Kingdoms of the Isles - Signatures

[The Bruce]

Suicidal Generals is one of the in built problems in MTW2. There are measures that can be taken to modify the BAI but I'm not sure the problem can be removed entirely.

The AI for Kingdoms of the Isles is one area that requires a lot of work still. Increasing the HP will of course help generals survive but not prevent them from getting into trouble in the first place!

[smoesville]

If they had more hp then it might mean they get out of some of the situations they get into, though it would probably still not work because of the way med 2 works. I think it almost impossible to find a balance between enough hp to get them out of trouble and an unstoppable killer, who will not die.

[The Border Reiver]

This is combination of three things, battle AI, battle formations (keeping the general back behind the troops) and also giving the bodyguard extra hit points as suggested. Although this does help, it's still far from perfect. Also keeping the bodyguard numbers (especially horses) to a minimum, and I like giving them no moral at all.

[The Bruce]

One other measure that can help is to keep giving factions generals (i.e. spawn one every 20 turns for every settlement held etc.). They still die but its less annoying.

[Zappez]

Why not lowering morale effect of dying bodygard? So the AI General will have no choice but to run when his bodygard get slaugethered...

[The Bruce]

.....and I like giving them no moral at all.

[The Border Reiver]

Originally Posted by The Border Reiver View Post
.....and I like giving them no moral at all.

Yes I would give them a small amount of morale, and it would be up to the individual whether they used a moral approach to battlefield tactics with their general unit.

Why not lowering morale effect of dying bodygard?

Do you mean in the charcater triats or in the EDU?

[smoesville]

It was a good movie I'll give you that, although it may or may not have been historically accurate. I think it was just meant to symbolize what the Scots went through to gain their freedom.

For instance the battle of stirling bridge involved a bridge

[The Bruce]

Apparently they were running out of money and took the bridge out of the script.

[smoesville]

It is a good film but you really don't get the differences between highland/lowland or the very complicated turn of events that led the Bruce to the throne.

[The Bruce]

Hopefully the same criticism won't apply to our mod .

[King Patrick]

What about the Irish changing sides?

[smoesville]

What about the Irish changing sides?

According to some accounts it was the Welsh that caused dissent; though they didn't switch sides only refusing to participate. The irish apparently did their job and managed to inflict the most casualties on the Scots pikemen.

[The Bruce]

They did not change sides.

The irish apparently did their job and managed to inflict the most casualties on the Scots pikemen.

Where did you find this out?

The accounts I have read attribute this to archers (English, Welsh and French).

[smoesville]

They did not change sides.



Where did you find this out?

The accounts I have read attribute this to archers (English, Welsh and French).

Some online article, i took it out of context though, they killed the most of the english infantry, the archers did indeed win the battle. After the cavalry wisely withdrew from the battle. Braveheart shows them as cowards but the same men fought at bannockburn and were victorious. I like Braveheart but it is very anachronistic.

[madrush]

i agree dragon, temporary the freedom may have been, the scots did go through a lot

[The Bruce]

temporary the freedom may have been

Temporary? The freedom gained during the wars of independence was never lost (although one could argue that it was given away 400 years later).

The battle of Bannockburn was in 1314. In 1603 the Scottish King became King of England. The Acts of Union in 1707 saw both England and Scotland unite to form Great Britain. Scotland is 'free' to dissolve the union at any time should the majority wish to.

[smoesville]

Scotland is 'free' to dissolve the union at any time should the majority wish to.

Yeah but i don't really see that happening any time soon. The economic viability of small countries can be a bit dodgy, as ireland has shown to great effect It's like Texas, they can leave the union any time they want, they just don't want to, and in fairness they're probably the most american state in the union.

[madrush]

well they still follow the british queen, scotland is free to govern it self but it isnt formally seen as a independent nation in the world's eyes

[The Bruce]

The economic viability of small countries can be a bit dodgy, as ireland has shown to great effect

Denmark does OK, as does New Zealand. Ever heard of Dubai? With 95% of the remaining North Sea oil reserves an independant Scotland would be far better off than it is now.

well they still follow the british queen, scotland is free to govern it self but it isnt formally seen as a independent nation in the world's eyes

The British monarchy bases its very dodgy legitimacy on descent from Scottish monarchs. An independent Scotland could choose to retain the current Queen of Scotland (Elizabeth the first) as head of state. She is half Scots after all (the other half being German).

Scotland, like England is not an independent state. Both are nations however and many would argue that their political union has been of benefit to both countries and the other members of the United Kingdom.

it's like Texas, they can leave the union any time they want

Never heard of it, is it even a real place?