Suicide Bandits During Quest

Users who are viewing this thread

If bandits running out from invisible quest area is an issue, it can be solved by just flagging every group that enters it as a valid quest target. That way player can't just kill random bandits on the other side of the map on one hand and on the other he doesn't have to worry about not catching them inside the quest zone.
It just wouldnt be enough to make the quest worthwhile.The quest takes time to complete, time that could be used more productively on other activities. The opportunity cost of that quest is, more often than not, just too high to be worth it.

The current implementation cuts that cost down abit; which is ofcourse one way to improve it. I mean, you could also just have dramatically increased the reward for the quest.

Even so. Even with the new implementation, my personal reaction when I encounter that quest is pretty much "arghh ffs, not that one"
 

hruza

Knight at Arms
Your logic is flawed because you're taking this whole "hand-holding" business into its extreme, while it's not even there yet. The dumbed down pathfinding only happens in the quest, and as you said yourself, the quest is not even that frequent.

This is just one of the QoL things that makes the game more convenient for the player, which is a good thing in general. Why would you make the game unnecessarily inconvenient? Because inconvenience = difficulty and thus skills?

When did dumb AI became convenient in games? See, this is what I am trying to point out. To defeat purposefully dumb AI is not fun. At last not sort of fun that I had in pervious MB games. Fun in the game only comes with challenge.

So what is challenge and fun in chasing down somebody that does not run from you and lets player catch him on purpose?

I don't see the problem. It's one of those smaller grind missions where you just do it for the renown, rewards and other stuff. It's meant to be fairly straightforward and easy to get done with.

Yes, but it doesn't meant to be dumb, does it? You are meant to hunt down bandits. What's the point of hunting them if they let you catch them on purpose?

It makes no sense and it's immersion breaking. It's like competing in the race where all other competitors are chained to the start line.
 
Last edited:

Grank

Sergeant Knight at Arms
WBNWVC
When did dumb AI became convenient in games? See, this is what I am trying to point out. To defeat purposefully dumb AI is not fun. At last not sort of fun that I had in pervious MB games. Fun in the game only comes with challenge.

So what is challenge and fun in chasing down somebody that does not run from you and lets player catch him on purpose?
A difficult chase is hardly a part of what makes this game fun. It's the combat, campaigning and role playing. One could argue that a difficult chase actually hinders those. There's no interesting mechanics in a chase to make it a fun challenge either. Unless you're tryharding that party of looters into that little valley way over that corner for 5 minutes (which by itself is lame as hell), it's only decided by your party size, scouting points and dumb luck (another party scares it into your direction).

Besides, at the end of the chase, you'll only be fighting those 10 bandits with your 100 men party, which is lame. Why am I using such a huge gap in my example? Because if your party size is anywhere close to your target the chase wouldn't be difficult at all.
 

hruza

Knight at Arms
A difficult chase is hardly a part of what makes this game fun. It's the combat, campaigning and role playing. One could argue that a difficult chase actually hinders those. There's no interesting mechanics in a chase to make it a fun challenge either.

You are roleplaying leader of a war party that accepted quest to chase down bandits that harass local villagers. Why accept quest to chase something if you are not interested in chase?

You can literally assign one of your companions and few soldiers to do it for you if you are in it only for a reward. The only reason you would ever accept this quest yourself is if you like to do it yourself. It's not like game does not offer an easy way to solve the quest already, so why dumb down the quest for those players who actually want to go through it?

Why am I using such a huge gap in my example? Because if your party size is anywhere close to your target the chase wouldn't be difficult at all.

Well that's the point, isn't it? You can either recruit a huge army and go conquer the kingdom, or you can keep your party small an mobile and go solving petty issues of some dirty villagers. And given that you usually solve petty issues of some dirty villagers so that you can recruit a huge army to fight wars of nobles, it actually doesn't exclude one another. It's a normal progression of the game.

And then even when you already lead huge army and conquer lands, you can still send your companion with handful of soldiers to solve petty issues of dirty villagers for you. Now that you have huge world conquering army, you can afford to have 7 soldiers leave for a week to chase bandits.
 
Last edited:

Grank

Sergeant Knight at Arms
WBNWVC
You are roleplaying leader of a war party that accepted quest to chase down bandits that harass local villagers. Why accept quest to chase something if you are not interested in chase?
I'm interested in killing the bandits and helping the villagers, not the chase.

You can literally assign one of your companions and few soldiers to do it for you if you are in it only for a reward. The only reason you would ever accept this quest yourself is if you like to do it yourself. It's not like game does not offer an easy way to solve the quest already, so why dumb down the quest for those players who actually want to go through it?
I want it done quick because I'm often at war. I have a fixed amount of companions, and I don't recruit fighter types. The leader types are already leading their own parties.

Well that's the point, isn't it? You can either recruit a huge army and go conquer the kingdom, or you can keep your party small an mobile and go solving petty issues of some dirty villagers. And given that you usually solve petty issues of some dirty villagers so that you can recruit a huge army to fight wars of nobles, it actually doesn't exclude one another. It's a normal progression of the game.

And then even when you already lead huge army and conquer lands, you can still send your companion with handful of soldiers to solve petty issues of dirty villagers for you. Now that you have huge world conquering army, you can afford to have 7 soldiers leave for a week to chase bandits.
If I can't be arsed to chase down small bandit parties for miles, what makes you think I'll want to garrison most of my men in a fief, go around in a small mobile party, crippling my fighting power for that duration, just to walk around aimlessly for a specific quest to appear, and having to go back to grab my men again later?
 
I want it done quick because I'm often at war. I have a fixed amount of companions, and I don't recruit fighter types. The leader types are already leading their own parties.
Yeah, this is actually a bit of a problem. The number of companionslots you have available just doesnt lend it self to having spare companions for that type of activity.

I have virtuelle never been in a situation where I have had a companion available that match the skill requirements of the quest in question and that I can spare. Its a good idea on paper but not really practical.
 

hruza

Knight at Arms
I'm interested in killing the bandits and helping the villagers, not the chase.


I want it done quick because I'm often at war. I have a fixed amount of companions, and I don't recruit fighter types. The leader types are already leading their own parties.


If I can't be arsed to chase down small bandit parties for miles, what makes you think I'll want to garrison most of my men in a fief, go around in a small mobile party, crippling my fighting power for that duration, just to walk around aimlessly for a specific quest to appear, and having to go back to grab my men again later?

Well you can't have a cake and eat it too.
 
When did dumb AI became convenient in games? See, this is what I am trying to point out. To defeat purposefully dumb AI is not fun. At last not sort of fun that I had in pervious MB games. Fun in the game only comes with challenge.

You always defeat purposefully "dumb" AI in games. If AI wasn't purposefully "dumbed down", you wouldn't win a single fight, let alone play the game for more than two minutes out of frustration.

The reason I put dumb in brackets, is because this isn't really about the AI, and it's arguable that you can even call it that. There wouldn't be some new intelligent fleeing mechanic in place to react dynamically to. You'd just do the exact same thing with them as you do with all other parties that are at or at a lower speed level than your party. If you couldn't catch them, tough luck, but the only thing that actually accomplishes is setting you up to do more menial grind later.

I really shouldn't let myself be baited into these weird flexing contests when people consistently mistake inconvenient, time-wasting grind for some sort of difficulty. But I really gotta wonder how on earth going to some castle, or disbanding a bunch of your troops, or artificially limiting your party size ahead of time and then clicking on an enemy party that's now slower than you is a challenge?

Unless, of course, you've never done the quest before and you're totally unsure if you could do it when they run away. Then it really might be a test of skill, or a challenge, if you will, and I apologize.
 
I tested this out a bit tonight and I don’t think it’s that bandits aggro towards the player. Instead it’s like they lose their aversion to the player. The continue on about their paths (not hightailing it towards the player). And that makes it easier to catch. Which, well, is fine.
 

hruza

Knight at Arms
You always defeat purposefully "dumb" AI in games. If AI wasn't purposefully "dumbed down", you wouldn't win a single fight, let alone play the game for more than two minutes out of frustration.

AI been dumber then HI doesn't mean that it's done on purpose.

I really shouldn't let myself be baited into these weird flexing contests when people consistently mistake inconvenient, time-wasting grind for some sort of difficulty. But I really gotta wonder how on earth going to some castle, or disbanding a bunch of your troops, or artificially limiting your party size ahead of time and then clicking on an enemy party that's now slower than you is a challenge?

Unless, of course, you've never done the quest before and you're totally unsure if you could do it when they run away. Then it really might be a test of skill, or a challenge, if you will, and I apologize.

That's literally almost every other quest in the game: Go there, do that, follow this, pickup that, find it, bring it back, deliver it there...
 

Gadheras

Regular
Don't worry. They made it up to you...

In Beta 1.5.10...

Once the enemy flee, you can't issue any commands to your units. So later stage in the game, when those bandit parties become bigger, and if you want to fight them manual, it will be up to you alone to chase them down when they flee, unless you just issue an all charge right from the start and hope some of your units will keep chase.

Quests that involve killing bandit parties doesn't accept "part of a bandit party". So enjoy keep enter fights with remains over and over. Or just have to auto resolve any fight that involve such. Which in most cases would be more "deadly" for your own units.
 

Apocal

Grandmaster Knight
Once the enemy flee, you can't issue any commands to your units. So later stage in the game, when those bandit parties become bigger, and if you want to fight them manual, it will be up to you alone to chase them down when they flee, unless you just issue an all charge right from the start and hope some of your units will keep chase.
Hmm? I've been able to tell my men to charge once the enemy start fleeing in 1.5.10.

edit: Oooooh, you mean after the complete rout begins? Yeah, that's strange. I don't know why they took away the ability to command your troops then.
 
Last edited:
Do you know reason for this change? It makes no sense.
It is clear you are to blame:wink:

They figured out that players use looters to level up low level troops and went:

"Hey that will not do, there should be a risk involved! How can we solve this? I know! Make it so tedious to do that players will autoresolve instead so we can secretly kill off some of the elite units!"


Maybe they just figured out that they couldnt solve the "how many knights does it take to ride down one fleeing looter problem" and decided to resolve the problem by removing the option entirely.
 

Gadheras

Regular
It is clear you are to blame:wink:

They figured out that players use looters to level up low level troops and went:

"Hey that will not do, there should be a risk involved! How can we solve this? I know! Make it so tedious to do that players will autoresolve instead so we can secretly kill off some of the elite units!"


Maybe they just figured out that they couldnt solve the "how many knights does it take to ride down one fleeing looter problem" and decided to resolve the problem by removing the option entirely.

Keep losing cav on auto resolve when doing all these silly bandit quests for villagers get annoying af... consider the time it take to train them up. You can still train up fresh recruits vs bandits, just they not very good at chase down fleeing units.
 
Keep losing cav on auto resolve when doing all these silly bandit quests for villagers get annoying af... consider the time it take to train them up. You can still train up fresh recruits vs bandits, just they not very good at chase down fleeing units.
Thats what I mean by the "how many knights does it take to ride down one fleeing looter problem".

I am sure others than my self have been on the verge of throwing stuff at the screen in rage over watching your brave band of knights chase a looter across the map only for him to escape in the end.
 

hruza

Knight at Arms
It is clear you are to blame:wink:

They figured out that players use looters to level up low level troops and went:

"Hey that will not do, there should be a risk involved! How can we solve this? I know! Make it so tedious to do that players will autoresolve instead so we can secretly kill off some of the elite units!"


Maybe they just figured out that they couldnt solve the "how many knights does it take to ride down one fleeing looter problem" and decided to resolve the problem by removing the option entirely.

Well, then I have a proposition that can solve that too :wink: https://forums.taleworlds.com/index.php?threads/leveling-stronger-opponent-logic.442664/
 
Top Bottom