Welcome

Please register for Total War Access to use the forums. If you're an existing user, your forum details will be merged with Total War Access if you register with the same email or username. For more information please read our FAQ’s here.

Categories

Agent actions and other factors I despised in earlier games

Ingr8Ingr8 Posts: 199Registered Users
I really hope that CA abandon the pre-determined outcome of agent actions (i.e. you can reload as many times as you like, the AI agent will always succeed when you load an autosave) as this was utter wank and a blight on some of their earlier games. It also worked the other way (i.e. if you tried to undertake an action it might always fail and this carried over to subsequent turns - so if you waited a turn then tried it would still always fail) and made a mockery of the whole ingame prompts about % of whether or not an action would succeed.

Since Rome I have pretty much given up on using agent actions because of this rancid and fetid crap. If it is included in 3K I will never buy that game (and you can hold me to that).

I hope that they will also stabilise the engine - as games progress the AI turns tend to get much longer and more boring. I do tend to Alt+Tab when the AI turns are generating to do something else but in later turns this regularly causes the games to crash. I hope they have realised this and sorted it.


Yes, I damn well would!

Comments

  • SchepelSchepel Senior Member Posts: 1,453Registered Users
    So, because you can't save scume this is 'rancid and utter crap'?

    I must say, that is an opinion I do not necessarily share.
  • Warlord_Lu_BuWarlord_Lu_Bu Posts: 1,749Registered Users
    I DISAGREE!
    "I am the punishment of Tengri, if you had not sinned, he would not have sent me against you." - Chenghis Khan Temujin
  • Ingr8Ingr8 Posts: 199Registered Users
    edited January 12
    Schepel said:

    So, because you can't save scume this is 'rancid and utter crap'?

    I must say, that is an opinion I do not necessarily share.

    No, because if I am told I have a 50% chance of success, I legitimately want 50% chance of success. The utter rancid crap is that it saves rolls in advance. If you have multiple heroes you can change the order of actions and succeed but if a result always succeeds or always fails the system is wank... and it is.

    And you clearly didn't play TW:W1 where pretty much every turn after the Chaos invasion your generals would be assassinated or your armies would be ravaged by lvl 30+ heroes who just shadowed all your armies. Oh and because their rolls were predetermined there was nothing you could do about it but town hop so that they hit the garissons and walls rather than your army. CA's own incompetence in balancing those mechanics mean that, yes if I could have rerolled their actions each turn until they all had critical failures I would have done.
    Post edited by Ingr8 on


    Yes, I damn well would!
  • TayvarTayvar Posts: 10,142Registered Users
    Agents might have a much smaller role in Total War: Three Kingdoms in the first place.
  • tfwoods3tfwoods3 Posts: 844Registered Users
    There are reasons they did it that way, probably the best option.
  • Ephraim_DaltonEphraim_Dalton Senior Member Posts: 18,445Registered Users
    Eh no, save-scumming is honestly one of the dumbest things to encourage, so saving seeds is good and proper.

  • SchepelSchepel Senior Member Posts: 1,453Registered Users
    edited January 13
    Ingr8 said:

    Schepel said:

    So, because you can't save scume this is 'rancid and utter crap'?

    I must say, that is an opinion I do not necessarily share.

    No, because if I am told I have a 50% chance of success, I legitimately want 50% chance of success. The utter rancid crap is that it saves rolls in advance. If you have multiple heroes you can change the order of actions and succeed but if a result always succeeds or always fails the system is wank... and it is.

    And you clearly didn't play TW:W1 where pretty much every turn after the Chaos invasion your generals would be assassinated or your armies would be ravaged by lvl 30+ heroes who just shadowed all your armies. Oh and because their rolls were predetermined there was nothing you could do about it but town hop so that they hit the garissons and walls rather than your army. CA's own incompetence in balancing those mechanics mean that, yes if I could have rerolled their actions each turn until they all had critical failures I would have done.
    You clearly didn't think anything you say through. I have played TW:WH1. Which you could have figured out with a few easy clicks...

    The thing is, the game calculates the result *once*. After that, it is set to what it is, to avoid save scumming. Which is all you seem to want to do. Don't insult other people because a 'cheat' doesn't work.
  • mitthrawnuruodomitthrawnuruodo Junior Member Posts: 1,590Registered Users
    edited January 14
    I do not agree with OP's particular use case or adjectives, but seriously? You lot are harassing someone for wanting to save scum in their singleplayer game? You know the best way for you to avoid save scumming? By NOT save scumming. We should not need loaded dice rolls limiting other players from enjoying their single player experience the way they want, just because you are too weak-willed to not save scum.
  • ThedossbossThedossboss Posts: 139Registered Users
    Look, even if an agent action was so important that you absolutely HAD to savescum, all you need to do is use 1 click order to reset the seed. Simply choose a different target and immediately switch back to the target you actually wanted to affect after the agent starts moving. If your character is the one being targetted, load the end-turn auto-resolve and even if your army doesn't have any movement points, clicking an attack/move order should reset the seed

    As for this game, afaik there are no agents. Characters act as both generals and agents from my understanding, so you shouldn't worry too much about agent spam anyways.

    Save-scumming shouldn't be used anyways. Changing something a game to be more favorable to you without accepting what happens takes away the challenge, and thus the experience. If you are the kind of player to savescum when an rng doesn't go your way, you should just play on easy, since you like controlling the outcome and dislike challenge or unfavorable situations
  • mitthrawnuruodomitthrawnuruodo Junior Member Posts: 1,590Registered Users
    edited January 14
    If challenge is so heavily dependent on RNG in a game, then it is a badly designed game. Thankfully that is not the case for Total War.

    Facing off 3 armies with 1 of your own is challenging. Your high level agent dying trying to complete an action with a 95% success chance due to RNG fluke is frustrating.

    And who are we to dictate that someone else shouldn't save scum? "You shouldn't charge cavalry into a wall of spears" is a sound advice based on the subject of the game. But saving is something that happens outside the flow of the game. It is a quality-of-life feature. Saying "save-scumming shouldn't be used" is like saying "keyboard shortcuts shouldn't be used" or "tactical pause shouldn't be used" because they reduce challenge. Might as well remove save games altogether and force EVERYONE to play in ironman mode. See how that works out, lol.

    Besides this a video game. Not real life. A solo recreational activity that people pay for. If there ever was a thing that should have a choice to be free from consequences, it is a video game.

  • Ephraim_DaltonEphraim_Dalton Senior Member Posts: 18,445Registered Users

    I do not agree with OP's particular use case or adjectives, but seriously? You lot are harassing someone for wanting to save scum in their singleplayer game? You know the best way for you to avoid save scumming? By NOT save scumming. We should not need loaded dice rolls limiting other players from enjoying their single player experience the way they want, just because you are too weak-willed to not save scum.

    If you allow save scumming, you turn every friendly agent action into a guaranteed success and every hostile agent action into a guaranteed failure since you only have to reload until you get what you want.
    This turns the entire mechanic into a pretty bad joke. Engaging in agent actions should come with a risk.

  • TayvarTayvar Posts: 10,142Registered Users

    I do not agree with OP's particular use case or adjectives, but seriously? You lot are harassing someone for wanting to save scum in their singleplayer game? You know the best way for you to avoid save scumming? By NOT save scumming. We should not need loaded dice rolls limiting other players from enjoying their single player experience the way they want, just because you are too weak-willed to not save scum.

    If you allow save scumming, you turn every friendly agent action into a guaranteed success and every hostile agent action into a guaranteed failure since you only have to reload until you get what you want.
    This turns the entire mechanic into a pretty bad joke. Engaging in agent actions should come with a risk.
    True, that's why save scumming is a type of cheating, while pausing the game is not really a cheating, because the AI can easily micro a lot of units too, but not pausing shows more player's skill.
  • mitthrawnuruodomitthrawnuruodo Junior Member Posts: 1,590Registered Users
    edited January 15
    Tayvar said:

    I do not agree with OP's particular use case or adjectives, but seriously? You lot are harassing someone for wanting to save scum in their singleplayer game? You know the best way for you to avoid save scumming? By NOT save scumming. We should not need loaded dice rolls limiting other players from enjoying their single player experience the way they want, just because you are too weak-willed to not save scum.

    If you allow save scumming, you turn every friendly agent action into a guaranteed success and every hostile agent action into a guaranteed failure since you only have to reload until you get what you want.
    This turns the entire mechanic into a pretty bad joke. Engaging in agent actions should come with a risk.
    True, that's why save scumming is a type of cheating, while pausing the game is not really a cheating, because the AI can easily micro a lot of units too, but not pausing shows more player's skill.

    I do not agree with OP's particular use case or adjectives, but seriously? You lot are harassing someone for wanting to save scum in their singleplayer game? You know the best way for you to avoid save scumming? By NOT save scumming. We should not need loaded dice rolls limiting other players from enjoying their single player experience the way they want, just because you are too weak-willed to not save scum.

    If you allow save scumming, you turn every friendly agent action into a guaranteed success and every hostile agent action into a guaranteed failure since you only have to reload until you get what you want.
    This turns the entire mechanic into a pretty bad joke. Engaging in agent actions should come with a risk.
    And you can keep reloading a lost battle until you win, or reload after your powerful neighbor declares war to prevent it with gifts, or reload after your top general rebels against you to pacify him. Save scumming is already there. It makes little sense that "save-scumming bad!" is selectively used to justify the case of agents.

    And again, I still do not understand why it bothers you people that someone else wants to savescum. You do not have to reload if you do not want to. How does it affect you? Can you enjoy something only if you know that someone else does not? It is very strange.
    Post edited by mitthrawnuruodo on
  • SchepelSchepel Senior Member Posts: 1,453Registered Users
    edited January 14

    I do not agree with OP's particular use case or adjectives, but seriously? You lot are harassing someone for wanting to save scum in their singleplayer game? You know the best way for you to avoid save scumming? By NOT save scumming. We should not need loaded dice rolls limiting other players from enjoying their single player experience the way they want, just because you are too weak-willed to not save scum.

    It isn't so much a question of OP's need to save scum, but rather the manner in which he made his point. I really couldn't care less whether or not people save scum, but I do care (ever so mildly) when somebody feels the need to behave in a certain manner simply because his favourite 'cheat' doesn't work.
  • FranzSaxonFranzSaxon Posts: 2,357Registered Users

    Tayvar said:

    I do not agree with OP's particular use case or adjectives, but seriously? You lot are harassing someone for wanting to save scum in their singleplayer game? You know the best way for you to avoid save scumming? By NOT save scumming. We should not need loaded dice rolls limiting other players from enjoying their single player experience the way they want, just because you are too weak-willed to not save scum.

    If you allow save scumming, you turn every friendly agent action into a guaranteed success and every hostile agent action into a guaranteed failure since you only have to reload until you get what you want.
    This turns the entire mechanic into a pretty bad joke. Engaging in agent actions should come with a risk.
    True, that's why save scumming is a type of cheating, while pausing the game is not really a cheating, because the AI can easily micro a lot of units too, but not pausing shows more player's skill.

    I do not agree with OP's particular use case or adjectives, but seriously? You lot are harassing someone for wanting to save scum in their singleplayer game? You know the best way for you to avoid save scumming? By NOT save scumming. We should not need loaded dice rolls limiting other players from enjoying their single player experience the way they want, just because you are too weak-willed to not save scum.

    If you allow save scumming, you turn every friendly agent action into a guaranteed success and every hostile agent action into a guaranteed failure since you only have to reload until you get what you want.
    This turns the entire mechanic into a pretty bad joke. Engaging in agent actions should come with a risk.
    And you can keep reloading a lost battle until you win, or reload after your powerful neighbor declares war to prevent it with gifts, or reload after your top general rebels against you to pacify him. Save scumming is already there. It makes little sense that "save-scumming bad!" is selectively used to justify the case of agents.

    And again, I still do not understand why it bothers you people that someone else wants to savescum. You do not have to reload if you do not want to. How does it affect you? Can you enjoy something only if you know that someone else is not? It is very strange.
    I mean this says it all really. No argument to this point. I gotta say you really made this point well. Perfectly said. I guess it don't matter if someone else save scums. And honestly I do all the time anyway lol.
Sign In or Register to comment.