I was searching in data.pak for interesting things and i found something.. Ubi implemented small, average and large battlefiled size to the beta.. But for some reason they blocked small and large battlefield and all battles are in average size..

I was traying change sometihng in config files.. and i found one line in autoexec.cfg : combat_force_average_arena 1

I tried to change this line to: combat_force_large_arena 1 but didnt works. And than i tried to change this line into combat_force_average_arena 0 and it works like a dynamic size battlefield. If u have small army..the battlefields is smaller as now.. but in large armies the battlefield sets to large . Don't know how can this works in net games but in hot-seat and SP games it works perfect.. try it

This message has been edited. Last edited by: xManiaCCCx,

In your data.pak incursions have you found anything relating to scrolling the screen on the battle screen? I.E. you zoom in on the battle field to get a closer look at your troops, but it blocks half the screen.

No...i found in data.pak command for being combat. I tried it. and i saw that battlefield can be set to large and small size. i try all surface ( snow is not implemented) and all have small and large battlefields too..

Ahh sry man.. i didnt undestand your question Ok.. I tried to play with camera to bind some move camera same like in adventure map into cities and combat..but didn't work.. iand in data.pak i found that move with camera is possible only in avdenture map.. in cities nd combat u can only pan, rotate, zoom and raise camera in cities only.. Trust me.. i tried almost everything..but camera isn't movable..

Bummer, on the higher resolution settings a lot of the creatures look so tiny, that you want to zoom in. However, when you zoom in the screen for some reason just focuses on the center of the battlefield, seems like an oversight. I hope they resolve that issue.

if anyone found way how force large battlefield in all combats, pls write here.. Can't find right command..

Err... People- remember that this is a beta. That is, you're supposed to be testing the game, not testing what's been discarded. If you play with the dynamic battlefields, most feedback you give on combats is pretty much unuseable.

I dont agree with naileg at all!

great work man

gj, this can stop all the threads about the battlefield size.

pls find a way to activate the a.i for the cpu(as in there should be an a.i script that is deactivated atm and actaully makes the cpu do soemthing but stay in town) and every1 will be happy.

quote:

Originally posted by akrav:
pls find a way to activate the a.i for the cpu(as in there should be an a.i script that is deactivated atm and actaully makes the cpu do soemthing but stay in town) and every1 will be happy.

Working on it...but i am affraind it's impossible becaus the ai_scripts are probably removed.. But i'll try something..

ye i also looked into it and the only thing I thought it could possibly be is AIgeometry, but thats just code for positioning and stuff of troops(at least from the 2 files I opened) and I doubt it will help the a.i at all.

the only way is if we get new files.

Good one, xManiaCCCx!

Now you can do a decent testing on why the variable battlefield had to be taken out although it was such a great idea!

You should start playing the different factions in hotseat against each other, watching the importance and strength of shooters. Mind that e.g. Inferno gets their shooters later than other factions.

And btw you'll certainly find out that you can easily split your shooter stacks into 7 to force a large battlefield everytime. So you can finish off small grunts before they can even reach you.
That's an exploit that can hardly be solved.

And you will see how hard it can be to click your small creatures on the large field. So it's not only about how beautiful they look when nearer (what's still a rather weak, compared to the gameplay issue), but also how well or bad you can access them.

So to solve the gameplay issue vs the accessibility an average field has to be in the final game, being like 12x10.

I suspect that a "dynamic" sized battlefields would only work well for 2 cases:

1. All creatures are melee only [no casters, shooters, etc.]

OR

2. Everything else

Otherwise you have to do things like dynamically adjust damage values or dynamically adjust speed of crossing the field, etc.

I would think that a slightly larger battlefield that is fixed in size would be fine.

its a great idea having the size of the battlfield dependes on how large is your army!.

quote:

Originally posted by ravidlior:
its a great idea having the size of the battlfield dependes on how large is your army!.

Exactly my thoughts! Unfortunately it does not work.

sorry but that dynamic size battlefield is a bad idea

the best -that is the most simple- that u can do is increase 1-2 squares per side and reduce the sixe of some creatures, believe me, even if u increase the size of the map u will find problems to move some units by that 4 square size monsters

This is large battlefield.. I think i sould be fine dueling on this size..

Thank God, now I can finally throw a decent attack against that army stack with 4000 angels...

yeah, yeah, looks nice, but coz most creatures are small

Just out of curiosity, what advantage does hypersnap have over just using the 'PrintS Screen' key on the keyboard?