Is it me or does Autoresolve FAIL COMPLETELY?

Users who are viewing this thread


Okay so, heres my story as to why AUTORESOLVE (all versions) fails.

The legion invaded, and i got surrounded (my 300 men to ... somewhere around 3200).  My battle size is set to 100.

So, after the series of things, the legion dies pretty quickly. Theres about 400 of them left and thats when i get knocked out (i only lost 10-20 troops up to this point). Since i couldnt "Leave...", i had to send my troops forward without me.  Somehow my army loses 250 men, they lose 40..... How can ANYBODY use autoresolve? It's a complete crock of bullpiss.

(i cant make a poll). So who here agrees/disagrees?
well right there I think it was gettingit on the dot, in real life,  your men would be completely surrounded by the bastards.
Yet when you are there they only bring out like 30 at a time.
I don't think i have ever played a game thats had an autoresolve option thats been fair...  Turn based strategy games are renown for it.
I always try to go the manual option if available. 
Well, he surely meant more turn based strategy games than just the TW series.
Of course, there are hundred of turn based strategy games, and some of them are great, too (just take a look on HoMM V or Age of Wonders 2 Shadow Magic), but Blackrain is right, an rather irritating auto resolve behavior is part of most games.
However, it also has to do with the increasing player skill, which lets good gamers win battles, that are at best desperate and at worst impossible to win, but thanks to skill, luck, and the lack of AI, a good player still goes out winning).

I would rather say, not the auto resolve itself is that bad, it's rather that a player can be soo much better when fighting in tactical battles.
Yeah well, in the mod sword of damocles I decided to test this, I saved before a battle, I had 20 villainese longbowmen against 20-ish marinian infantry or footmen or w/e.
In the first try I killed myself with f3 and watched the battle, I won, I had like 10 left.
But when I used auto-resolve I LOST.
Auto-resolve FAILS, whether the player isn't there or he is has nothing to do with it.
So, did you actually understand my point? I assume you did not, otherwise there would not be such an reply...
First of all, I referred to the whole problem of an auto resolve, where AI decides (in most games) only on relative strength numbers of the units, these numbers (in most games, some do make differences, but that are the fewest) do not take the actual situation into account, that would have been in an tactical battle.

Then, my point was, while the relative strength comparison does not only disregards most of the detailled tactical situation, it also disregards the whole skill of the player as an commander, trying to outmaneuver the Ai and make best uses of the troops (and for some, uses AI exploits).

Let's get specific. The autoresolve of SoD (it has been updated as far as I know) takes some things into account (lvl, attris, skills, equipment, health and surely more), however surely not (or not as a big factor) that there are archers doing some skeet shooting. In autoresolve means that, Infantry strong (w or wo shields), archers get smashed.
In tactical battle, this is different, as there these things are important, as well as the intervention of the player (mostly).
Better example, why not let 100 archers fight against 100 Conscripts. Autoresolve gets your archers smashed, no change.
Wo player inteference, I would assume that at least 20 archers (40 are more likely) will be dead after the battle, since they run to the enemy, occasionally shooting, the typical problem. With player intervention, using skill and tactics, this number can be shrunk to 5? Something around that.

So, back to auto resolve, try a battle wo specialised armys. Take a battle between 2 sides with each 20 cavs, 40 infants and 30 archs. Then do autoresolve, tactical battle and player intervented tactical battles. The effects of 1 and 2 will probably the same.

Btw., would you play on the marinian side of your little battle, with some skill you could go out victorious with only 5 conscripts killed, by using your terrain. So much to the uber strength of the archers against the marinians. There just lacks human intelligence, would both armys are controlled by players, the outcome would be interesting.

So, enough written. Could take into account, why auto resolve, and the system used right now isn't that bad, or what could be done against it, or even some phylosphical (and statistical) questions reagarding generalizing or the lacking of enough tests.

It's late, G'night ^^
Actually, I think in one game I saw an auto-resolve that is better in assaulting fortification than the player. I think it was one of TW games. No matter what I did, auto-resolve managed to take cities with fewer losses :smile:

Then, maybe it only means that I suck at assaulting :smile:
Yeah, sounds like TW.
I fear it means that you suck at assaulting.
However, I suck at assaulting in the TW games, too ^^.
I tested the supposedly smartest auto-resolve in the module, the one that takes all troop stats into account, against twice as large Swadian army. All my soldiers were down after some time but my character was simply invincible. After a dozen clicks, my character finally defeated the remaining enemy army :smile:
Top Bottom