AI a bit stupid?

[middy]

I am playing on easy, pretty newbie to the game.

Having takes most of europe pretty easy, but pope kept complaining http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif...

I go for the east, and whoon the golden horder appears. My 1700 men gets attack by their 1800, since I am the defender I can deploy. There is a river with two bridges.. I place my feudal sergants in front on the first bridge and archers/abelasters on all the sides and have reserve regiments of spearmen waiting.

What do the AI do?.. he simply charges over the brige ignoring the unprotected one, and slowly dies. When my archers run out of ammo I simply replace them with reinforcement.

Result, 1800 dead on enemy side, I only loose 300 and thats onlt because I made a stupid charge with my cavelery in their flank,using the other bridge. I got wiped out in a few minutes http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/frown.gif.

Anyway can I exspect that behaviour from the AI on higher levels?

[Alrowan]

better.. and the same. Expert the AI does do a little better, and tends not to charge headlong into the battle ALL the time

[LRossaLordJimi]

On the bridge AI don't play well,the enemy just charge on the bridge,and if you have some archers and some good troup of defense you can kill entirely enemy http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/eek.gif
So on easy level you can conquer with no much problem,but on medium and expert music change...but if you want some massive strategic battle play on multiplayer with some human http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/smokin.gif
Ave

[Geoffrey_FiztRogers]

Middy try expert. I have had the Ai lay some nice ambushes on me on occassion.

[Exile]

The AI is terrible at bridge battles - partuclarly when atttacking. I've been given a rough time or two when the AI is defending.

By its nature, AI gets predicatable after a while, but I've been outmanuevered by the AI many times - often my own mistake http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif but sometimes the AI will give me challenge.

I suppose the AI advantages/player disadvantages on HARD and EXPERT setting are in part to make up for the limited scope of AI tactics and predictability after many battles.

Anyway, it was much worse pre-patch. I could easily beat any size AI army with 700 men. Not so post-patch.

[kaasbris]

Same story here:

As Polish, I had Kiev in 1231, when Golden Horde came with 5,000 strong army of Mongol Heavy Cavalry and Cavalry Archers against my 1,200 strong army of 5 crossbows, 3 archers, 2 royal knights, 1 polish retainers, 4 steppe cavalry, 6 woodmen, 2 spearmen, 4 feudal segents...but most of them were not full strength, around 80% of full size ude to previous battle against Rebels.

This was my first major encounter with Hordes. I used to deal with them fairly easy at bridge map odds 1:2. so I thought 1:5 doesn't matter much...but it did.

They rarely rout. Fought to the final man. I spent all of ammo of archers, then crossbows, then casualties of spears & feudal sergents defended bridge were risen slowly but 6 units were not enough.

About the time last spears retreat, I sensed there left few HV cavalry on mongol side. I launched flanking move with all my cavalries, which routed some, but I found another HC was coming...I lost most cavalries there.

Hordes were endless When last woodmen routed, King had to defend bridge, which failed even he lasted for a long time.

Casualty was 1,800 for Hordes, 800 for Polish.

Well fought, but I really wanted not to lose, as I knew my King will get good runner yeah, he got.

But I still think I could win 1:5 odds if I had all spears & crossbow armies. against 5,000 elite Hordes, I could deal with 10 spears & 10 crossbows. Any one had success? http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/redface.gif

[Gregoshi]

Also consider this: there are very few generals that are genius, most are average or below average. Same holds for AI. Not every attack on you is going to be genius level skills.

[Deerslayer]

Yes the AI attacking across the bridge seems a guaranteed win but I've only played on medium...

[SmokWawelski]

Quote[/b] ]Also consider this: there are very few generals that are genius, most are average or below average. Same holds for AI. Not every attack on you is going to be genius level skills.

Yes, very good point by Gregoshi. I was thinking if the AI uses different hmm, levels when playing a 1 star general vs 7 star genius? Any facts to support that idea?

[Gregoshi]

Facts? Why let facts get in the way of a nice theory? http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/rolleyes.gif http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif

If I could get anywhere near playing a SP campaign consistently, I'd check it out. I think it has been over a month now since I last did my campaign. Anyone else already research this?

[middy]

Well I once lost a battle because the AI was clever enough to hit on my general who was busy mopping up the first wave, they all ganged up on him and he died. Maybe that was my mistake for letting him run around.


Does any notice that the AI only react when you come close enough. Then they send out a unit to attack or evade a charge. Tried it once, they evades and took me from behind, I was slaughtered

[Kristaps]

Haven't noticed AI playing better tactics due to higher ranked generals. However, a +9 star general attacking you will have +4 (or 5, not sure) valor to all his units... Unless you have a valor boosting general to match, this can make a big difference...

[burma_mtw]

Attacking across a bridge is difficult at any level. The Mongels are especially agressive and have no choice but to attack the bridge head on. On a two-bridge map they could opt to try and out-flank you but I haven't see them do it yet.

For me, the only success attacking a bridge has come from scare weapons like catapults and/or high-valor maniac troops like Ghazi Infranty backed by Archers/Arbalasts. Of course, if the defender doesn't have a good general they will often run anyway opening up the bridge for you to cross.

My experience has been that at higher levels up to Expert, the AI's are much more agressive in the Early Period and more Civ's use the Mongel bait-and-trap tactic in battles. Also, they seem to use out-flanking and feinting manuevers more often. Not sure about this as it is only an impression and I haven't read the AI code. The Mongels and Egyptians do especially use the bait-and-trap tactic.

It seems that if you put your general into the battle that he draws attackers like a light draws insects.

[cugel]

Facts? Why let facts get in the way of a nice theory?

If I could get anywhere near playing a SP campaign consistently, I'd check it out. I think it has been over a month now since I last did my campaign. Anyone else already research this?


I don't know how you would prove this Gregoshi. Sometimes the AI seemingly uses good battle tactics, but it could be a chance event. How can one tell? I doubt, however, that the AI is programed to be smarter when facing a high level general (this would require a lot of extra programming that would seldom be used - if CA could get the AI to use better tactics, why not use them all the time (at least on the higher difficulty levels), why save it only for instances where there is a high honor general)? Surely, no one at CA is under the illusion that the AI is too strong for the player? http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/joker.gif

The AI DOES however, vary the numbers and composition of it's invading army based on how many men you have in the province. If you have a lot, it brings a lot, if you have fewer it brings fewer. One post stated the view that this proves the AI doesn't try to win. I belive that it considers other priorities