[Beta e1.2.0] Auto-Resolve needs a hotfix ASAP!

[Punchtown Hero]

running an army of 500 to 10 looters is fun! 30 seconds to load 15 seconds for them to die 30 seconds to load out and repeat 2000 time wooooohoooo!

I don't get why you would bother with 10 or even 30 looters when your army is 500 strong. They don't give that much xp. The only time I fight looters in the mid game is when they are a band of 50+, when your army of 100+ consists mainly of elite units you're gonna get like 2-6 upgraded troops at most.

 

[black_bulldog]

running an army of 500 to 10 looters is fun! 30 seconds to load 15 seconds for them to die 30 seconds to load out and repeat 2000 time wooooohoooo!

It really takes you 30 seconds to load? That sux man sorry, I think it's maybe 6-7 seconds for me. But that fact still stands if you have 500 men why are you even going after 10 looters pick better targets if you want a challenge or take on looters for an easy win your choice. It really sounds like you want to have your cake and eat it too.

 

[durbal]

Looters not killing units was a bug itself. People here saying 'give us this bug back so I can spam autoresolve vs looters'.

The problem is autoresolve's calculations, not the fact that some units can actually kill in autoresolve now.

 

[Casseius]

Army with 120+ max tier units vs 30 looter and 3 of my soldiers die? Thats just horrible.

 

[Crowquills]

running an army of 500 to 10 looters is fun! 30 seconds to load 15 seconds for them to die 30 seconds to load out and repeat 2000 time wooooohoooo!

30 secs to load?? time to upgrade that PC bruh
my load times are instant, like 1-2 secs
Not saying that to defend the autoresolve, dont get me wrong

 

[Crowquills]

can confirm, lost 3 battanian fians and 2 battanian fian champions vs a party of 1 looter.

Obviously it broken...
If they dont fix that, they should rename it something other than auto-resolve

 

[Stratigo]

First of all, have you played any other game that has autoresolve? It is always punishing. It calculates the battle either purely on troop stats or it assumes a demented leader who dismounts his cavalry, puts archers to melee and then marches them all off a cliff.

Second, how do you imagine the battle will be calculated then? As though your troops were lead by the average AI lord with no perks?

You know, when I play a total war game and send a full stack of troops against 3 peasent tier soldiers, when I hit autoresolve, it doesn't turn out that I lost 4 full units of my most elite men.

Auto resolve was already strickly worse than fighting. You could load in, hit f6, and lose nobody, but in auto resolve lose half a dozen to a dozen wounded dudes. But that's fine because it IS NOT FUN to load in against 5 bandits, hit f6, and then make yourself a sandwitch. It. Isn't. Fun. The **** are we playing games if not for fun? Don't make antifun busy work a thing. It's bad for the health of a game and makes it a strictly worse experience. There's no sense of accomplishment having to manually watch your 100 elite knights trample 5 jerkoffs to death. You aren't overcoming adversity. You're doing busywork. Looters exist for you to have something to fight in the start of the early game. By the midgame they should be mostly irrelevant, and should reflect that. Not create a duller experience. And you can't afford to ignore them because they have an effect on the game world. If you let them wander around unmolested they worsen the economy and kill nascent lord parties, robbing you of a far more entertaining future fight.

I understand that, but what I'm saying is that's what TW thinks is the game loop for early - mid game. I enjoy it so it doesn't bother me I guess because I like to see what kinds of tactics work and what doesn't. Boring is a matter of opinion, and if you find fighting looters too easy look for more challenging targets. I personally think auto resolve shouldn't even be a thing, but that's just my opinion. Again if you want an easier way to auto loot look to mods because I don't see TW changing this because it seems like that's the way they want it, either way cheers.

Your opinion is strictly bad game design that doesn't understand progression systems. The loop for the early game should be made skippable by the mid and late game, else it becomes a detriment to the game as a whole. Almost every rpg operates off this principle.

It really takes you 30 seconds to load? That sux man sorry, I think it's maybe 6-7 seconds for me. But that fact still stands if you have 500 men why are you even going after 10 looters pick better targets if you want a challenge or take on looters for an easy win your choice. It really sounds like you want to have your cake and eat it too.

Because those looters will kill villagers, caravans, and weak lords, and there's no one else in the game that is willing to manage them. The bandit swarm is a huge issue with the game and the player is the only one that can remotely manage it. And because there isn't really any way to level troops up in a timely manner. Indeed, it seemed like that was the point of looters and the removal of a training skill line. I originally thought it was elegant design. But it turns out taleworlds only accidentlyed into good design and decided to reverse it.

 

[John Shepard]

Odd, for me the opposite. Tier 6 Cavalry , 170 ish of them vs 490ish Battanians of varying tiers. I lost 15 top tier cavalry.

A-Do I say it is great, not great?
B-Top tier units need to be far more expensive. Overall every unit should be 2-3 times as costly to upgrade and to maintain.

 

[Stratigo]

Odd, for me the opposite. Tier 6 Cavalry , 170 ish of them vs 490ish Battanians of varying tiers. I lost 15 top tier cavalry.

A-Do I say it is great, not great?
B-Top tier units need to be far more expensive. Overall every unit should be 2-3 times as costly to upgrade and to maintain.

That's an economic balance, and not a progression balance. The time it takes and the ease of maintaining an elite force doesn't have much bearing on, once you have that force, what you should be able to do with it. I think the rate of troop growth without looters is going to be remarkable slow and dull, but even if they, for whatever reason, took away all xp gains when fighting looters, you'd still have to fight them and you still shouldn't lose elite troops to them.

 

[blackbellamy]

Stop fighting looters. What kind of lord are you, fighting against men armed with rocks? Those casualties on the final screen, those guys died of shame.

 

[Stratigo]

Stop fighting looters. What kind of lord are you, fighting against men armed with rocks? Those casualties on the final screen, those guys died of shame.

If the game had some way to stop looters and other bandits from killing all your peasants and caravans and all the weak lords without you, personally, stopping them, I might agree with you. Heck in warband, I DO, agree with you. At a certain point I ignore bandits (That are ignorable. I have played pretty much nothing but PoP for the past five years whenever I loaded up warband. Now they have an interesting and dynamic faction system) in warband because they are a waste of my time and I let patrols and manhunters deal with them. You can't do that here.

 

[John Shepard]

That's an economic balance, and not a progression balance. The time it takes and the ease of maintaining an elite force doesn't have much bearing on, once you have that force, what you should be able to do with it. I think the rate of troop growth without looters is going to be remarkable slow and dull, but even if they, for whatever reason, took away all xp gains when fighting looters, you'd still have to fight them and you still shouldn't lose elite troops to them.

I disagree, given the idea economic balance directly correlates to progression and maintain said progression.
If the former is too easy, the latter becomes childsplay.

 

[Stratigo]

I disagree, given the idea economic balance directly correlates to progression and maintain said progression.
If the former is too easy, the latter becomes childsplay.

you're right, economics and progression are linked. But that doesn't have much bearing to what a late game or even a mid game progressed character and their army should be able to do and focus on. If you make getting troops harder and harder to get, that will extend the amount of time you have to spend personally punching looters in the face, but once you get the elite troops, you SHOULD be beyond having to personally punch looters in the face.

 

[John Shepard]

you're right, economics and progression are linked. But that doesn't have much bearing to what a late game or even a mid game progressed character and their army should be able to do and focus on. If you make getting troops harder and harder to get, that will extend the amount of time you have to spend personally punching looters in the face, but once you get the elite troops, you SHOULD be beyond having to personally punch looters in the face.

That is why I recommend, BuyPatrols mod

 

[Stratigo]

That is why I recommend, BuyPatrols mod

Mods can't be every answer to the game XD

 

[Azhael]

Yes, please fix simulated battles to take into account huge number differences between sides.

 

[Crowquills]

Mods can't be every answer to the game XD

yea, im beginning to think that people want this game to become Mount & Blade ModLord

 

[mehmeteking]

can confirm, lost 3 battanian fians and 2 battanian fian champions vs a party of 1 looter.

I lost some legionaries and fians to a looter. I thought maybe he was Barristan Selmy in disguise...

 

[King Yngvar]

Just another thread that confirms why I should keep running Steam in offline mode to prevent an update.

 

[Stratigo]

Just another thread that confirms why I should keep running Steam in offline mode to prevent an update.

you can opt into older patches. Indeed, the main branch 1.10 doesn't have this issue in it yet