Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
Discussions Rules and Guidelines
Report this post
Similarly, in Warhammer 40k Gladius, players can rename every unit, which could be really fun and satisfying in a Sims 4 kind of way, if that makes sense.
I think it would be cool in this game, for sure.
Armies are not static in aow. They don't need to be recruited into the stack, they don't need a leader, they can be split and recombined wherever and however you want.
So, once again, what would the name be attached to? Does it go away the moment you change the stack in any way? If you name a 6-stack and split it into 3s, do they both share the name? Does it disappear? Does the name change if something in the stack evolves and suddenly becomes the leader?
No.
The three units you selected get a new name. The easiest way to keep the names unique would be to add a number at the end for the new army. So if you had an army named "BFG" and split it in two, the new one would be "BFG 1". If you split either "BFG 1" or "BFG", the new army would be called "BFG 2", and so on.
If armies with the same name (not including the number) merged together, the lowest number would remain (so BFG 3 + BFG 5 = BFG 3, for example). If they merged with the original stack, the original stack would remain. If armies with different names merged together, you could apply the same rule. If they had the same number, you would name the merged army after the army that was standing still.
No.
Not saying I support (or oppose) this idea, but it is VERY doable, albeit somewhat tedious to program all these rules.
"The army" doesn't have a centralized unit that the army is based on. If you took the BFG example and split it into a 2-stack and a 4-stack, and they automatically got a number on the name, what happens when you split one of those stacks again? Also how does the game differentiate between who inhereits a new name and who keeps the original name. If you split a stack of 6 into 1 and 5, that can be done by moving the 5 out of the 6, or moving the 1 out of the 6. Currently the game doesn't have to actually keep track of this, because there is no difference, but if they're being given (and then automatically assigned names), this suddenly has to mean two different things, and then be tracked differently.
Then it gets even worse, what if you rename any of them then recombine them? Whose name do they keep? Or when you take units from one named stack and add them to another named stack that was completely different?
It just keeps going and going from here. No matter how many answers you provide, there will be more ways to continue breaking it, and at the end of the day it would require so many rules and conditions to even function, but would have lost all meaning by the time you've taken something from a 'named' stack, and moved it through 10 different stacks, had it be a normal unit, had it evolve, had it become a leader, etc. Nevermind the fact that the game would now have to keep track of all of this to have it even work, which it currently doesn't seem to.
Then there's the part where this starts to become a lot like named mod loadouts in planetfall, and most players agreed having to have a name for each iteration was more of an annoyance than a benefit.
I mean, I agree.
But I don't agree with it requiring conditions and rules to function. A state machine can do it easily without making the code unnecessarily complex or full of if/else statements. It will, however, cause a performance impact however little as the game now needs to run additional code to execute it and that I don't think is worth it.
Well, let's see what I wrote...
The units you manually select are the ones whose army gets a new name.
Again, let's see what I wrote...
None of what you said "breaks" what I wrote. In fact, a lot of what you said makes me think you didn't even read what I wrote, seeing as how the situations you described are covered by what I wrote.
Having the option isn't bad. You can just turn it off if you don't want to use it.
I read it. You're not following the process or not understanding what I'm saying. Which makes sense, considering we're talking about something that doesn't make sense in this game because it relies on keeping track of processes that normally don't need to be tracked.
You're talking about BFG splits into BFG1 and BFG2, then BFG2 can be split into BFG3 and BFG4.
I'm pointing out that you can also split BFG into BFG1, BFG2, and BFG3, which is a different BFG3 than the BFG3 you mentioned, because it's coming from a different flow. None of this mattered before.
Also, you're clearly the one not reading what I wrote, because "if armies with different names merged together, you could apply the same rule." would only apply if the only difference was the number, and I specifically mentioned RENAMING the army. As in you're combining an army named BFG and an army named XYZ, what name would they use?
And, no, most of your situations are not covered by what I said. You're assuming that nothing is ever being changed but the numbers, and then assuming it will just reverse the automatic naming process, but that's not the case,. If you're allowed to just name any stack, then you can completely remove and change those numbers, and it STILL would need a way to handle re-combining them again if they're completely different names and are still expected to be automatic.
And if they're NOT automatic, then the names are being lost or have to be manually re-entered every time something combines that there isn't a convenient number system for. Then it gets even better when we're talking about numbered sub-stacks of completely different armies being combined, like XYZ 23 + BFG 3, and then being joined by a hero with their own name.
You're talking like this is simple, but it's not. It's not simple to add, it's not simple to maintain or debug, and it rapidly progresses into uselessness if you're doing the usual splitting and adjusting of stacks that comes naturally in this game.
Stacks are dynamic in AoW, they aren't designed to be fixed or to have a fixed identity. They don't have a nucleus to assign an ID to that would be persistent, either. Closest and cleanest you could get would be to give a hero's army a name, and have that name always used any time that hero is the leader.
Let's see here...
In this case, BFG and XYZ have the same number (none), so if you moved XYZ into BFG, for example, then the combined army would be called BFG, since XYZ was being "absorbed" by BFG.
If you change the name, then it becomes a "unique" name, as far as the game is concerned. So if you renamed "BFG 2" to "BFG 5", a split from "BFG 5" would become "BFG 5 2". Still, why would you - or anyone - do this, except to try to break something?
It's simple to add, but not easy. And I don't think there's a lot that's easy to maintain and/or debug. As for being useless, like I said, I'm not saying I'm for or against the idea, just that it's doable.
When you select an army and have that pop-up with all the units in it, does that entity (the army) not have a unique ID? If not, how is it possible to select the army that you want? Clearly the game already differentiates between armies.