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

[Campaign] Balance retreat, please...

L_OstL_Ost Senior MemberRegistered Users Posts: 156
edited April 4 in General Discussion
Hi CA,

Could you please balance the way those retreats are done ? Because a 2 dude army can run and run and run away and it's very hard to catch them.
This may be the most annoying gamedesign mecanism people see after playing just a few hours in your game(s).

There should be ways to avoid conflict, but not so easilly, with no cost, like this. Players invests a huge cost to catch guys, and they flee with no cost, this is really frustrating.

There is many ways to correct this because you no take into account army supplies now (which is a great great idea). So I would fix this like this :

1- actually retreat seem to give you full normal mode to march mode movement points (not sure about this).
  • Solution : next turn they have 80% of their movement points.
  • Reason : they would have to re-organise first.
  • Why it is a concern : this is not usual march, this is "out of turn" march. Which is stronger because it is a bet where odds/gains are like either he comes and I loose the normal mode, either he doesn't come and I still get the normal mode.
    100% win scenario : never march away. At the begining of my turn I have odds of normal mode rest vs 0% odds of normal mode rest if I march away.
    So this situation should have to be "bough", aka hava a cost.
2- actually retreat seem to not change anything to supplies (not sure about this).
  • Solution : an army fleeing lost 50% of their supplies.
  • Reason : they did not have the time to pack their things up.
  • Why it is a concern : an army retreating is still fresh. It should panic a little. Lost suplies would make them disband in the long term or have middle term going home goals, which would be a good simulation of what problems a retreating army would face I guess.
3- if an army fled last turn, they still can retreat nex turn again.
  • Solution : if an army fled last turn (aka they had point #1 20% movement malus), they could be catched by marching units.
  • Reason : chasing armies should be exausted but still attains their goals if they really needs it.
  • Why it is a concern : an army retreating can "kite" a stack until he goes into one of his castle. This is gearing the game toward defense and position, and doesn't favour counterttacks.
    Btw, as a programmer, I know this is less easy to do, so I would do this like this :
    - if an army have fled at the end of one's turn, I would give them a 2-turn malus with no effect, like "Fleeing".
    - adding a 2 turn "fleeing" status add new turns to that status, then are cut to 2 turns (add the turns, then modulo 2).
    - a marching unit then can only attack armies that have that "fleeing" status.
The hardest part of this is calculating the involved costs to feed the AI engine, so it can make a good decision (fighting cost vs fleeing cost).

Anyway, if those effect would be just there for a start, I think you would have corrected a huge problem in the design.

Many many thanks for the reading, cheers.

P.S. - 10 years ago, I talked there about 3 kingdom chineese idea, so I'm very (²²²²) please ! ;)
Post edited by L_Ost on

Comments

  • L_OstL_Ost Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 156
    edited April 4
    (dbl post sorry)
  • ComradCommodoreComradCommodore Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 487
    The huge loss of supplies is an idea I can get onboard with

    Please CA, can you just allow us to choose where our army falls back too, please for the love of all that is holy
  • Whiskeyjack_5691Whiskeyjack_5691 Registered Users Posts: 3,261
    I definitely like the idea of the the retreating force losing some of it's army supplies and movement range, say -20% on both. There really should be some penalty to retreating.

    And while they're at it, I really hope they fix that BS issue where a retreating army can move through the zone of control of nearby enemies, and sometimes move absurdly long distances.


  • IchonIchon Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 4,993
    edited April 4
    When the AI retreats across a river is the most annoying... they move further in 1 turn of retreat than I can force march in 3 turns because they went thru the river crossing AND marched up across from my army on the other side of the river and then did a normal full retreat move.

    If AI is stuck by terrain or enemy ZoC they should offer surrender or to fight- not get a full retreat move for free. Same with player armies- they can elect to try and surrender or have to fight if they are stuck.
    YouTube, it takes over your mind and guides you to strange places like tutorials on how to talk to a giraffe.
  • Whiskeyjack_5691Whiskeyjack_5691 Registered Users Posts: 3,261
    Ichon said:

    When the AI retreats across a river is the most annoying... they move further in 1 turn of retreat than I can force march in 3 turns because they went thru the river crossing AND marched up across from my army on the other side of the river and then did a normal full retreat move.

    I've rage-quit campaigns because of **** like that. Absolutely infuriating.
  • RewanRewan Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 2,472
    To be fair that's the reason why I pretty much only fight with ambushes since TW:Attila
  • SanzquechievSanzquechiev Registered Users Posts: 34
    edited April 5
    In the real world in the three kingdom story if you do retreat after face the enemy, you just retreat to any possible route that you can go, so sometime retreat is just to make you face an enemy again or you really escape them.

    Like cao cao getting pursued by liu bei force after red cliff. Cao cao almost died because of that.

    Maybe CA want to implemented that..retreat route without player decision. But yes should have put some penalty for that... I personally disagree if retreat can choose to where to go... If you are playing vs player..the game will just became hit and run
  • L_OstL_Ost Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 156

    In the real world in the three kingdom story if you do retreat after face the enemy, you just retreat to any possible route that you can go, so sometime retreat is just to make you face an enemy again or you really escape them.

    That's not retreating, that's routing.

    I'm sorry, I'm french : as specialists, I know the difference :):):)

  • L_OstL_Ost Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 156
    edited April 9
    Re-reading myself, I'm now unsure point #3 is a good gamedesign : marching armies would still be kited by a retreating army.
    So this is a bad idea.

    There is still a problem :
    - say Army Attack and Army Defense.
    - discarding bonuses from armies and generals, there is 3 scenario of distance : distance between them may be either 50% move points or less, 50-100, 100-150 (assuming retreat and march gives +50% move points)

    Scenario 0-50% :
    - Attack come at contact of Defense and attack.
    - Defense activate retreat and march +50% away.
    - Attack can still attack, defense can't do anything, but still have a chance of attacker letting them go.

    Scenario 50%-100% :
    - Attack come at contact of Defense and attack.
    - Defense activate retreat and march +50% away.
    - Attack can't still attack, since it would have to march to be at contact.
    => defense can kite ad nauseam

    Scenario 100%-150% :
    - Attack can't come at contact of Defense without marching and can't attack.
    => defense can kite ad nauseam

    So, this is telling the game is geared toward castelling.

    MAYBE point 3 would be solved if retreat gave only say +25% move points.

    This way you would have scenario A @ 0-75%, scenario B @ 75%-100%, scenario C @ 100-150, and kitting (without marching) completly gone. If you want to kite, you would have to march.
    Also, marching toward an intruder would be a valid strategic decision, since it would put them in better range of the Defense army in the next turn, providing they don't profit of attacker being exausted.

    I kinda like this 2-step simple solution : nerfing move points when retreating, nerfing supplies. Nerfing move point when retreating would discard the need of nerfing next turn's move points.

    "I think" this is easy to mod, right ? If so, I may try this.
  • Ephraim_DaltonEphraim_Dalton Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 23,861

    In the real world in the three kingdom story if you do retreat after face the enemy, you just retreat to any possible route that you can go, so sometime retreat is just to make you face an enemy again or you really escape them.

    Like cao cao getting pursued by liu bei force after red cliff. Cao cao almost died because of that.

    Maybe CA want to implemented that..retreat route without player decision. But yes should have put some penalty for that... I personally disagree if retreat can choose to where to go... If you are playing vs player..the game will just became hit and run

    Only in the fantasy novel that tried its darndest to humiliate Cao Cao. In history his retreat from Chibi was absolutely smooth.

Sign In or Register to comment.