Tactical AI (and how it breaks).

**Polemists** · 03-05-2009, 07:53

Well I think it sounds like a loose system.

I mean if you were in a small city setting, the wide flanks around and garrisoning buildings in the center would be a legit tactic.

Yet most of the time you are out in the open, during a field battle

The odd time you run into a building on end of the map though, the Ai seems to say, Garrison priority number 1.

Nothing's perfect, i'm sure Ai fixes will be in patches. It's not a life killer.

**Monk** · 03-05-2009, 07:56

Originally Posted by Polemists

Well I think it sounds like a loose system.

I mean if you were in a small city setting, the wide flanks around and garrisoning buildings in the center would be a legit tactic.

Yet most of the time you are out in the open, during a field battle

The odd time you run into a building on end of the map though, the Ai seems to say, Garrison priority number 1.

Nothing's perfect, i'm sure Ai fixes will be in patches. It's not a life killer.

Buildings and stone-wall fences (cover) on your field maps are more likely than you think. I wasn't suggesting it was a death knell, but its something that needs to be addressed.

It's not something that cannot be patched or modded and may be as simple as a priority listing.

**AussieGiant** · 03-05-2009, 07:59

Hi Monk,

From your description it does seem these "New" tactical components are causing a few incoherent choices.

Hopefully it's just a question of rebalancing priorities and reaching a few thresholds earlier or later in the decision making process.

It certainly seems like it is "thinking in the right direction" which is a huge thing in itself.

*fingers crossed*

**Monk** · 03-05-2009, 08:09

Originally Posted by AussieGiant

Hi Monk,

From your description it does seem these "New" tactical components are causing a few incoherent choices.

Hopefully it's just a question of rebalancing priorities and reaching a few thresholds earlier or later in the decision making process.

It certainly seems like it is "thinking in the right direction" which is a huge thing in itself.

*fingers crossed*

Indeed. It's good to see it trying to balance numerous tasks, but not when those task contradict each other's purpose. I read on TWC that CA is already going to release a second patch next week that will deal with many graphical improvements as well as a crash fix.

If they keep up this sort of support, I see no reason why an AI fix cannot be implemented sooner rather than later.

**Polemists** · 03-05-2009, 08:17

Agreed. I have no idea what the release date patch was, but assuming they will get quite a few of the graphical issues hammered out next week, I would assume the next focus would be AI or something similiar (Since they have a whole ai team now, shouldn't take to long.)

I give CA credit where credit is due, the game may not be perfect but it is nice to see them supporting us with a patch every week. One can only hope this keeps up :)

**AussieGiant** · 03-05-2009, 09:22

I'd say we are in good shape guy's.

The thread titled: "Official: Empire - The first 24 hours" has CA committed to ongoing support and patching. I expect the AI to have ongoing time spent on it.

There's nothing quite like 30 000 people play testing for you!!

**Monk** · 03-05-2009, 11:09

Hm.

I bumped the AI up to VERY HARD and gave the campaign another go <H/VH>.

Color me impressed that the AI has not once in my 10 turns and subsequent battles displayed the behavior that I saw on Hard. Its very strange. Perhaps whatever perimeters that lead to its behavior are not present on Very hard. Or maybe I have just yet to put it in the right conditions to lobotomize itself. Time will tell!

It even fought me to a grueling standstill in Western Poland by use of formations and clever adaptions. I won, but barely.