A.I. Rather poor in Demo

[Serendipity]

Is it just me or do you think the A.I is poor in the demo? I moved the majority of my forces over the left crossing (out of range of their guns), including my artillery. I came across one unit hiding in the woods, which were dealt with rather quickly. No big deal up to this point. I pushed my army close to the edge of a hill and set up my artillery on the hill to bombard the filthy yanks (no offence, just having fun :)).

From this moment onwards I started to notice some problems with the enemy A.I.

1. The enemy A.I set up two lines of infantry facing my army. But they put one unit in the building. I presume you all know which one I refer too? Anyhow, I pounded that building over and over but the unit stayed in the building regardless, even when it was on fire and close to destruction!! Eventually I destroyed the building and with that, the unit. Now what was the point of keeping that unit in the building when it was obviously going to be destroyed? In real life would a unit just sit in a building whilst artillery was pounding the building it was in, if that building was close to destruction? Would there not come a point when you would evacuate the place?

2. A few units of the enemy broke off to join with their artillery further away, but there was still two lines of enemy to deal with, which I pounded relentlessly and then moved all my other units to engage. They were finished off rather quickly. Now the next A.I. blunder was after I had accomplished this, the enemy A.I. decided to move two units of artillery towards me, without any support from infantry or cavalry. I was shocked to see two units of artillery being moved towards my line ALONE, without any other units from the enemy to support this movement. Now what was the CPU thinking? Why do that, because I am sure you can all work out what happened next? I rushed them with some units and wiped these two artillery units out very quickly. What a completely pathetic move by the A.I.

3. After this second thing had happened, the A.I decided to cross the river with 3 infantry units and charge towards the units I had left on that other side ( i had taken most of my troops to their side but had left my general and some infantry and cavalry where they were). The enemy had no chance because in this encounter they were outnumbered and I had 3 cavalry units, including infantry, at my disposal, so I was able to out flank them. They ran off, most being slaughted. But then to my horror, one unit came back, and stood in a square formation, all alone now, very close to the line of my army on this side of the river. Suicide? I don't get why it would do that when it was heavily outnumbered, and would have been best going back across the river to stand with the the last remaining units the A.I had.

What do other people think about the A.I for the demo? In the land battle I was not too impressed with the CPU, and to be honest it was far too easy to win this particular battle. But most of all the computer did some stupid things, as stated above.

[Alexander the Adequate]

Have you set the AI on VH difficulty yet? You can do so in the preference files.

I agree though, on M the enemy AI was rather lacking in the intelligence department. They would form squares for no reason and then sit in place while I filled them with cannister. Fortunately I have had better luck on VH.

[Sol Invictus]

Compared to earlier TW games, I think it is an improvement. Even in a victory, I have taken quite a few casualties. This battle is also set up to mimic the historical battle, which was a solid British victory. I would like to see how the AI does if the sides were reversed.

[Monk]

Have you set the AI on VH difficulty yet? You can do so in the preference files.

I agree though, on M the enemy AI was rather lacking in the intelligence department. They would form squares for no reason and then sit in place while I filled them with cannister. Fortunately I have had better luck on VH.

I would love to try this battle on VH, does anyone know where the scripts file is located on Vista?

[peacemaker]

I dunno. I think the point of the demo was to split your forces so only some of your army crosses the river. When I did that, I got my butt handed to me even on M. Sure, if you send your whole army one way that the AI doesn't expect, they'll probably make a stupid move one time or another.

Remember, this is still a vast improvement from the AI of Rome and M2

[Evil_Maniac From Mars]

I was pleasantly surprised by the AI - I last encountered AI so good in M:TW.

[ratbarf]

I also think the AI was rather poor, on VH I sent my three units of cavalry along the alternate route and as soon as they crossed the river the entire yank army up and left to that side even though I had all of my infantry right infront of the first river crossing! IF it was scripted I can forgive them but if it wasn't this isn't shaping up to be to good, after they killed my cav I had already taken out all of their arty (as the arty was shooting at the cav across the map at the time) and then took the village and killed them as they came back in ones or twos.... It was most depressing.

[A Very Super Market]

It is scripted. As soon as you cross the other ford, the majority of the army runs back to the town.

[quadalpha]

I would love to try this battle on VH, does anyone know where the scripts file is located on Vista?

In vista, you go to C:\Users\[name]\AppData\Roaming\The Creative Assembly\[etc.] You will need to show hidden folders to see AppData.

[Monk]

In vista, you go to C:\Users\[name]\AppData\Roaming\The Creative Assembly\[etc.] You will need to show hidden folders to see AppData.

You're my hero.

[Masek]

Hi,

the AI (better term AS) is unluckily like most AIs in tactical or strategic games: weak. Since
"depth search" is not viable, it restricts itself to a number of heuristics. Don't get me wrong,
i love the TW series, but the AI never ever impressed me. I've done 1000's of battles from
Shogun to M2. I can never recall being genuinely surprised by a move of the AI (except by
those "how can it be so stupid"-type of moves).

Typical shortcomings are:

• It fights in pennypockets. I stand there with 4-5 units in plain sight and it sends 2-3 units to attack. Naturaly they get slaughtered.
• The AI completely lacks the concept of "Schwerpunkt", a main focus for an attack. The only tactic known seems to be "All units advance" and "We make a frontal at their strongest point".
• I have never ever seen something like a "fighting retreat". Sometimes you're doomed: The best thing in those cases is to sacrifice some units (least mobile or worst positioned) to buy time for other units to flee. The AI instead loves to make a "final stand".
• In attacks, the timing is often poor. When the last unit attacks, the first is already battered. When units arrive sequentially in firing range, it allows me to concentrate my fire.
• The AI is too easily flanked. There are nearly never keeps enough reserves. Even with numerical superiority, it can be flanked by drawing out the line and using the reserves on a flank attack.

A positive point for the AI in E:TW is, that it feels "nimbler" to me.

Sincerely yours, Martin

P.S. I hope i got all "tactical" terms correctly, english is my second language.

[Gaius Terentius Varro]

I was able to win every time by just sending my cav, the cannons and a unit infantry: grenadiers to protect the cannons around the back i set up a def position(which i slowly pushed forward) and the AI sent 2-3 units at a time to get slaughtered untill it had only cannons left. Then i sent the all my remaining infantry to zerg the cannons. Now explain to me the good AI part please. I understand its new and shiney but in 2 months we'll be sitting here waiting for a patch ... AGAIN

[NimitsTexan]

I do believe there is a fair amount of scripting handicapping/helping (who knows?) the AI in this battle, as, regardless of my moves or force composition of my wings, the AI pretty much never changes its moves.

Also, I think, despire the American numerical advantage, they rather stacked the odds against the Americans. In one play through, I pretty much got a stand up firefight with my 6 British battalions (with the Hessian brigade in reserve and out of the way) against the whole of the Yankee line on the plain behind the inital American MLR. Needless to say, I routed them all with pure firepower, while sustaining acceptable losses and no routes on my part.

[X6_861]

I think this is more of a quirk than anything, but I've played the Battle of Brandywine 4 times, and each time those stupid long rifle men turn around, lay down their stakes, and the turn back around to fire. So, in essence, the stakes are pointed toward them instead of toward my charging cavalry.

[Gaius Terentius Varro]

They also lay the stakes in the exactly same spot so i am not buying the "not scripted" that jack lusted is spreading:

https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showp...8&postcount=17

[Evil_Maniac From Mars]

They also lay the stakes in the exactly same spot so i am not buying the "not scripted" that jack lusted is spreading:

https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showp...8&postcount=17

I've had them in at least three different spots, about six tries on the battle. Stakes were laid about four or five times.

I think this is more of a quirk than anything, but I've played the Battle of Brandywine 4 times, and each time those stupid long rifle men turn around, lay down their stakes, and the turn back around to fire. So, in essence, the stakes are pointed toward them instead of toward my charging cavalry.

I've had that happen sometimes, other times they were pointed toward my cavalry, and other times they were brilliantly placed along with a rock cliff and the river, preventing my cavalry from charging at all. When they did place them backwards, I almost ran into them with cavalry as I was falling back and trying to lure Americans away. Almost.

[Zoring]

I have had some bad experiences with the AI in the battle, and im hoping that it will perform better on an opener field. I do recall being impressed by the demo AI in Medieval2 and horrified when i played the game! So hopefully the reverse is true.

What happened to me the first time was when i tried flanking with the force it gives you the American infantry marched to meet me, with the majoirty of it's forces, fairly decent behaviour, although they left their Artillery unprotected.

The second time however, i tried a more frontal assault across the river, i sent my dragoons forward to harass the enemy artillery from the woods, at this point 3 units of minutemen charged across the river which i thought was good but then simply charged straight into my main battle line of 12ish units of line infantry. A uniut of American dragoons also at one point ran up to my light infantry in the woods and got shot to pieces. The American line infantry then simply stood stock still on their side of the river regardless of what i did.

I have also been having some issues with my own troops. They sometimes walk backwards and forwards within the space of a meter or two, i also dismounted my dragoons and tried to form a line they then decided to run around the woods all crazily refusing to follow orders it even said 'withdrawing' at one point, although they weren't under fire nor had i hit withdrawing or anything moraleish like that. I got them back on their horses and they started acting normally.

I am overall a bit wary, but am still buying a new PC to play this game maxed out so i still have faith. Hopefully we get a button to remove all the tracer fire too!

[Polemists]

When I played I encountered a fighting retreat, splitting of the army, and a wooded ambush.

Three things the AI would have never done in MTW2 or at least not that I ever saw to any sucess. (I mean actually splitting the army not just sending 2 calvary units off to god knows where)

I played on medium and was impressed but some people always want a harder difficulty, that's why they made medium and easy for the rest of us

[Dramicus]

In my opinion, the A.I. in the demo was fairly standard for what I've come to expect from your average Total War title, which is to say acceptable but by no means brilliant.

I have only had the chance to fight the major land battle once, but in that battle I did notice a few surprising moves made by the AI, such as using the woods to flank and ambush my forces and also sending a few infantry units the long rout (seeing as I opted not to cross where the enemy had been fortified) and they reached my rear while I was busy with the front.

So, in general I think we are seeing what we usually see with each release, namely steady and noticeable increases in the battle performance of the AI. As a result, I am fairly pleased, but I didn't go in expecting a miracle.

[Phog_of_War]

The AI has been ok IMO. I lost the first battle even after reading up on the Brandywine battle.

My second fight I won, hewever it was a Phyrric victory. I used the historical movements of the British army. Both General Howe and Washington were KIA. Howe was killed out of hand from a lucky musket ball and Washington was killed by a well aimed cannon volley.


I won the third fight when I forded the alternate crossing with my entire force. We both set up in the field to the US rear and had a merry firefight. Only thing is that the AI did not move its cannon at the first crossing to engage me. If it had my victory would have been in question.


I tried a full frontal assault on the main American force. Put my cannons on a small ridge to the British right with Dragoons for protection. Everything was going swimmingly until I crossed to the opposite bank. My line inf and Hessians had crossed and made their way forward a bit. My Hussars were following close behind the foot inf. Suddenly, the cannon on the left, and on the ridge to the right, let loose with canister shot at the same time and turned my Hussars and their mounts into finely chopped hamburger. 2 full Cav units knocked down to a 9 and 13 man unit.

After that the US forces pulled back to the house and put up another fight. I did win eventually but took VERY heavy casualties.

I have also had the AI counterattack me from the hill a time or two.


My 2 cents, but I think the AI is much improved from some of the crazy stuff I saw in Med 1, Rome and Med 2. Med2 not so much tho. The best AI of all of them IMO was Shogun. Sometimes I think that CA went a little too fast developing the last few tatical AI, but in the end they are trying to keep up with the demands/requests of their consumers (us) and their Management. On the bright side, I bet they are already working on a patch and with Steam it auto-updates.

[Polemists]

My opinion as that for what the difficult is MEDIUM, it is a very good Ai.

If you want harder, you can choose harder settings. However considering this should be just basic combat (not hard to win, thus it's not on Hard) I found it challenging and enjoyable.

A vast improvement over mtw2, but that's just because units in mtw2 never seemed to split up properly or attack me with hidden units much.

[Gaius Terentius Varro]

That wooded ambush is not the AI but set starting positions in a historical battle . There is a difference. Really no point in arguing against you now when all of you are beating your chests and swearing that this game is the final boss of the internets. So in 2 months i will simply link this thread...

[Sir Beane]

That wooded ambush is not the AI but set starting positions in a historical battle . There is a difference. Really no point in arguing against you now when all of you are beating your chests and swearing that this game is the final boss of the internets. So in 2 months i will simply link this thread...

No one in this thread has done anything of the sort. Most people have said the AI is acceptable or reasonably good. Of those who said that all of them presented clear and reasonable arguments as to why they thought this was the case. There has certainly been nothing so hyperbolic as 'chest beating'.

[Gaius Terentius Varro]

please be so kind and reread the title of this thread

[Sir Beane]

please be so kind and reread the title of this thread

Nothing to see here folks.

[Gaius Terentius Varro]

I have no problems with ppl disagreeing but i reserve a right to agree with OP.

[woad&fangs]

For those of you that have changed the difficulty lvl, did it make the AI smarter or just give them attack and moral bonuses?

[Strategy]

For those of you that have changed the difficulty lvl, did it make the AI smarter or just give them attack and moral bonuses?

The AI in the demo didn't change its behavior at all when the difficulty level was boosted. The key difference I found was that the AI artillery was significantly more effective (being able to actually inflict losses at a distance, where before it really hit nothing). I assume that the enemy muskets are probably also more efficient, but since I never really got into a shooting fight with any of the enemy units (routed most of them with cannister/enfilading fire before they got into position to return fire), I can't really judge that.


On the subject of the thread, I find that the AI has basically the same flaws as in previous games that make it easily exploitable. An inability to comprehend combined arms tactics and being unable to handle the basic problem that arises when an enemy is able to fire at it without it being able to reply. Not surprising, of course, these are extremely hard AI problems, and the next game I find that handles this will be the first.

[Smellycat]

so funny rereading this post and seeing make fools of themselves

[Allu X]

Guys: THIS IS BECAUSE THERE IS NO AI IN THE DEMO!

The battles are all scripted.