Official KaM Remake Ideas topic

[Remake 2012]

I know that was not your intention, don't worry. Sure, if it's going to be some sort of scripting command I can live with it and maybe I'll even use it myself, who knows... But it shouldn't be an option for the game lobby.

I gree, with: " it shouldn't be an option for the game lobby"

I just want to do some maps that I could give this option in the editor.
a somewhat different example:
Map: Open World, available to all buildings.
Player: Czechboss , completed the game after .. 20 minutes, because he ran out of stone : D
With such "tricks", even the best fall. : D

[kamil]

Can you add the time of production or extraction in the buildings? Something like a timer?
For example, the production time of a sword or a crossbow.

[Lewin]

Can you add the time of production or extraction in the buildings? Something like a timer?
For example, the production time of a sword or a crossbow.

I think it's better to keep some aspects of the game qualitative not quantitative. I mean that the time it takes to make a sword should be something pro players have a "feeling" for, not a number anyone can check up. That adds more depth to the game IMO. I'm also not sure under what circumstances it helps you to know how long it will take for something to be produced, except if you are trying to optimise your build order, for example by measuring how many iron mines you need per smelter or something. But I think those things are something you learn as you play the game more. If you could just look up the perfect number of iron mines per smelter there's less room for players exploring and learning the game in that regard, and develop their own build orders through experience.

[Krom]

@Kamil: You mean like a timer in school that shows how much time left till unit is trained? I agree with Lewin, I don't think it will add value to the game. Any way, the sword is done when it's done - having a progress bar wont speed it up nor allow you to cancel it. That would be too much micromanagement

[kamil]

Ok

[Jeronimo]

I have been thinking around an idea to improve melee troops efficacy.

With current code, a soldier will hit any enemy unit around its square (8 tiles). And as far a unit from your squad is in touch with an enemy squad, your men will move towards that conflict point (while engaged).

My idea is about increasing melee troops aggresivity +1 tile to all directions. This way 1 soldier will hit anyone in range 1-2 will have 24 tiles action (as when ranged troops hit are allowed to hit any enemy inside 4-10 tiles range).

This way, melee will immediatly jump into next closer target when they finish killing the one they were "touching".
I notice melee troops engaged have [Task: Idle], so if they kill a unit, you have control of it before engages with next target (while automatically moves, you have like 2-3 seconds to move him away, and interrupt the "pursuit").

This code would bring some benefits also to the engaging system, since troops instead of moving towards 1 conflict point (range 1), they will move immediatly to the enemy in front, thus for keeping formation while killing forward (range 2).

REFERENCES
0 enemy troop
X conflict point (touching)
8 your troop
_/|\: march direction (accomodation)

Range 1 (8 tiles action)
0 0 0 0 0
X \ \
8 8 8 8 8
____/_/

Range 1-2 (8+16= 24 tiles action)
0 0 0 0 0
X | | | |
8 8 8 8 8

Cavalry will be more useful, specially when chasing crossbowmen (not having to click repeatdly to make another kill).
Charge will be more useful, if unit doesnt hit a troop in first contact, but it's enough close to 1 enemy unit (range 2), you can say he has also engaged enemy (with more efficient reaccomodation).

You save mental energies with less silly micros (moving forward continously). But still these chases/pursuits arent 100% something to rely... if enemy manages to scape to 3 tiles distance from your troops, then you have to manually advance again.
------------------------------

I know Lewin said something about refactoring warrior's code so the melee will "chase till completly destroy" a selected enemy squad (as in most strategy games), basing the change in making your troop remember previous order to engage.

I still present my idea as another possibility... and perhaps easier to program.

[Lewin]

I agree that it's silly to have to keep reordering your troops to attack e.g. crossbowmen when they are running away from you. But I'm not sure the "2 tile engage" rule solves it in the best way. Sometimes you are chasing crossbowmen, kill a few, then want to run away because the enemy is bring up his pikemen. If your units kept engaging within 2 tiles you could not easily run them away after killing a few.

I think a better solution is to make the units "follow through" with orders. So if you tell a knight to attack a group of crossbowmen, he will keep chasing them after killing each one until you tell him not to. This means he would have to "remember" move/attack order you give him while he is in battle if you wanted him to stop chasing them, but IMO that's not a problem. (you still can't control your units in battle, you can just control what they will do AFTER the battle by giving them a move/attack order during the battle) This means chasing down units won't require micro management after killing each unit, but you can still have the option to run away.

I haven't thought about this in too much detail so there could be flaws, please feel free to discuss it

As you said all of this is only really possible after we've refactored the warrior code, which will hopefully happen after this upcoming release (it's also kind of required for AIs military side too) We'll also hopefully be able to sort out other issues like giving archers attack orders.

[mmx]

Hi, I have some ideas which i want to write there.

a) If i close bringing wares to buildings, people still going there. Can be there separate button to stop people going there?
b) set priority to buildings in construction and if not make, please, better AI for labourers, because I don´t need 20 labourers for 1 building if I want to make road for example.

Thank you, translator to CZE, Milan Molnár

[The Dark Lord]

I have a simple idea too. When making units, right clicking means making 10 instead of 1. It would be awesome if I could remove units that are 'waiting to be trained' in the school with a right click.
Imagine I'm training a serf, and 5 units are in the waiting line: a recruit, a farmer, a woodcutter, a baker and a butcher. Right clicking on the farmer would delete the farmer, the woodcutter, the baker and the butcher from the waiting line.
I'm often training recruits when I see a building is finished and then I first want to train the appropriate unit for that building and then continue training recruits. It's annoying if one has to click all the recruits away seperately.

[T*AnTi-V!RuZz]

I have a simple idea too. When making units, right clicking means making 10 instead of 1. It would be awesome if I could remove units that are 'waiting to be trained' in the school with a right click.
Imagine I'm training a serf, and 5 units are in the waiting line: a recruit, a farmer, a woodcutter, a baker and a butcher. Right clicking on the farmer would delete the farmer, the woodcutter, the baker and the butcher from the waiting line.
I'm often training recruits when I see a building is finished and then I first want to train the appropriate unit for that building and then continue training recruits. It's annoying if one has to click all the recruits away seperately.

I agree with TDL. I'd like this feature too.

[dargonslayer]

I agree with The Dark Lord to, I sometimes irritate with the same scene The Dark Lord explained

[Lewin]

a) If i close bringing wares to buildings, people still going there. Can be there separate button to stop people going there?

It's planned that the block wares button will also stop people coming to the house (e.g. occupants like a fisherman in his hut or recruits in the barracks)

b) set priority to buildings in construction and if not make, please, better AI for labourers, because I don´t need 20 labourers for 1 building if I want to make road for example.

This has been suggested before, we don't want to simplify things too much because building things in an efficient order is part of the challenge (if you place 20 buildings at once then you'll have to wait while all the roads get made before they build the houses). I think there's some room for improvement regarding 20 labourers going to build 1 house, some of them should take other jobs.

I have a simple idea too. When making units, right clicking means making 10 instead of 1. It would be awesome if I could remove units that are 'waiting to be trained' in the school with a right click.
Imagine I'm training a serf, and 5 units are in the waiting line: a recruit, a farmer, a woodcutter, a baker and a butcher. Right clicking on the farmer would delete the farmer, the woodcutter, the baker and the butcher from the waiting line.
I'm often training recruits when I see a building is finished and then I first want to train the appropriate unit for that building and then continue training recruits. It's annoying if one has to click all the recruits away seperately.

Sounds like a good idea, and it can't do any harm anyway since people who don't know about it won't be right clicking there Right clicking on a slot in the queue can remove it and all units AFTER it in the queue (so if you don't want to remove the one currently being trained you can right click on the next slot to remove all the others)

[Krom]

I see no problem in rapidly clicking 3-4 times on a unit in a queue to remove it and everything past it. Just 3-4 fast left mouse buttons clicks ) It's not like a 10 or 20 ))

[The Dark Lord]

I see no problem in rapidly clicking 3-4 times on a unit in a queue to remove it and everything past it. Just 3-4 fast left mouse buttons clicks ) It's not like a 10 or 20 ))

Yeah... Except that it can easily happen 10 times in a single game.

[Da Revolution]

When you got three schools all making recruits which need to be deleted from the queue you need to be fast. Right-clicking would solve this problem probably.