(Secondary) attack types (https://code.wildfiregames.com/D368)

[Ceres]

This was started because of this:

Maybe we can discuss here about secondary attack types and how this is proposed there:

https://code.wildfiregames.com/D368

[Stan`]

Bring back A23!

Seriously though I think this would be a great addition to the engine. I can see it being used for the 1866 mod.

[Ceres]

1866 mod?

[maroder]

I'm in favor, there are so many interesting possibilities. Although it may make balancing harder.

[Stan`]

31 minutes ago, Ceres said:

1866 mod?

See this and this

[Ceres]

But why is secondary attacks specifically a topic for this mod? For testing purposes? Could it eventually flow into vanilla 0ad?

[Stan`]

Well the goal is to have it in Vanilla so other mods can use it too.

[Micfild]

Hi! If it is of any interest, i've found that if you copy the <melee> attack of a spearman.xml and add it to a javelineer.xml file it will show on the ui, but the javelineer will still only use it's ranged attack. However, if you change the <PreferredClasses datatype="tokens"> of that <melee> attack from "Human" to "Structure", when you order those Javelineers to attack a structure, they will use the melee attack instead of the ranged one. I even changed the damage of the melee attack to something stupid like 250 Hack just to be sure that it wasn't using the damage values of the ranged attack.

I might be wrong, but this small experiment leads me to believe that it might be possible to implement the secondary attack mechanic by making use of this preference thing.

Also, i found in the component Attack.js a GetBestAttackAgainst function (lines 343 to 378), that draws a distinction between Slaughter, Capture and other forms of attack. I don't know if this function is used or not since i haven't found another reference to it, but it might be possible to add more distinctions to it (maybe even one based on distance between units and stuff).

I don't know if this will help but, who knows?

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

18 hours ago, Stan&#x60; said:

Bring back A23!

 

Nah, merge DE. 

[Stan`]

6 hours ago, Micfild said:

Hi! If it is of any interest, i've found that if you copy the <melee> attack of a spearman.xml and add it to a javelineer.xml file it will show on the ui, but the javelineer will still only use it's ranged attack. However, if you change the <PreferredClasses datatype="tokens"> of that <melee> attack from "Human" to "Structure", when you order those Javelineers to attack a structure, they will use the melee attack instead of the ranged one. I even changed the damage of the melee attack to something stupid like 250 Hack just to be sure that it wasn't using the damage values of the ranged attack.

I might be wrong, but this small experiment leads me to believe that it might be possible to implement the secondary attack mechanic by making use of this preference thing.

Also, i found in the component Attack.js a GetBestAttackAgainst function (lines 343 to 378), that draws a distinction between Slaughter, Capture and other forms of attack. I don't know if this function is used or not since i haven't found another reference to it, but it might be possible to add more distinctions to it (maybe even one based on distance between units and stuff).

I don't know if this will help but, who knows?

Well it already works in @bb_'s patch

[Micfild]

1 hour ago, Stan&#x60; said:

Well it already works in @bb_'s patch

Is that the 1866 mod that you mentioned before or something else?

[Stan`]

2 minutes ago, Micfild said:

Is that the 1866 mod that you mentioned before or something else?

No that's this patch https://code.wildfiregames.com/D368

[Lion.Kanzen]

On 22/09/2021 at 12:08 AM, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:

Nah, merge DE. 

Not at all. 90%.

[Lion.Kanzen]

this patch would save us from having several units that are the same.

it happens with certain skirmishers who were also swordmen.

[Genava55]

From what I see it is wanted mostly to give to some units the abilities to switch between ranged and melee attacks. But I think it is more complex than that.

The cases I identified are:

1. Infantry ranged and infantry melee.
2. Cavalry melee and cavalry trampling.
3. Cavalry charged attack and cavalry melee.
4. Naval ranged and naval melee (ramming).
5. Siege ranged and siege melee.
6. Elephant ranged and elephant melee.

In some cases, the wanted feature is a switch between melee and ranged that would be manually activated.

In other cases it is multiple attacks simultaneously like archers on elephants and siege towers with battering ram.

[Genava55]

A poll on aoe forum suggests people want an automatic switch from ranged to melee when fighting in close combat:

https://forums.ageofempires.com/t/poll-should-ranged-units-switch-to-melee-attack-in-close-combat/240872

 

[alre]

1 hour ago, Genava55 said:

A poll on aoe forum suggests people want an automatic switch from ranged to melee when fighting in close combat:

https://forums.ageofempires.com/t/poll-should-ranged-units-switch-to-melee-attack-in-close-combat/240872

I agree with the results.

personally I would rather have different stances that define the automatic switching logic, than let users do all the switching.

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

13 hours ago, Genava55 said:

From what I see it is wanted mostly to give to some units the abilities to switch between ranged and melee attacks. But I think it is more complex than that.

The cases I identified are:

1. Infantry ranged and infantry melee.
2. Cavalry melee and cavalry trampling.
3. Cavalry charged attack and cavalry melee.
4. Naval ranged and naval melee (ramming).
5. Siege ranged and siege melee.
6. Elephant ranged and elephant melee.

In some cases, the wanted feature is a switch between melee and ranged that would be manually activated.

In other cases it is multiple attacks simultaneously like archers on elephants and siege towers with battering ram.

Right, some of these are wholly different features. Such as the mentioned archer in elephant tower.

 

2 hours ago, alre said:

I agree with the results.

personally I would rather have different stances that define the automatic switching logic, than let users do all the switching.

Agreed as well. For a battalion system where you are controlling only 10-20 battalion "entities" manual switching makes way more sense. When you have 200 individual little soldiers to control, manual makes less sense.

[Lion.Kanzen]

1 hour ago, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:

Right, some of these are wholly different features. Such as the mentioned archer in elephant tower.

 

Agreed as well. For a battalion system where you are controlling only 10-20 battalion "entities" manual switching makes way more sense. When you have 200 individual little soldiers to control, manual makes less sense.

Controls will be needed for battalions in the long run and they will fight a little more in order.

Also the bonuses from the formations.

 

 

Edited Friday at 17:15 by Lion.Kanzen

[alre]

57 minutes ago, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:

Agreed as well. For a battalion system where you are controlling only 10-20 battalion "entities" manual switching makes way more sense. When you have 200 individual little soldiers to control, manual makes less sense.

even in total war, the only real reason for manual switch is that ammo is limited. but still, soldiers do automatically switch to melee if engaged.

[Lion.Kanzen]

In some games the secondary attack was a passive ability on the first encounter.

It was used before entering into melee clash.

 

 

Edited Friday at 18:08 by Lion.Kanzen

[Genava55]

2 hours ago, alre said:

even in total war, the only real reason for manual switch is that ammo is limited. but still, soldiers do automatically switch to melee if engaged.

The biggest difference in total war is that ranged units are locked by melee units when the fight is engaged. It is difficult to disengage the ranged units without taking massive losses.

3 hours ago, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:

Right, some of these are wholly different features. Such as the mentioned archer in elephant tower.

Yes. But it means the implementation of the attacks in javascript should take in account the different possibilities we could use. And the IA is the biggest issue because it should be adapted to use the features.

3 hours ago, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:

Agreed as well. For a battalion system where you are controlling only 10-20 battalion "entities" manual switching makes way more sense. When you have 200 individual little soldiers to control, manual makes less sense.

Obviously the best is to group all the units with this feature and to associate them to the same key.

Edited Friday at 19:42 by Genava55

[Lion.Kanzen]

In AoE 3, ranged units were also blocked when entering melee combat.