SP - Battles & Sieges Command in Battle

[Miila]

So, now that I've finally joined a faction (Southern Empire) and am participating in battles and sieges and such, I'm finding there to be a bit of a... problem. That being, that the AI in charge of all the allied troops is a complete and utter moron, either straight charging the enemy regardless of the situation, or otherwise marching their forces to a line HALFWAY ACROSS THE MAP, where I can't get my troops in formation with them in time to be effective.

I believe overall command of AI troops should go to the player if their influence is the highest out of present allied lords (and by default if there ARE no present lords) on the field (i.e. if they are all too wounded from a previous battle or round to participate, you are in charge; after all, if they got knocked out and you didn't, clearly you're doing something right that they aren't).

That, or at least adjust AI decision-making to be more manageable. Even the Warband method of allied parties getting into formation and slowly advancing by like 20 paces at a time (unless the enemy is notably outnumbered/outpowered) was better than this.

Speaking of which, in addition to this... please bring back an "Advanced 10/20 paces" movement order. Would be lovely for advancing an entire formation without losing the effective positioning entirely

 

[EternalHeathen]

I posted a similar idea here, https://forums.taleworlds.com/index.php?threads/command-negotiation-when-assisting-allies.423255/ , but got no love. A fix like this is very much needed, and is as simple as making any multi-ally battle into an army battle. It wouldn't matter if we the player were in charge for most cases either. Just so long as there is a unified command for the battle.

 

[Yangbang]

Are these battles that you're jumping into? I do know what you're talking about tho, but I never really see it as an issue. The only times I've seen them bum rush the enemies is when there's no doubt at all that we could lose. Unless we all dropped weapons and faced backwards, were gonna win with reasonable AI casualties.

It would be cool tho, if the AI could give us some general idea of what theyre doing, like in the big AI army battles with the army leader telling us what we "should" do. It doesn't need to be perfect, but like a simple "I'm forming up a line and attacking soon" or a "I'm pulling my men back 20 paces" would do wonders.

 

[EternalHeathen]

Are these battles that you're jumping into? I do know what you're talking about tho, but I never really see it as an issue. The only times I've seen them bum rush the enemies is when there's no doubt at all that we could lose. Unless we all dropped weapons and faced backwards, were gonna win with reasonable AI casualties.

It would be cool tho, if the AI could give us some general idea of what theyre doing, like in the big AI army battles with the army leader telling us what we "should" do. It doesn't need to be perfect, but like a simple "I'm forming up a line and attacking soon" or a "I'm pulling my men back 20 paces" would do wonders.

That would be better as well.

I am talking about jumping into battles, and it isnt always an issue. Generally though, I try to roleplay an honorable and valorous commander who will go into a horribly outnumbered battle to try and save an allied lord or five. In those situations, unified command is essential, especially on realistic and fighting for sturgia. They're getting better, but can still be rough even on an even field.

And I have to save my allies so so much.