ToranagaSama
07-17-2005, 06:27
Unless I'm seriously mistaken, the Roman "dogs of war" were used to hunt down -- literally -- fleeing troops after the battle that were trying to hide from the victorious side.
I was reading some old threads and came across this quote from Doug-Thomson (Senior Member)
You know he's right.
I was thinking that in order to bring more realism to the Dogs of War, the *Fleeing* code needs to be re-worked. Perhaps, the first instinct for fleeing units s/b to *hide*; and, to stealthily work there way to freedom by exiting the map.
Of course, the degree to which a unit would engage in this hide/stealth behaviour would be dictated by the availability of Objects useful for hiding/stealth; AND, the degree level of any Pursing troops.
If pursing troops are right on a unit's heels, then going into hide/stealth mode is a bad idea.
The proximity and activity of enemy (victorious) troops in relation to the fear level of a fleeing unit along with the proximity and capablity of Objects; objects would included, trees, rocks, backside of hills, gulleys, etc.
Of course, battles in or near large forests would have the greatest potential for hiding and stealthy Fleeing.
As the games eixts, I have and I know many have won battles where the enemy units have fled, BUT you still don't get the Victory screen, because somewhere someplace there's a unit or the remants of a unit lost or hiding(?) and the game clock is ticking away. Often, it takes awhile to track that unit(s).
This is the perfecf scenario for the Dogs of War. Dogs s/b coded to have *bloodhound* capabilities or something approximating such. Won a Victory, or so you would think, but the no Victory screen. Let your Dogs loose to slowly *hunt* down the fleeing hiding scragglers.
Well, that's just some thoughts I had. To me it gives the Dogs a more purposeful role, rather than the present gimmicktry/eye candy sort of role.
A lot of behaviour coding to achieve this, but it'd be worth it, no?
BTW, anyone have any ingenius or unintended ways they've used the Dogs of War?
I was reading some old threads and came across this quote from Doug-Thomson (Senior Member)
You know he's right.
I was thinking that in order to bring more realism to the Dogs of War, the *Fleeing* code needs to be re-worked. Perhaps, the first instinct for fleeing units s/b to *hide*; and, to stealthily work there way to freedom by exiting the map.
Of course, the degree to which a unit would engage in this hide/stealth behaviour would be dictated by the availability of Objects useful for hiding/stealth; AND, the degree level of any Pursing troops.
If pursing troops are right on a unit's heels, then going into hide/stealth mode is a bad idea.
The proximity and activity of enemy (victorious) troops in relation to the fear level of a fleeing unit along with the proximity and capablity of Objects; objects would included, trees, rocks, backside of hills, gulleys, etc.
Of course, battles in or near large forests would have the greatest potential for hiding and stealthy Fleeing.
As the games eixts, I have and I know many have won battles where the enemy units have fled, BUT you still don't get the Victory screen, because somewhere someplace there's a unit or the remants of a unit lost or hiding(?) and the game clock is ticking away. Often, it takes awhile to track that unit(s).
This is the perfecf scenario for the Dogs of War. Dogs s/b coded to have *bloodhound* capabilities or something approximating such. Won a Victory, or so you would think, but the no Victory screen. Let your Dogs loose to slowly *hunt* down the fleeing hiding scragglers.
Well, that's just some thoughts I had. To me it gives the Dogs a more purposeful role, rather than the present gimmicktry/eye candy sort of role.
A lot of behaviour coding to achieve this, but it'd be worth it, no?
BTW, anyone have any ingenius or unintended ways they've used the Dogs of War?