THE FOG OF WAR

[merlin]

IN rome t.w could the developers not include a device wherby the further a unit is away from the generals unit the greater the TIME lag is in carrying out the order.We already
have units that can attack without orders what about units that wont attack on time especially if they are v. far from general?
this certainly would add to the fog of war effect
and add a level of REALISM.perhaps the more elite the unit the less this fog of war factor would take effect ,but with peasants at distance anything could happen,what do you all think?
P.S This would certainly add to the importance of a general
especially if he is killed during game,perhaps further lag could be incurred if general is lost.THE IDEA OF A GENERAL BEING CLOSE TO MEN ALSO BECOMES CRUCIAL.

[Parmenio]

Creative's Assembly's game engine could be used to create a historically accurate simulator, but I don't think they'll do so.

I think that task will fall to a mod author if the source code is ever publically released.

[goscho]

Quote[/b] (Parmenio @ Aug. 24 2003,13:55)]I think that task will fall to a mod author if the source code is ever publically released.
Don't wait this at least in the next 5 years http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/confused.gif

[Gregoshi]

merlin, nice suggestions, but it is not simply a matter of introducing a delay based on distance and troop quality. Each unit would need a third level of AI: unit commander AI. In the current TW games, aside from the impetuous units, the units stand there and do almost nothing unless you tell them to. You could have a unit taken in the flank/rear by another unit that marched slowly from a long way off on flat, barren terrain. Your unit would do nothing even though you would think the unit should be able to turn around on its own and face the enemy approaching from the rear - and maybe even launch an attack on it

In addition to your suggestion, I'd like to see my army's units show a little initiative on their own, i.e., think. However, I know there are control freaks (meant with all due respect http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/pat.gif ) that don't want units going off on their own without orders. Some would even have issue with introducing a delay in orders. Having preference settings for these types of things would be nice, but I think the result of these setting would be two different games.

Interesting discussion folks.

[Monk]

Quote[/b] (Gregoshi @ Aug. 24 2003,23:47)]In addition to your suggestion, I'd like to see my army's units show a little initiative on their own, i.e., think. However, I know there are control freaks (meant with all due respect http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/pat.gif ) that don't want units going off on their own without orders. Some would even have issue with introducing a delay in orders. Having preference settings for these types of things would be nice, but I think the result of these setting would be two different games.

Interesting discussion folks.
It may be just me, but in the last three vids that were released i seem to remember seeing Roman Legions turn and face a nearby enemy unit. What i mean is, a unit of barbarians charged the unit the the left of another one. well the unit that was not in battle seemed to raise their sheilds and turn towards the battle.

So maybe CA is improving battlefield AI.

[Oaty]

Yes that is 1 thing I'd love is to see a unit turn to its most immediate threat as long as there isnt a unit right in front of him. I hate having a unit that is way out there that just got done chasing routers just stand there and get nailed in the back in the heat of battle. I can understand them not turning on there own when there is 1 huge battle in front of them but when it becomes 1 on 1 with no other threats of course they should turn towards that unit. I don't like using the pause button as it takes away one of the A.I.'s few advantage. Thats why in just about every battle I get 1 unit that gets mauled by an inferior unit. I really do'nt mind it if its 1 unit that getshammered by 2 inferior units because I did not catch there dilemma in time but to have a unit get smashed only because they just stood there and got nailed in the back really really really sucks

[Hakonarson]

Gregoshi there do sem to be a lot of cases where troops DID apparently sit there and do very little - Cannae, Chaerona spring to mind.

I think having them trun outwards to face an attack - when one is launched - would be fine, but that's all - preparing for it before it arrived would be too much - ancient officers were not there to manouvre their troops IMO, they were there to make their troops STAY in the right places within the formations.

I think having delays would make for a great game - it would REALLY put the acid on getting your timingright, but it might make teh game a bit difficult for newbies and recruits to the era, so I'd suggest that it would ned to be on a sliding scale with difficulty - no delay on the easiest up to a vaguely historical one on hard or similar.

[Gregoshi]

Hakonarson, standing and doing nothing is a valid option - especially with a poor general in command. But if the unit is commanded by a 4/5 star general, I wouldn't expect him to ignore an obvious threat to his unit or the army (unless a V&V says otherwise http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/cool.gif ).

I don't know, what is a realistic expectation of a cohort commander in such situations? How much freedom did they have? It just seems to me that if delays in orders are put in the game, the far-flung units must have some form of independence to react as necessary as a situation presents itself. Anyway, those are just my thoughts, right or wrong.

[merlin]

THANKYOU FOR THE REPLIES SUMMING UP I WOULD LIKE TO SAY

1.HISTORY IS FULL OF INSTANCES WHERE UNITS AND COMMAND FAILED TO CARRY OUT ORDERS

2.THE RANDOM MOVEMENT AND ACTIONS OS DISTANT UNITS WOULD HELP US TO FEEL THE FRUSTARTIONS OF THE ANCIENT COMMANDERS

3.THE AI INITIATIVE OF THESE UNITS MIGHT ALSO HELP THE PLIGHT OF THE GENERAL WHO CAN NOT SEE ALL AT ALL TIMES

4.LET THE FOG OF WAR HELP TO DECIDE THE OUTCOME OF BATTLE

5.GIVE ME LESS CONTROL http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

6.PERHAPS THIS COULD BE GIVEN AS AN ADDED OPTION WITHIN GAME OPTIONS

7.OTHER OPTIONS ATTRITION UPON ARRIVAL ON BATTLEFIELD
IE PICKING AND PAYING FOR 14 UNITS ONLY 13 SHOWING UP WHERES MY CAV?(OPTION AVAILABLE IN COMBAT MISSION)

[Vanya]

GAH

Vanya recalls the olde days... of Centurio. Remember the "ring" of effectiveness that a general had? He could only give orders to units within that "ring"? If the unit was outside, the general would have to move until the unit was within it to give it an order. The size of the ring grew with the general's command. So, the better the general, the wider his reach to give order out.

This sounds like what youz are reaching for...

GAH

http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/smokin.gif

[bhutavarna]

good suggestion merlin, it'll be very realistic.

but i can imagine the amout of frustration i'll get when my units do not react the way i want. there will be lots of keyboard pounding and head smashing. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

[merlin]

thanks vanya and bhut
1.vanya i think the game combat missions had the feature where fighting units were more effective ifthey stayed in contact with their officer,not general tho
2.bhut imagine the satisfaction of still winning a battle when your remoter unis fail to respond imagine the fun if a remote elie unit acted using a.i and swung the game,in your favour

3.i still think that we have too much control during the battle and would go further by saying that units should be given more complex commands at begining with units getting less commands and being more independent as the battle moves on.if changes to remote units plans were required why not a messenger unit
(2horse extremely fast)
remember the charge of the light brigade and the importance of the officer nolanand his messages.
ah well all good fun maybe total war after rome could employ some of these ideas

[Aide de camp]

I like all the ideas you're talking about but I don't think CA is going to be so REALISTIC. They've already said it's going to be more accessible to new players. There are some games that include some of those features but aren't very comercial.

Focusing on some ideas:
1.Generals could change orders in two ways: using the "ring" concept that reprents how far the general's voice can be heard; or dispatching messengers when units are out of that "ring". This messengers could be raiders from the general's unit, so general's could only send a limited number of messages (until he's alone in his unit).
Messengres could be killed if intercepted, making impossible to send orders to units surrounded by enemies.

2.Units standing and doing nothing: Units could be told before the battle, how to react aginst some situations. This wouldn't allow them to perform complex manouvers but could avoid waht Gregoshi said:


Quote[/b] ] You could have a unit taken in the flank/rear by another unit that marched slowly from a long way off on flat, barren terrain.

The number or complexity of reactions a unit's commander can remember would be determined by the commander's experience.

A game featuring unit reactions is Histwar http://www.histwar.com/ang/index_1806_2.php
Some battle scenes look like Shogun's.

[Murmandamus]

I like the ideas of command lag, messengers etc but didn't the Romans use large horns to send orders on the battlefield meaning that most messages would be instant?

http://www.roman-empire.net/army/cornicen.html

[merlin]

v.interesting murmand, i would expect that of all the factions it would be the romans who would have an answer for it,infact i saw on the programme what did the romans do for us ,a signalling system they used using flags raised
from a timber frame,
However, in the din and screams of battle i'm sure the
sound of the horns would be diminished,misheard,
misinterperated.
Imagine trying to fight and listen for horns
im sure these orders by horn would be for general movements i.e advance retreat etc etc,not move ,wait, then flank?
The romans were advanced in their organisation but what of the level of orders given by the gauls or other factions
,i doubt wether these units could give or take complex battlfield orders LET ALONE CARRY THEM OUT AT ONCE.

[Parmenio]

Historically, signals such as horns or otherwise were used in conjunction with simple pre-prepared plans, but even so most battles were still some from of organised chaos, with units advancing too quickly, too slowly, or not at all, or charging/pursuing rashly against/without orders.

Such was the difficulty in organising open battles, that at times there was almost a form of agreement between opposing sides to give battle in a arranged and 'proper' manner, were too much tactical fighting would be seen as cowardly or dishonourable.