Pet peeve: AI & Ammo

Users who are viewing this thread

I love archers. They are frightenly powerful. But they have 1 big weakness, besides from always being attacked by 1 cavalry troop and then completely forgetting about the main horde of infantry soldiers running up to them, which are their quivers.

I like to be the army leader, avoiding any sort of manual labor or physical activity, telling others what to do and where to go. So I put my archers in formation, I place my infantry, I set my cav up and surround myself with guards.

My archers will reign hellfire down upon the enemy during the course of the battle. For about 3 minutes. And then they stand there, **** in hand, waiting to die. I could order a rush or advance and then they'd break formation and act like themselves (bad). But atleast the ones without ammo would contribute. Not having unlimited ammo limits long and drawn out battles and instead pushes the player to just Charge after the initial attack.

And in sieges, attacking AI archers have plenty of opportunity to pick up shot arrows.
But the defending AI archers dont. They either have none since most get shot at the wall or fly over them. They do however have plenty of arrow supply boxes they cant/wont use.

But why do archers have limited ammo in battles? Shouldn't there be camp followers supplying the field with equipment, distributing resources? Is it a justified pet peeve or is there historical precedent? Curious to know what you think. Thanks in advance!
 

Poddicus

Knight
M&BWBWF&SNWVC
Yeah let's make archers even more overpowered :mrgreen:

But a cool feature would be to have some sort of arrow / supply cart that you'd have to drag around on the campaign map and would load where you spawn on the battle map where archer AI could automatically run back to for a refill.
 

anoddhermit

Sergeant
If it cost raw supplies for repairs and replenishments I could see this being an interesting feature. I guess troop wage are supposed to reflect this a bit, but it doesn't really have the impact of a real resource limitation where one might actually factor in equipment production and maintenance into balancing their party/army.

Currently, meh, it's just part of unit balance. I think some archer units should have bigger quivers though, currently it seems kind of silly how much disparity in damage per quiver there is. But I just end up using Forest Bandits, Fians, Sharpshooters, Hired Crossbows in every game eventually.
 

black_bulldog

Knight at Arms
WBWF&SVC
If they got rid of ammo then they might as well rename the game Archerlord because archers, mounted archers, and crossbow men would be the only troops used by players.
 

lukkyb

Sergeant
i wouldnt be upset about armies defending a town getting more ammo (maybe base it on a building teir) but in feild battles no but i agree that certain soliders need more or less ammo
 
Yeah let's make archers even more overpowered :mrgreen:
It is not the archers who are superior, it is the armor that does not do the job they are supposed to do.
A simple parameter (the armor value) and the complete neglect of the percentage of coverage of the body with respect to the parts covered by the armor generates all the problems of balance between the various types of units.
And the lack of logistics and supply lines (which would naturally lead to the creation of "battle fronts" and the defense strategy of the lines, which would balance everything) generate situations in which not only are there no tanks with ammunition to go to. refuel, but above all you see an entire army that on the other side of the world, instead of attacking the city / castle closest to the border of its faction, is moving towards the farthest city and its only concern is its OWN FOOD RESERVE, on which the enemy cannot act.
If this reserve were linked to a supply line that was cut even by a weak enemy, then the great army would:
1) do not go too far into the enemy territory, otherwise the line becomes long and in the event of an attack on it by the enemy, you will not be able to defend it and then you will find yourself without food.
2) if he really wants to go far into the enemy territory, then he will be forced to divide the army into secondary and tertiary parties that have the task of defending the sides of the supply line, or forming an "attack front" in such a way to intercept small armies ready to outflank the large army to cut the line.

There are too many mechanics that would be necessary and DUE (for a game like this) to balance out pretty much everything that doesn't work right now.
Instead we just vary a few parameters and put perks with ridiculous percentages that don't even make you feel the progression.
Instead of inserting perks that unlock VITAL and SUBSTANTIAL mechanics, they put insignificant numbers.
 

Poddicus

Knight
M&BWBWF&SNWVC
It is not the archers who are superior, it is the armor that does not do the job they are supposed to do.
A simple parameter (the armor value) and the complete neglect of the percentage of coverage of the body with respect to the parts covered by the armor generates all the problems of balance between the various types of units.
And the lack of logistics and supply lines (which would naturally lead to the creation of "battle fronts" and the defense strategy of the lines, which would balance everything) generate situations in which not only are there no tanks with ammunition to go to. refuel, but above all you see an entire army that on the other side of the world, instead of attacking the city / castle closest to the border of its faction, is moving towards the farthest city and its only concern is its OWN FOOD RESERVE, on which the enemy cannot act.
If this reserve were linked to a supply line that was cut even by a weak enemy, then the great army would:
1) do not go too far into the enemy territory, otherwise the line becomes long and in the event of an attack on it by the enemy, you will not be able to defend it and then you will find yourself without food.
2) if he really wants to go far into the enemy territory, then he will be forced to divide the army into secondary and tertiary parties that have the task of defending the sides of the supply line, or forming an "attack front" in such a way to intercept small armies ready to outflank the large army to cut the line.

There are too many mechanics that would be necessary and DUE (for a game like this) to balance out pretty much everything that doesn't work right now.
Instead we just vary a few parameters and put perks with ridiculous percentages that don't even make you feel the progression.
Instead of inserting perks that unlock VITAL and SUBSTANTIAL mechanics, they put insignificant numbers.
Absolutely TL;DR
All I got from that is 'armour sucks'
And you're absolutely right. For both singleplayer and multiplayer.
This is true for melee hits too.
 
But a cool feature would be to have some sort of arrow / supply cart that you'd have to drag around on the campaign map and would load where you spawn on the battle map where archer AI could automatically run back to for a refill.
Yeah this is what I want too. It should be possible but inconvenient for archers to go to the supply wagons/tent (whatever)and refill thier ammo, you need to be in control of the battle situation for this to go smoothly, obviously if the enemy is on top of you it's going to be bad for archers to be turning around to the supply and not fighting but if you're got it under control then there's no reason to have to charge you ranged in melee just to finish off the last stubborn enemies.
Having some extra cost would be good. I'm okay with extra cost for ranged and mounted units in general since the base pay and cost is just based on level. I think horses could add to food consumption too.

If they got rid of ammo then they might as well rename the game Archerlord because archers, mounted archers, and crossbow men would be the only troops used by players.
That ship has already sailed and the cruise continues until TW makes Cav great again and makes Infantry have more defense and mobility against ranged and lower tier units, for now they just trade way too much. I don't want magical never ending ammo, but I think we should be able to re-fill it if TW insist on making oversized battles so common.

They do however have plenty of arrow supply boxes they cant/wont use.
I can't remember if I've seen an AI bot use an arrow barrel, I want to say so but it might of been them just picking up a stray arrow of mine. I know that enemy AI archers always seem to have about 1.5 stack of arrow when I kill them, so I don't know if they do use the arrow barrel or if they just take turns shooting or what. It seems uncommon for them to be low on arrows even if the shooting has been going on for awhile. I guess they may also be getting the re-fills from dead archer next to them too. This is something TW should look into as they fix up siege stuff though as this could be a serious issue in defensive siege. For now I feel the placement of ranged and the clunky/limited controls over troops in defensive siege make it a really bad idea anyways.
 

Antaeus

Sergeant at Arms
This is a pet peeve with limited battle size.

Your archers fire off all their arrows, kill masses of enemies, then run out. More enemies spawn and you are now punished for winning the battle, by having no way of fighting them off.

Especially if you're on the defensive, and you've chosen the battle site, you should have access to logistics or some kind of representative of access to the train. If you're on the attack, it's understandable that you might march beyond your supply reach and have to fall back to re-equip.

My solution:

The baggage train could be symbolised in game using existing mechanics - by a circle of camels/donkeys like you see in trade party battles. They become resupply points - even if you capture the enemy's. It gives you something to aim for if you're on the attack - capture the enemy's train to re-equip your archers and javelins.

Combine it with better armour and hey presto - battles with an objective, battles that last long enough to make tactics important. Without losing any of the speed and excitement we currently have. Of course, resupply would have to be limited to prevent camping. But *shrug*
 
Top Bottom