Matrix thread.
-
- Sergeant First Class - Panzer IIIL
- Posts: 361
- Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2011 7:00 pm
- Location: Staunton, Va.
Matrix thread.
The thread about this game on the Matrix General Discussion Forum has been brought back to the top by someone who bought the game because of a mod he saw. A link to see it is in his post. I took the opportunity to once again post how excellent this game is. I don't do mods but it's worth a look at for those who do. I think that the thread being made current again gives fans of this game a chance to post there about how good it is. Perhaps sales will increase if more of us tell about its' virtues.
Re: Matrix thread.
agreed, also don't think many really understand the game and how good and great it is, ease of use and small footprint means almost anyone can enjoy, must admit i enjoyed the beta and loved the game
Re: Matrix thread.
Thank you for spreading the word!
Have a nice evening guys.
Have a nice evening guys.
-
- Brigadier-General - Elite Grenadier
- Posts: 2164
- Joined: Fri Jan 01, 2010 4:40 pm
- Location: Wokingham, UK
Re: Matrix thread.
I love the game and still play now, I'm currently playing random worlds at the highest difficulty level and am (finally) about to win after my third attempt. I wouldn't describe the game as great, but would describe it as very good. To make it great a number of the bugs need fixing and some of the illogical (maybe poor logic may be a better description) AI play would need improving.
Some examples;
1 - Too often the replay facility is in the wrong order, units walk into the sea and then a ship arrives, or a ship moves across the ocean, then a unit runs across the sea to the ship.
2 - Continuing to build or pointlessly move settlers around country despite everything being developed. If there are no roads to build or improve and all the fields are built then sell them and build armies instead. Slightly related is the tendency to move settlers next to enemy units... the result is very predictable.
3 - AI relies on cavalry far too much. It will continue to build and send to death cavalry units despite their ineffectiveness against hoplites or legionaries.
4 - Randomly moving badly damaged units or continuing to attack with them even when they are likely to die. There seems to be no concept of resting for a few periods to heal. This way moderately good units never get chance to evolve into good or great veteran units.
I could list more improvements... but I want this to be a supportive comment for a very good game that has the potential to be great.
Some examples;
1 - Too often the replay facility is in the wrong order, units walk into the sea and then a ship arrives, or a ship moves across the ocean, then a unit runs across the sea to the ship.
2 - Continuing to build or pointlessly move settlers around country despite everything being developed. If there are no roads to build or improve and all the fields are built then sell them and build armies instead. Slightly related is the tendency to move settlers next to enemy units... the result is very predictable.
3 - AI relies on cavalry far too much. It will continue to build and send to death cavalry units despite their ineffectiveness against hoplites or legionaries.
4 - Randomly moving badly damaged units or continuing to attack with them even when they are likely to die. There seems to be no concept of resting for a few periods to heal. This way moderately good units never get chance to evolve into good or great veteran units.
I could list more improvements... but I want this to be a supportive comment for a very good game that has the potential to be great.
-
- Sergeant First Class - Panzer IIIL
- Posts: 361
- Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2011 7:00 pm
- Location: Staunton, Va.
Re: Matrix thread.
I've seen #1 and it amuses me more than bothers me.
I agree with # 2, 3 and 4.
I agree with # 2, 3 and 4.
Re: Matrix thread.
It is a feature called "walking Jesus", you didn't know that?
On a serious note - we know about this bug and we will look into this.
True, this should be improved. On the other hand, AI does sell those settlers eventually. It just takes some time to consider it properly.Morbio wrote: ↑Tue Jun 25, 2019 12:14 pmContinuing to build or pointlessly move settlers around country despite everything being developed. If there are no roads to build or improve and all the fields are built then sell them and build armies instead. Slightly related is the tendency to move settlers next to enemy units... the result is very predictable.
That's also true but this is on purpose. It tries to use the cavalry units for initial attacks (cavalry units have high withdrawal chance) and the same turn AI attacks these weaken units (with more battles penalty) with strong melee units. That's what cavalry units are for. It might not be balanced perfectly but that's how it should be.
This really suprises me. AI not only uses healing itself and recovering but very often to send damaged units to rear and use proper "healing" action. I havent noticed at all that it attacks with very weak units.Morbio wrote: ↑Tue Jun 25, 2019 12:14 pmRandomly moving badly damaged units or continuing to attack with them even when they are likely to die. There seems to be no concept of resting for a few periods to heal. This way moderately good units never get chance to evolve into good or great veteran units.
-
- Brigadier-General - Elite Grenadier
- Posts: 2164
- Joined: Fri Jan 01, 2010 4:40 pm
- Location: Wokingham, UK
Re: Matrix thread.
It does this even when there is no more land to build on, this is most apparent on small islandspavelk wrote: ↑Tue Jun 25, 2019 3:53 pmTrue, this should be improved. On the other hand, AI does sell those settlers eventually. It just takes some time to consider it properly.Morbio wrote: ↑Tue Jun 25, 2019 12:14 pmContinuing to build or pointlessly move settlers around country despite everything being developed. If there are no roads to build or improve and all the fields are built then sell them and build armies instead. Slightly related is the tendency to move settlers next to enemy units... the result is very predictable.
-
- Brigadier-General - Elite Grenadier
- Posts: 2164
- Joined: Fri Jan 01, 2010 4:40 pm
- Location: Wokingham, UK
Re: Matrix thread.
I almost always see it attack with wave after wave of cavalry, all dieing or getting very depleted, without an infantry unit in sight. It will eventually build nomads, but that's when the population and economy is almost dead after constantly building units it soon loses.pavelk wrote: ↑Tue Jun 25, 2019 3:53 pmThat's also true but this is on purpose. It tries to use the cavalry units for initial attacks (cavalry units have high withdrawal chance) and the same turn AI attacks these weaken units (with more battles penalty) with strong melee units. That's what cavalry units are for. It might not be balanced perfectly but that's how it should be.
-
- Brigadier-General - Elite Grenadier
- Posts: 2164
- Joined: Fri Jan 01, 2010 4:40 pm
- Location: Wokingham, UK
Re: Matrix thread.
Yes, it will move some units to the rear, but it's not the majority action. It rarely pauses and uses self-heal, which is economical even if slower.pavelk wrote: ↑Tue Jun 25, 2019 3:53 pmThis really suprises me. AI not only uses healing itself and recovering but very often to send damaged units to rear and use proper "healing" action. I havent noticed at all that it attacks with very weak units.Morbio wrote: ↑Tue Jun 25, 2019 12:14 pmRandomly moving badly damaged units or continuing to attack with them even when they are likely to die. There seems to be no concept of resting for a few periods to heal. This way moderately good units never get chance to evolve into good or great veteran units.
Re: Matrix thread.
Yes, this certainly requires some improvement.
Self-heal is the least-favourable action indeed. If there is a way to heal inside a builder, AI goes for it. If there is a way to recover, AI goes for it. Self-heal is something what should be used only when you have enough money and time and there is no threat around.
I also wouldn't call it "economical" because you pay a soldier's pay to these units every turn and this pay is pretty much "wasted" because that unit is unusable. It is the same like having a car and paying an insurance for it but you couldn't use it. Usually you want the car to be functional and that's why you try to heal it as quickly as you can. Self-heal is good only in a situation when there is nothing else for the army to do and you want to keep it.
And does that AI player have an access to advanced unit types? Indeed this should not be like that, but maybe it was already the only option in that situation?Morbio wrote: ↑Fri Jun 28, 2019 7:12 amI almost always see it attack with wave after wave of cavalry, all dieing or getting very depleted, without an infantry unit in sight. It will eventually build nomads, but that's when the population and economy is almost dead after constantly building units it soon loses.
-
- Brigadier-General - Elite Grenadier
- Posts: 2164
- Joined: Fri Jan 01, 2010 4:40 pm
- Location: Wokingham, UK
Re: Matrix thread.
I think the 'enough money' comment is misleading. You have to pay for the unit's upkeep whether it is active or not and this applies for self-healing and healing in a city. It's more efficient from a resource perspective because there is no cost for self-healing (other than time), whereas healing in a city consumes population and IIRC another resource (gold?). Consuming population isn't free, this reduces taxes (gold generation) or can cost in terms of birth control support to replace it. Self-healing also gives additional benefits or not reducing morale of the unit and its experience. I have found that fewer, highly experienced units are much more effective in battle and cost much less to support. I only ever use healing in cities in a dire emergency. I even self-heal on the front line once units get moderately experienced as they aren't always attacked, and if they are then they can withstand the attack without problems.pavelk wrote: ↑Fri Jun 28, 2019 7:25 amSelf-heal is the least-favourable action indeed. If there is a way to heal inside a builder, AI goes for it. If there is a way to recover, AI goes for it. Self-heal is something what should be used only when you have enough money and time and there is no threat around.
I also wouldn't call it "economical" because you pay a soldier's pay to these units every turn and this pay is pretty much "wasted" because that unit is unusable. It is the same like having a car and paying an insurance for it but you couldn't use it. Usually you want the car to be functional and that's why you try to heal it as quickly as you can. Self-heal is good only in a situation when there is nothing else for the army to do and you want to keep it.
Re: Matrix thread.
That is true for sure but self-healing can take up to 20 turns (depending on the actual damage), recovering only up to 8 (depending on the actual damage) and healing inside is always just two turns. If you don't need the army, that's absolutely fine. Unfortunately it is not always the case.
This is a bit risky, because during self-healing, the unit has 50% defense penalty but whatever works for you is good.
-
- Brigadier-General - Elite Grenadier
- Posts: 2164
- Joined: Fri Jan 01, 2010 4:40 pm
- Location: Wokingham, UK
Re: Matrix thread.
Yes, it has access to advanced unit types... it just rarely builds them. The don't subscribe to the attack with cavalry first option, I always attack with infantry, the first takes some damage and will win some battles, but they build experience win or lose and once they get experienced they are much more effective. I never build stables or cavalry and always sell or destroy stables as soon as I acquire them. Sometimes I keep cavalry that defect to me, either as cheap units to garrison a city, or for scouting and capturing other units and besieging cities. In my opinion cavalry only has some good use is for; scouting, isolating and for guarding a large area before paved roads. I think cavalry for Carthage sometimes makes sense because it has a huge area to defend from seaborne invasions and it's not always practical to have infantry everywhere. Even in this role it is only really useful for delaying the enemy until infantry arrive. Note: Once paved roads are in play and units have elite and pathfinder then they can cover a fairly large area without problems. Once the roads bonus comes into play it's even easier.pavelk wrote: ↑Fri Jun 28, 2019 7:25 amAnd does that AI player have an access to advanced unit types? Indeed this should not be like that, but maybe it was already the only option in that situation?Morbio wrote: ↑Fri Jun 28, 2019 7:12 amI almost always see it attack with wave after wave of cavalry, all dieing or getting very depleted, without an infantry unit in sight. It will eventually build nomads, but that's when the population and economy is almost dead after constantly building units it soon loses.
One other strange behaviour I observe at times is the building of cities with army units. To see a hoplite used to build a new city seems madness to me, especially given the lack of use of infantry. I'm less concerned about cavalry as I don't see the value of these anyway. Having said that, there are times when a lack of gold may make supporting units an issue and so this is a quick way to reduce costs and start generating more income, however I still see this behaviour more than I'd expect.
Last edited by Morbio on Fri Jun 28, 2019 12:04 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
- Brigadier-General - Elite Grenadier
- Posts: 2164
- Joined: Fri Jan 01, 2010 4:40 pm
- Location: Wokingham, UK
Re: Matrix thread.
I agree on both points. The use of these tactics, as with all decisions, needs to be done with thought. I heal my units before they get devastated and so are generally only needing 1-4 turns to fully heal so the extra time is less of an issue. The more experienced and stronger a unit gets then the less damage it takes, which means less downtime. Ultimately I get an army whereby I have about 25-33% of the army recovering all the time and I cycle through the units for attacks.pavelk wrote: ↑Fri Jun 28, 2019 11:56 amThat is true for sure but self-healing can take up to 20 turns (depending on the actual damage), recovering only up to 8 (depending on the actual damage) and healing inside is always just two turns. If you don't need the army, that's absolutely fine. Unfortunately it is not always the case.
This is a bit risky, because during self-healing, the unit has 50% defense penalty but whatever works for you is good.
Re: Matrix thread.
Same here. I rotate out battered units to use them on guard duty.Morbio wrote: ↑Fri Jun 28, 2019 12:02 pmI agree on both points. The use of these tactics, as with all decisions, needs to be done with thought. I heal my units before they get devastated and so are generally only needing 1-4 turns to fully heal so the extra time is less of an issue. The more experienced and stronger a unit gets then the less damage it takes, which means less downtime. Ultimately I get an army whereby I have about 25-33% of the army recovering all the time and I cycle through the units for attacks.pavelk wrote: ↑Fri Jun 28, 2019 11:56 amThat is true for sure but self-healing can take up to 20 turns (depending on the actual damage), recovering only up to 8 (depending on the actual damage) and healing inside is always just two turns. If you don't need the army, that's absolutely fine. Unfortunately it is not always the case.
This is a bit risky, because during self-healing, the unit has 50% defense penalty but whatever works for you is good.