Any chance of improving tactical engine?

[moderation]

Hi, I've been trying the demo out and like the game so far, but I am on the fence about getting it. The strategic elements of the game and the variety of magic seem really fun, but the tactical battlefield part of the game is a mess when you want to do anything beyond it's basic capabilities.

Basically, my complaints revolve around around certain tactical options which are available in other games which reduce the complexity and need to micromanage things (and therefore allow you to have more fun ). The basic battle formation I've worked out in Dominions seems to be infantry in a line down the front, cavalry on the flanks attacking archers or the rear, and mages and archers in the back. While it's not too hard to manage this with an small homogenous army, as you get a larger, more diverse army with more mages and commanders, it becomes increasingly difficult to keep things organized. I could mention a lot of things I'd like to see improved, but I'll stick to two main points for now:

1. Is it possible to get your troops into a line formation short of breaking them up into small squads and lining them up in a row? The square formation might be okay (but not optimal) for certain units like archers, but it sucks for melee units when half of a large squad is simply sitting at the back waiting for the guys in front to get killed. (If you've ever seen any History Channel documentaries about ancient battles, you'll noticed that armies were usually organized in rectangles, not squares.) It would vastly improve gameplay if you could get your troops into a line formation without micromanaging them into small squads. Also, this would make it easier to use expensive and difficult to produce troops effectively.

2a. Is it possible to get your troops to advance in formation without extensive micromanagement? I've noticed that all units rush in at top speed, which is bad when you have some infantry that moves faster than others. What happens is that the faster infantry runs in and gets slaughtered by the enemy while your slower troops are struggling to get into position. Basically, I want my squad to operate more like a coherent squad. Part of the solution could even be something as simple as adding an option to put a "speed limit" on the faster units within a squad.

2b. I suppose it is possible to fix this through micromanagement and splitting off the faster infantry into smaller squads and putting them farther back, that would be another annoying exercise in micromanagement. What's more, it's unrealistic to rush in battle like this. Maybe you'd expect this from a barbarian horde, but not from a professional army. What are you paying your commanders for if they can't exert even the most basic discipline over your troops?

So to sum things up, I would really like to see options for putting your troops into line and rectangle formations and an option to tell them to advance in lockstep rather that each unit charging in at top speed. I have a few other thoughts on possible improvements, but I would also like to know if other people have encountered similiar problems with managing the battlefield. Also what improvements to the tactical engine do the developers have planned?

[Sombre]

No improvements to the tactical engine are planned. You won't see any requests or suggestions for such things implemented either. It's at the core of the game and they just don't update stuff like that, sorry.

Then again that's true of 99% of games that are even patched. The core doesn't change, you just get a few tweaks. Dom3 after release support is already FAR better than with most games, but we aren't talking about a beta or work in progress here. The game is finished, it just gets patches.

[moderation]

Hmm... are you one of the developers? I would like to hear their opinion on this. If what you say is what they would say though, I'm a little disappointed.

It doesn't seem that difficult to add a command like "advance in formation" or "advance at the same speed", or "don't charge in ahead than your comrades and get killed pointlessly", but then again, maybe it is. Even a cheap workaround like zero cost spell that reduces a squad's movement to a specific number for the duration of the battle would help.

Actually, to expand on that idea, I think there could be quite a few other interesting zero cost "tactical spells" that commanders could cast in order to issue orders to the troops. This might solve some of the problems, and even add some more realism as your extra commanders would be ordering or directing your troops instead of just sitting in the back waiting for the end of the battle. Not a perfect solution of course, but it seems one way of approaching the problem without the extra work that redesigning the UI might.

While I love the game's depth, I don't love the micromanagement required to accomplish some basic tactical goals.

[AdmiralZhao]

1) I think that as you play more you will see that the micromanagement of mortal troops becomes progressively less important as a game goes on. Except for the indie expansion phase, the magical aspects of combat tend to dominate the battle. So by the time you have lots of troops and commanders, you won't have to worry about every last heavy infantry since you will be worrying about things like Shadow Blast, Darkness, and Army of Gold. Of course this introduces all sorts of the magical micromanagement problems, but that is at least a different can of worms.

2) A simple way to get this effect is to put your fast troops behind a wall of slow troops. In practice, I find that my armies have only one or two types of troops, which makes it fairly simple to have everyone arrive where they need to on time.

[Shovah32]

If you would prefer your troops not to advance at all, consider setting some on guard commander with the commander scripted to holdx5(or fire x, if he has a weapon with a good range) and then stay behind/fire. Make sure he has good armour/shield/air shield/appropriate resistances depending on what you're going to fight.

And the chances of the engine getting updated are low. There are alot of things you can't do in it, and that can get annoying at the start, but you really do get used to it.

[ArkhanTheBlack]

Hmm, isn't there a post of leaked patch 3.16 info that they want to replace the current combat system? If it isn't a joke then that's definitely a huge change.

[moderation]

Ehh, I'm not sure if real time combat would reduce the need to micromanage units on the battlefield, but it would be... different.

[vfb]

Shovah32 said:
If you would prefer your troops not to advance at all, consider setting some on guard commander with the commander scripted to holdx5(or fire x, if he has a weapon with a good range) and then stay behind/fire. Make sure he has good armour/shield/air shield/appropriate resistances depending on what you're going to fight.

Guard Commander is great! It's perfect for your light infantry with javelins. They will throw them when they have the opportunity. You can have your commanders behind a line of heavy infantry and set on Hold/Attack/Hold/Attack/Hold/Attack or something similar.

You can also use Guard Commander to move your troops backwards and sideways, to pull enemy arrow fire where you want it (if the enemy is using Fire Closest), or even to get enemy flankers pulled into the middle of your army.

The one thing you need to be careful of is that commanders move first. So using this on flankers or frontline troops is dangerous because your commander will charge out ahead of the troops and will most likely get whacked first when the enemy moves.

[moderation]

"You can also use Guard Commander to move your troops backwards and sideways, to pull enemy arrow fire where you want it (if the enemy is using Fire Closest), or even to get enemy flankers pulled into the middle of your army."

Hey, thanks for the idea, this seems really useful. I can see how the Hold/Attack pattern would be good for keeping a rein on your overeager troops.

However can you explain how to get your commander to move backwards and sideways using this technique? I would think retreat might work for moving backwards, but I am guessing that this would pull the troops off the field with you.

[vfb]

The commander normally does not move backwards or sideways Well, he can move sideways and forwards together. He can also move backwards or sideways when chasing enemies, but it's difficult to base any real plan on that kind of movement.

You place your troops in one spot, and tell them to Guard Commander. They will march to whatever the location of the commander is.

So troops at the top of the formation will march down to the bottom if that's where the commander is.

Troops at the front will move to the back, if that's where the commander is.

If you place the commander at the very back and Hold x 1-5, attack rear, then your Guard Commander units will chase from wherever they are to the commander and join him in his charge forwards.

If you place the commander at the very back and Hold x 1-5, Stay Behind Troops, then your Guard Commander units will chase from wherever they are to the commander and join him as he moves forward to behind your main army group.

Here's an example:

RR are squads on attack rear, GG is smaller infantry on Guard Commander, C is a few commanders on Hold x 5, Attack Closest; or Hold x 5, Stay Behind.

Code:

---

........RR................

..........................

..........................

.........GG.......II..AA..

.........GG.......II..AA..

..........................

..........................

C.......RR................

---

Enemy infantry II will chase your GG, allowing RR to attack enemy archers AA. The archers AA locks fire on GG, possibly even advancing without firing as GG moves out of range. GG turns around and engages II at the same time RR reaches the Archers.

And this is not even theoretical, I really have used this in MP games, and it worked. Some of the time .

Admittedly, it's also early game tactics. As AdmiralZhao notes, pretty soon the right Battle magic is much more important.