Author Topic: Joining battles at 99% especially siege ones.  (Read 854 times)

Andre

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 365
  • Karma: +2/-2
  • Constant boredom
    • View Profile
Re: Joining battles at 99% especially siege ones.
« Reply #15 on: May 29, 2017, 09:01:17 AM »
If the battle preparations really are only preparations, then it would be very easy to just break the siege and run away when you spot those enemy forces. But you can't do this, once you attack you are stuck, even though people are saying that its only the preparation phase.


Though I don't think there is anything wrong with what happened.

De-Legro

  • M&F Dev Team
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3109
  • Karma: +105/-54
    • View Profile
Re: Joining battles at 99% especially siege ones.
« Reply #16 on: May 29, 2017, 09:27:22 AM »
If the battle preparations really are only preparations, then it would be very easy to just break the siege and run away when you spot those enemy forces. But you can't do this, once you attack you are stuck, even though people are saying that its only the preparation phase.


Though I don't think there is anything wrong with what happened.

Yes Tom explicitly made it so that choosing to start/join battle has no means of escape. In his words he wanted choosing to fight to carry risk.
He who was once known as Blackfyre

Constantine

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 257
  • Karma: +19/-10
    • View Profile
Re: Joining battles at 99% especially siege ones.
« Reply #17 on: May 29, 2017, 12:16:02 PM »
It is a compromise. If we didn't delay battles and allow others to join, super active and coordinated realms would have even more of an advantage then they have now. Realms need the time to march to assist each other, and it can advantage both side of the conflict.

I don't see the logic. Poorly coordinated players usually have no chance to get to the battle in time no matter if waiting time is one hour or eight hours. And if they were already nearby assist action should have them covered. For super active players long preparations give an extra edge though because they can pull all kinds of tricks outlined by Weaver in his write-ups.
[/size]

Also realistically against stonewalls, even the first numbers given were not a sure victory.
Maybe reinforcements that arrive as the combat is already in progress should not be allowed to enter settlement/use fortifications. A constructive suggestion for a change.

willy

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 88
  • Karma: +1/-2
    • View Profile
Re: Joining battles at 99% especially siege ones.
« Reply #18 on: May 29, 2017, 02:34:01 PM »
Lol, I think this is where my character didn't last a week. Mistaken for a girl, named for a madman...sleep well poor Orestes.


I popped out a bit in front of the town and thought I could block two traveler's at once. Looks like it only caught one (40v200). I assume they both crossed my blockpath, but it looks like blocking only involves 1armyv1army. Captured guy seemed to do the same thing with same results almost right on top of me.

It is possible to block travel around a town. I'm not entirely sure how the mechanics on it work (if someone knows or finds out, please tell me) but it should be possible.

I 'tested by mistake' blocking travel in-to-outside of a town at one point. Had a bandit blocking travel around a town and I'm pretty sure it auto-engaged when I tried to leave gate.
« Last Edit: May 29, 2017, 02:36:10 PM by willy »

De-Legro

  • M&F Dev Team
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3109
  • Karma: +105/-54
    • View Profile
Re: Joining battles at 99% especially siege ones.
« Reply #19 on: May 29, 2017, 02:56:34 PM »

I don't see the logic. Poorly coordinated players usually have no chance to get to the battle in time no matter if waiting time is one hour or eight hours. And if they were already nearby assist action should have them covered. For super active players long preparations give an extra edge though because they can pull all kinds of tricks outlined by Weaver in his write-ups.
[/size]Maybe reinforcements that arrive as the combat is already in progress should not be allowed to enter settlement/use fortifications. A constructive suggestion for a change.

And between poorly co-ordinated and hyper active is the rest of the player base, those that come online to find a battle started at their rally point 2 hours ago etc. The really active realms don't need the timer, they arrive enmass at the same time and can join the battle almost immediately.
He who was once known as Blackfyre

Constantine

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 257
  • Karma: +19/-10
    • View Profile
Re: Joining battles at 99% especially siege ones.
« Reply #20 on: May 29, 2017, 04:09:14 PM »
those that come online to find a battle started at their rally point 2 hours ago
Military Aid action.

De-Legro

  • M&F Dev Team
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3109
  • Karma: +105/-54
    • View Profile
Re: Joining battles at 99% especially siege ones.
« Reply #21 on: May 29, 2017, 10:59:27 PM »
Military Aid action.

Sure, if you want to remove entirely your ability to decide and analyise before joining a battle.
He who was once known as Blackfyre

Demivar

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 136
  • Karma: +1/-0
  • Purveyor of cunning plans.
    • View Profile
Re: Joining battles at 99% especially siege ones.
« Reply #22 on: May 30, 2017, 02:25:06 AM »

Yes this is assuming it wasn't 99% done, are the siege engines only constructed in the last 1% of the battle preparations? This is what I mean by 600 men marching through the siege lines right at the end of a battle as if nothing at all is going on. You totally missed my point here mate. Like this actually makes me think you didn't read my post at all. I said I was fine with losing, its just these circumstances are illogical. We were encamped outside the town, circling it for days in game. We obviously built siege engines during the 99% of time that we were there. Being able to just march in and get defensive bonuses doesn't make sense. If you think that I'm not sure how you reached that conclusion. They might be able to attack us from behind sure, but march through the siege line without a battle? Arnheim is no Antioch, we surrounded that baby easily. Come on.


I'm totally fine with losing  ;D  most of the time that is what happens in this game, for me at least. Its just these circumstances are kind of ridiculous.


I did read your post fully and I do get where you're coming from. The mechanics aren't perfect, and it does lead to things that can be a bit weird (which is why the Rage Zone exists, and it's being used correctly). I just thought that I'd try to provide an alternate perspective to the events to try to show an alternate path of logic. You're a sound player, and I fully believe you, you've been calm and controlled and it's nice to see. The game is abstracted to a preparation/"upcoming battle" phase and the combat itself. Whilst thinking about it directly can seem like it's quite silly, in the simplest form of the game's abstraction the reinforcements were delayed, but not by enough to prevent men from getting to the defences in time.


The contingent of the Dark Forest troops that were assigned to blocking and harrying were swept aside, and I guess that they can be considered to be the perimeter forces. M&F's system is designed to be functional in battles themselves, but I do get how a lot of things seem counter intuitive and illogical if you take it literally. Thankfully, Decius was only wounded, so less harm was done than there might have been otherwise.
22:34 - Roran Hawkins: Radovid's like you
22:34 - Roran Hawkins: but then insane
22:34 - Roran Hawkins: Dijkstra is like you

Constantine

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 257
  • Karma: +19/-10
    • View Profile
Re: Joining battles at 99% especially siege ones.
« Reply #23 on: May 30, 2017, 11:13:38 AM »
Another constructive criticism: if the entire time until the actual resolve is considered to be just "preparation" then I see no value or logic in attacker not being able to disengage when he sees a 1000 men enemy reinforcements arriving and marching through countryside for 8 bloody hours (1+ ig days!).
« Last Edit: May 30, 2017, 12:23:33 PM by Constantine »

De-Legro

  • M&F Dev Team
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3109
  • Karma: +105/-54
    • View Profile
Re: Joining battles at 99% especially siege ones.
« Reply #24 on: May 30, 2017, 11:45:56 PM »
Another constructive criticism: if the entire time until the actual resolve is considered to be just "preparation" then I see no value or logic in attacker not being able to disengage when he sees a 1000 men enemy reinforcements arriving and marching through countryside for 8 bloody hours (1+ ig days!).

Tom was clear on his reasoning for that. Attacking or choosing to join a battle has to carry more risk then being forced into battle by the other side. Originally no one could disengage from battle.
He who was once known as Blackfyre

Constantine

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 257
  • Karma: +19/-10
    • View Profile
Re: Joining battles at 99% especially siege ones.
« Reply #25 on: May 31, 2017, 02:11:54 PM »
I think it is important to realise that while the initial ideas were sound (attacker is somewhat disadvantaged, preparation time allows more people to join) current implementation is pretty bad. If you decided to attack, you turn into a sitting duck for 8-14 hours, which means an active realm can turn this battle into a disaster for you. I don't understand how anyone can claim this system is actually beneficial to casual players. If there are casual players around, please tell us how often disengagement ban+day long preparation time helped you and how often it led to your obliteration.

willy

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 88
  • Karma: +1/-2
    • View Profile
Re: Joining battles at 99% especially siege ones.
« Reply #26 on: May 31, 2017, 02:22:02 PM »
That makes sense. Attackers initiate and are committed to an action, defenders have a chance to disengage since they haven't committed soldiers to an order. Abstract 'preparation time' and it probably would take almost a day to prep, position, fight, and then disengage a battle of hundreds. If nothing else, just imagine that it's custom to get a good night's rest right before proper fighting.

pifmage

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 23
  • Karma: +7/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Joining battles at 99% especially siege ones.
« Reply #27 on: June 02, 2017, 02:17:58 AM »
I think it is important to realise that while the initial ideas were sound (attacker is somewhat disadvantaged, preparation time allows more people to join) current implementation is pretty bad. If you decided to attack, you turn into a sitting duck for 8-14 hours, which means an active realm can turn this battle into a disaster for you. I don't understand how anyone can claim this system is actually beneficial to casual players. If there are casual players around, please tell us how often disengagement ban+day long preparation time helped you and how often it led to your obliteration.


I think this whole system is in place to ensure that one random dude doing random stuff can't do much harm against an organized force, thus if you want to wage war you'll have to coordinate with your allies (if you have any) and encourage interaction between realm-mates, if you could willy-nilly attack someone and disengage as soon as you see reinforcements closing on you, there'd be way more random aggressions than we already see, and the fact that starting something actually endangers you if you're the one on the offensive should ensure that you consider nd weight the benefits and how prepared you are before trying to mess with someone.

Demivar

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 136
  • Karma: +1/-0
  • Purveyor of cunning plans.
    • View Profile
Re: Joining battles at 99% especially siege ones.
« Reply #28 on: June 02, 2017, 10:03:24 AM »
Mm. You're also forgetting the idea of feint spamming. If one could disengage at will, they could rinse and repeat the same process over and over again until the circumstances are perfectly in their favour. I don't want to have to react so frequently, nor would I enjoy it if wars were prolonged to a mess of constant engage/disengage, it'd be tiring and not fun.


If you attack, you are setting up a "confirmed" battle. If the other side doesn't evade, there will definitely be a battle of some scale at a certain spot around a certain time. This actually benefits less active players, as they know that if they can get to the battle, there will be a battle. Feint-spamming favours the active and dedicated, and perhaps even worse it's just boring.
22:34 - Roran Hawkins: Radovid's like you
22:34 - Roran Hawkins: but then insane
22:34 - Roran Hawkins: Dijkstra is like you

Constantine

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 257
  • Karma: +19/-10
    • View Profile
Re: Joining battles at 99% especially siege ones.
« Reply #29 on: June 02, 2017, 10:28:00 AM »
I think this whole system is in place to ensure that one random dude doing random stuff can't do much harm against an organized force
Bollocks. It actually ensures that one random dude with twenty characters can absolutely destroy an organized force consisting of many players. I mean, have you ever waged wars against Stonedman for example? You have and you got your ass whooped because the system gave him enough time to coordinate and being a casual player you couldn't use that same time to your advantage at all.
To actually level the field joining and disengaging should be more flexible. Battles should be province-wide in terms of joining and last maybe 6 hours but not 12.




Feint spamming is not even an issue if you give a disengaging attacker a regroup timer.
Another important change is to make all disengage cost something. Yes, you managed to disengage from the battle but you will still lose troops. Sometimes a lot of troops, if enemy's party comprises of faster troops.