Should we allow AI reinforcement for players involved ongoing battles just like simulation ones?

Currently viewing this thread:

Seafoodking

Recruit
I'm not sure how feasible this is in terms of coding, but I would find it much more fun and strategic if we can allow AI to join players ongoing battles. This would enhance the strategic experience especially if the reinforcement would join the battle in the direction of where the battle is happening. This would work well with the new terrain system as well.
 

Saint Jiub

Sergeant
I dont think the strategy layer really works at the same time as the battle layer so you couldn't do it in a real sense. might be able to just check if any armies that would normally join the battle are close and then spawn them in after some amount of time.

this would be a pretty big change since a lot of the game seems to operate on the assumption you can pick off lords armies somewhat safely
 

froggyluv

Grandmaster Knight
NW
Its a fantastic ideas the game needs more dynamic action-
this would be a pretty big change since a lot of the game seems to operate on the assumption you can pick off lords armies somewhat safely

..is exactly why its needed. The above is the very definition of a grind. There is a Reinforcements mod that does allow parties that were nearby whence the battle started on the World map -join the fray coming in from that direction with a time delay. D3efinitely makes the battlefield feel more alive and that generally how things went down in historical battles -other lords arriving with a late day showing to change the course of battle
 
I believe that's how it works in Total War games?
Generally I would agree, but the current reinforcements system already sucks and I am not entirely sure how it could be improved.
 
It does feel unrealistic the way it is now, definitely... For example if a siege is ongoing, AI can reinforce their castles. But if the player decides to partake in the siege then they are just frozen in time and can't reinforce because the battle finishes right then and there. If there was at least a notification and a timer which stated: after X minutes party Y will enter the battlefield (a lord who was already coming to reinforce the castle), that would improve it tons. It would also give you some time pressure. If, let's say, you capture the castle before the time runs out (and by "capture the castle" I mean you reach the Keep (Keep battles incoming), then the reinforcements won't come anymore. Who knows, I wouldn't make it too complex, but a little improvement in this area would be nice since it does feel a little off.
 

Dreed89

Sergeant
This feature has been talked over multiple times.

It is not possible because it requires the time in strategic map to progress while player is in battle.

I would have liked to see it as well but no feasible way was found for this. Things like, how to progress time, how to manage long battles, how to make player not lose every battle with unending reinforcements, etc.

Currently nearby AI lords in some radius join the battle as it starts to make it appear as if they joined as reinforcements.
 
This feature has been talked over multiple times.

It is not possible because it requires the time in strategic map to progress while player is in battle.

I would have liked to see it as well but no feasible way was found for this. Things like, how to progress time, how to manage long battles, how to make player not lose every battle with unending reinforcements, etc.

Currently nearby AI lords in some radius join the battle as it starts to make it appear as if they joined as reinforcements.
It's very much possible without creating time paradoxes. Armies in a smaller radius join the battle immediately, while armies in a somewhat larger radius are scheduled as reinforcements, arriving based on their speed, distance and direction. If the battle is too short, they might not arrive at all.
 

Seafoodking

Recruit
I think this is a good suggestion and won't over complicate things, as we know TW avoid implementing complicated features.
It's very much possible without creating time paradoxes. Armies in a smaller radius join the battle immediately, while armies in a somewhat larger radius are scheduled as reinforcements, arriving based on their speed, distance and direction. If the battle is too short, they might not arrive at all.
 

Dreed89

Sergeant
It's very much possible without creating time paradoxes. Armies in a smaller radius join the battle immediately, while armies in a somewhat larger radius are scheduled as reinforcements, arriving based on their speed, distance and direction. If the battle is too short, they might not arrive at all.
Good but this approach might create a different kind of time paradox:

Suppose there are two lords that are far from player, and one of them is pursing the other to engage a fight.

And the player is fighting a third lord at player's position on map. (Far from the above two lords.)

Now when one of the far away lords joins the player's battle as an enemy reinforcement, and player loses the battle, that lord will have teleported to safety as it will return the campaign map on player's location, basically messing up their old location and happenings there.

Edit: I give credit that this approach is relatively a light one to implement, yes.
 

Calabanar

Sergeant
Good but this approach might create a different kind of time paradox:

Suppose there are two lords that are far from player, and one of them is pursing the other to engage a fight.

And the player is fighting a third lord at player's position on map. (Far from the above two lords.)

Now when one of the far away lords joins the player's battle as an enemy reinforcement, and player loses the battle, that lord will have teleported to safety as it will return the campaign map on player's location, basically messing up their old location and happenings there.

Edit: I give credit that this approach is relatively a light one to implement, yes.
I mean, the simple fix would be that all parties who took part in the battle would be at the same location...

Something I find more complicated is taking the army limit into account: when does the ally reinforce, how many of them come? What if both armies are being reinforced, what is the ratio? What if you have way more men than them, do they come in tiny waves? I mean, to be honest it could make for a super powerful and interesting tactical perk: your reinforcements taking priority of the ennemy's.

Also, does this apply to auto-calc or is it a simulation-only thing? I'd go for simulation only, because auto-calc always takes much more time to process than simulations, so if they can get reinforcements, they usually do.
 
Good but this approach might create a different kind of time paradox:

Suppose there are two lords that are far from player, and one of them is pursing the other to engage a fight.

And the player is fighting a third lord at player's position on map. (Far from the above two lords.)

Now when one of the far away lords joins the player's battle as an enemy reinforcement, and player loses the battle, that lord will have teleported to safety as it will return the campaign map on player's location, basically messing up their old location and happenings there.

Edit: I give credit that this approach is relatively a light one to implement, yes.
Of course there are messy details to settle and you pointed at one of them.
The main question is what to do after the battle with the reinforcing parties. You can either leave them be wherever they were on the map (with new casualties and prisoners) or teleport all participating parties to the battle location, so it would look more natural and you can have a post-victory chat with your allies. There are advantages to both approaches - the first one interferes the least with the map parties (so they can continue what they were doing) and the second one feels more natural to the player.
And of course this can be abused in interesting ways - the decision whether to include a party as reinforcement to the battle may also have logic for preventing exploits. In your case, parties chasing each other could be deemed "too busy" to reinforce other battles.

Something I find more complicated is taking the army limit into account: when does the ally reinforce, how many of them come? What if both armies are being reinforced, what is the ratio? What if you have way more men than them, do they come in tiny waves? I mean, to be honest it could make for a super powerful and interesting tactical perk: your reinforcements taking priority of the ennemy's.
The reinforcing parties come at different times after the battle starts, calculated from their distance and speed. So you have a time schedule of parties joining the battle, they are not immediately available. Ideally they would not be simple reinforcement waves for the main battle participants, but they'll enter the battle on their own from their own direction.
 
Last edited:
I "would" suggest that a larger force/battle give like a pull in radius to bring in more parties then usual, to simulate that allies are going to arrive before the battle can finish, and maybe spawn them as reinforcements or a second battle or something.... HOWEVER I don't suggest that because I think battles bigger then like 300X 300 are pure garbage and it's like TW decided to make the game about massive armies fighting but then didn't back it up with everything else being like it was ment for warband limitations. It the cart before the horse. Okay great we have huge battles but the formation UI, unit performance and maps are all horrible if the battle is beyond say 500 total units.

I would be better if there were no armies at all and it was like warband.

While I see the absurdity in sitting down to grind out 800+ armies with your tiny single clan party and nobody get there to help as you slowly kite them around the map, I also resent having to fight large armies EVERY DAY ALL DAY FOREVER Of course if you a vassal and can lead armies it's SO EASY the game is no challenge to just march you doom stack around eating Armies and parties alike for sustenance all day forever and ever.

I come to really enjoy playing just as a lone clan though, however too many armies become very annoying so PERSONALY I'm glad I don't have to fight an army + all the roaming parties + THE OTHER ARMY on it's way all at once. Even if I won it would waste so much loot and prisoners. If as a vassal it'd be a non issue as you'd be a massive force and pull in allies too.
 

Stonestool

Recruit
"Should we allow AI reinforcement for players involved ongoing battles just like simulation ones?"

No. The AI already has so many other advantages. I don't want to enter a battle to have AI parties b-lining to reinforce from the other side of the map.
 
Top Bottom