AI better on the Attack?

[DEY123]

In the battles the AI seems to do a much better job of attacking then defending.

When it attacks it seems to march its entire line forward (while adjusting for any flankers you might have). It also seems to try and win a victory on one side of the line (or this could be that I am just on the other side of the line trying to turn one side).

However, on Defense there are way too many times where the AI lets me walk up to its units, set up my cannons, and unload with cannister shot...then maybe it thinks about charging my cannon or the 2 units of line infantry on either side. Additionally on defense the computer get seperated too easily.

Another flaw is with buildings. once I start bombarindg a building you would think the computer would vacate his troops, but instead he just leaves them there...


Anyhow just wondering if others get the impression the AI does a better job on offense then on defense?

I will try and write down soem more specific examples that I see the next time I am playing.

[Eusebius86]

Good observation. I agree. When attacking, the AI is rather aggressive (I play on H). When defending, he sits around all day, literally, letting his forces get ripped to shreds one by one by canister shot, cavalry, and militia. Also, the building mechanics are a little bugged as well. Not only does the house look perfect at 1% strength, the AI takes no pains to get his troops out of the line of fire. Not very intelligent...

Maybe these problems can be fixed with a patch.

[Liberator]

I played my campaign on battle difficulty hard and the AI often attacked me in field battles even if it should defend... :no:

[Polemists]

I agree, the AI does seem better.

I think this is partially do to fact that in a attack it seems to merge all it's units and converge on you. (also will hunt down your general if you don't watch him)

Where as on defense it seems to seperate and hold. Which dosn't seem to be much to the AI's advantage.:juggle2: