Is it just me, or do archers no longer gain a range bonus on a hill?

[Elmar]

And where is a CA employee when you need one?
Oh, they were about promoting the game here and there at launch, and they were quick enough to try and diffuse the DirectX poopstorm. But here where they could make a genuinely useful contribution... not a sight nor sound.

[wolfbane751]

when i play battles and manage to hide troops in forests the enemy archers seem to be able to see them and shoot them even tho they are hidden wich is dumb cuz they have them on auto fire and they automaticaly target my hidden troops..

[IGdood]

Warscape Engine. No range bonus for being on a hill. Been here since ETW and NTW.

[DeMolay]

Warscape Engine. No range bonus for being on a hill. Been here since ETW and NTW.

Are you sure it's not "moddable" ?

[SonOfCrusader76]

Warscape Engine. No range bonus for being on a hill. Been here since ETW and NTW.

That wasn't my experience in Empire.

[IGdood]

I think it's an engine limitation.

[fightermedic]

that change sucks
can't see why they implemented this
as with the diplomtaic options to exchange regions this has worked flawlessly in napoleon (for gunpoder units, not sure if it works for matchlocks in shogun 2)
there just was no goddamn need to change this

[adiuvat]

For the apologists claiming the physics of elevation is just too hard to model, hmm. All processors that run this game are in ghz. Let's say the physics takes up roughly 1ghz of x86 cpu time, assuming you're running a machine that is >2ghz. No need to get into complex topics like 64bit optimizations, or really kinky stuff like gpu compute.

Now then. Let's say you brought 20 archer units of 160 men apiece, and so did the other guy. 40*160=6400. Starting to sound scary, right? No.

Each unit is only firing at one other unit.. there is no split fire in this game. So, the plus-minus has to be calculated 40 times TOTAL. That is, will the unit fire, because it's in range, or not? That's the only decision that has to be made here. And you make it for the whole unit at once. 40 times. Let's be generous and say you need 100 instructions to run the calculation. 4000 cycles * 60 hz = 240k cycles per second. Out of 1 BILLION cycles per second. 0.00024, or 0.024% of the physics cycle budget on a low end machine in the theoretical worst case scenario. And that's being ridiculously conservative. I'm sure you could do the calculation in under ten instructions.

Yeah, sure, it's *really* expensive to have super advanced physical modeling like this in games.

/did physics programming for 3 shipped games. Flame on.

[loony]

super advanced physics? simple 2-vector model with a (height) difference on Y axis allowing further movement over the X axis?? this is complicated? wtf? you have got to be kidding...

[vanadis]

As a multiplayer gamer I'm very glad they don't get a range advantage on hills, since camping is powerful enough without additional range.

I agree it isn't realistic in any way, but in this case gameplay > realism.

[priam11]

One of the problems with the hidden aspect is the AI is constantly shuffling their armies when they are in heavy forests. Keep bloody still for bit and you might stay hidden a bit longer.

Also why are the generals unable to hide? Seems a bit dumb that an entire army is hidden except for the general. It would add more to the immersion factor for the game.

[emperor77]

Also why are the generals unable to hide? Seems a bit dumb that an entire army is hidden except for the general. It would add more to the immersion factor for the game.

The reason is AI that stupid thing wouldn't have a target if your general would be hidden, they would just sit there doing nothing.

[priam11]

The reason is AI that stupid thing wouldn't have a target if your general would be hidden, they would just sit there doing nothing.

Not really refering to the AI's point of view but from the player. It would make those types of battles much harder. Seeing where their general is at all times gives me a pretty good idea where they are exactly.

[Humble Warrior]

Not really refering to the AI's point of view but from the player. It would make those types of battles much harder. Seeing where their general is at all times gives me a pretty good idea where they are exactly.

This has been a pet peeve since the original Shogun. I remember in that game desperately `hiding` my General in trees and wondering why the AI always saw him... Until I realised the General can never hide. Uh why?

I don`t see why you can`t have the General hidden too and have the BAI send out scouts forward and then if nothing there, start a wide circle or zig-zag search including near all forests. As soon as it spots the Player`s army it should retreat to the main army and togther advance.

As for the archers, I agree. Archers should have an advantage on the hill not just in moral, but in range. If archers appear overpowered, then lower the kill effect of arrows. If these guys would stick to Sun Tzu and stop altering things for their version of `fun` we might actually be able to use proper tactics like in the original STW and MTW.

[Col]

I've always enjoyed taking down campers with line infantry in NTW. But its a legitimate strategy for newer players. If you're want to nerf camping, a better solution would be to increase the cost of siege units. That would be a whole better than to do away with an entire battle mechanic.

[adiuvat]

And for the apologists saying range calculations have to be broken so the game can be balanced, just nerf archer damage then, or accuracy. Don't nerf fundamental physics. Don't make the samurai run at 20 mph either.

[Humble Warrior]

I`m no modder, but it makes sense that compromises would have to be made. The battle map simply isn`t big enough to put true to scale ranges and the units aren`t small enough. Only a proportional representation can be done.

[adiuvat]

I'd like it parameterized, so that whatever the range boost given due to hill is (call it R), there's some data file controlled parameter k such that the final range boost is R*k, allowing modders to play with how much range boost is given from altitude.

Ideally *every* important physical attribute and AI property would have some data-driver control that allows modders to screw around with them. There aren't enough constants in a well-realized physical system like the latest TW system (and I totally give them credit for doing a FINE job on this one, as well as Rome's engine). I just.. hunger for perfection. They're so close!

[Ecka65]

My dear fellow, I fear Brigadier Holmes has been ferreting around in my sitting room! I've spent weeks tweaking these very tables! Initially it was not because I loathed the bows so much as I simply couldn't stand the matchlocks having less range and effectiveness than damn bows. Utter nonsense Sir! By experimenting with the armor penetration values as well as half ranges, damage and velocity I am very close to being satisfied.

However, as you say, we must await the patch.

Sadly, I did post in the mod threads a proposal for just such a mod - being more than prepared to release a beta - but met with little or no interest. My work thus far has been purely for private enjoyment. I must say, watching your samurai laugh at ashigaru arrows at medium ranges is a source of satisfaction. But nothing like the satisfaction of watching a well delivered volley of musket fire put the wind up whoever was at the wrong end of it!

I must confess my good man, that the ears don't go well with all this string twanging of bows. Nor do my arms take too well to lugging a sword nowadays. But give me a whiff of sulphur and the crackle of musketry and by God I'm a new man!

[Asuryan]

Yeah it's disappointing that there's no range bonus. I was really frustrated on the demo battle (especially Sekigahara) I ran my ashigaru atop the hill just to find out they can't shoot at the Tokugawa. It's already became my habit that I'll place my archers on a hill, keep forgetting that they don't get any bonuses. So I'm just trying to stop doing that and send my archer run forth, spray the enemy, then run back.