Topic: why the AI don't dismantle the military buildings it's about to lose?

teppo, Stefan

thanks for your opinions, I am glad I am not the one who does not like dismantling military buildings.

I looked today at the battle object, and was disappointed what it in fact is. It includes only two soldiers, the ones just fighting currently. I need to learn more about it, but it does not start smoothly :). Never mind, I am not in hurry so I will keep studying it :)

Top

Quote

Hmm...

What if you allow them to be dismantled, but only if a soldier is in them at the time? So if it has only one soldier, you'd have to dismantle it before the actual fighting starts.

Or, if you prefer, you can add a "can demolish"/"can't demolish" checkbox to the game setup.

Top

Quote

einstein13 wrote:

But implementing prohibition for dismantling/ destroying is quite not settlers-II-like. When you do that you broke lots of good strategies.

Settlers has lots of authority here. We do not need to copy everything Bluebyte has done.

In my mind, prohibiting the dismantle would just lead to more advance planning. It would also weaken some strategies, like King of Nowhere mentioned, but whether that is good or bad, seems to depend on personal tastes.

Would everybody be happy, if dismantling under attack could be switched on/off at the start-of-game menu?

Top

Quote

Well, I absolutely hates when a game I like does some changes that modify the strategies. I mean, I take the power player approach, I like to be good at a game, to figure out how to be good at a game, and to figure out how to become even better. And then all of it becomes for nothing because somebody suddenly decided that the game should be changed, and I have to relearn from scratch. I understand that other people have other priorities, I just wanted to make clear my motivations. changes to the graphic, to the game engine, shortcuts that improve the gameplay are ok. changes that improve the AI are very welcome, since I have a hard time finding challenges otherwise. Changes that affect the gameplay are abhorred.

And especially forbidding too dismantle the military building, because not only it would affect all the strategy, but it would also push the strategy in what I perceive as the wrong direction. forbidding to dismantle would weaken the stronger soldiers, because now it would be possible to rush a level 10 soldier with rookies until it dies. but level 10 soldiers are extremely expensive, so it could be no longer convenient to make them. So people would be enouraged to no longer make a complex economy to ultimately get better troops, just to get as many level 0 soldiers as they can. barbarians and empire would play most games without even making farms. it would all boil down to who can field more soldiers. ok, probably I am being too melodramatic here, the impact would not be so high, but it definitely goes in the wrong direction.

Anyway, to answer the question: I would not be happy because on internet games there could be a doubt on whether to allow dismantling or not. I don't like the idea that in the next tournament people may vote and set that as the default. And I know it will happen. Even if the "can dismantle" was the default, I'm sure it would eventually worm its way into mainstream*. If not for that, I'd have absolutely no problem with it. I would however be happy if the option to be switched on/off is for the AI to be able to dismantle under attack.

*The reason I am sure it would happen is that it is an element the stronger players use to their advantage, and the weaker players do not like when stronger players defeat them by mastering some element of gameplay they haven't mastered, and there are more weaker players than stronger players. I've seen it happen in ogame. The stronger players used to farm on the weaker players. The thing is, there were perfectly viable strategies to avoid being farmed, one just had to learn a bit how to play. People were too lazy to learn to play, and asked for it. the society that owned the game decided to change it so that farming would not be rewarding anymore. And I quit playing. That's why I feel particularly strongly about gameplay changes that advantage the weaker players.

Top

Quote

One comment on the dismantle feature: there was a time (e.g. old version of widelands) where the dismantle feature was not implemented. Now it is possible, and a new strategy using it is possible, too.

I think if a user can dismantle a building under attack it is a valid thought to allow the AI to do the same.

On the other hand even if dismantling an attacked building would be forbidden it would still be possible to destroy it. The effect is the same, but you lose more building materials. And it's faster.

Personally I'm undecided if I'm happy using the dismantle feature in warfare... So I just wanted to point out that as long as widelands is under development there can always be new features requiring a change of strategy.

Top

Quote