Battle Spawn Points Need to Change Dynamically

Users who are viewing this thread

bbaydogdu

Veteran
Sure. It is so authentic when 10 guys spwans right at my head or behind my archers. Like in the real battlefield, no battle ranks, no structure, just random guys spawned all over the place.
It needs to be fixed for sure. Still better than men spawning into the formation out of no where.
 

Badcritter

Squire
I feel currently only the first wave engagement feels good and then it all become a big mess. I think it might also have something to do with the AI behavior and the advance command.
This tends to be true for battles with multiple hundreds of soldiers on each side, even if reinforcements aren't required.

You can (and should) rally your troops back together in their formations by using F1 and setting the point for each unit type to regroup at. Then you can proceed to direct your well oiled military machine to grind up the random rabble of the enemy more efficiently.


Discussion on the subject of reinforcements kind of moved from this thread a few weeks go to another thread:


Then that one ran out of steam and discussion came back here when this thread got necro'd. Not that the discussion flowed or shared the same main posters, just two different threads spawned over the same issue.
 

Azirok

Regular
It's not just reinforcement spawns that need adjusting. I just love it when fighting on a valley map and my calvary spawn on top of a mountain and half of them die falling off when heading to the battle.
 

SoupDumpling

Recruit
WB
This tends to be true for battles with multiple hundreds of soldiers on each side, even if reinforcements aren't required.

You can (and should) rally your troops back together in their formations by using F1 and setting the point for each unit type to regroup at. Then you can proceed to direct your well oiled military machine to grind up the random rabble of the enemy more efficiently.


Discussion on the subject of reinforcements kind of moved from this thread a few weeks go to another thread:


Then that one ran out of steam and discussion came back here when this thread got necro'd. Not that the discussion flowed or shared the same main posters, just two different threads spawned over the same issue.

True, but I think you are missing my point. The player can always using F1 to regroup and reform then charge again and again but often the enemy won't. They regroup to their spawning point and then charge back at you in a non-formation mess and you can just sitting there use F1-F3 and F1-F1 over and over. Especially their cav AI is a joke atm. They won't even charge at you most of the time if you manage to use your archers to soften their number enough to have their 1st reinforcement wave appears. They just ride back to "regroup" and by the time they decide to charge they pretty much already lost. As the player, sure you could constantly micro manage your troops this way so they don't act like a mess as the enemy. It's fun for me at the beginning, but it gets boring real quick and I rather spend more time to do actual fun harvesting. You can't do both atm with the current AI/spawn/command situation (I am not an expert on this. Just my feelings).
 

eritchie

Recruit
If the enemy won't come to me I ride over myself and shoot them with arrows. Once a few of their troops are down they generally go on the attack.
This is very silly of course.

This is absolutely right and something I have to do now in battles of 800+ vs 800+. It is really annoying and stupid but works.

Secondly my suggestion would be that you are allowed to decide where to deploy (within reason) at the beginning of a battle and you can select where your reinforcements arrive from (again within reason e.g. your half of the map) They arrive from the dead zone, enemy reinforcements behave more or less as they already do.

Another issue which i haven't seen mentioned is this bizarre way the enemy kinda runs back towards there reinforcements when you attack them and you end up in this long protracted chase down of a retreating army. While there reinforcements come pouring in. Its just weird and seems completely at odds with the way an army would behave. Once they are engaged they should stand and fight and their reinforcements should come in in bigger groups and group up together before joining the fight
 

Honved

Knight
If the armies held formation, then it would be advantageous to have individual respawns just behind the battle lines, who would then advance to fill in holes or expand the line. Since the armies disintegrate into a tangled mass of individual headless chickens, it means that the spawn points have to be at the edges of the battlefield.

I've been killed countless times by over a dozen enemy reinforcements suddenly spawning all around me, where there were no enemies within 20 yards a moment ago. The AI loves to back up to a map edge, so their spawn point ends up BEHIND your front line. That is unacceptable, in my opinion. As said, the initial engagement is at least reasonably realistic; after that the respawn does its nonsensical thing by making roughly 20 men suddenly appear out of nowhere, and the illusion of reality is gone.

Actually, for "illusion" purposes, having individual respawns appear "on top of someone's head" might be ideal. Have the respawn appear at the same point as an existing NPC, but not become solid until they move into their own space. Ideally, it should appear to the player as if they step from behind the existing NPC, rather than materialize unexpectedly in plain view.
 

TheShermanator

Sergeant
This tends to be true for battles with multiple hundreds of soldiers on each side, even if reinforcements aren't required.

You can (and should) rally your troops back together in their formations by using F1 and setting the point for each unit type to regroup at. Then you can proceed to direct your well oiled military machine to grind up the random rabble of the enemy more efficiently.


Discussion on the subject of reinforcements kind of moved from this thread a few weeks go to another thread:


Then that one ran out of steam and discussion came back here when this thread got necro'd. Not that the discussion flowed or shared the same main posters, just two different threads spawned over the same issue.

Right - for what it's worth, I recommend checking out this other thread for any interested in the subject.

Long story short: A lot of the discussion on the other thread centered on competing aesthetic/realism logic vs. gameplay logic. That is, reinforcements appearing from anywhere but the outside of the map looks/feels wrong and breaks immersion, but reinforcement spawning from the very edge of the map negates Lancaster's Square Law and drives the player to defensively cheese-camp their own reinforcement area(s). (Conversely, when the AI, with their infinite patience, sets up a defensive position on top of their own reinforcement zone, big battles just stink for the player.) And most solutions that address the first concern exacerbate the second concern - and vice versa.

Ideally, the sweeping solution here is for most computer processors to just be able to handle big battles without reinforcements at all.
 
Last edited:

Somnorila

Recruit
Even battles where you take part are simulations too. It could be that on the battlefield you get all the soldiers in your army/party. So when there are size differences, those could be simulated more like in a Might and Magic Heroes type of game. The parties field troops in the same proportion regarding their size difference. Or individual troops, their resilience and power are balanced to present that size difference.

Or we could just have all troops like now but without spawning new troops. So you get waves for a battle until all troops are exhausted where you can chose what troops and their position to come to the field. Somewhat like now when you retreat just to continue again with fresh horses and ammo.
I seen the latest info regarding a roadmap for the game where there is a part regarding order of battle, which is pretty much a variation of the old tactics perk "One step ahead". We could have that between battle waves instead of having troops spawning in to the battle all erratically in weird location and even with troops coming in in a row one by one rather than having them in a formation coming from the edge of your side of the map.
 

julijs

Sergeant
WBNWVC
There's more to it then just having reinforcements be centered around the main mass of the army, in the vanilla version units die too quickly for an army to be reinforced at an adequate time, this also makes the morale mechanic almost meaningless- I had always thought that before steam release that during battles if an army lost too quickly a large chunk of its first wave that they'd break and start routing off the map and then the 2nd battle would appear freshly in another sequence.

Aside from gameplay mechanics, you also have to take into consideration the people with better computer specs that have sizes (bigger battle size, less chance for reinforcements) set to max and others not so much- a difficult thing to find a balance in.

My personal ideal solution would be more skirmishing involved in battles, but this also means more development and possibly an overhaul, which is very far fetched. Too many variables to balance, changing just one wont fix the issue and may end up being a double edged sword.

¯\_(ツ)_/¯
 

KingEroc1st

Veteran
The reasoning behind reinforcements mechanic is tied to game engine's limitation. If we had the capability to deploy all our units at once without any performance hit then there would be no problems at all.

So we shouldn't look at this mechanic as "reinforcements" but the developer's workaround for game engine's incapability.

I'm fine with that workaround as long as it makes sense.
it makes sense for there to be a work around

the particular method they implemented it seems like a drunken after thought following a 2 week vegas trip done by an 80 years old alzheimer's patient.

and of course, the best is they'll likely never change it


Personally i think reinforcements like the word means, is your reinforcements to the current battle. they cannot spawn on top of you or behind the enemy (unless a flanking maneuver is done before the battle)
it should be a TIMED EVENT, coming in waves every few minutes. as in, there should be reinforcement timers that won't spawn units for you even if you lost some troops unless the time has been reached. This will create an artificial advantage for the side that did better in the initial engagement which should be rewarded rather than punished via the current instant spawn system.
Ai should be programmed like the RBM ai, when reinforcements arrive, they retreat towards them and regroup.
Reinforcements should arrive from the redzones aka outside of combat area, directly behind your spawn points.
 
Last edited:

Maximum997

Squire
I think that ANY spawn system in battle is a crap. Becouse it reward camping\defending and punish atacking.

And only solution is to split one huge battle to few small.

BUT! Right now you spend SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO much time on useless crap like closing distance and chasing this one last horse archer
 
Wouldn't it be better to have the units of both armies appear constantly and just behind the respective centers of mass of the units of the same type, with the condition that the ratio between the forces of the 2 armies remains constant?

So if an army has 3 groups of units of different types (infantry, archers, cavalry) deployed, a center of mass will be associated with each of these units.
Whenever a cavalry unit dies, a new one appears just behind the cavalry unit's center of mass.
If an infantry unit dies it will get one behind the infantry unit's center of mass.
etc...
All this by ensuring that the ratio of forces between the two armies remains constant and by ensuring that the ratio between the number of units of one army compared to those of the other remains constant.

In this way we do not need "spawn points" and the two armies are as if they are facing each other with more men and for a longer time.
 

Shaxx

Squire
Right now you spend so much time on useless crap like closing distance and chasing this one last horse archer
Mounted combat is not in a great place right now not just in balance but not even as a basic mechanic. Cavalry vs cavalry combat is more like two drunken hornet nests fighting than anything else. "We just engaged now let's spread out to kingdom come, make pretty circles and run into trees while everyone else does a battle or something!"
 

Mjdecker123

Recruit
I wish they made one update and just worked on the AI. Like everything the AI touches. Whether that is how they do Diplomacy, How they go about sieges, anything and everything. The AI for this game is a let down in some ways. If they really solved those issue, then I would be good for awhile. Even with the Realistic Battle mod, they still have their kinks. That mod makes them better in everyway though. I've soon some people say that the AI can never be on par with a human, but there are games where the AI are just too good, so to say that we cannot make the AI any better, in 2021, especially with the specs we have is dumb. It's very much possible.
 
Top Bottom