Q for Armagan about unit selection per-battle

Users who are viewing this thread

Wanderer

Recruit
Armagan,

How does the percentage structure work on unit decisions to be joined into the fight? From what I can tell so far, it basically works like this:

A unit has a set percentage to enter a fight. It goes down the list as per the order you've set up in the stacks, checking each soldier with a percentage. Heros, if at the top of a list, always seem to enter (100%), otherwise, it'd be something like 10%.

So, ex:

Hero
Marnid
Swadian Footman (3)
Swadian Knight (:cool:
Swadian Sharpshooter (30)
Swadian Peasant (12)

So, let's say the tactics and battle size let me get 8 ppl into the fight, it'd be similar to:

Person 1: Me! (100%)
Person 2: Marnid (100%) roll 50%, enters
Person 3: Swadian Footman (10%), rolls 25%, next
Swadian Footman (10%), rolls 88%, next
Swadian Footman (10%), rolls 52%, next
Swadian Knight (9%), rolls 5%, enters
Person 4: Swadian Footman (10%), rolls 8%, enters
Person 5: Swadian Footman (10%), rolls 38%, next
Swadian Footman (10%), rolls 42%, next
Swadian Knight (9%), rolls 18%, next...
etc.

Is this accurate?

(If this question is answered before, please post the link, I couldn't find it.)
 
IMO you should be able to choose which guys you take, you know, being the commander and all.
 
Quite close. Only, inclusion probability for a regular is not 10% it is:

25% + (number-of-soldiers-in-stack / number-of-soldiers-in-party)

Also, parties other than player's party enter battle in reverse order.
 
One of the great things about M&B is that it doesn't give a player too much control over what's going on. That keeps things a bit unpredictable and fresh. I very much appreciate the idea that you can suggest a battle order but that things might not go precisely how you'd have wished.
 
I'm all for keeping things fresh, but you SHOULD have absolute control over the actions of the men you command. Refusal of your men to obey your commands is mutiny. I've often wished there was an option to execute those soldiers who disobeyed you after the fact, as an example to the others.
 
I'd certainly be all for that, Captain Bligh, but considering we're talking about small, irregular, mercenary forces here then the game should track fear (keeping men in line through force), loyalty (keeping men in line through rewards while not overextending forays) and keep ever present the possibility of mutiny if the leader manages to anger more of his men through punishment than he intimidates. The tougher the unit the less likely it should be to be intimidated.
 
Well yes, I'd definitely want to be careful of pissing off 30 Vaegir knights, but the punishment thing was in response to a situation that shouldn't exist in the first place. I experimented once with a mixed force, including a number of Vaegir Marksmen. Yeah, an archer is different from a knight, but in its particular class, it's supposed to be the most elite unit available. Bad enough they can't hit anything; the fact that I'm trying to group them on top of a hill, and one or two always want to stand away from the main force, out in the open is infuriating. Fine, it provided some fun to take my crossbow out and shoot him in the back, but damnit, I could have used the extra firepower! I pay them to do a job. They should do it properly. I'd be all for increasing their wages if it meant they'd do what I told them to do, how I told them, when I told them.
 
GreenKnight said:
Well yes, I'd definitely want to be careful of pissing off 30 Vaegir knights, but the punishment thing was in response to a situation that shouldn't exist in the first place. I experimented once with a mixed force, including a number of Vaegir Marksmen. Yeah, an archer is different from a knight, but in its particular class, it's supposed to be the most elite unit available. Bad enough they can't hit anything; the fact that I'm trying to group them on top of a hill, and one or two always want to stand away from the main force, out in the open is infuriating. Fine, it provided some fun to take my crossbow out and shoot him in the back, but damnit, I could have used the extra firepower! I pay them to do a job. They should do it properly. I'd be all for increasing their wages if it meant they'd do what I told them to do, how I told them, when I told them.

Amen...whole command thing and AI needs big improvements...but...that will be fixed later I bet...
 
The thing about my archers accuracy is that it doesn't seem any near as good as that of the enemies. Some people complain that the AI is too good of a shot...i think its fine, should be more accurate IMO, but the thing that does bother me is that my guys can't shoot worth crap. The enemy is capable of hitting me 4/5 of the time at decent range if i stand still...which makes sense. But my guys can't do that, nowhere near that. I had 6 marksmen shooting at 1 bandit on foot. They fired 5 volleys, so a total of about 30 arrows, and only 1 hit...ONE!! And if i have a group of infantry with me, their archers almost never miss, they at least hit a shield or something, but with the reverse situation...heh. All i ask is that your own guys be as good as the enemy when it comes to aiming. Anyone else notice this? or is it just all in my head?
 
DaLagga said:
The thing about my archers accuracy is that it doesn't seem any near as good as that of the enemies. Some people complain that the AI is too good of a shot...i think its fine, should be more accurate IMO, but the thing that does bother me is that my guys can't shoot worth crap. The enemy is capable of hitting me 4/5 of the time at decent range if i stand still...which makes sense. But my guys can't do that, nowhere near that. I had 6 marksmen shooting at 1 bandit on foot. They fired 5 volleys, so a total of about 30 arrows, and only 1 hit...ONE!! And if i have a group of infantry with me, their archers almost never miss, they at least hit a shield or something, but with the reverse situation...heh. All i ask is that your own guys be as good as the enemy when it comes to aiming. Anyone else notice this? or is it just all in my head?

I have the same problem. It's even more pronounced when you take your Swadian Crossbowmen against Swadian deserters consisting of mostly crossbowmen, grab a nearby hill, and watch your guys all fall down dead when they started with +3 men.
 
DaLagga said:
Anyone else notice this? or is it just all in my head?

Oh, it's definitely not just you. Admittedly, I haven't used archers much after witnessing their initial ineffectiveness, given that they slow the party down and all, but they're definitely terrible shots. I do remember this one time...I'd killed most of the enemy myself, so I wasn't too worried about the rest. I was just sitting on my horse, watching as a River Pirate, or a Sea Raider, or whoever came ambling after me. The significant thing it that he was at the bottom of a small canyon, and he was in clear view of a bunch of marksmen I had stationed on the ridge off to his right. They got him eventually, but my God, the inefficiency! As far as I can tell, marksmen are good as a novelty. That's it.
 
Bowmen will also accidentally shoot down your own soldiers too. I don't see what's so good about them. And it's annoying to always have to bring your units up to a hill every battle, so the bowmen can effectively snipe. I'd rather just make a whole army of melee infantry and charge the enemy.
 
Yeah, there have been a few times when I rode up to attack an enemy, and right when I was about to swing, I get an arrow in my shoulder from MY vaegir archer. Also there was a time I was fighting in the arena at Zendar, I only had 50 gold and I was out of food, and I bet all my money so I could buy some grain or something. I had just finished off the last opponent of the 3v3 match, when *thunk* I get hit by my own archer and he kills me. It made me lose the match and my money!!!! I quickly alt-f4ed so it wouldn't save and had to try again...
 
I have a character that consists of entirely sharpshooters (with the odd crossbowman). the result is that the only enemy that I can defeat is river pirates or unmounted bandits. Even so, I kill 80% of the enemies. With good AI on, I've seen 3 river pirates take over a minute to slog through a huge river and up the hill toward my 7 sharpshooters. The result: one quarrel stuck in a pirate's leg, and one in another pirate's stomach. This is partly because they miss so much. However, a lot of this is because the archers seem to wait around a lot to shoot. If i'm lucky, I'll have 50% of my archers shooting, and the rest are walking back and forth or staring stupidly at the oncoming forces. They seem to have "locked on" to a target, because they are always facing the direction of an enemy, yet they don't shoot. As a result, I've abandoned this character :roll:
 
Before I start critizicing the game, I'd just have to say that I really can't stop playing it... It's just too good.

Going on with the topic;

I took it a step longer... i've abandoned all my non-hero characters and just put everything into the personal fighting skills of myself, Borscha, and Marnid.

After taking down a group of 40 dark knights and 20 hunters by myself, I don't know why anyone should hassle with normal pc's. Besides which, lvls and reputation don't count in when some 8 odd river pirates think you're an easy catch and start following you.

The most enjoyable part now is just sitting back and watching my two heroes kill as many enemy npc's by themself. (lvl 22/20)

I don't even bother with enemies that aren't dark knights or quest related anymore. Don't need anymore gold than the 250k i'm carrying.
 
Back
Top Bottom