Has Anyone from EB Taken a Look at this Fix?

[mcantu]

I found this in the Scriptorium and am curious if EB has checked into whether this fix really works or may already be incorporated into EB...

https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showp...84&postcount=1

Finally!

Only now ...in the end....this came to a fix. But it is never late than never.
During my tests in my preparation for my patch 8.1 for DarthMod I came to some very valuable knowledge about the usage of some stats in EDU file

-stat_charge_dist
(Beside its common sense usage it is actually the value given to foot missile units to determine the distance from where they can begin the AI projectile attack approach!)
-stat_fire_delay
(Its value is interpreted more by me like the median of AI number of ticks to calculate the cycle between 2 attacks hard coded AI routines(projectile or melee)

At the moment I write these lines I have not much time to write a lot of things so I will come later here for more specifications.

So about the foot missile defense fix...

-Archers/Slingers need

-stat_charge_dist=approx double and less (For example if range is 120 then set to 200-250), the value of the range of their weapon. Generally give value>=range of weapon
-stat_fire_delay=zero (=important!...CA gave some value here in BI units with devastating effect to the AI.Do NOT give even minus value here!)

-Javelineers need
-stat_charge_dist=Can be set to a really large value (5x-7x their missile range>=range of weapon)
-stat_fire_delay=minus (-50000) - (-70000) ...this makes them fire in very good and realistic rate against approaching opponent. You can leave them and they will do their work effectively now even in corners of their map (They will not be trapped now!!!)

-Siege weapons need
-stat_charge_dist=range of their weapon
-stat_fire_delay=zero (Important!)


What is the outcome in all this?
When AI now defends will effectively use its foot missile units than wander with them.
And not only this...the general behaviour of the units is a lot better when used by the AI. It seems that the stat_fire_delay value helps them to group units more distinctively and not mess them all together.

Not only this!

-General Cavalry settings
-stat_charge_dist=in my mod I give very large setting in this (approx 100 - 300 m) according to kind of cavalry.
-stat_fire_delay=minus large values (approx (-90000) - (-450000!)

Specifications:
-(Mobile light cavalry / with projectiles)
-stat_charge_dist=(150-200)
-stat_fire_delay=minus large values (approx (-150000) - (-350000) (according to armour)

-(medium/heavy cavalry )
-stat_charge_dist=(90-400) (In BI lancers I give the max, in very heavy cavalry with much staying power I give the min.)
-stat_fire_delay=minus large values (approx (-90000) - (-450000) (according to armour and character of unit)
For melee cavalry I give approx (-90000) - (-190000) for special elite units with much charge I give above -200000, and....
most importantly!....general cavalry units get the max in the whole game...I give -350000 in RTW and -450000 in BI.
This makes them almost impossible to catch the AI general to a fight as he cleverly engages and disengages.

-(Elephants)
-stat_charge_dist=approx 100 (may change this to get the exact value of their projectile range if they have...will test)
-stat_fire_delay=approx 100000. Not only this makes them heavy enough to change directions all the time but makes their missile tower units
to fire more realistically decisive volleys...you must increase their projectile attack after this .

-(Chariots)
-stat_charge_dist=approx 200
-stat_fire_delay=approx 100000. Not only this makes them heavy enough to change directions all the time but makes their missile to fire more realistically decisive volleys...you must increase their projectile attack after this .


-Melee Infantry
-Short weapons (sword-axes-short spears etc.)
-stat_charge_dist=varies (For example I give to barbarian units large values to have a realistic thunderous charge effect and smaller to heavier civilized units.)
-stat_fire_delay=fixed 5000 to all (helps AI to group units together and not do isolations..for example I gave the same value even to germanic
phalanxes bcs all their units must have the same or else AI groups them individually and messes things up.If you give minus value the unit becomes to behave like crazy skirmisher and does not melee too much. But can be used maybe for certain troop types like woad warriors)

-Phalanxes
-stat_charge_dist=1-2 (very small value for fix of the tossing effect and also for the AI to stop wandering with them). They get more static.Avoid giving zero or minus values bcs it creates unorthodox phalanx moving and crazy single troop isolation moving constantly in front when in melee
-stat_fire_delay=55000 - 100000 or more. (Large value which actually becomes an advantage since the phalanx must stay in formation to be
effective than point too many times to many directions...watch AI phalanx approach now....)
For best effect give to each faction available phalanx unit the SAME value for better AI grouping

-Precursor units (Like Romans)
-stat_charge_dist=range of their weapon
-stat_fire_delay=-55000 approx....

This setting is so clever..the precursor AI units gain more mobility, fire more effectively, charge sooner...they do not stall as before!



That is all for now...
I will release my open beta DarthMod 8.1 patch (2) probably today to see the settings in action.

Uploaded ...here it is Download


I will not reply to any PM according this matter.(Cannot tell the same things multiple times. All deserve to know combined)

I will reply only here (to those who can post here) and in my forum in here
__________________
DarthMod It is pointless to resist. Give yourself to the dark side of the force!

[Foot]

Yes, we have and our stats people have already done much testing in this area. They have appraised the benefits of the changes suggested and acted accordingly. I don't think they agree entirely with conclusions, but certainly the research was useful.

Foot

[Lysander13]

I found this in the Scriptorium and am curious if EB has checked into whether this fix really works or may already be incorporated into EB...

This isn't really a "fix" per say. It's more like an astute hypothesis. The actual implementation of the suggested stat changes will in all likelihood have various degrees of effectiveness depending on the battle system employed by the mod that uses them.

[mlp071]

I agree with Lysander.It does changes units performances quite a bit , and can cause misballance on battlefield, specially with cavalry units.

All mods have different approach to units stats, some preffer to beef up defence , some offence and some to keep it ballanced.

There is a similar work on M2TW,but it's not showing good results in different modes, as they all have their units balanced differently.

[Dol Guldur]

I do not think I have seen any meaningful differences whatsoever with those "fixes" (I am using BI).

[Lysander13]

I did not mean to imply that the institution of the actual values that DV came up with in his research make for a meaningful difference in terms of unit behavior one way or the other. (I'm still in the process of trying to formulate my own unbiased opinion on that.) What i am saying is the behavior of units seem to me to vary by methods of empirical testing depending on the "Battle AI". For example if you take the literal given value for stat_fire_delay= -55000 for pre-cursor units and apply it for use with the Darth Battle AI (edited for EB) then turn around and use EB's Battle AI or Sinuhet's Battle AI (edited for EB); it seems to me like i've seen a bit of wacky behavior by the pre-cursor unit affected by this stat change. I think it's because of the various flags associated with the formations in the different Battle AI's but of course i'm not claiming to be an expert on the matter. I merely just like to "tinker" with this stuff for fun. As for the overrall "effectiveness" of this "fix" I can't say i'm really sure one way or the other.

[Dol Guldur]

I'm certainly no expert either - merely stating my observation.

I hope we can get to the point of actually finding out what these elements do, and pin down their values, as no one seems to know.

The AI foot archer bug would be good to overcome and, in BI at least, Darth's soultions do not work.

[Lysander13]

I'm certainly no expert either - merely stating my observation.

I hope we can get to the point of actually finding out what these elements do, and pin down their values, as no one seems to know.

The AI foot archer bug would be good to overcome and, in BI at least, Darth's soultions do not work.

Ave Dol Guldur,

Firstly, let me say congratulations on the release of the current build for FATW-The New Shadow 2.0. It looks great and i look forward to downloading it and experiencing the world of FATW in the near future.

I would like to ask you a few questions as it relates to this thread. A few weeks ago i downloaded the 1.9 build of FATW as i was curious to see how the FATW Team chose to implement "Darth's Battle AI". If i recall correctly and my apologies if my memory fails me here; In looking thru the FATW edu file i thought i saw the values suggested by DV being used or a version thereof.

So my questions are... does the current build of FATW no longer contain these values and if so what changed the minds of the FATW team in incorporating their usage? or is the opinion you've expressed here simply yours and that their incorporation has minimal value no matter the mod or battle system it chooses to employ?

Please understand that their is no hint of sarcasm in any of my questions. I am merely "playing" with these values as it relates to EB for my own entertainment on the off-chance i might stumble upon something that would seem to be "significantly useful" depending on the Battle AI/Formation system used---and along those lines would appreciate any insight or commentary from an experienced modder such as yourself.

[Dol Guldur]

Ave,

Thank you for your kind words. TNS is doing real well.

Yes, Darth made some formations for us some time ago and these would have been present in 1.9; however we discovered they were causing an issue which caused weird problems on the battlemap when a certain unit was present. We could not work out why the issue existed and so Aradan took it upon himself to deal with this problem. We gained permission from Sinuhet to use his RTW formations as a base and Aradan has been adapting them for BI and for The New Shadow. They are in the current release and no CTDs yet ;)

As for the EDU, yes I went through it a long time ago and experimented with Darth's suggestions. I cannot say I noticed any or much difference. Those values still largely exist in some of the lines simply because we have not ascertained the effect and value of these EDU elements as of yet and so have not changed them.

I believe Aradan and Xerex intend pinning down these details; certainly we will rely upon our own tests and investigation.

Perhaps Aradan or Xerex might best answer this, but I can say that is the opinion of us all that the suggestions made by Darth are not verified and require independent investigation as to their nature and effect.

Aradan has a discusion thread here at the Org in the modding questions forum, associated with the Complete EDU Guide tutorial. It'd be great to dicuss this there.

[Lysander13]

Thanks for taking the time and answering a few questions DG. I've been
"playing" with these values alot recently to see if i really noticed anything different in terms of battle behavior. I've taken a faction or two and have applied these values across the board. Like let's say the Romani here in EB, then observed and fought battles, etc. I can't honestly say i've noticed anything of significance. The only thing i have noticed is perhaps a bit odd behavior depending on the Battle AI being used in conjuction with these stats but i'm not even sure of that. Hmmmmm, i don't know, it sure would be nice to pin this down as you say. Thanks for metioning the EDU thread, i'll be sure to check it out.