Historic Battles for EB?

**QuintusSertorius** · 04-07-2008, 10:43

I went to the trouble of checking (having never actually looked before) to see what there was, and there are precisely two in 1.0.

Has anyone put any thought into doing some more historical battles for EB? Are they a difficult thing to do? Would anyone be interested in playing them?

**keravnos** · 04-07-2008, 11:05

There will be more.

**Tellos Athenaios** · 04-07-2008, 11:37

Quite a few were simply not yet ready by 1.0, but in 1.1 you should have a much wider selection...

**bovi** · 04-07-2008, 11:40

Are they a difficult thing to do?

Yes. Scripting the AI to not do its usual thing and botch everything up is really hard.

**Lysander13** · 04-07-2008, 13:17

@bovi
BTW, thank you for the thorough explanation regarding the rebellion CTD in that other thread.

Regarding historical battles:

Perhaps this is a futile question considering the known limitations of the Battle AI but I'll ask it anyway. Why is the AI so horrible with historical battles? This is not an EB specific thing of course just a generality that applies in general IMO. One can go thru the trouble of setting up the initial deployment formation that is to be used by the combatants and come pretty close to the formations that were actually used in that particular battle based on a description let's say. Relatively speaking of course. However, once the battle actually begins it is a complete and utter mess. It makes the standard Battle AI Formations seem like Hannibal Barca by comparison. Will the battle scripts help with this? How effective is this script? How do the commands work in the script? Has anyone ever attempted to reference one of these battle scripts in descr_formations_ai.txt file in some fashion that of course would be custom written to fit the file it was being referenced by? Of course this hypothetical custom battle script would have to reside in the data folder where the ai formations file exist. Just curious if the compiler would acknowledge it there?

**QuintusSertorius** · 04-07-2008, 13:29

There's another limitation of the AI related to morale and lethality; namely that some of the tactics used, like those by Hannibal at Cannae, are impossible in the RTW engine. His centre would simply have been shattered and the wings would run away before doing their work.

**Lysander13** · 04-07-2008, 16:05

Originally Posted by QuintusSertorius

There's another limitation of the AI related to morale and lethality; namely that some of the tactics used, like those by Hannibal at Cannae, are impossible in the RTW engine. His centre would simply have been shattered and the wings would run away before doing their work.

Yes of course. Those kind of tactics would require a quick thinking, fast clicking human player, if at all. I was of course strictly speaking of working within the known limitations of the Battle AI as far as the end user is concerned and was curious if anyone has ever tried using a battle script to be referenced by the descr_formations_ai.txt file....in some fashion. In the same manner that descr_battle references a script in some historical battles. Perhaps to aid in flanking cavalry movements and such. More than likely not possible. Just curious if anyone has actually tried it.

**bovi** · 04-09-2008, 09:04

Originally Posted by bovi

Scripting the AI to not do its usual thing and botch everything up is really hard.

So yeah, the script says that the cavalry is supposed to go that way instead of charging into the first spearmen to come its way. Then it's a problem to take into account all the stuff that can happen to it underway, such as being slowly cut to pieces from behind.

**Matinius Brutus** · 04-09-2008, 10:19

I tried Zela last night. Awsome!!!!Kudos to Eduorius!!! Thank you man!
I took a look at Carrhae(sp?) and got scared to try it out. Seemed Impossible. But than again, Imbossible is nothing!

**QuintusSertorius** · 04-10-2008, 16:57

I've got a minor criticism on the historical battles: namely the composition of the Roman forces for Telamon, Metaurus, Cynocephalae and others. They're all-Roman, or only featuring a token allied component. Historically (and presumably at the battle in question, too) half of a Roman army was composed of allies, and not just cavalry and skirmishers.

Especially given the rich variety of allied troops available in the Romani campaign, I would have expected to see them represented amongst those armies.