-up and tell people that they won't. Acting like they never heard this feature before and ignoring questions won't bring any good to them. And I'm talking about an official statement about dropped/discontinued features - not talking about Duh's personal responses, he is a developer and can't possibly know features outside of his team unless someone shares with him.- Bloc
- Post #13
- Forum: The Citadel - General Discussion
-
What happened to "building a criminal empire"?
No? They are saying stopping gangs is helping the economy and stabilizing the city. Or having them are destabilizing the city. They are also saying that having criminal activity undermines the authority who owns the town ( which indicates it can affect their influence and disables their political power within the faction if they don't handle this well) and IF they find it out, it will impact your relationship. And how they will find it out? Based on their perks? Based on the amount you earn? Based on your companion's skills? Not mentioned but clearly what they had in mind was more than just a workshop mechanic.
Is there a thread where they say this? Because if I'm mistaken, since the beginning of EA, AI was always able to recruit randomly from other towns and villages without worrying about the owner. ( at least they were able to recruit within the same faction) I might be mistaken tho, don't remember much, it was one year ago after all. Nevertheless, it's certainly a weird choice to stop snowballing.- Bloc
- Post #11
- Forum: The Citadel - General Discussion
-
What happened to "building a criminal empire"?
We all know what will happen. They will create something extremely basic or they will just brush up what they have now, just enough to say "we have it what are you talking about?" and then be done with it.
For those who don't agree with me about this, let's make a fact-check with that video to see what we have now after 5-6 years:
- Character editor -
In the game although changed and different from that version
- Swords horses and fighting with bandits -
In the game
- Building a crime empire -
Not in the game
- Workshops owned by lords or merchants outside of that town ( I'm assuming it's referring to notables in current version now ) -Not in the game
- Being able to tell smith to craft things for you for a price -Not in the game
- Influence based system to tell people what to do - In the game
- Interesting and detailed political mechanics which decides who will be ransomed to who -Some form of ransoming added but clearly not very "interesting political mechanics" related at all
- Lords who lost battles are forced to tax their people in order to afford to have an army -Not in the game
- Feeling more pressure from faction after losing battles. And using "interesting politics" to influence others to nominate you as Marshall -Not in the game
- Being able to raid villages of a particular lord which will show this impact on his army -Not in the game. Because lords are able to recruit from almost anywhere in the world without any downside to them. Even if you completely **** up every single village for Vlandians, they can still recruit from Battanian villages and towns if they are not at war with them.
What is really sad about this fact-check is that almost all of these are extremely easy to implement and can very much be a really nice touch to a game that can also balance a lot of existing problematic things such as "snowballing".- Bloc
- Post #8
- Forum: The Citadel - General Discussion
-
In Progress Default-Posed Empty/Ghost Characters
Almost one year has passed since I reported it - yet this issue still remains. Perhaps it will get a lightning-fast fix if I say it's not Politically Correct like in the case of "Death" information from the scoreboard?
Anyways, here:
Not a clear screenshot since I was getting chased by 3 dudes but you got the idea. It's still there and always staying in the scene which is extremely annoying
Version 1.6.3- Bloc
- Post #7
- Forum: Multiplayer
-
Help request : c# modding
For the discussion part, I guess you were supposed to open this new thread under https://forums.taleworlds.com/index.php?forums/the-citadel-general-discussion.434/ since it's more like a general discussion thing. But I'm guessing moderators can move it to the correct place. Although I'm seeing that you wrote:
which makes it a suggestion. But your "intro" is too long for anyone to read or understand.
I would suggest you separate your discussion/knowledge sharing thread from your request thread.
About your request, they already have this in Agent
which you can set by getting the target Vec2 position. So you can simply keep track of Agent objects in and when you want to update their target, you can call this with target agent's position.C#:public void SetTargetPosition(Vec2 value) { MBAPI.IMBAgent.SetTargetPosition(this.GetPtr(), ref value); }- Bloc
- Post #9
- Forum: The Smithy - Mod Development
-
Help request : c# modding
Okay in here you switched the strategy I think. Because in previous post you said you were checking affected agent - not the affector agent. Or perhaps I misunderstood. But agreed, looking at affector agent stats is better than simply checking affected agent. Since affector knows its own "motive" better.
That's fine, but patching things with your own code grants you more flexibility on your analysis. For example,
ComputeBlowMagnitudeMeleemethod in Mission is private and doesn't have any "event" that you can listen. So you can simply add something to it's Prefix or Postfix and get the exact same parameters that normal ComputeBlowMagnitudeMelee is getting. ( You need to check method signatures and stuff first, don't rely on what I posted, it's just an example )
and you need to make sure patch is called in submodule so something like this would do the trickC#:public class MySuperPatchingClass{ [HarmonyPatch(typeof(Mission), "ComputeBlowMagnitudeMelee")] public class PatchMissionComputeBlowMagnitudeMelee { public static void Postfix(BasicCharacterObject attackerCharacter, BasicCharacterObject attackerCaptainCharacter, AttackCollisionData acd, bool isAttackerAgentNull, Vec3 attackerCurrentWeaponOffset, bool isVictimAgentNull, bool doesAttackerHaveMount, bool doesVictimHaveMount, bool isVictimMount, float momentumRemaining, bool cancelDamage, bool hitWithAnotherBone, float baseMagnitude, float specialMagnitude, float movementSpeedDamageModifier, int speedBonusInt, StrikeType strikeType, Agent.UsageDirection attackDir, MissionWeapon weapon, bool attackerIsDoingPassiveAttack, Vec2 attackerVelocity, Vec2 victimVelocity) { // Now you are hooked to ComputeBlowMagnitudeMelee in Mission class // Do your analysis with params in here if you need anything from ComputeBlowMagnitudeMelee method } } }
C#:protected override void OnSubModuleLoad() { try { new Harmony("com.my.analysis.on.weird.ai").PatchAll(); } catch (System.Exception e) { } }
Nevertheless, it's very strange to see that 45% of the hits are done to agents that weren't targeted.
It clearly shows half of the entire combat is simply put, a cluster****. And it's funny to see that 10% of it was actually unintentional self defence lol I think all these collateral damages might be happening because of "unit blob" that is happening because of poor AI target choice or bad collider radius. If I'm not mistaken, @Terco_Viejo had several tests on unit blobs/formation collision clustering - but I think this requires another thread to be discussed since I don't think it's related to coding part of this question. Still he is welcome to correct me if I'm mistaken.- Bloc
- Post #7
- Forum: The Smithy - Mod Development
-
Help request : c# modding
I see, glad to help - at least we have a solution like thing now.
But for the future questions, it's better if you explain what you want to do - since CustomBattle's are different than Campaign Battles as you already figured it out and suggestions people can give will change based on that.
For further checking, since you are doing this only for getting statistics out of it, you can simply use Harmony and hook-up to game methods and do your counting/analysis without bothering with your custom logic. With this way you can take more information since some parts of the game are still and very much internal or private.
I understand what you are trying to measure but I don't think this approach is correct.
Because think about this scenario,
Agent A vs Agent B and Agent C. A targets B, meanwhile B and C target A. We will listen Agent A.
A hits B
C hits A ( registered as non target hit )
A switch targets to C since it got attacked by it
B hits A ( registered as non target hit )
in numbers, it will say A is hit by non target two times and died. But in reality, A did what human players do and actually engaged to enemy which damaged them.
So you can make it a more fair analysis for bots by keeping a temporary target list with timestamps and measure if the registered non-target was a previous target or not - so that you can see if AI initially considered this as a target but had to switch because of something else. If you see that it's the case, then you can search for reasons why AI is switching to wrong target.
Or you can measure this for each agent,
When agent picks a target, you can get enemy agents within a small radius and check how many of them are targeted this agent.
Keep them in list and when any of non-targets change stance from defense ( holding shield or blocking ) to attack, you can see if our main agent is able to pick this cue and change it's target for proper defence.
Because issue is ( not doing analysis like you do so it's a hunch based on gameplay experience ):
AI focusing on the same target until they get hit by some another target. This means they are ignoring the fact that agent C is lifting his weapon and about to hit because it's busy with targeting agent B which is defending himself. What agent A have to do in this scenario is turning to C and blocking that attack if possible.
And I guess that's also what you want to find out - with analysis and numbers.- Bloc
- Post #5
- Forum: The Smithy - Mod Development
-
Help request : c# modding
I think you opened this thread in the wrong sub-section. It should be in -> https://forums.taleworlds.com/index.php?forums/modding-q-a.538/
@Marko͘ can move it to the correct section I guess
I wouldn't say what you are asking is suitable for "hello world" project especially since you are confused with "what overrides what". It's better for you to check and make sure you understand that logic first. Otherwise, things can be complicated. Bannerlord has a strange architecture and you can get confused easily if you are not able to estimate what they were thinking.
There are multiple ways to achieve what you want but a more straightforward way is:
- Have one CampaignBehavior that is based fromCampaignBehaviorBase
- Have one MissionBehavior that is based fromMissionLogic
- In your CampaignBehavior, register toOnMissionStartedEventand in there, based on Mission type, add your MissionBehavior with usingAddMissionBehaviour
- In your MissionBehavior, override OnAgentHit and do what you want to do.
So basically, what will happen is the following:
Your Module will add CampaignBehavior when the Campaign starts. Your action/method will be called when Mission starts ( each scene is actually a Mission in-game, so Mission doesn't necessarily mean Battle/Combat ) and your action will add MissionBehavior. And in MissionBehavior, your OnAgentHit will be called whenever something happens so that you can catch that event.
I recently uploaded a source-code for a simple banner mod. You can check this and understand better what calls what. You don't have to check CarrierMissionController.cs instead check SoldierResponseController.cs for a simpler version of a MissionController. And this line in CampaignBehavior to see how MissionBehavior is added.- Bloc
- Post #2
- Forum: The Smithy - Mod Development
-
SP - General Ambush And Camp Mechanic ( with demo )
Yes, they are unaware of your existence in the area until they spot your soldiers and this allows you to sneak and reposition your soldiers before launching an attack. And at night, this "detection" sight range is even shorter.- Bloc
- Post #63
- Forum: Suggestions