1.3 RTW Comments

[Red Harvest]

16. Wardogs still pose absurd difficulties, because they still can't be targeted directly. So on VH, where they have plenty of morale they just keep killing and killing in AI hands. They are non-sensical anyway, so it looks like I need to mod them out once again. GRRRR!!!!

[player1]

Interesing.
I thought that first time in BI factions that have them make sense.

[Kraxis]

I have actually found wardogs to be less of an issue now.

They take 2 turns to train (didn't it use to be 1 turn?), the handlers need to get a whole lot close to release their little pets and the dogs aren't as powerful or numerous as before. I thought I was bright to bring some with me on rebelhunting against Steppe Raiders... Well, that turned out to be a resounding failure of the dogs.

They couldn't even deplete a single unit of enemy archers despite suffering no losses to archery.

And the AI doesn't use them in important capacity as far as I have noticed.

[Teleklos Archelaou]

Can anyone tell me if 1.3 fixed the coastline bug? Where in a battle-map the water close to the coast was turned into a big flat dirt plain? This wasn't there in vanilla, but was introduced with 1.2. I would think 1.3 would fix it, after all the complaining about it, but I haven't had time to try 1.3 out yet and was really curious about this one point in particular. Can anyone answer that?

[Puzz3D]

Can anyone tell me if 1.3 fixed the coastline bug? Where in a battle-map the water close to the coast was turned into a big flat dirt plain? This wasn't there in vanilla, but was introduced with 1.2.

I've been watching for this problem, and haven't seen it in RTW v1.3. However, I've only fought a few battles near the coast.

[Red Harvest]

I've been watching for this problem, and haven't seen it in RTW v1.3. However, I've only fought a few battles near the coast.

I think the coastline bug is gone. I haven't seen it yet. The Roman AI hasn't been as likely to attack my coasts in 1.3 so I haven't had as many battles along there.

[Sleepy]

I think the coastline bug is gone. I haven't seen it yet. The Roman AI hasn't been as likely to attack my coasts in 1.3 so I haven't had as many battles along there.

I've fought a number of battles on the coast with no glitches with the coastline.

[Red Harvest]

I have actually found wardogs to be less of an issue now.

They take 2 turns to train (didn't it use to be 1 turn?), the handlers need to get a whole lot close to release their little pets and the dogs aren't as powerful or numerous as before. I thought I was bright to bring some with me on rebelhunting against Steppe Raiders... Well, that turned out to be a resounding failure of the dogs.

They couldn't even deplete a single unit of enemy archers despite suffering no losses to archery.

And the AI doesn't use them in important capacity as far as I have noticed.

The impact is primarily morale/flanking/enemy in the rally area. While they didn't seem to kill very rapidly, their ability to insta rout units already in combat and then enter the rear (insta routing a bunch of others) was decisive. If I could target them, it would be manageable. With them causing havoc and running wild in the rear without the opportunity to engage them or keep them out of the rear, I'm crying "foul." The morale hit is too great on VH. Having one unit of wardogs effectively cause the rout of an entire army is BS.

[Puzz3D]

The morale hit is too great on VH. Having one unit of wardogs effectively cause the rout of an entire army is BS.

Well it can't be right at medium difficulty and also right at very hard. Dogs are a nuisance at medium, but haven't been a decisive factor in any battle I've had.

[Red Harvest]

Well it can't be right at medium difficulty and also right at very hard. Dogs are a nuisance at medium, but haven't been a decisive factor in any battle I've had.

I don't doubt that, VH makes them more of an exploit for the AI. Similar for the flaming arrows. On VH, the AI loves those stupid flaming arrows. It can see the morale and knows when to go after units with them. While I applaud it for making a good decision with its archers for a change, it is in essence making super weapons out of a non-historical use of flaming arrows. Immersion killer. Might as well have Zeus throwing thunderbolts at my army, or maybe Sponge Bob Square Pants annoying them to death.

I wouldn't mind the dogs so much if they could be directly confronted, or there weren't 3 or 4 sets of them in each AI stack at times--eliminating the counter of shooting them to death at range before they release. Druids and Screeching women don't bother me as much.

[gardibolt]

I have actually found wardogs to be less of an issue now.

They take 2 turns to train (didn't it use to be 1 turn?),

Wardogs have been 2 turns to train since 1.0.

[Kraxis]

Wardogs have been 2 turns to train since 1.0.

Heh... Ok. I never used them much, and prolly never will.

[Red Harvest]

Per the lack of missile unit/skirmish unit effectiveness by the AI: it is DEFINITELY a huge problem in the campaign. The AI can't use its ranged units as much more than a nuisance.

Example:
In my Carthaginian campaign on VH/VH, I've had a string of consecutive battles with archers where the archers tried to attack my melee units in melee. My standard mode of operation whether sallying or fighting open field is to put my Balearic slingers in front, backed by spears, then swords, with cav on both wings and general in the rear.

How does the AI handle this? Well, in two back to back battles vs. the Julii, the Romans have had the reforms and are pumped up with early cohorts, archer auxilia, light auxilia, and other auxilia, as well as onagers, scorpions etc. I'm stuck fielding Libyan spearmen, spanish/barb mercs, Balearics, and round/long shield cav in this section of Gaul. In the 1st battle the force ratio was 3:1 in favor of the AI according to the slider (similar number of men, but their stats were WAY better.) The AI actually outnumbered me in the archer auxilia vs. balearics category in several battles. Yet in 3 battles it killed only about 20 Balearics, and most of those were from the 1st battle where I got caught unprepared by an onager.

So what do you think the AI did? Did it: A) Put its archers in front and engage my ranged units with the superior range (170) of the auxilia vs. balearics (120.) B) Hold its archers in the rear cutting the balearics down out of range. C) Rush its melee units forward en masse avoiding the ranged combat altogether. D) Backup the army for a while, then advance 1 archer unit at a time against my 3 partial units of Balearics, allowing the archers to be cut to shreads, sometimes sending a few melee/cav units forward in a piecemeal attack supported by more archers attacking as melee infantry.

If you guessed D you get the prize.

Of course, with its overwhelming force, the AI withdraws a distance when I sally. In doing so, it lets me pepper it with Balearics shooting into the rear of its moving men. It also leaves the slow moving onagers/scorpions/ballistae unprotected vs. my cav. Fortunate, since I don't have a counter to the onager at the moment.

I'm not doing anything gamey. I'm just moving out the front gate and using a logical deployment: missiles/spears/swords with cav on flanks and general in the rear/center.

The openfield battles are a bit different in that a mass rush by the AI is the norm. Again, the AI fails to directly engage my long ranged units with its own long range missile units before charging my lines. The archers have a tendency to engage in melee as they are moving forward in melee support role, rather than seeking good missile engagement range.

The AI is giving up one area where it should be on close to even ground: head to head missile exchanges. I'm not doing anything gamey, simply putting the ranged units in front so that they make 1st conatct.

This is as broken as the AI's failure to use pila.

[Puzz3D]

The AI is giving up one area where it should be on close to even ground: head to head missile exchanges. I'm not doing anything gamey, simply putting the ranged units in front so that they make 1st conatct.

This is as broken as the AI's failure to use pila.

I'm sure it could be improved, but unlike the pila problem the ranged unit AI works the way it was designed to work. It's not going to seek out an even exchange. It's going to attempt to shoot at units more valuable than enemy ranged units if they are present. The AI definitely rushes exposed enemy skirmishers. I think it uses cavalry for this if available, but it does use skirmishers as well possibly because they are fast moving. Maybe if skirmishers didn't run so fast the AI wouldn't use them to rush. I know in MP that shooting enemy melee units is what players try to do, and they try to neutralize enemy ranged units by charging them with cavalry.

The change in v1.2 to reduce friendly fire casualties causes the AI to stop shooting if its target engages in melee which can lead to ranged units not shooing at anything. I've seen this with my own ranged units which are on fire-at-will. I think that's good otherwise ranged units would be shooting into the backs of their own men.

Since no one in a ranged unit can shoot until all the men stop moving, an AI ranged unit can take a lot of casualties as it marches forward to a shooting location. I noticed in archer vs archer tests in custom battle, that this causes the AI to loose every shootout. So, if you set the AI up to engage enemy ranged units it would loose almost every time.

One thing I notice about the AI is that it doesn't take into consideration possible losses due to ranged fire. It's decision to charge is apparently being made only on a comparison of melee combat stats and possibly unit speed.