The pathfinding in this game really needs work

[Unchained]

The pathfinding within the game seems to be really bad.

Units often have a hard time passing even minor obstacles. They do not pick the shortest most logical routes and times and have to be micro-managed to do so.

Cities can be problematic. In larger battles the units often don't seem to obey orders or worse, get a mind of their own and go all over the place. This can be an issue because they can go around the wrong corner and get flanked or attacked from the rear (although admittedly, the AI is not competent enough to exploit this).

The AI does not seem to be faring any better and it seems to get its units killed a lot through poor positioning of units.

Compounding all of this, the patches have not seen any real improvements in this regard.

[Modestus]

The pathfinding within the game seems to be really bad.

Units often have a hard time passing even minor obstacles. They do not pick the shortest most logical routes and times and have to be micro-managed to do so.

Cities can be problematic. In larger battles the units often don't seem to obey orders or worse, get a mind of their own and go all over the place. This can be an issue because they can go around the wrong corner and get flanked or attacked from the rear (although admittedly, the AI is not competent enough to exploit this).

The AI does not seem to be faring any better and it seems to get its units killed a lot through poor positioning of units.

Compounding all of this, the patches have not seen any real improvements in this regard.

I actual beginning to suspect its more then just path finding and its also the interaction between the game and the players computer. The term to cover this I believe is the Graphical User Interface (GUI) so if you click on point A and your unit moves instead to point B is that a path finding problem or is it a GUI problem?

Since ETW there has been problems with some commands for example trying to quickly select a unit or targeting an enemy unit with artillery and while some of the issues with RTW2 would be
path-Finding I am now beginning to wonder is there an even deeper problem.

All games must be able to interpret the players commands effectively if the game its not doing that 100% then there is no reason to expect that AI commands will fair any better and while the player can quickly reissue a command what does the AI do?

Warscape has very strange unit behaviour across all of its games, units stopping an attack on its own accord , cavalry halting a pursuit even when the player ordered them to pursue, I have never seen an AI army turn passive as much as I have in the Warscape games its almost as if the commands are not getting through to the units.

[riskymonk]

I'd rather they just release more factions to purchase. Helps cover up the core elements and keep my mind off the flaws.

[jtfjtfjtf]

You can set waypoints by holding ctrl or shift, i forget which one. I usually do this if I want my units to flank so they don't try to go from point a to point b through units that are fighting, which they often do.

I wish there was a hold/pursue toggle. I hate how some units just stand there getting shot by arrows or watching their fellow soldiers fight against multiple units.

[Causeless]

Guard mode is really needed, definitely.

[Unchained]

Guard mode is really needed, definitely.

Yeah I'd agree.

Warscape does seem to have issues in all games that have been released with that engine. But it seems to be far worse in this title than in the others for some reason. That and the AI is not handling it very well.

[lollaaja]

The way pathfinding works in games is the accessible map is laid out in a grid, the size of each grid being determined by the developer. Smaller grids require more computational power but result in more accurate pathfinding. The program then works through the grid logically to determine the shortest path from point A to point B (think of one of those dot drawings where you have to draw lines in order between said dots to create the image). Rome 2 works in a 32-bit environment which severely limits the amount of available system resources that are possible to be assigned to it. The system does a good enough job but it's unlikely to be improved much before the next iteration of the engine which will hopefully be 64 bit or bigger.

[Taskeen]

Games got more problems than pathfinding :-D

[DeliCiousTZM]

Guard mode is really needed, definitely.

Guard mode is the default stance.

[Modestus]

Guard mode is the default stance.

That is almost like saying jumping off a cliff is flying mode, you mean the default mode is doing nothing.

Explain to me me why guard mode should be considerd a default mode ?

[karamazovmm]

That is almost like saying jumping off a cliff is flying mode, you mean the default mode is doing nothing.

Explain to me me why guard mode should be considerd a default mode ?

because that is the default mode.

not rather because you disagree with it, because it simply is.

[saeedonweb]

That is almost like saying jumping off a cliff is flying mode, you mean the default mode is doing nothing.

Explain to me me why guard mode should be considerd a default mode ?

I also miss a guard mode. I have seen it well implemented in the old Age of Empires series. I would like to be able to assign a couple of infantry units to guard my artillery. This does not work without micromanagement right now. Or if it does I am not aware if it.

[totalwar_legend]

The pathfinding does need improving, but in Rome 2 it is a vast improvement over the previous titles, especially Rome 1. Except maybe Shogun 2, but there were very few obstacles in that game making pathfinding easier to program.

Why do so many people jabber on about guard mode? You don't need it in Rome 2. The units stay in formation unless you don't know what you're doing.

[riskymonk]

The pathfinding does need improving, but in Rome 2 it is a vast improvement over the previous titles, especially Rome 1. Except maybe Shogun 2, but there were very few obstacles in that game making pathfinding easier to program.

Why do so many people jabber on about guard mode? You don't need it in Rome 2. The units stay in formation unless you don't know what you're doing.

Because micromanaging can be a chore when it's a 40v40 game... in head to head. Sometimes, if the opponents cav is engaged or he doesn't have any, you'll want one group of skirms to chase down swords who are trying to anvil and force them to run away and wait for support whilst leaving skirmish mode on. Sometimes you'll want the skirms behind your front line to stay put. Unfortunately it's just another strategy component stripped from the game yet requires more clicky.

They seemed to have gone backwards with the micromanagement thing. Less on the campaign map where you have all the time in the world to do things, more on the field where you only have 3, 5 maybe 6 mins of engagements. You need to use those magic powers more frequently and sooner than the opponent.

The ideas in this game were not developed and brainstormed by TW gamers.

[totalwar_legend]

Because micromanaging can be a chore when it's a 40v40 game... in head to head. Sometimes, if the opponents cav is engaged or he doesn't have any, you'll want one group of skirms to chase down swords who are trying to anvil and force them to run away and wait for support whilst leaving skirmish mode on. Sometimes you'll want the skirms behind your front line to stay put. Unfortunately it's just another strategy component stripped from the game yet requires more clicky.

They seemed to have gone backwards with the micromanagement thing. Less on the campaign map where you have all the time in the world to do things, more on the field where you only have 3, 5 maybe 6 mins of engagements. You need to use those magic powers more frequently and sooner than the opponent.

The ideas in this game were not developed and brainstormed by TW gamers.

Yes, I agree that the campaign map could use more options and micromanagement. But no, the battles are so much easier and fluid than in rome 1. You do not need to micromanage anywhere near as much and the battle pace is about the same.

[DeliCiousTZM]

Because micromanaging can be a chore when it's a 40v40 game... in head to head. Sometimes, if the opponents cav is engaged or he doesn't have any, you'll want one group of skirms to chase down swords who are trying to anvil and force them to run away and wait for support whilst leaving skirmish mode on. Sometimes you'll want the skirms behind your front line to stay put. Unfortunately it's just another strategy component stripped from the game yet requires more clicky.

They seemed to have gone backwards with the micromanagement thing. Less on the campaign map where you have all the time in the world to do things, more on the field where you only have 3, 5 maybe 6 mins of engagements. You need to use those magic powers more frequently and sooner than the opponent.

The ideas in this game were not developed and brainstormed by TW gamers.

I have had this problem 0 times. In over 100 H2H in Rome2 You place your unit in position behind your stuff and they will automatically fire. If you want to target fire you can target fire, but! Then you have to accept the fact that your units will carry out your order PROPERLY and chase them as they should. Solution? Get better controls.

I have skirmish mode off in every single engagement, you have to micro all those suckers individually. Skirmish mode works with HA against melee infantry thats it, anything else and you will just have a bad day. If the AI could skirmish as well as a player could manually few people would ever beat the AI.

Tbh i would like a different stances aside from guard mode, guard mode is all we have! I wish i had an option to make my units think for themselves and engage the nearest targets by themselves. Like Berserkers do.

The irony of crying about the lack of a guard mode when it is the only mode available is hilarious.

[Modestus]

The irony of crying about the lack of a guard mode when it is the only mode available is hilarious.

Guard mode in RTW1 meant that if you performed a ranged attack on the enemy your unit would remain in position and would not pursue the enemy unit if it moved out of range, a melee attack was essentially the same thing except of course you needed to make physical contact with the enemy.

However using ETW as an example if a player issues a ranged attack your unit will pursue that enemy unit and will always attempt to keep it within range regardless of whether you use guard mode or not, if you switch to melee your unit will attack the enemy unit but again whether you use guard mode or not it will not pursue.

The real difference is not between a guard mode and a free mode but between a ranged mode and melee mode, I would suggest that guard mode does not exist and that for RTW2 CA simply removed a button that basically did nothing compared to what guard mode meant in RTW1.

[GoTW Kubee]

Guard mode does not exist in R2 and all this does is give you less control over your army and fewer tactical options. In RTW, for example, knowing when to have guard mode on and when not to was very important in high-level online play. For every single unit aside from melee chariots there would be situations where you would need to toggle guard mode on or off.

Tbh though with the melee combat in this game being such a mess, it's hardly as if being able to toggle guard mode on or off would have made battles much better tactically. However, it still would have helped in that it would give you the option to not have your missiles abandon formation when their target leaves their firing arc. Missiles also now charge at enemy units they were firing at when they run out of ammo, which again cannot be avoided due to the lack of a guard mode.

[Alhaioth]

Skirmish mode is a huge mess. I've had my skirmishers run into the enemy troops way too many times. It's most egregious in urban combat.

And speaking of cities, once when I tried to disembark a fleet in a city and send the soldiers to the aid of the garrison they just started to lock up on the streets and had to be manually unlocked by reissuing the order. Even then, they would only go a few steps farther. THey barely made it to safety before the besieging army got them.

[karamazovmm]

Guard mode in RTW1 meant that if you performed a ranged attack on the enemy your unit would remain in position and would not pursue the enemy unit if it moved out of range, a melee attack was essentially the same thing except of course you needed to make physical contact with the enemy.

However using ETW as an example if a player issues a ranged attack your unit will pursue that enemy unit and will always attempt to keep it within range regardless of whether you use guard mode or not, if you switch to melee your unit will attack the enemy unit but again whether you use guard mode or not it will not pursue.

The real difference is not between a guard mode and a free mode but between a ranged mode and melee mode, I would suggest that guard mode does not exist and that for RTW2 CA simply removed a button that basically did nothing compared to what guard mode meant in RTW1.

interesting enough you are incorrect.

if you issue and attack order for a ranged unit it won't matter the mode, it will pursue the unit, thats how it works, and it works the same way for melee units, and this is true for tw I have played.

However... when you issue guard mode and the ranged unit starts shooting because someone entered their range, they will still be there at that spot and this is mimicked by the melee units as well.

unless my favourite tactic in m2tw changed a lot last time I played, and clearly that game doesn't use warscape.