Bannerlord A.I.

Users who are viewing this thread



This problem could be solved by caravans ignoring the player or the lords, since we already receive heavy penalties (relations-wise) when attacking them.
A more realistical approach would be for them to calculate a better path.
 
What's wrong with a trade blockade? Seems realistic that those merchant would avoid a town camped by an enemy army
 
What's wrong with a trade blockade? Seems realistic that those merchant would avoid a town camped by an enemy army

It's that they keep checking back like every five minutes. "are they still there? Yes. Okay. How about now? What about now?"

But, I mean, this never ceased to amuse me in old warband either.
 
A.I for caravans definitely needs to be sorted out and there should be a proper way of diverting caravans or blockading towns.

I don't think you can starve out towns/castles yet can we?
 
Normally you will be attacked by enemy lords after doing this for a time (1-3 days). However in this example you are far from their lands. You are standing in front of neutral settlement not the caravan's belong to.
 
Normally you will be attacked by enemy lords after doing this for a time (1-3 days). However in this example you are far from their lands. You are standing in front of neutral settlement not the caravan's belong to.
Right, but this can happen in literally every chokepoint so long as its a neutral settlement. The mountain pass by Ormanford castle is another example of this. Just sitting in your castle you cause the same issue with caravans.
 
Right, but this can happen in literally every chokepoint so long as its a neutral settlement. The mountain pass by Ormanford castle is another example of this. Just sitting in your castle you cause the same issue with caravans.

Yes this is a problem. Normally caravans change their target settlements after they run away from enemies too much in last hours. They cancel traveling their target and find another target. However if new target is in same direction this problem occurs. This is hard to fix if there is a bridge at critical point or player is holding at a point where caravans need to use to reach all other possible good targets. After fixing other serious issues we can develop this.
 
Yes this is a problem. Normally caravans change their target settlements after they run away from enemies too much in last hours. They cancel traveling their target and find another target. However if new target is in same direction this problem occurs. This is hard to fix if there is a bridge at critical point or player is holding at a point where caravans need to use to reach all other possible good targets. After fixing other serious issues we can develop this.

you could simply give the caravans the order to go straight to the established destination if there are other allied or neutral caravans in their vicinity such that their "quality / numbers" ratio exceeds that of the obstacle.

In the case of the video on one side there are even 180 enemy units.

If the player or in any case an enemy unit of the faction of these caravans attacks one of the caravans, all those within range (neutral but with good relations between factions and allies of the caravan) come to the rescue.
 
you could simply give the caravans the order to go straight to the established destination if there are other allied or neutral caravans in their vicinity such that their "quality / numbers" ratio exceeds that of the obstacle.

In the case of the video on one side there are even 180 enemy units.

If the player or in any case an enemy unit of the faction of these caravans attacks one of the caravans, all those within range (neutral but with good relations between factions and allies of the caravan) come to the rescue.
+1 , that could be a solve for now, until it can be fixed later.
 
Currently caravans have agressiveness of 0 they do not attack any target. To allow this we need to enable caravans attack targets and this is not a minor difference which can result in different bugs or unexpected results.
 
Currently caravans have agressiveness of 0 they do not attack any target. To allow this we need to enable caravans attack targets and this is not a minor difference which can result in different bugs or unexpected results.
I explained myself wrong, I apologize.
my solution included these 3 features:
1) Caravans must not attack.
2) The caravans close to the one attacked act as "reinforcements".
3) that the algorithm that designates the path to be followed by the caravans takes into account the fact that if the value of the ratio (troop quality / number of troops) of the total of the caravans close to the obstacle exceeds the same value referred to the obstacle, then the designated road must be what it would be if the obstacle were not there.
 
@mexicco
I don't know what path finding algorithm do you use. But if you would make network of all cities and castles you could use Dijkstra algorithem to caluclate path distances (not precise but still) and could remove links between cities if some point would be besieged. So when caravan would check where to go next, it would exclude the cities to which it can't go.
Just idea, I don't know how useful it is.
 
maybe there should be an honor stat that works with roguery where if you're infamous(negative honor) enough they will avoid you but if you're not or have a positive score they ignore you.
 
A.I for caravans definitely needs to be sorted out and there should be a proper way of diverting caravans or blockading towns.

I don't think you can starve out towns/castles yet can we?
You actually can starve out settlements, I noticed my cities food was directly tied to how much food was on sale in the trade in addition to what villages provide plus surrounding lands.

If you drop 100 fish into a town, the +food amount increases after a quick 5 seconds waiting in town, allowing prosperity to increase for a period, if you stop villagers and caravans the food will drop, forcing a lower garrison and prosperity, which is useful if you want to singlehandedly capture a city by forcing the garrison to less than 100. Sure, it would take a bunch of time, but its still an easy way to avoid massive troop loss when cities have 400+ troops.
 
Back
Top Bottom