[suggestion]Allow picking sides in a fight between neutral parties

[The Yogi]

One small issue I have is how difficult it can be to go hostile with a faction should I desire to do so. Finding a caravan of theirs (which are the only ones I can attack) can take for ever.

An easier way would be to be able to enter a battle between to factions I'm not hostile with. Right now my only option is to "not interfere" or something like that. Would be much better if I had the option of aiding either side. It would also be a good way to improve my relations with a faction I want to smooch up to.

 

[2Coats]

Hail The Yogi,

I agree, plus I'd also ask for the ability to attack both sides.  If this cant be done during the first battle, perhaps an additional dialogue screen asking if the player wants to attack or just talk to the party they originally helped.  Now that would be fun!

 

[The Yogi]

Hi there 2coats!

So you've found your way here too, eh?

 

[CryoNomad]

Hail The Yogi,

I agree, plus I'd also ask for the ability to attack both sides.

3 way battles would be badass!

 

[Berserker Pride]

A mod for an older version called bandit king had that option.

 

[Riggea]

I agree, for many reasons. First, because improving relationships is hard (losing them is easy, just besiege a castle and you get a -25 I think), and I'd lobe to see those 3-way battles, in "The Eagle and the Radiant Cross" you can do a 4-way battle in the quick battle section, havent found that in the game, but it would really, really... Im gonna quote it XD.

would be badass!

 

[italiano]

Hail The Yogi,

I agree, plus I'd also ask for the ability to attack both sides.

3 way battles would be badass!

It would be absolutely ridiculous. A commander with any ounce of intelligence would wait until at least near the end of the battle, if not after. As for attacking neutral parties, I agree, and it's very easy to add if the developers wish to do so.

 

[amade]

Hail The Yogi,

I agree, plus I'd also ask for the ability to attack both sides.

3 way battles would be badass!

It would be absolutely ridiculous. A commander with any ounce of intelligence would wait until at least near the end of the battle, if not after. As for attacking neutral parties, I agree, and it's very easy to add if the developers wish to do so.

Well, not necessarily the end of the battle but he would certainly choose a moment where he's sure he's going to come up on top if he decices to take out all the other sides e.g. say you're at war with Swadia and Vaegirs and they're both at war with each other. It would be tempting to strike at their armies when both of them have been weakened in battle and in a state of confusion.

A 3 way battle or larger could be possible but the risks would be big, especially if the player was foolish enough to enter the fray too early. The problem is in making the armies fight with some sort of actual tactics in mind, 'cos now that there are 2 or more enemy groups on the field how and where will the soldiers march? How will they flank or keep their guard and which enemy should they keep an eye on? Current AI is not good enough to support having more than 2 groups on a battlefield without it being a disorganised mess like in the tourneys.

 

[johncage]

the 3 way thing would be kinda dumb. either one side will choose to ally themselves against the other, or a diplomatic agreement will be reached.

 

[Heafodban]

1866 lets you do this, it is very nice.

 

[The Yogi]

I'd be happy to be able to just pick one side. Three-way would be kinda fun, but it might also be a litte silly.

 

[pentagathus]

Or you could just wait untill the two armies had finished fighting and then attack the victor. But I would like to be able to choose sides.
Also on a related note, the relation bonus you get when helping out lords in battles should be more proportional to how the battle is going beforehand. So if you decide to help lord in a desperate situation you get a large relations boost.

 

[amade]

Also on a related note, the relation bonus you get when helping out lords in battles should be more proportional to how the battle is going beforehand. So if you decide to help lord in a desperate situation you get a large relations boost.

That's already how it is in game.

 

[radicalhit]

well the 3 way/4way battle does happen during tournaments and it tends to work perfectly fine so why the hell not ?

 

[amade]

Because it's a mess, troops chasing whichever troops that are closest to it instead of following some sort of tactic e.g. taking care not to expose their flanks or rear to another army while engaging a different one.

In tourneys I will often tell my team members to hold ground and let the various teams duke it out, and then I get my men to follow me and overwhelm an unsuspecting group. Rinse and repeat.

It might be fun in field battles, but the AI will be at a severe disadvantage if this was to happen.

 

[pentagathus]

Also on a related note, the relation bonus you get when helping out lords in battles should be more proportional to how the battle is going beforehand. So if you decide to help lord in a desperate situation you get a large relations boost.

That's already how it is in game.

Thats why I said more proportional rather than just proportional. But yeah I should have been more clear. It just seems to me that there isn't enough difference at the moment, I've had pretty large relations bonuses for doing almost nothing in a battle that was already clearly won. Haven't helped out a lord in desperation yet though.
Oh and why do we get negative relations for capturing lords? Its what is expected, I think that unless the lord has a certain personality you shouldn't get the negative relations. Or that it could be random, but I definitly don't think it should be a definite decrease when that lord has decided to fight you.

 

[Stratigos001]

A three way (or more) battle would be quite nice. Look at tournaments for example. It can be done.

 

[TalonAquila]

there's a difference between an arena melee and a battlefield.  the current ai is not capable of handling battlefield 3-way fights. period.
to give us a choice of aiding one side or the other is fine, and i agree would help game strategy a good bit.
  if you're at war with 2 factions which are also warring with each other, wait until they're done fighting and attack whichever you choose.  with the current ai, that's the only reasonable approach.

 

[Riggea]

I hope you are talking about a battle... because waiting for a war to end is ridiculous, they never end with one dead, and they last for a long time. And if you mean a battle... they usually take a few hours, not to say days. I always hated that, AI battles (over 100 on each side, smaller are a little shorter in time) take a damn long time to end, but my battles, the ones we fight are instant... 1.2k nords slaughtered in an instant by a small band of 100 swadian knights. But thats just off topic xD.

Now, if I am not wrong, if an enemy is fighting with one of your allies another enemy of yours ( Ally with enemy vs enemy) you can fight with your enemy, on a normal battle, and then, your enemy that was with your ally will attack you, instantly.

Now again, this is going well off topic, the OP was about picking sides in neutral battles, I say yes! Very useful and not hard to do (I think xD), this 3-way battles was an idea, nothing more, nothing less.

 

[2Coats]

Hi there 2coats!

So you've found your way here too, eh?

Yep!  Big fan of the original - played it ad infinitum!

As for the argument about  joining in a battle.....

Firstly the option to attack either side should be present in  menu.  There may be instances where a player wants to repair the damage against his reputation with a lord or faction they are currently at loggerheads with.

Furthermore, Id like to see something akin to bandit kingdoms being createable by players who choose the dark side.  Imagine if the player could call upon deserters to fill their ranks.  Or lead a loose confederation of bandit groups..... most likely MODDED of course - then the player would want to choose if they attack brigands or not, if another faction is attacking them!

As for letting one faction win a battle and then the players close... well it would be kind of nice if MERC players where able to ask if a side would want to pay for some urgent assistance!  How else is my merc band likely to make mo' money!?!

I think expanding the current menu system will give MODDERS alot of potential but also add an extra dimension to roleplaying strategy as well.

Id agree that tactically most wise leaders would let two foes duke it out before stepping onto the field of battle.  But having a three-way could be oh so much more fun!