Simple commands for your followers

[Kamamura]

Okay, I know that AI programming is difficult. I appreciate the recent changes, when the combatants try to form a line, the battles are now look much more organized and much less as a mob fight. However, I would appreciate the following commands that would not be so hard to implement IMO:

- Possibility to address soldiers with different weapons separately, as they play different roles in combat - melee cavalry, missile cavalry, missile infantry, melee infantry, polearms infantry.
- New commands - Use ranged weapons only, use melee weapons only.

 

[Kelpo]

I think it would be good if you could form your troops into squads at the party screen before the battle, like choosing one stack of 5 archers and another stack of 3 marksmen into squad 1, 4 horsemen and 3 knights into squad 2 and so on. This would allow more specific commands instead of just having 'archers' and 'horsemen' to issue commands to.

Also, it would be nice to be able to split troop stacks so that you could have, for example, 2 stacks of 5 knights instead of 1 stack of 10.

Squad 1:
Vaegir marksman (1)
Vaegir archers (3)
Vaegir skirmishers (5)

Squad 2:
Vaegir infantry (3)
Vaegir footmen (5)

Squad 3:
Vaegir knights (3)
Vaegir horsemen (5)

Squad 4:
Vaegir knights (2)
Vaegir horsemen (7)

This would allow commands like:
Squad 1: Hold ground
Squad 2: Charge
Squad 3: Charge
Squad 4: Follow me

 

[Archonsod]

This was one of the things which inspired my suggestion for changing the way orders are given ( here )
I wouldn't think it would be too hard to implement. You wouldn't actually need to change the way the AI responds to orders, just filter out which units respond to those orders.

 

[barbaros]

I was also thinking grouping should be like Kelpo's suggestion. Then its easy to implement a system like this;
1. Press 2 (group 2 is selected)
2. Press 1 (order group 2 to hold this position)

But current commands are not enough. I want move commands and to be able to select an exact location for move commands. This can be done with mouse clicking to desired location. This may work like this;

Attack-move
-------------------------------------------
1. Press 2 (group 2 is selected)
2. Left click on some point (on top of a hill for example) to order your troops to move there. They will stop and engage if there are enemies on their way. This is like attack-move in RTS games. Your first left click is used for targeting after you press 2. So this can be a little dangerous to use this in the middle of a melee combat.

Passive-move
-------------------------------------------
Right click is for situations when you want your soldiers to reach some specific point no matter what.
1. Press 2 (group 2 is selected)
2. Right click on some point to order your troops to move there. They will again fight with enemies on their way. But they won't stop to fight. They'll keep moving to target point and fight at the same time in more defensive way (blocking generally). This is like passive move command in RTS games

Targeting an enemy
------------------------------------------
If you want one of your groups to engage a specific enemy group (assuming enemy army will consist of a few groups like yours);
1. Press 2 (group 2 is selected)
2. Right click on a member of an enemy group (on an archer to target enemy archer group) to order your troops to attack this enemy group. They will target the whole group not just a single enemy you pointed. They will again fight with enemies on their way. But they won't stop to fight. They'll keep moving to target enemy group and fight at the same time in more defensive way (blocking generally).

Waypoints
------------------------------------------
Finally, waypoints would be good. This can be useful for tactics like sending your cavalry behind the enemy lines for example.
1. Press and hold 2 (group 2 is selected and since you're holding the key, game expects multiple inputs from you for waypoints)
2. Right or left click on multiple points to give waypoints to your group. Again right click orders passive-move and left click orders attack-move.

 

[jrawlings]

- New commands - Use ranged weapons only, use melee weapons only.

Another new command - use blunt weapons only... for those capture-type quests!

 

[Vachir]

I'd love to have the ability to configure my waves of reinforcements that way as well as see what portion of the enemy force I'm going to be up against at the start so I can balance my force better.

 

[Archonsod]

I was also thinking grouping should be like Kelpo's suggestion. Then its easy to implement a system like this;
1. Press 2 (group 2 is selected)
2. Press 1 (order group 2 to hold this position)

But current commands are not enough. I want move commands and to be able to select an exact location for move commands. This can be done with mouse clicking to desired location. This may work like this;

I too would like to see more advanced commands.

The problem I have is with your implementation of them. It occurs to me that your more likely to spend most of your time running around the battlefield trying to order your troops, rather than getting stuck in to the fight.

 

[Vachir]

I was also thinking grouping should be like Kelpo's suggestion. Then its easy to implement a system like this;
1. Press 2 (group 2 is selected)
2. Press 1 (order group 2 to hold this position)

But current commands are not enough. I want move commands and to be able to select an exact location for move commands. This can be done with mouse clicking to desired location. This may work like this;

I too would like to see more advanced commands.

The problem I have is with your implementation of them. It occurs to me that your more likely to spend most of your time running around the battlefield trying to order your troops, rather than getting stuck in to the fight.

I think it would be more your choice between being a fighter and being a leader. A general wouldn't do much fighting himself (contrary to Hollywood), being more valuable as a commander than a warrior, where as a more combat focused player might give a couple simple orders now and then, focusing the rest of the time on fighting. Balancing these two features would be difficult, but a welcome challenge I think that would add some much needed depth to the battles in M&B.

 

[Orion]

You so stole my idea of the battalions/groups.

AND the way to give orders.

Bastards!

 

[barbaros]

The problem I have is with your implementation of them. It occurs to me that your more likely to spend most of your time running around the battlefield trying to order your troops, rather than getting stuck in to the fight.

You don't have to use orders constantly. You can just give a few orders in the beginning of the round and attack by yourself as you please. But I think you are talking about the temptation to use the commands excessively. I may also think "If its possible to give detailed orders to my troops, I should use this a lot to full extent". Well, that's the problem with any kind of detailed ordering system. After playing with a new order system a bit, people would find a balance between the times spent with ordering and fighting. But its good to have a more advanced system like this especially for people who wants to be more of a commander type. And why do I have to run around?. You can give orders without moving at all in this system (not in extremely hilly terrains I guess). A system similar to this was used in Brothers in arms (FPS game) succesfully.

 

[Archonsod]

Yeah, but given the current AI you'd probably spend a lot of time micromanaging archers.

It may be possible to issue the orders without moving around (the enemy tend to just rush towards you anyway) but it may still detract from the fighting. This wouldn't be a problem if you wanted to head more down the command route I guess.

I just think there may be a simpler way to get the same result. My suggestion was based around Op. Flashpoint (which also allowed you give move or engagement orders via the crosshair) as it is relatively quick and easy, especially if your using a mousewheel.
The other question is how sophisticated the AI is. Movement orders shouldn't be too hard, after all the existing hold ground uses a similar system (except the player position is used over the crosshair). Ordering it to attack a group may be a little more tricky though. I suspect you'd end up in situations where your troops get butchered attempting to reach the unit you ordered them to attack as they refuse to defend themselves against other units.
Perhaps this could be overcome by setting a target priority rather than ordering a direct attack. So before battle, you order your knights to engage ranged units. During the battle, unless they are attacked (in which case they will defend themselves) they will concentrate on moving towards and engaging ranged opponents. If there are no ranged opponents within a certain distance, or there are none left on the field, they revert to the usual targetting priority. Again, I'm not sure how hard this would be to implement.

 

[Papa Lazarou]

I suggest these more complex orders could possibly be attached to the tactics skill, with more specific orders becoming usable with more tactics points.
Also, I think we should keep realism in mind, considering how orders would be given to troops (shouting, horns?) and whether these orders would be recieved and understood in various situations.
For example, an order like "gather near me" is very simple and could be easily followed, but others like "move to that hill" could, realistically be very ambiguous for the soldiers getting them.

 

[<deniz>]

The problem I have is with your implementation of them. It occurs to me that your more likely to spend most of your time running around the battlefield trying to order your troops, rather than getting stuck in to the fight.

But isn't it a matter of how you would prefer to play the game? I mean you may simply ignore those commands or even use the command "hold this position" at the beginning of the battle to play the way you used to.

I think barbaros' system is consistent, and not much difficult to implement. But not that complete. The only missing point is the commands regarding formation of the troops. We still need a way of defining troop formations that can be integrated with the commands system. But I think all the suggestions are going to be valid for the current situation only. I still hope to see new troop types, so the classification of them will definitely affect the way those commands are defined.

 

[genericname]

waht i would like is the ability to tell my soldiers to use blunt or edged weapons. I always try to capture noble and have to do it solo because they will kill him before i can rech him

 

[Archonsod]

But isn't it a matter of how you would prefer to play the game? I mean you may simply ignore those commands or even use the command "hold this position" at the beginning of the battle to play the way you used to.

Yes. I did say it would depend on whether you prefer strategy or actually getting your hands dirty. The point I was making is that similar systems have been used in the past and worked well without forcing you to make that choice.

I think barbaros' system is consistent, and not much difficult to implement. But not that complete. The only missing point is the commands regarding formation of the troops. We still need a way of defining troop formations that can be integrated with the commands system. But I think all the suggestions are going to be valid for the current situation only. I still hope to see new troop types, so the classification of them will definitely affect the way those commands are defined.

The beauty of these systems is that you no longer need formations. When you give the hold ground order under the current system, for example, your troops already form a loose formation around that point.
If your giving orders to individual groups, then the formation is already there. As soon as you order one group forward and another to hold you end up with two distinct groups, rather than a mass.
Its not quite a shield wall, but there is an argument against the rag-tag mercenaries you tend to get in your employ being capable of these formations.
As for new troop types, it depends on how tightly the classifications are. Anyone with a bow could be covered by archers, and anyone with a mount could be classed as cavalry. The only real problem here is horsebowmen...

 

[Alric]

OMG I JUST POSTED THE EXACT THING LIKE 30 SECS AGO.

 

[Roach]

Just to play devil's advocate:

I like the order system the way it is now. In fact, I don't think you should be able to give orders at all if you are too far away and out of sight of your men. Perhaps more complicated orders could be given (such as 'move over to that hill and give covering fire') but you should have to personally walk over to the guy and tell him (in real time, no pressing the 'f' button to pause the game, so you have to pay attention to what's going on or you get a spear in the back.) Your guys will have been fighting with other people (if you rescued them) or be complete novices (if they're peasants), how the hell are they immediately supposed to pick up what you're trying to get across if you're halfway across the battlefield telling them to 'move to that hill, going through that valley there but avoiding the forest, and when you get there have the archers stand at the top and the infantry screen them. Oh, and if anyone comes within range as your moving.. etc. etc. etc.' Of course it would be great to give detailed orders in the midst of battle, but it's just not possible unless you're physically speaking to them.

Maybe before the battle you could assign relatively simple commands to a series of gestures or horn sounds, something simple like 'move around the left flank and attack' or 'take out those f*ckin horse archers', something you could change depending on who you're fighting against. The way I see it is like that bit in Braveheart (freedom!) Where Big Mel tries to get the cavalry to charge by signalling with the flag. This gives you a few tactical options without the usual Medieval Personal Radio Receiver b.s. you get in games like Medieval Total War. And waypoints should really not be implemented IMO, too much micromanagement. Trust your guys, they know what to do! (sure.)

 

[Kelpo]

Just to play devil's advocate:

I like the order system the way it is now. In fact, I don't think you should be able to give orders at all if you are too far away and out of sight of your men. Perhaps more complicated orders could be given (such as 'move over to that hill and give covering fire') but you should have to personally walk over to the guy and tell him (in real time, no pressing the 'f' button to pause the game, so you have to pay attention to what's going on or you get a spear in the back.) Your guys will have been fighting with other people (if you rescued them) or be complete novices (if they're peasants), how the hell are they immediately supposed to pick up what you're trying to get across if you're halfway across the battlefield telling them to 'move to that hill, going through that valley there but avoiding the forest, and when you get there have the archers stand at the top and the infantry screen them. Oh, and if anyone comes within range as your moving.. etc. etc. etc.' Of course it would be great to give detailed orders in the midst of battle, but it's just not possible unless you're physically speaking to them.

Maybe before the battle you could assign relatively simple commands to a series of gestures or horn sounds, something simple like 'move around the left flank and attack' or 'take out those f*ckin horse archers', something you could change depending on who you're fighting against. The way I see it is like that bit in Braveheart (freedom!) Where Big Mel tries to get the cavalry to charge by signalling with the flag. This gives you a few tactical options without the usual Medieval Personal Radio Receiver b.s. you get in games like Medieval Total War. And waypoints should really not be implemented IMO, too much micromanagement. Trust your guys, they know what to do! (sure.)

I second that to an extent. The current system is good and functional, it just has to be extended a little. Just adding a couple of new commands and the ability to assign troops into squads would go a long way. Having waypoints and the like would require the addition of a completely new system and would most likely take a lot of work.

 

[franbeard]

I already posted this elsewhere in reply to someone else's thread about commanding your army, but I don't know where that thread went.

My take on a simple, and probably really useful, addition to the existing command system, would be the ability to give orders to individual soldiers during a battle by using the 'use' ('f' by default) key.

So, you would call out your orders like usual, for example 'hold position'. But then you could walk up to an individual soldier, press 'f' (like when you talk to someone in town) and an order menu would pop up. You'd pick the order for that individual soldier, for example 'follow me', and he'd carry it out. The rest of the soldiers would keep on doing whatever they were doing before.

This would be a very simple and straightforward addition, I think, that would let you play 'leader' a little more by individually telling your soldiers what to do.

 

[Roady]

I'd like to be able to set up my groups and initial commands for my troops on the travel map and/or on the page I choose to fight/run/watch.

I want to be able to tell group 1 to guard group 2 in which case group 1 stands near group 2 between them and the enemy.

Commands can be linked to the leadership skill.

• Leadership 0-1 = Hold, Charge, Follow, Mount, Dismount, Goto for all troops.
• Leadership 2-3 = Hold, Charge, Follow, Mount, Dismount, Goto for troop groups.
• Leadership 4+ = Guard, Waypoints, Formations.

I'd also like the heroes to have a more complex AI than regular npcs and be able to place them in charge of a squad and perform flanking maneuvers, etc.