Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Post
  • Reply
Kanos
Sep 6, 2006

was there a time when speedwagon didn't get trolled
It's funny because docking your archers is always a terrible idea that dramatically reduces their ability to shoot for some reason.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

AAAAA! Real Muenster
Jul 12, 2008

My QB is also named Bort

Hunt11 posted:

Thing is I have played 3k a lot and did have a lot of fun with sieges as the defender. As the attacker though anything past like turn 15 or so they all go the same with artillery just slowly moving up and tearing through everything before sending in the troops to clean it up.
Thats fair. Its probably just personal preference on my part. Part of it is that I think you can do sieges without artillery better. If you have cav you can send them to the other side of the city to draw some defenders that direction while your infantry take the walls and that kind of stuff that really doesnt work in WH3.

Hunt11
Jul 24, 2013

Grimey Drawer

AAAAA! Real Muenster posted:

Thats fair. Its probably just personal preference on my part. Part of it is that I think you can do sieges without artillery better. If you have cav you can send them to the other side of the city to draw some defenders that direction while your infantry take the walls and that kind of stuff that really doesnt work in WH3.

Fair enough. Personally if I was to take anything from 3K it would be to make them more willing to take field battles and actually attack settlements much sooner instead of just waiting them out.

AAAAA! Real Muenster
Jul 12, 2008

My QB is also named Bort

Hunt11 posted:

Fair enough. Personally if I was to take anything from 3K it would be to make them more willing to take field battles and actually attack settlements much sooner instead of just waiting them out.
Yeah this would be A #1 for me too. I dont want the AI to be suicidal but it would be nice if it was less chickenshit. Its there to be an interesting opponent, not to be annoying as gently caress, and I frequently find that it is being annoying as gently caress.

Ulio
Feb 17, 2011


Gonkish posted:

New CM is going to drown in a tide of reddit nerdrage, unfortunately. I do not envy their position. That said, reddit is populated almost entirely by manchildren, so I guess the CM was expecting this, to an extent.

Ya I actually don't remember total war community being this pedantic before but I guess the mix of warhammer fans + total war fans is something special. I do get the game is not in the perfect state but you should know by now that big game launches rarely in good state. You want to play early, you pay full price and wait for upates/patches to improve the experience. That's just how game dev works these days.

Azran
Sep 3, 2012

And what should one do to be remembered?
I'd either have the AI not be able to rebuild towers while enemy troops are in near proximity (to keep from needing a unit dedicated to bringing down towers), significantly increase the cooldown before you can build again if the tower is destroyed, or, as a more extreme measure, have towers be already constructed without being able to rebuild them, just upgrade them.

ErKeL
Jun 18, 2013
I think a global thing I'd like to see is the AI follow the same rules I do more often. I'll accept they'll generally need a cheeky extra card under the table to compete but it shouldn't be as painfully obvious as it has been.

Towers are kind of a weird mechanic. It would be cooler if you could just drop siege weapons/archers on walls or points of interest.

The main boost they could do is make towns less of a poo poo show to trudge through. You can feel it right at the beginning on deployment how hosed the maps are and how hard it is to find room in streets to deploy and move your troops. The engine doesn't work well in narrow corners.

Ra Ra Rasputin
Apr 2, 2011
I really really hate the building barricades and towers mid-fight concept, both from a gameplay sense and a logical sense, like oh yeah just gonna materialize a barricade and tower right on top of the enemy army and immediately start shooting out of it.

pre-battle barricade building is good however and can help you decide the flow of battle in your settlements.

Tiler Kiwi
Feb 26, 2011

Kanos posted:

It's funny because docking your archers is always a terrible idea that dramatically reduces their ability to shoot for some reason.

Putting Iron Hail Gunners on dockable barricades and sticking some peasant spearman nearby to intercept any unit trying to tear down the barricades is about the only way to let those guys score ridiculous kill counts.

AAAAA! Real Muenster
Jul 12, 2008

My QB is also named Bort

Ra Ra Rasputin posted:

I really really hate the building barricades and towers mid-fight concept, both from a gameplay sense and a logical sense, like oh yeah just gonna materialize a barricade and tower right on top of the enemy army and immediately start shooting out of it.

pre-battle barricade building is good however and can help you decide the flow of battle in your settlements.
This 1000x

Ra Ra Rasputin
Apr 2, 2011
Demon magic creating a giant pus bubble on top of my army to make space for the mecha-spider demons to run in? fine and dandy.

Wooden tower materializing out of thin air? my immersion is ruined.

Dr Kool-AIDS
Mar 26, 2004

Ulio posted:

Ya I actually don't remember total war community being this pedantic before but I guess the mix of warhammer fans + total war fans is something special. I do get the game is not in the perfect state but you should know by now that big game launches rarely in good state. You want to play early, you pay full price and wait for upates/patches to improve the experience. That's just how game dev works these days.

I do think it's true that a lot of game launches these days are borderline early access, but 1) it's reasonable for people to be annoyed by that even if it's very common, and 2) I think it's still particularly grating in this instance because it's the third game in the series, and there's a lot of poo poo that just flat out works worse than it has in 2 in a long time. I don't think it was crazy to expect this to be more polished/less busted at launch even if someone did assume there would be some inevitable issues.

Staltran
Jan 3, 2013

Fallen Rib

Ra Ra Rasputin posted:

I really really hate the building barricades and towers mid-fight concept, both from a gameplay sense and a logical sense, like oh yeah just gonna materialize a barricade and tower right on top of the enemy army and immediately start shooting out of it.

pre-battle barricade building is good however and can help you decide the flow of battle in your settlements.

Barricades can't finish if an enemy (or your own troops) is standing on top of it, though. (Actually sometimes towers can't either, I've had to move a unit to let a tower finish before. It was one of the settlements the Kurgans spawn near, the one with a roughly circular settlement with four entrances that's two distinct halves with the key building at the high ground on one half and a supply point on the other. I had everyone at the high ground supply point and the tower was stuck at 0 seconds left until I moved a unit farther from it.)

dogstile
May 1, 2012

fucking clocks
how do they work?
I think i'd actually be fine if I had to assign a unit to go build a tower, at least then it feels less bullshit when the AI does it.

Props if for the barricades the unit had an animation pulling chairs and poo poo out of houses for barricades.

Panfilo
Aug 27, 2011
Probation
Can't post for 5 days!

Kanos posted:

It's funny because docking your archers is always a terrible idea that dramatically reduces their ability to shoot for some reason.

There's some weirdness with line of sight going on with those dockable areas. My own suggestion was to have the immediate area in front of them permit projectiles through so long as you're docked, and let them fire 'downward' inversely proportional to range (so something like pistol kossars could hit enemies hugging the walls but Strelsi could not).

Twigand Berries
Sep 7, 2008

The Sea of Dread sporting some intense algae blooms today.

Half the pathing problems are the barricades popping up during the battle. I've watched the AI bait out part of a unit outside a barricade and then the second I attack it, it jumps back behind it, and now my unit thinks it needs to walk 20 miles in the other direction to get at that unit. Should default to attacking the barricade but that is beyond CA it seems.

Ulio
Feb 17, 2011


Sinteres posted:

I do think it's true that a lot of game launches these days are borderline early access, but 1) it's reasonable for people to be annoyed by that even if it's very common, and 2) I think it's still particularly grating in this instance because it's the third game in the series, and there's a lot of poo poo that just flat out works worse than it has in 2 in a long time. I don't think it was crazy to expect this to be more polished/less busted at launch even if someone did assume there would be some inevitable issues.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KjmjqlOPd6A

Avasculous
Aug 30, 2008

ErKeL posted:

I think a global thing I'd like to see is the AI follow the same rules I do more often. I'll accept they'll generally need a cheeky extra card under the table to compete but it shouldn't be as painfully obvious as it has been.

It has been a rule in Total War games for a long time that the AI has no clue what's going on and difficulty level determines how much it gets punished for this.

IDK if this is still true, but in prior games the AI did not know about attrition and would gleefully traipse through corrupted lands. On Easy, it would take normal attrition damage and melt while on Legendary, it would take like 5%.

I think this can be ok and even expected to an extent. I think what annoys me about it is the pretending we are playing the same game, like having a bunch of abilities to hurt the enemy economy when the AI gets its stuff out of thin air.

dogstile posted:

Props if for the barricades the unit had an animation pulling chairs and poo poo out of houses for barricades.

Slaneshi barricades are spanking benches, St. Andrew's Crosses, and bottoms.

Avasculous fucked around with this message at 16:42 on Mar 16, 2022

AAAAA! Real Muenster
Jul 12, 2008

My QB is also named Bort

Ra Ra Rasputin posted:

Demon magic creating a giant pus bubble on top of my army to make space for the mecha-spider demons to run in? fine and dandy.

Wooden tower materializing out of thin air? my immersion is ruined.
My thoughts exactly!

Dandywalken
Feb 11, 2014

Wonder if those tower timers are moddable yet

dogstile
May 1, 2012

fucking clocks
how do they work?

Ra Ra Rasputin posted:

Demon magic creating a giant pus bubble on top of my army to make space for the mecha-spider demons to run in? fine and dandy.

Wooden tower materializing out of thin air? my immersion is ruined.

We're not talking about how realistic it is, we're talking about the AI having functionally infinite resources being kind of annoying. I feel the same way about all of those "gently caress over the ai on the world map" abilities that don't work because the AI doesn't obey the same rules we do.

A Perfect Twist
Aug 15, 2007

"What have I done? I'll have to start again. To forget and to disappear. I'll head north, far-north, to that big question mark, the Northern Territory"
I took a level one bastion army supported by an army of four units and defeated a full stack and half of chaos because of dragging them through level 4 towers. Towers are all right by me.

AAAAA! Real Muenster
Jul 12, 2008

My QB is also named Bort

A Perfect Twist posted:

I took a level one bastion army supported by an army of four units and defeated a full stack and half of chaos because of dragging them through level 4 towers. Towers are all right by me.
I dont think anyone is saying they should be removed entirely. The issue is them being able to built mid-battle at all, and the AI building them on cooldown.

ErKeL
Jun 18, 2013

Avasculous posted:

It has been a rule in Total War games for a long time that the AI has no clue what's going on and difficulty level determines how much it gets punished for this.

IDK if this is still true, but in prior games the AI did not know about attrition and would gleefully traipse through corrupted lands. On Easy, it would take normal attrition damage and melt while on Legendary, it would take like 5%.

I think this can be ok and even expected to an extent. I think what annoys me about it is the pretending we are playing the same game, like having a bunch of abilities to hurt the enemy economy when the AI gets its stuff out of thin air.

Slaneshi barricades are spanking benches, St. Andrew's Crosses, and bottoms.
Yeah exactly. I can accept it but a lot of the time I have all these cool abilities and I'm chilling there like, "this doesn't actually do anything against the AI does it?"

Panfilo
Aug 27, 2011
Probation
Can't post for 5 days!

AAAAA! Real Muenster posted:

I dont think anyone is saying they should be removed entirely. The issue is them being able to built mid-battle at all, and the AI building them on cooldown.

While I agree it's annoying, I do find it nice that the game gives me an incentive to get up off my rear end. If pathing and LOS weirdness wasn't as big an issue then I think this would be a little more manageable.

jokes
Dec 20, 2012

Uh... Kupo?

I’d like to have a lot more starting supply for sieges

AAAAA! Real Muenster
Jul 12, 2008

My QB is also named Bort

Panfilo posted:

While I agree it's annoying, I do find it nice that the game gives me an incentive to get up off my rear end. If pathing and LOS weirdness wasn't as big an issue then I think this would be a little more manageable.
Yeah I think its one of those things that personal preference has a lot to do with it. I personally cant stand it but I can also understand if someone doesnt mind it.

ErKeL
Jun 18, 2013

jokes posted:

I’d like to have a lot more starting supply for sieges
This would be tops. My defensive battles always end the same with me pulling my forces back to the centre and going all in on the last point's tower so it can do insane damage. Actually being able to spend on the other fortifications would be cool.
I think the capture points are awkwardly placed where most defensive walls can be ignored and destroyed when your opponent captures a point so they end up valueless except for the last one which they can't grab.

Funky See Funky Do
Aug 20, 2013
STILL TRYING HARD

AAAAA! Real Muenster posted:

I dont want the AI to be suicidal but it would be nice if it was less chickenshit.

I wouldn't mind the AI being suicidal as long as it has a full stack. I've got vague memories from Rome 1 where the AI would attack with a couple of peasant units and that sucks, but as long as there's a full army then they should just go for it no matter the odds.

We play these games to have battles not to pass turns waiting for the AI to build siege equipment or to chase them around the map.

jokes posted:

I’d like to have a lot more starting supply for sieges

I'd like for siege maps and settlement battles to go. It's been, what, 12 years now? They can't get the AI to work and they're never ever going to. They're fine for multiplayer but they don't and have never worked in campaign. Scrap 'em. Make some defensive terrain battles where the defender starts out with a good position near a choke point or something.

I know it'll never happen from CA's side but maybe someone can mod them out.

DeadFatDuckFat
Oct 29, 2012

This avatar brought to you by the 'save our dead gay forums' foundation.


You can edit how much supplies buildings will give you. In the data.pack, db > building_effects_junctions_tables. Sort by "Effects" and you'll see a lot of entries for wh3_main_effect_building_settlement_initial_supply_points with the value 1000, and you can change it to whatever. The effects for the other defensive buildings that can increase supplies is right under those using the the effect wh3_main_effect_building_settlement_supply_points.

jokes
Dec 20, 2012

Uh... Kupo?

Funky See Funky Do posted:

I wouldn't mind the AI being suicidal as long as it has a full stack. I've got vague memories from Rome 1 where the AI would attack with a couple of peasant units and that sucks, but as long as there's a full army then they should just go for it no matter the odds.

We play these games to have battles not to pass turns waiting for the AI to build siege equipment or to chase them around the map.

I'd like for siege maps and settlement battles to go. It's been, what, 12 years now? They can't get the AI to work and they're never ever going to. They're fine for multiplayer but they don't and have never worked in campaign. Scrap 'em. Make some defensive terrain battles where the defender starts out with a good position near a choke point or something.

I know it'll never happen from CA's side but maybe someone can mod them out.

Yeah, honestly giving defenders a choke point is a more than sufficient advantage. Add a tower or two and it’s gonna be similarly insurmountable with even a token Garrison.

They can even have the choke point be presented as a ruined part of a wall, so the defenders are protecting the invaders who are attacking through a “breach” in a massive wall. Towers are still firing the whole time, of course.

Like, every Warhammer game shows exactly that playing out: a bunch of humans get chopped up by orcs or chaos demons or whatever that break a hole in a wall and invade through it.

Vashro
May 12, 2004

Proud owner of Lazy Lion #46
my settlement battle strat is to wait and blast a hole so I can jam 19 gorgers through it

Funky See Funky Do
Aug 20, 2013
STILL TRYING HARD
My strategy is to set the difficulty to easy, auto resolve it, and then set it back to VH.

Actually I made a dark elf mod for WH2 where they were kind of fun in a non-challenging way. I set all the dark elf tower projectiles to be a stronger version of the Medusa projectiles with a big explosion radius. So all the towers would shoot these evil purple laser beams that would devastate an army before it even got to the walls but I only did that because I was sick of settlement battles and it's at least kind of fun to sit back and watch units get destroyed like that.

AAAAA! Real Muenster
Jul 12, 2008

My QB is also named Bort

Funky See Funky Do posted:

My strategy is to set the difficulty to easy, auto resolve it, and then set it back to VH.
Amen to this. Its the one great aspect of AR being tied to difficulty. I dont do it all the time but its nice that its an option if the AR is being stupid. Like a Decisive Victory with low casualties still leading to the annihilation of one of my units.

edit: I wonder if CA has the ability to see the stats about the number of people that lower the difficulty to AR a battle then switch it back...

Fuligin
Oct 27, 2010

wait what the fuck??

AAAAA! Real Muenster posted:

Amen to this. Its the one great aspect of AR being tied to difficulty. I dont do it all the time but its nice that its an option if the AR is being stupid. Like a Decisive Victory with low casualties still leading to the annihilation of one of my units.

edit: I wonder if CA has the ability to see the stats about the number of people that lower the difficulty to AR a battle then switch it back...

hundreds of hours and i never knew you could do this

AAAAA! Real Muenster
Jul 12, 2008

My QB is also named Bort

Fuligin posted:

hundreds of hours and i never knew you could do this
Its only game 3, if helps you feel any better.

Captain Beans
Aug 5, 2004

Whar be the beans?
Hair Elf

Funky See Funky Do posted:

I wouldn't mind the AI being suicidal as long as it has a full stack. I've got vague memories from Rome 1 where the AI would attack with a couple of peasant units and that sucks, but as long as there's a full army then they should just go for it no matter the odds.

We play these games to have battles not to pass turns waiting for the AI to build siege equipment or to chase them around the map.

I'd like for siege maps and settlement battles to go. It's been, what, 12 years now? They can't get the AI to work and they're never ever going to. They're fine for multiplayer but they don't and have never worked in campaign. Scrap 'em. Make some defensive terrain battles where the defender starts out with a good position near a choke point or something.

I know it'll never happen from CA's side but maybe someone can mod them out.

Did you play 3k? siege battles worked pretty well in that game, the AI was fun to play against. I’m never going to say the AI was “good” because it doesn’t need to be good, just fun to play against.


Edit: they could solve two problems at once by making the AI defense towers pre built in different variations. That way you could have the same map, but with a different experience depending on how that variant has its towers laid out. Let the AI build barricades mid match thats fine.

Captain Beans fucked around with this message at 20:05 on Mar 16, 2022

Chucat
Apr 14, 2006

Avasculous posted:

It has been a rule in Total War games for a long time that the AI has no clue what's going on and difficulty level determines how much it gets punished for this.

IDK if this is still true, but in prior games the AI did not know about attrition and would gleefully traipse through corrupted lands. On Easy, it would take normal attrition damage and melt while on Legendary, it would take like 5%.

I think this can be ok and even expected to an extent. I think what annoys me about it is the pretending we are playing the same game, like having a bunch of abilities to hurt the enemy economy when the AI gets its stuff out of thin air.


Yeah that latter point is one of the reasons why I just have absolutely no qualms about cheesing this game at any and all times. There's no point trying to be cute and do things like "Use my agents to tank public order and spread corruption and gently caress up their finance" because one AI settlement can support 2-3 armies and fight off an assault and essentially ignore corruption to the point you're better off just smashing 3 doomstacks into it and siege cheesing it over 1-2 turns.

Incientally, part of me does want to try some sort of Easy/Normal VC campaign where you just spread by doing corruption and forming revolts and see how good/bad it is.

Staltran
Jan 3, 2013

Fallen Rib

AAAAA! Real Muenster posted:

I dont think anyone is saying they should be removed entirely. The issue is them being able to built mid-battle at all, and the AI building them on cooldown.

Doesn't the AI actually ignore the cooldown, often starting to rebuild a tower the second it's destroyed? If the AI actually respected the... 2 minute? cooldown the player gets when a tower it's destroyed, the tower spam would be greatly reduced since a tower would pop back up 210 seconds after destruction, not 90.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

AAAAA! Real Muenster
Jul 12, 2008

My QB is also named Bort

Staltran posted:

Doesn't the AI actually ignore the cooldown, often starting to rebuild a tower the second it's destroyed? If the AI actually respected the... 2 minute? cooldown the player gets when a tower it's destroyed, the tower spam would be greatly reduced since a tower would pop back up 210 seconds after destruction, not 90.
Oh yeah, derp, thats what I meant but I worded it wrong. I meant "cooldown" as in "the second it gets blowd up it comes right back" but you got it right.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply