https://forums.elementalgame.com/393123

Overhaul of the combat system using mostly stats already in the game with a couple others.

I have a similar thread here:

https://forums.elementalgame.com/395918

Agree entirely with OP.

And I certainly hope that Brad's AI comment doesn't mean that they won't change it because the AI couldn't handle it.

My hope is that they spend a little bit of time making easy improvements to tidy the game up and release all these little improvements as patches, THEN they step back and spend a lot of time making a complete rethink of various broken or poor mechanics and release a huge patch which brings the game up to what it should have been.

Note however that I don't think this necessarily means complexity. Arguably the current combat system is too simple but the solution isn't to add lots and lots of stats to make it more complex... meaningful choices and sensible outcomes with the simplest and most logical system is probably the goal.

Of course. It doesn't have to be ULTRA complicated to be entretaining. Most of the suggestions I'm posting come from other games, and they have really simple, but fun combat systems, after all.

This thread has lots of great ideas for the improvement of the game, some of those I had myself.

But what amazes me is that since the beggining of the development of this game I hear one big thing: "this game will be the ultimate game to mod!".

So here's my question: can't we mod this game into a better AI and implement the new combat ideas?

Becouse if we can't do that, there are a lot more games that didn't make any fuss about being "the ultimate game to mod" that can have the combat system and the AI tweaked by mods, the biggest of them being Civilization IV.

Things like what AI consider important, what kind of strategy to implement based on resources around you and the peculiarities of your civilization, what to do when facing a stronger opponent, how to judge if the opponent is stronger... all this can be tweaked according to your will and according to anything you add that wasn't in the core game (meaning the original AI won't even recognize the new stuff you've added if you don't change it to).

So far I didn't see any projects of players for improving the lamme AI of the game or to change the combat system themselves, so that concerns me a lot and makes me believe that it can't be done by a mod.

So back to my question: can't we mod this game into a better AI and implement the new combat ideas?

For the AI at least - probably not extensively until it's opened up into Python code - though there seems to be some xml that deals with the AI so maybe there's something that could be done.

Combat model - no idea there. Will have to hunt the xml to see if I can see anything.

While I support the modding community of all games 100%, things like these should be fixed in the vanilla game. Only lazy companies like Bethesda make their fan community fix their games.

I wish I played the games you played where the stock AI was as good as the modded AIs. Or so good that modding the AI isn't even a thought

He's actually right. AI is one of the most "Organic" parts of a game, and it's also one of the hardest thing to tweak.

Usually you want to build the AI around the features. I'm no expert, but many modded AI are just a shifting around of "weights", that effectively happen to improve the game, while we are talking about modding in stats the AI wouldn't even be aware of.

Correct me if I'm wrong, because I'm not 100% sure about this...

The combat system is not flawed, it's broken. In addition to that there are too few unique units and special abilities - it looks like Warcraft 2 all over again in terms of faction differences. Guess they wait for book 3 in order to produce something like GC2 TA. I expected more. Anyway, I bought the LE after release in order to gave them a chance.

Well, AI is hard to code, but most companies at least try. Companies like Bethesda don't even try, so that's what I was going to with my post. Sure, not all companies get AI right, in fact, only a few can do it well (Stardock being one of them, the AI in GalCiv II was ruthless, not sure about their other titles though), but as long as it turns out decent at the least, and it doesn't need to be fixed by modders, it's fine with me.

MP is suppose to come out this week.  This will be when the "Stats hit the fan".  I'm guessing with the current build, most people will retreat the majority of the time if they are outclassed by ATK.  There will be no strategic options (nor Magical/Spell options) to give you any hope of winning otherwise.  It's not like you can outthink, out maneuver, flank, or counter you opponent's stratagies, so what is the use of fighting unless there's a cat playing against you.

Just use the MOM system.

nuff said.

Look, I love MoM as anyone, but really, I don't think that would be doable atm. I've seen a lot of your posts around stating they should "just redo MoM" and, while I agree that a 2010 version of that UberClassic would rock, it's clear that SD has other plans for this particular game.

I'm not atacking you or anything, just pointing out that what you ask won't be happening, probably.

it won't be happening, at all. Stardock tried to purchase the rights. They were denied, possibly because the right-holders were planning on making their OWN remake in some crazy point of time in the future. 

Yes, a FPS, probably  (/sarcasm)

Nope

Foul Play on Senior[gamers].

There's no scripting bindings in the game for modders yet, so no. You can tweak values to change priorities on the current AI and do some things with the combat system (there is a dodge stat), but you can't rewrite the AI or change how attack vs defense works.

Sorry but that's not a HELL OF A LOT of people compared to 70000 copies sold+. That's not even a smidgen of a handful and many of those posts are by the same people twice thrice and more times.

When you have a poll of 70000 players who bought the game then come back and tell us you found a HELL OF A LOT of players who disagree. Everyone knows most of the posters on forums are the whinners and criers and boohooers and I don't see 70000 of them here.

Plus just because YOU think it will never be truely fun doesn't mean it won't for the MAJORITY and that's all that matters.

To developers: postpone the AI, make game mechanics reasonable and playable and feed us at least a multiplayer version, and then focus on your holy-cow AI

I don't see much of I in AI at the moment, btw. And yes, fireballing fire giants in the first turn is a flaw that can not be fixed by improving AI.

So please please please, decrease AI priority.

Not to mention the improved AI won't work if game mechanics are changed.

As a developer myself, I see a very simple solution for early stages of mechanics change.

For example,  for AP instead of combat speed and separation of damage and toHit, make AI take into account, say, weaponDamage*0.5 + (avgApCost - waponApCost)*0.25 + (weaponToHit-avgToHit)*0.25, where only damage was used before.

For bows range penalty, add another modifier like (avgRange - bowRange)*0.1

Or even better, calculate average damage wielder unit (or some measure unit) would do with this weapon in 100 turns of combat (for bows - with target moving towards the shooter).

There's always a way to convert new many values to older few

We actually almost have all the base stats we need; from an earlier post:

Attack = Chance to hit.

Damage = Damage dealt when an attack lands.

Defense = Chance to avoid getting hit.

Resistance = Chance to avoid getting hit by spells.

What we actually have is.

Daring = Chance for attack damage not to be reduced. (Attack Skill)

Attack = Damage dealt (Damage)

Dodge = Chance to avoid getting hit. (Defense skill)

Defense = Reduction in damage taken (physical and spells i think) (Resistance)

I just think the attack and defense numbers get out of hand and the dodge and daring numbers are not used enough.  The main difference between the two systems would then be that in the former the attack and defense skills are directly opposed. Where as in the latter the chance to be hit is in the defenders hands, where as the attackers skill determines if he gets past the defenders armour.

Combat speed should rarely get altered and instead the movement point cost should be employed more as a penalty (especially with heavy armours). For example being on a horse should not increase the number of attacks you get, but should increase how far you can move. Likewise holding a sword should not make you move further.

Of course I have no idea if the AI would take proper advantage of the modified stats even though they already exist in the game.

I agree that the 1DN is a little annoying though. Though if I am right in thinking how squads work now it isn't quite as bad as it was.

Thanks for all the guys who answered my question about the current possibility of AI tweaking and combat system revamp by a mod.

I think the lack of those in a game that was advertised as the ultimate modable game is quite sad.

It would be even if the AI rocked. We freak players always find some new weird strong strategies that developers had no idea of, and it's nice to implement the AI to behave like that if the conditions are met.

Heretic?