Dumb Hero Movements: Smarter Hero Update Failure (Pics inside)

[Lloopy14]

I have not seen the behavior that you speak of. Troop retargeting usually requires the troop to be traveling some distance for the retargeting to take affect.

Before the update I was hunting for DE. I chose my base. Cleared all the buildings in the area - including the inferno that was in the way - and dropped my queen whose target was set on the DE.
She walked into the base aimed for the DE... then turned around walked outside the base and along the wall to some random building nowhere near her or the DE

The queen actually pulled back on her x bow... but my clan mate and I did not reach agreement as to whether she actually took a shot at the DE and ran away or just aimed and decided nah!

Fortunately I had wizards in my CC that cleared the DE or my king would have died for nothing.


I appreciate that you may not have seen such randomness & it can be difficult to understand. The only thing that I can say is that I'm bizarred out by it all.

[nesnnesn]

Check and mate. Eat your words. Oct. 2013
http://forum.supercell.net/showthrea...ht=Retargeting

It does mark the intended target however as stated that is subject to change until the troop does damage to a structure and locks on.

Haha, did you even read the thread that you linked? The thread that you linked is titled: Barbarian King Targetting Bug.

My point was that a hero ignoring the bullseye target is a bug. And that's exactly what your linked thread is proving: even assuming re-targeting, the BK should not have ignored the bullseyed town hall, because the town hall was the closest target. Here is Zombiebender's quote from your linked thread:

Yep, even if he redid the targeting algorithm its hard to imagine why he would change to the tesla based on his path.

So re-targeting is not the correct explanation for switching from a bullseyed target. Thanks for disproving your own argument that troops re-target on the way to the bullseyed target.

[Coathanger]

Haha, did you even read the thread that you linked? The thread that you linked is titled: Barbarian King Targetting Bug.

Sorry, troop re-targeting never used to happen with the bullseye mark

Is that enough of a highlight of the point being made? Let me spell it out for you. It happened in 2013 therefore the statement that it never used to happen is proven false.

My point was that a hero ignoring the bullseye target is a bug. And that's exactly what your linked thread is proving: even assuming re-targeting, the BK should not have ignored the bullseyed town hall, because the town hall was the closest target.

So re-targeting is not the correct explanation for switching from a bullseyed target. Thanks for disproving your own argument that troops re-target on the way to the bullseyed target.

Call it a bug if you want. However Steve's post in this thread explains that troops targeting odd buildings is intentional. When you combine Steve's explanation with troops seeking a different path (while moving towards their target) you get what you and others have shown. It is a function of the AI and not a bug.

Again show me the bullseye rule? This rule only exists in imagination.

[nesnnesn]

Is that enough of a highlight of the point being made? Let me spell it out for you. It happened in 2013 therefore the statement that it never used to happen is proven false.

Big whoop, so this bug happened before. That doesn't disprove that it is a bug. If you want to cherrypick statements, I can clearly prove your argument false too, with 3 pictures from the same thread that you linked:

When troops travel long distances and are not actively firing upon a target they will check for more optimal targets or paths.

Your argument is clearly proven false:

- Picture 1: BK bullseye on TH
- Picture 2: BK checking for more optimal target should still pick TH
- Picture 3: BK walks past TH, and attacks tesla

Is that enough of a highlight of the point being made? Let me spell it out for you. Your statement that troops walking toward the bullseye, will check for more optimal targets is proven false, because the BK did not choose the closest target.

[Coathanger]

Big whoop, so this bug happened before. That doesn't disprove that it is a bug.

The fact that it has happened before was not offered as evidence that it was not a bug. The fact it has happened before was offered to show that it was not new to the game and that your assertion of it being new to the game was false.

Call it a bug if you want. However Steve's post in this thread explains that troops targeting odd buildings is intentional. When you combine Steve's explanation with troops seeking a different path (while moving towards their target) you get what you and others have shown. It is a function of the AI and not a bug.

Again show me the bullseye rule? This rule only exists in imagination.

This quote is offered as evidence to disprove it being a bug.

Good job straw manning arguments.

Yes I used term optimal to describe the behavior and that was not an accurate way to describe it. The original post in response to the misnomer of the use of bug stands.

Troops en route to a target will reassess their intended target if they are not currently actively engaging one.

[nesnnesn]

Yes I used term optimal to describe the behavior and that was not an accurate way to describe it. The original post in response to the misnomer of the use of bug stands.

Troops en route to a target will reassess their intended target if they are not currently actively engaging one.

And I'll repeat my very first question to you, when you posted your original statement:

Care to share your source for that?

[nesnnesn]

The fact that it has happened before was not offered as evidence that it was not a bug. The fact it has happened before was offered to show that it was not new to the game and that your assertion of it being new to the game was false.

This quote is offered as evidence to disprove it being a bug.

Good job straw manning arguments.

Sorry, the only one strawmanning here is you. I was not trying to state that it never happened before, as a stand-alone argument that it was new to the game. Here are 3 sequential quotes I made about troops ignoring the bullseye.

Good job cherrypicking one fragment from a series of my posts, and strawmanning it.

Sorry, that has nothing to do with the bullseye mark that appears when a troop is first dropped. The bullseye has always shown the intended target of a new troop dropped.

The AQ should go after the gold storage first. I'm just pointing out that the bullseye is acting screwy, if it is not marking the intended target. That's another new bug that I never noticed happening before.

Sorry, troop re-targeting never used to happen with the bullseye mark (unless the target was destroyed before the troop got there, or there was a hero/cc distraction first). Maybe troops re-target things without a bullseye mark, but that is not what we're talking about here.

[Coathanger]

---

Sorry, the only one strawmanning here is you. I was not trying to state that it never happened before, as a stand-alone argument that it was new to the game. Here are 3 sequential quotes I made about troops ignoring the bullseye.

Good job cherrypicking one fragment from a series of my posts, and strawmanning it.

Can you explain to everyone how I used a straw man here? I took your argument, that it never used to happen, and showed that to be false. This disproves your statement and is not a straw man.
An example of a straw man would be something like, I dunno, taking a thread used as evidence to disprove the statement that this behavior is new to the game. Then claiming the thread was used an argument that this is not a bug.

Sorry, troop re-targeting never used to happen with the bullseye mark Is a statement of fact. (unless the target was destroyed before the troop got there, or there was a hero/cc distraction first). Maybe troops re-target things without a bullseye mark, but that is not what we're talking about here.

Check and mate. Eat your words. Oct. 2013
http://forum.supercell.net/showthrea...ht=Retargeting
Shows the statement of fact to be wrong.

Again where is this bullseye rule that states troops will not retarget a bullseye?

[Mswan2000]

Heroes, same as other units, have a minor randomiser system when choosing a new target, allowing them to act more "realistic" when fighting instead of following the exact same pattern, like a robot, for every attack. The intention is not to make them fail or miss obvious targets, but to add more depth and variety to each battle. The result is that occasionally their movement seems less linear than it should be. This is very hard to notice, so good on you for catching it.

We'll make some minor adjustments in the future, but this is more or less the intended behavior.

Cheers,

Steve

Seriously? How many hero movies have u watched?


imagine the scene, superman is confronted by his evil nemesis in a dark alley, his nemesis is shooting him, superman thinks "hey im gonna bang my head on that wall for a while and eat lead"......

heros are meant to be heroic! Not dumb, right now I'd rather a pekka 5 at least u can predict their behaviour.

[rjdofu]

Show me where this rule of the bulleye is? Or are you the one BSing?


I have not seen the behavior that you speak of. Troop retargeting usually requires the troop to be traveling some distance for the retargeting to take affect.

That is the point of the bullseye, freakin' genius.

You're too blind to see it, at this point I doubt that you've even played the game.

You're just here to troll people.