View Full Version : The AI makes me sick...
Ok, i havent complained much.... but now i really feel like it.
Im playing as the germanians at the moment, as my selucid campaign was so easy that it was boring. As a selucid, you only need a few elephants... and you win.
But, as a germanian, I ended up being at war with, almost since turn 5; the Britts, Gauls, Sarmatians and Dacians.
I could estimate that i have ratio of loosing 1 warrior for every 10 enemy.
And, how come the Gauls, can raise 1 full stack army almost everyturn, and i have problem recruting a spear warband!? It is a bit confusing.
But, never mind that, its the AI that is driving me mad. I can hardly see any improvement in the AI since MTW.
Example one: When attacking a city or attacking an army, they allways use the same tacitc, it doesnt matter if they have a general or not, or how good he is. They never do anything unexpected and so on.
And even when they see that their tactic (wich they have used since battle #1) isnt working, they dont try anything different.
Example two: It is Impossible to get a cease fire!? The Gauls attacks, I crush them in battle after battle, i threaten 3 of their major cities and still they dont agree to a cease fire... a cease fire with no other demands.
Now, is it really that hard to program an AI with atleast some sense of logic!?
otherwise... great game! :bow:
HopAlongBunny
12-15-2004, 13:05
I think you will find it is pretty much constant warfare with Gaul and Britannia.
Julii will likely not lift a finger against their sworn enemy, and you will have to take the 2 teched up (Gaul) cities in Northern Italy yourself. Taking those cities will of course immediately put you at war with the Romans ~;)
Great faction once you get rolling ~:cheers:
I could live with the war against the west, when each faction im at war with brings in one new fullstack army Every turn, you start to wonder how they programed the game!? Where do they get their soldiers from!?
Another thing; If i have a big city, filled with 1 great general with 3 golden marks, 2 units of Gothic cav and a few infantry units.
Do they AI really think they can take that city with 4 units or warbands? Or is it a proven fact that Britts are suicidal by nature!? :charge:
In the same thread we can't complain that the AI has too many full stacks and never sends full stacks.
Credit where credit is due.
I just started a Germania campaign and it has been a challenge.
As many have reported, the Gauls and Britons came after me immediately. I drove the Britons off the mainland, and prepared to march on the Gaul's capital. But then I detected 2 full Gaul stacks moving up to Trier and 2 full Brit stacks with generals landing to take back their province.
I have 2 nice size spear armies that could deal with these guys rather easily if they'd just attack me, but they seem to either ignore me (Britons) or go right past me (Gauls) into my interior.
To make matters worse, I can now see 3 Scythian armies milling about my very thinly defended eastern provinces. I was able to quickly get an alliance with them, and hopefully it will hold.
Oh, and my cash flow just went negative.
Good times.
HopAlongBunny
12-15-2004, 16:21
hehehe
There are things that make you wonder...
I had much the same situation as you; early game I took Alesia and thrashed every army that came after me...so you wonder, if they lose every battle and lose cities constantly where is the money for these forester warbands coming from? ~:eek: (we won't even mention the navy) Let alone the money to tech up that high. This was the first faction that really pushed me into selling maps; to keep my head above water I had a diplomatic blitzkrieg going ~D
Enjoy! :duel:
Some complain the game's too easy, some complain about where the AI is getting all their stacks from. CA cannot win can they!
What difficulty level are you playing at? At H and VH campaign levels, I think the AI gets financial bonuses. Play on medium if you want an even playing field.
Rurik the Chieftain
12-15-2004, 16:31
Well when, playing the German campaign, Gaul seems to hate you bitterly, and the same goes with Brittania. They wouldn't sign a ceasefire if you had all but one of their cities captured and had that one under siege. As for the AI, there are some(okay, quite a few) bugs to work out, but I have definitely seen different armies using different tactics. :duel:
Easiest way to play german is to sell all buildings, combine your stacks and take the two Italian Gaul cities. Leave the Germanian ones, they are useless..
I haven't personally played as Germenia yet. In my experiences as other factions, Germenia is always top-3 billionaire and military guru, better than Egypt - don't know why really.
If you don't want to rush Rome, I guess you can try to rush and take out one secure corner first - that's Britania. Staying at the center needs a good financial support. ~:)
Look, i know it sounds odd that i complain about AI attacking with full stacks and such... but where did the realism go? Do the AI get economic help from somewhere?
They raise armies like madmen. Im playing Medium by the way. And hard on the battlefield.
Gaul General: "ok men, the last 4368 armies we ordered to attack Alesia got slaughetered and the those that survived had no legs or arms. But Hey, maybe if we try it again they will give up".
Gaul Soldier: "dhuuuuuuu..."
Gaul General: "Thats the Spirit men! CHARGE!" :charge:
*Gaul army gets beaten badly as allways due to stupid tactics and so on*
Gaul General: "Crap, Right, well bring up the next army, maybe if we try the same tacitc again it might work!"
*Gaul officers nod and look retarded*
That kinda sums up the problem with the Gauls... :bow:
Germans are like HRE. Awesome late troops, but real crappy economy. Turtle and you'll suffer. I'm guessing the AI Germans get help from the almighty.
Mikeus Caesar
12-15-2004, 21:22
when each faction im at war with brings in one new fullstack army Every turn, you start to wonder how they programed the game!? Where do they get their soldiers from!?
That annoys me too. They seem to raise an entire stack from nowhere. Like just now, playing as the pontus, the seleucids brought together all their little armies, and together they wouldn't have even made half an army, but somehow the entire stack filled up.
You know, I really don't mind the magical mystery stacks the AI comes up with now and again, so long as it has the funds to pay for them then it's not such a bad thing. Personally I think the AI is allowed to build x number of units in a given city that same turn instead of waiting the normal amount of time necessary to complete the build queue.
One pet peeve I have is our inability to influence via modding what the AI builds in a given turn. The one thing I really miss about Medieval's text files was the ability for users to alter each faction's unit and building build priorities as we saw fit, with the ultimate goal of making the AI a better opponent. It would also allow us to make each faction build an army that reflects historical reality. Given the chance to do the same thing in RTW I guarantee most of us would push ships near the bottom of the AI's 'to do' list.
Not long ago I saw players complaining the AI was unable to unit their troops into full stacks, but now the opposite complaints happens. ~;) I was thinking if we visited the AI "too early" than yes, you don't see the full stacks because they haven't merged yet.
So I guess for anybody who doesn't like to see too many full stacks, you can be slightly more aggressive. For people who hate to see small stacks, you can be slightly more defensive. Or you can mod the game and see what happens.
In my experience, the AI (I play VH/VH, don't know about others) has an ability to train units even when their finance goes to the bottom of the stock chart. It seems to me they can also build things for free. Army upkeep seems to be a burden for them - since sometimes I see their bank account shrink.
So why does AI need cash anyways? I guess they can use it to bribe your army, etc. I got settlements bribed away by a middle-class faction. But once I put a diplomat in the settlement (hence increase the bribe cost), it can't get bribed anymore. ~D
I played a whole long game on medium difficulty and never once saw the AI make a stack out of nothing...how odd.
By the way, about the comments to do with the battlefield AI. You seriously expect the AI to learn that a tactic doesn't work against you and to try and come up with something different? You expect it to learn and invent? You don't have a clue how hard it is to do that in a situation like this, do you? ~;)
With current technology and understanding, it would take many, many years to develop a complex AI that could learn in an environment like a TW battlefield. It isn't happening for a long, long time, and frankly you're expecting far too much...
is programing an AI that can beat humans militarily a good idea?
really?
I think the reason the Gauls are so aggressive is a combination of the AI's tendency to focus on what ever faction the human is controlling and that patavium is freakin lousy with available troops. And their AI behavior settings. Also the fact that they mostly build spear warbands means that in a sheer numbers sense they have really strong army and that's why you can't deal with them.
You know, I really don't mind the magical mystery stacks the AI comes up with now and again, so long as it has the funds to pay for them then it's not such a bad thing. Personally I think the AI is allowed to build x number of units in a given city that same turn instead of waiting the normal amount of time necessary to complete the build queue.
One pet peeve I have is our inability to influence via modding what the AI builds in a given turn. The one thing I really miss about Medieval's text files was the ability for users to alter each faction's unit and building build priorities as we saw fit, with the ultimate goal of making the AI a better opponent. It would also allow us to make each faction build an army that reflects historical reality. Given the chance to do the same thing in RTW I guarantee most of us would push ships near the bottom of the AI's 'to do' list.
I sooo agree with this. As a strategy player and also a long standing programmer, I would love to have detailed hooks into how the battlefield and campaign map AI move their units. And how the AI gets battlefield/campaign map information so that it can make its decisions. In that way I could cook up an AI that simply used the information, but make it do what I want. THAT would utterly ROCK.
Now he can't really be complaining about the game being to hard, he is slaughtering full stacks with few losses ever turn. That seems about like my games too. Even if the AI was only as bright as MTW it would be better. As to how much the AI 'cheats', well who cares cause they don't know how to play the game and can't put up a decent fight!
Now he can't really be complaining about the game being to hard, he is slaughtering full stacks with few losses ever turn. That seems about like my games too. Even if the AI was only as bright as MTW it would be better. As to how much the AI 'cheats', well who cares cause they don't know how to play the game and can't put up a decent fight!
First.. before this comment, let me say that I love all the CA TW games (STW, MTW, RTW). They are very fun.
That said.. the battlefield AI has always been a pushover unless the AI managed to outnumber you in a big way. This was true of all the games, not just RTW.
Sometimes just to make things harder I'd run campaigns with less than full stacks for the extra challenge. This is why I made the previous wish I did in this thread. I'd love to be able to overhaul the AI to change behaviors. It sounds like a challenging technical problem (good!), and would result in a better game experience for me (good!).
I'm not holding my breath though.. it would be nice to see, but I can't believe its very high on the 'we gotta do list' at CA.
D.
is programing an AI that can beat humans militarily a good idea?
really?
Good point. Have none of these people seen Wargames? Teach a computer game to outthink us and what's next? Three full stacks of Spartan Hoplites surrounding the Pentagon before you can say, 'but haven't we got guns?'
~;)
TheDuck, you are right and wrong at the same time. MTW with Medmod was and still is a vastly superior game with a vastly superior AI than Rome. And I have never played a game for so long and enjoyed it more than I did MTW. It is still on my computer. I probably will never have another experience like it and I can't thank CA enough for providing me with so much fun for only $40.
I would not have enjoyed it nearly as much without the benefit of Wes and the whole Medmod crew. Medmod made the game fun and challenging. Playing a High start Medmod game was as good as it gets. The AI was really quite good. The battles were intense, the AI fielded lots of good units and the game was tough to win. Certainly there were certain factions that were easy but there were also factions like the HRE that were a real challenge to even survive.
However, Rome isn't fun exactly because it is a pushover. If Rome can ever get to the point Medmod MTW was I will be the happiest person on the planet! Here's hoping that CA understands how important the AI is and can actually do something about it!! ~:cheers:
Good point. Have none of these people seen Wargames? Teach a computer game to outthink us and what's next? Three full stacks of Spartan Hoplites surrounding the Pentagon before you can say, 'but haven't we got guns?'
~;)
Heh heh. NICELY PUT.
Good point. Have none of these people seen Wargames? Teach a computer game to outthink us and what's next? Three full stacks of Spartan Hoplites surrounding the Pentagon before you can say, 'but haven't we got guns?'
~;)
Meh...we'll just get them to play tic-tac-toe amongst themselves. ~;)
The AI does cheat of course, just as it did in MTW and STW. Just as it does in most strat games (Civilisation anyone?). It is programmed to because this is the only way it can provide a challenge to the player. It is just a pity that when you do see a large AI army it is always a bizarre mix of units. After getting hit by waves of pitifully small armies of hastati it was good to see a ful stack oming at me. Shame it consisted entirely of velites, but never mind.
The AI does cheat of course, just as it did in MTW and STW. Just as it does in most strat games (Civilisation anyone?). It is programmed to because this is the only way it can provide a challenge to the player. It is just a pity that when you do see a large AI army it is always a bizarre mix of units. After getting hit by waves of pitifully small armies of hastati it was good to see a ful stack oming at me. Shame it consisted entirely of velites, but never mind.
Heh, I've seen those odd stacks now and again. I've recently seen a Macedonian stack comprised almost entirely of Lancers, much more dangerous than a stack full of skirmishers but silly nonetheless. But for the most part Rome's AI does a much better job of creating balanced armies than Medieval's. However, as I said earlier, it would be much better for all of us if CA made it possible for us to tweak the AI build probabilities.
Alexandr III. Biges
12-18-2004, 23:01
hehehe
There are things that make you wonder...
I had much the same situation as you; early game I took Alesia and thrashed every army that came after me...so you wonder, if they lose every battle and lose cities constantly where is the money for these forester warbands coming from? ~:eek: (we won't even mention the navy) Let alone the money to tech up that high. This was the first faction that really pushed me into selling maps; to keep my head above water I had a diplomatic blitzkrieg going ~D
Enjoy! :duel:
Hey, that's typical :) Usually I send three diplomats to make a big selling spree with my map :greedy: And usually continue in future. I'd backrupt very quickly, especially on harder difficulties :worried2:
And I'm sure AI is cheated to get more cash.
Alexandr III. Biges
12-18-2004, 23:09
Look, i know it sounds odd that i complain about AI attacking with full stacks and such... but where did the realism go? Do the AI get economic help from somewhere?
They raise armies like madmen. Im playing Medium by the way. And hard on the battlefield.
Gaul General: "ok men, the last 4368 armies we ordered to attack Alesia got slaughetered and the those that survived had no legs or arms. But Hey, maybe if we try it again they will give up".
Gaul Soldier: "dhuuuuuuu..."
Gaul General: "Thats the Spirit men! CHARGE!" :charge:
*Gaul army gets beaten badly as allways due to stupid tactics and so on*
Gaul General: "Crap, Right, well bring up the next army, maybe if we try the same tacitc again it might work!"
*Gaul officers nod and look retarded*
That kinda sums up the problem with the Gauls... :bow:
GG: "Well, we will attack the same way, becase they would surely not expect us to do use the same tactics for the tenth time!"
Iberian general: "What about attacking Carthage? They are very strong and have large armies, so they would not expect us to attack us!"
Alexandr III. Biges
12-18-2004, 23:16
The AI does cheat of course, just as it did in MTW and STW. Just as it does in most strat games (Civilisation anyone?). It is programmed to because this is the only way it can provide a challenge to the player. It is just a pity that when you do see a large AI army it is always a bizarre mix of units. After getting hit by waves of pitifully small armies of hastati it was good to see a ful stack oming at me. Shame it consisted entirely of velites, but never mind.
AI in Civilization IN NOT cheating, only on the God and Sid difficulty, it's confirmed. On Prince it gets no bonuses, on lower difficulty he gets penalties and the opposite, but all is well known to the players. AI in Civilization is very good.
And AI in MTW is surely better than in RTW. And not so aggresive etc.
LordKhaine
12-19-2004, 00:35
The AI in RTW is an improvement over the MTW AI in many respects. It's also a lot worse then the previous AI in many other respects. Amazing how it can do some pretty impressive moves one turn, and then blow it all away with a mind numbingly stupid move the next turn.
Alexandr III. Biges
12-19-2004, 00:56
The AI in RTW is an improvement over the MTW AI in many respects. It's also a lot worse then the previous AI in many other respects. Amazing how it can do some pretty impressive moves one turn, and then blow it all away with a mind numbingly stupid move the next turn.
Of course, situation in MTW was different, because there was no "operational" moves.
I agree there is something that is not quite right about the AI. Case in point: I was attacking a settlement, with two full stack armies, the second army led by an experienced general. This should have been a cake walk. However, when the second army entered the field of battle they marched right up to the walls of the settlement, stopped at about a 45 degree angle to the wall, and stood there while being shot down by the settlements archers. The general did not even deploy his seige towers. If this is not a case of complete dereliction of duty and incompetence I do not know what is! :furious3: What is the point of bringing in 2 armies if the second one is just going to get slaughtered? It is a waste of men. Unless knowing that this will be the outcome, you fill the second army with throw away troops just to pin down some of your opponents while you make the main attack elsewhere on the fortification.
Crazed Rabbit
12-19-2004, 19:55
I've been playing H:TW recently, and the AI there seems very good, at least on the strategic level. The only odd thing was when a one island faction with 3-4 ships attacked my Macedonian empire. Of course, I crushed their pathetic fleet, attacked, burned their village and made slaves of their children.
Other than that, though, the AI seems pretty good. The Persians, for example, have over 30 full stacks which they use to attack and beat down their enemies. And of course, they also get the most money per year, due to their rich farming provinces. That's gonna be fun to take down, if even possible.
Crazed Rabbit
vBulletin® v3.7.1, Copyright ©2000-2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.