Topic: does the imperial blockhouse make any sense?
Tibor |
Posted at: 2016-06-29, 21:16
It seems to me that AI never use them, or have you ever saw AI use it? aihints in conf lua files for military buidlings can have these flags:
Blackhouse has none of them, so AI never picks it - at least it should be so, if I remember the code corectly.... Top Quote |
einstein13 |
Posted at: 2016-06-29, 22:12
Probably most of us remember old AI, that used blockhouses I can't remember current version of AI using this building. But if I see, I will let you know about it einstein13 |
Tibor |
Posted at: 2016-06-29, 22:16
OK, but from opposite angle - if somebody thinks it could be useful for AI, one of three above flags needs to be set in blockhouse/init.lua file. It is simple to change it, no recompilation is needed, so anybody can experiment with it... Top Quote |
king_of_nowhere Topic Opener |
Posted at: 2016-06-29, 22:21
well, if we lower the price, expansion would become true. Top Quote |
DragonAtma |
Posted at: 2016-06-30, 02:34
Keep in mind that the version I use is somewhat dated. That said:
Top Quote |
king_of_nowhere Topic Opener |
Posted at: 2016-06-30, 03:48
yeah, of course it could be removed entirely, but since it's there, we may as well give it a usefulness instead. Top Quote |
DragonAtma |
Posted at: 2016-06-30, 15:01
Then we should find a way for the AI to use it.
Top Quote |
king_of_nowhere Topic Opener |
Posted at: 2016-06-30, 18:46
The reason the blockhouse as it is right now is useless is that it is actually more expensive than the sentry. So, even for rear_expansion the sentry would still be the choice. That may change if we lower the blockhouse's price
In early game, when you make contact with your opponent after one hour or less, wood is the limiting resource (sometimes marble for empire). In those situations, if I have a front, I want the highest soldiers_housed / cost ratio. In that case, I may make a single tower for vision, and barriers all around for cheaper housing. That said, towers are by far more used than other medium military buildings, and ttheir high vision range would make them invaluable even if they housed one single soldier, so I wouldn't be against nerfing them.
The guardhall is a medium building. You can make it where you couldn't make a castle. It's also infinitely cheaper. Roughly, you can build 2 guardhalls in the same space that you'd need to build a castle, and overall they cost less resources, they can house more soldiers, and they heal more. Oh, and your front won't collapse if you lose one. And it's possible to lose one building even when you have greater power: all your best soldiers go out of the castle leaving only one rookie behind, an enemy soldier reaches the castle from another direction, and BAM! you lost the castle. It's actuallly much safer to have several different buildings at the front. The castle's main usefulness is its conquer radius; the enemy will need to build a tower to be able to see it and conquer it, which will slow him down greatly. Which is the reason in multiplayer I always make castles here and there into my land, to slow down a conquering enemy while I have time to bring reinforces. So, the best front line is a castle, a tower, and plenty of guardhalls. Top Quote |
Tibor |
Posted at: 2016-06-30, 19:26
Generally something like this can be done, but what I dont like is that rear_expansion would be in conflict with fighting flag. Algorithm would need to decide whether a building that has both flags can be built when enemies are nearby ... Current flags are not conflicting... Top Quote |
DragonAtma |
Posted at: 2016-07-02, 09:18
I'll be honest: I don't know what the exact criteria are for the current three flags. That said, if a building qualifies for the Fighting flag, it probably should not qualify for the Rear_Expansion flag, as by definition it's for areas far from enemies. Top Quote |