Originally Posted by Ryan Zelazny
I quite agree with your point, Solomai. Having differing levels of AI based on the actual intelligence of the creature is very good for keeping the theme with a game, especially where such things as trolls do exist. Is it good for gameplay? Well from what we've heard it's a no, so far. These types of things will be based on how things work out once they are implimented, and we find out what works best, both from our own standpoints and the standpoints of the beta testers.
Originally Posted by Darvin
Gameplay value should trump realism (otherwise the bases should be at least a few hours of walking from each other, now shouldn't they?), and the added management of having to baby-sit your trolls (or cavalry, for that matter) is certainly something that isn't desireable. I don't think making them chase after the most vulnerable units is absolutely necessary, just make it so that they won't run towards the ones they're vulnerabe to.
I've got a lot of experience with BFME2 as I worked with a group that made an extensive mod to rework the game mechanics. Attack trolls were one of the most annoying to work with since their primary counter was actually an AI bug that we couldn't fix.
I totally agree with both of you on the gameplay vs realism point, I was merely making an observation...
Obviously from a balance perspective trolls would be a very powerful unit and to have an easily exploited weakness would render them virtually useless... at the same time perhaps a good balance could be a percentage chance that trolls will berserk after they take so much damage, reducing their defense value but increasing their attack, and when they hit say 10% health make a reckless charge or something? that would make them behave in a more troll-like manner whilst maintaining playability
The problem with trolls is that a few arrows would only **** them off
It would totally suck if it took like 200 archers and a full heavy cavalry company to bring 1 down
talk about realistic