Is based on the cavalry danger but in order to act it has to have a stance: all out attack is a stance situation, only neutral or TC\player controlled officer are a no-stance situations.
What I am saying is that the decision to form square should not be influenced by the brigade stance. It should only be influenced by the perceived danger to the battalion. This can be influenced by the experience, morale, fatigue and close order values of the battalion. But the brigade stance should not be part of the calculation.
When not in a fight it determines the brigade destinations on the base of own proper objectives, when in fight it assigns the Play, so it assign them a place along the line and a Order (hold to the last, --- all out attack, which generates or change a stance) to every brigade.
So the division commander does set the brigade stance. Your first post made it sound as if that was not the case.
I can make this march and I will make Georgia howl.
What I am saying is that the decision to form square should not be influenced by the brigade stance. It should only be influenced by the perceived danger to the battalion. This can be influenced by the experience, morale, fatigue and close order values of the battalion. But the brigade stance should not be part of the calculation.
This has been the design choice for the AI of game according to the same choice done in Gettysburg: use of stance for the situations and never use skills values directly only columns from unitattributes.csv. Of course modding you can change how you prefer.
So the division commander does set the brigade stance. Your first post made it sound as if that was not the case.
No I meant the player cannot set the stance of all brigades pressing the button stance of division commander, but a Division Play is not a user decision is a automatic reaction.
This has been the design choice for the AI of game according to the same choice done in Gettysburg: use of stance for the situations and never use skills values directly only columns from unitattributes.csv. Of course modding you can change how you prefer.
That made sense for ACW battles as all units behaved the same. Only the training level was different. But in the European wars that was not the case. The ability to successfully change into different formations was very much dependent on the unit's experience. A militia unit would be barely able to form a square and could certainly not move while in it. A guard unit had no such problems.
This is why I am requesting that a function be created to access the oob numbers in the AI code.
I can make this march and I will make Georgia howl.
This is why I am requesting that a function be created to access the oob numbers in the AI code.
I have already open a ticket for Norb about this.
That made sense for ACW battles as all units behaved the same. Only the training level was different. But in the European wars that was not the case. The ability to successfully change into different formations was very much dependent on the unit's experience. A militia unit would be barely able to form a square and could certainly not move while in it. A guard unit had no such problems.
I agree but the standard AI game cannot manage this directly, AI must logically only take decisions, like a player, checked against hardcoded implicit or explicit limits having as base the csv files. A limit for the AI must works also for the player, exactly like for the charge button. The minimal number of men I set is already a forced logic I don't like but it was for avoid to have macro-gaps squares, I hope to insert this limit in the hardcoded part soon and delete it from the AI part, like to extend the set of values present in the csv for increment the complexity
I agree but the standard AI game cannot manage this directly, AI must logically only take decisions, like a player, checked against hardcoded implicit or explicit limits having as base the csv files. A limit for the AI must works also for the player, exactly like for the charge button. The minimal number of men I set is already a forced logic I don't like but it was for avoid to have macro-gaps squares, I hope to insert this limit in the hardcoded part soon and delete it from the AI part, like to extend the set of values present in the csv for increment the complexity
The goal is to have the AI behave in a manner that resembles a human decision making. So when the AI orders a unit into square or a player pushes the Form Square button, the AI will look at several variables to decide if the unit can successfully form a square and how long it will take before it is in square and safe from a cavalry attack. However, you may code this decision very different from how I would do it. The same may be true as to how many men I think are necessary to form a square. Perhaps I would want to code the AI to reform the square when it reaches 200 men. It would be smaller or maybe a triangle, but it would still function as a square. Moving that decision to the hardcoded part prevents me from doing that.
I can make this march and I will make Georgia howl.
I would move the check function not the full code and the limit value would remain in a csv file changeable not in the code like now, you can be always free to add additional control in the AI code. In any case the alternative set of actions will remain in the AI in the form:
If (cansquare(base))
else if
otherformation
else if
.....
Place a limit valid only for the AI and not for the player is not coherent
I find the SOWW AI to be just fine and very active. Any confusion or chaos on the battlefield surely simulates real-life very well.
I agree.. I don't really have a dog in the fight here since I'm a developer and it's not fair to offer an opinion on these kinds of things. But I just don't see any of these issues reported in this thread, and I've played the game more than I'd like to admit. You have to remember this is a completely different game than SOWGB, and not just an ACW re-skin.
Last edited by Little Powell on Thu Jul 23, 2015 7:37 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Look at the brigade in the following pictures, also look at the French unit its facing. Now to my mind the smart thing to do would be to deploy in a line (perhaps with a second line) and fire volleys into the Frogs.
Instead it did what you see above, stacked units on top of each other and constantly milled around using a fraction of its fire power. It actually lost the fight despite outnumbering the enemy considerably.
I dont see this behaviour in SOWGB, far from it. Whilst I agree its not perfect, its far better than the above.
Squid, the KS group has begun working on the problem of units moving in line everywhere. The latest version 1.08, is the first real step. More units will move and even fight in column of division. Moving in that formation makes pathing much easier. It's an ongoing process but progress on this front is being made.
I can make this march and I will make Georgia howl.
