The game is just TOO easy!!!!

[JAG]

Alright I am not blowing my own trumpet, but...

I understand I am a very experienced Total War player, I have played every single title from its first day of release and got pretty good online in the old Shogun days, but the game should not be this easy!

Back in the days of Shogun when the game was on the hardest difficulty, you damn well knew it, things were heavily stacked against you - now however it is just too easy.

I play the game on the hardest difficulty - very hard, for both the campaign and battles. Yet I have rarely lost a battle and the campaign is a complete doddle. For instance, I just started a Prussian short campaign a few hours ago and by the summer of 1713, I had completed all my goals - 14 territories in the centre of Europe, and 15 total - and France, united Provences, Austria, Poland, Spain and Denmark were all devastated. This was all with 2 army stacks and at one point being at war with every nation in Europe - over a 13 year, 25 turn period. Crazy.

The difference now I see is twofold - firstly there are so few attempts by the AI to actually take your cities with thier stacks that you can effectively leave cities completely defenceless, while the stupid AI goes around destroying your easily repairable towns and farms - which at the start of the game are NO WAY near as important as the cities themselves. Secondly, it is SO easy to get peace from nations you declare war on. Many times I literally declared war with my armies in striking distance, took over the couple cities I needed and then got a peace deal out of the nation that I just beat, which was extremely favorable to me - anything from 2000 to 5000 cash in hand. So the AI nation loses all thier cash as well as their important cities, while you can effectively gain a huge upper hand strategically for free - as the peace money can replace all your losses in your armies.

It is, quite franlkly, ridiculous. It is ruining the game for me, what can I do - play crap on purpose? Give the AI a chance, be as stupid as them? A brilliant, masterpiece of a work, completely undone by idiotic AI.

So anyone else getting this? I guess if you havent played a total war game before, it takes time to adjust to how to have success in battles and most importantly on the campaign map - but I am sure there are vets out there having the same damn problems I am, with this crazy, rubbish and infuriating AI.

[vladiator]

I don't know if I agree. I play on H/H, and although it has not been overly-complicated, it has not been a breeze either. Granted I haven't played that much yet, and you probably have much more experience in playing these games, so they are easier for you.

I definitely find battles quite challenging. I MTW2, I could beat 10, or even more, units of enemies with 3-4 units of my cavalry. These days I make sure that I have at least as many units as my enemy before going into a battle..

[Suraknar]

Yes you are blowing your Trumpet... ;)

But it is ok, I think the AI goes after the farms because these are economical buildings, same as the AI in previous TW games tried to blockade your ports first.

Also I noticed the AI does diversions, it will often send a small stack after the farms if you intercept then a bigger stack waits behind and goes after your city.

I personally like this way, it is not about blitzing town after town. But rather slowly bleeding you to death before the coup de grace.

Makes it a bit like chess, calculated moves, campaigning. I like it.

And I agree it is not like STW, where when they came for you you knew it was for your Castle/Town...all or nothing deal, and powerful factions would just come full stack after full stack sometimes from multiple directions.

ETW's game play is more subtle..it represents the Diplomatic Dance that nations played with one another, until Napoleon came about...but that is why most did not like him either...

And to do that the AI needs to be complex...it is easy to make the AI blitz...it is harder to make it calculate in a more subtle way.

[USMCNJ]

I would have to agree with JAG. I just started my first campaign as Prussia and by 1713 i control all of Germany. I'm playing on H/H, i didn't play the RTI or read the manual, just wanted to try it out.
and the two biggest exploits that is see (just like JAG mentioned)
1) The AI doesn't go for your cities and doesn't defend it's own
2) The AI will always take your peace offer.

Maybe it's just the Prussian campaign, but there is no way i should be essentially done with the campaign after ~8 hours on the first try.

[quadalpha]

I think the AI takes the peace offer because it knows it's beaten after you win a few set piece battles.

[ArtillerySmoke]

It sounds like you're just very good @ Total War.

There's only so much the AI is going to be able to do to you when you are as competent a player as you are.

Players like yourself, and those of us on the org who can eat and breathe a title for ages, are the minority. Looking around the web, most people are getting their rears handed to them by the AI so far.

Myself - I played a good dozen custom battles last night, on all different difficulties. 3000-5000+ men battles. I see the AI as a vast improvement over past titles, but I also see myself as much better in this time period than I was in antiquity and medieval. It just makes more sense to me...I like gunpowder, what can I say.

I'm sure when the mods get rolling you'll run into many a challenge.

[Dogfish]

I agree. The AI was touted as being a major improvement, and maybe CA has something up their sleeve with some future patches, but in it's current state the AI is lackluster, and that's being kind. Especially considering how much time it takes to go through the AI turns (a few minutes minimum on my machine). It's got to be calculating something.

Reminds me alot of the Brittania campaign of Kingdoms, when I first started I expected England to start coming after my Scottish territories, but no... the AI just sat there, being completely passive.

I was playing through the RtI campaign and reading forums, I saw several posts detailing how the RtI campaign's AI was nothing compared to the GC... so I thought, ok, cool, maybe they gimped the AI in RtI since it's somewhat of a tutorial campaign, at least it will be a challenge when I move over to the meaty GC. But then I started it, and it wasn't. I could leave all of England with no defenses, and I fear that none of it would ever be threatened by an AI faction. This is all on VH/VH (Except for RtI, which was just VH, there being only one slider and such).

Combine that with several bugs and other assorted issues (I was really hyped about the naval battles, but they are arcadey and have some big issues with regard to pathfinding and control of groups), and I'm putting aside my copy until some of these things are addressed, by mod or by patch.

I mean, some of these issues are so blatant it makes me question whether the testers played any campaigns for any amount of time. I still really like the game, and a month or two from now will probably be playing it as much as I have in the past week, but in it's current state I just don't think it's ready. Maybe they should've delayed it again... I just really hope CA is open to making major adjustments via patches, and not just fixes and tweaks.

OT naval rant: Can you not set the speed of a group of ships? and why when you move a group is it like each individual ship getting a move order to that location, and not just the lead ship, with the others always following it? And no formation maneuvers, like turn abouts? And I've said it before, but I don't think I'm going to be able to come to accept that you can sail upwind. The land battle equivalent would be hills and trees not having any effect on gameplay.

[ratbarf]

How about a sublte blitz? I would love that kind of thing. I also played Shogun and all other titles since '99 and it only took me a year to be able to absolutly thrash that game on Hardest. Oh well, it was too easy to realy turtle anyways unless you where playing Takeda or Oda anyways.

Anyways, one thing from the Original Shogun that I would love to see implemented somehow in Empire is the ability to turn on your enemy in the middle of a battle. Create a peace treaty, get them to go to war with you against a common enemy. Then just when you are about to defeat the enemy forces they turn on you and catch your stacks way out of position screwing your for quite a few turns as they then blitz your castles as you try and rebuild your main army. I did to the Imagawa several times and (Best of all) had it done to me by the Oda. (was playin as Takeda the best freaking faction eva!)

Thats the kind of thing I want to see from the Empire AI. If the Dutch Belgians had turned on Wellington at Waterloo while they were in amongst his formation, that would have won the battle and secured the French for at least a year. Too bad I know it won't happen though. (that also happened in Multi player Age of Empires, my supposed ally built a crapload of Bombard towers next to my buildings in my main settlement then turned off his ally setting while mine was still set to non aggression. To be frank I went into the next room and clocked my brother for his treachery.)

[Callahan9119]

I have NEVER been so challenged by the battle AI, since 2001 or whenever I bought my first total war game. I play with medium unit size, I read that it makes the AI much better, I have no complaints compared to previous game.

Video problems and my other GPU sitting there useless because of a memory leak in SLI is another story

[DisruptorX]

Problem, as always, is the dreaded Passive AI. If there were full stacks of enemy units coming at you every other turn during the early game, it would indeed be challenging.

Its really the same problem thats always been there. The AI hates sending full armies to assault territories.

[Polemists]

It all depends upon perspective I guess.

If you pick short campaign I can see why the game would go quickly, but then again it's short, it's not meant to take you the 100 years. Even long is only meant to take you half the time. Only World Domination is about taking the globe.

Again, the goal is to establish yourself.

I've actually found, in my experience the minor factions to be far more aggressive then the major ones.

Nations like Savoy, Wutemburg and Venice have all invaded my cities with full stacks, (Savoy with two armies) and even taken a city. So my border is maintained. Plus as you go on in years, more and more rebels begin to pop up so your bound to increase your local stacks for that reason. Most of my cities have a decent garrison do to slav rebels, who are quite numerous and march straight for the capital.

Not to mention I have found holding territory early on in America against the numerous native american factions quite challenging and enjoyable. I'm only on M/M.

Again it's what you want, but it's like saying you played Short Campaign of Rome, and your 15 years in and you've beaten the biggest challenge. When we all know the other Roman houses not Carthage was the challenge.

Same thing with this game. Beating a handful of smaller Euro states is not the main challenge, or even beating the major ones.

It's global expansion, and revoultion. I personally find it very challenging and enjoyable. I recently had to hold off 1000 Cheeroke from taking Florida who had only a few hundred men. It was quite challenging.

[peacemaker]

Well, that's because you're just great. I understand I'm not that great of a player, and even on M/M, I find myself being almost destroyed several times over. I'm not sure what it is, but you're just reaaaaaly good. I'm sure mods will come out that can help this, right now just hope for the best and find a hard faction to play(I found that prussia was actually fairly easy compared to other factions)

[quadalpha]

You are missing the point if you play it like a conquer-the-world-o-meter. It is primarily about building something that you can identify with. The direction CA is moving the franchise is more toward balance and atmosphere, exemplified by the fact that the default objectives are no longer "conquer a mass of provinces," but are a much smaller set aimed at recreating the historical aims of the nations involved. The move to reduce the number of armies and provinces, and to take the recruiting of agents out of the players control accentuate this shift in emphasis, and makes the player care more about what he has. So of course you are not going to enjoy it very much if the only reason you play is for conquest; then the game might as well be a chore, much like how the latter parts of previous TW titles often turned out. To get the most out of it, you need to invest your faction with a little personality.

[DisruptorX]

You are missing the point if you play it like a conquer-the-world-o-meter. It is primarily about building something that you can identify with. The direction CA is moving the franchise is more toward balance and atmosphere, exemplified by the fact that the default objectives are no longer "conquer a mass of provinces," but are a much smaller set aimed at recreating the historical aims of the nations involved. The move to reduce the number of armies and provinces, and to take the recruiting of agents out of the players control accentuate this shift in emphasis, and makes the player care more about what he has. So of course you are not going to enjoy it very much if the only reason you play is for conquest; then the game might as well be a chore, much like how the latter parts of previous TW titles often turned out. To get the most out of it, you need to invest your faction with a little personality.

Its less fun when you don't get to defend your empire because the AI never launches naval attacks, never invades, and generally just sits around. Late game if you want a fight, you have to start it.

I'm enjoying Empire, myself, though.

[Mailman653]

I'm just the average player who plays on the default setting as far back as MTW so I can't atest to the difficulty of the game on VH etc, but what I have noticed is that I have an abudance of money and a very peaceful excistence. In M2TW I would bulid up trade as fast as I could but I would always be low on cash and waring with one or two other factions.

As opposed to ETW where I seem to have almost an abudance of cash and hardly anyone trying to topple my empire down.

[Polemists]

It all depends on how you play, I have gone bankrupt several times over in ETW. Do to losing trade rights do to past wars and new alliances.

As for

Its less fun when you don't get to defend your empire because the AI never launches naval attacks, never invades, and generally just sits around

I have had the AI do all of the above quite frequently on M so I dunno, maybe you should go with medium

Venice took over two of my ports with large navies, invaded my empire, and took out both my school and new church before it struck my capital, weaving around larger defended cities. I was quite impressed considering it was only turn 16...last time I ask venice to become a protectorate

[Dayve]

The AI isn't too easy for me... I do win every battle but i lose 90% of my army in doing so. Still trying to figure out a tactic that works effectively.

[NimitsTexan]

It all depends on how you play, I have gone bankrupt several times over in ETW. Do to losing trade rights do to past wars and new alliances.

As for



I have had the AI do all of the above quite frequently on M so I dunno, maybe you should go with medium

Venice took over two of my ports with large navies, invaded my empire, and took out both my school and new church before it struck my capital, weaving around larger defended cities. I was quite impressed considering it was only turn 16...last time I ask venice to become a protectorate

So you are saying you had the AI transport land troops on a ship and invade a costal region/island against you?

[Callahan9119]

I will agree with you there. I'm attacking france completely in the new world and have no resistance. Indians are another matter though.

Still way more fun than any other TW game, I love techs, makes the campaign map more than just making buildings.

I can complain (my SLI doesnt work) but this is a great game. The game everyone wants, where the AI behaves like a human is far off, so far the AI has been good (try medium units).

[Yun Dog]

Yeh I hear your concerns but I think theres a few issues here. Bear in mind this isnt a criticism in any way.

I mean you wanna make it harder give the AI insane stacks of death with bonuses and have it attack at all costs, someone can mod that in. I would be bored if I was defending against endless stacks of men.

To some degree wasnt that mid - late game STW with masses and masses of stacks of the few that were left, I dont think I ever bothered to finish a game once it got to that stage. So my first thing would be make sure your not looking at Shogun with rose coloured glasses because it was the first of its kind.

ETW:
I played through the Tute - ok that was alright, but easy yes, but its a tute.

I then went to VH/VH and the few battles I fought I got either pwned or just won by a few stragglers, that was encouraging enough to leave VH till later. As far as the AI sea invasions surely that can be fixed?

Then I went back to Med/Med cause I intend to get some value out of this game, then I will play through at hard, then I will play through at VH/VH, and then I will play all the factions, and then they will have patched/upgraded the game, and Ill play through a few more times, and then I might play it a few more times for old time sake.

On the up side I hear theres going to be a MP campaign so all your challenge issues will be solved then.

Its sort of a glass half full thing. Can you think of alot of recent game releases that had proved challenging for you? or lived up to your expectations, or werent full of bugs? What about the last two titles of this series - were they challenging? Cause I goto be honest mate I dont think your going to get that game you want for a long time to come.

The way I look at it, if Im not going to enjoy this game then I really have to look at why Im still playing games, and what game will ever be good enough to challenge players who have played this game as much as we have. Cause Its along wait till the next one.

Even if I get a month of honeymoon period where Im excited about the game, before I get bored or frustrated... thats sounds like I got a month more than some people. Once I get to the point where that excitement is no longer there, goodbye gaming.

Till the day this incredible game your waiting for comes out, Im going to play this one and enjoy it.

[sassbarman]

I agree completely with the O.P. the AI is far to passive. CA really have to look into this and stop relying on pretty graphics to carry their games. It's not much a game when there is little to no chance of losing.
Having said that it's still fun to play because there is nothing else out there like it, but it could be so much better.

[Polemists]

First point

So you are saying you had the AI transport land troops on a ship and invade a costal region/island against you?

Costal yes, Venice sailed upwards from it's city in southern greece. Landed near Vienna, whose troops were trying to take Venice and had lost, and then proceeded to march upon my capital.


Islands, yes. Spain invaded Cuba from Hisponola despite our regional trade 15 turns prior, do I assume to the fact I took Gibraltar and we were at war.

Not saying it happens all the time, but it can happen.



Again this goes back to what you want from your AI, and what people. Want I have lost battles, I have lost cities.

This isn't to say the game shouldn't provide some challenge for all levels, but remeber these forums are by and large veterans. People who play strategy game, after strategy game and never feel the AI is "good enough". The only way to satisfy most of those people I assume is to let them fight each other on MP.

The AI, is AI, it is not a person, it will never be as good as a person can be for years and years.

I find the game challenging and fun, not impossibly easy. I think the average gamer (who CA is trying to cater to do to the fact that apparently veterans and hardcore don't have enough of a market) will enjoy the game.

The fact it has resounding reviews and lots of fan faire I think is good. Is it perfect no? Is there a easy battle from time to time? Sure. By and large though I think the average gamer (Guys used to play M/M, will find it a nice challenge.

The AI at least has some tactics this time, which to me anyway, is a vast improvement over MTW2.

Again, I found MTW2 challenging at times. So take it all with a grain of salt.

[AussieGiant]

I have one response for all those of you complaining.

Please play the Prestige game on VH/VH...get back to me with your thoughts at 1799...

...and that should not be for a few weeks

[amritochates]

Polemists, you are the first to state that contrary to a large number of players Naval Invasions are working. Are you sure that the order of events was as you stated??

Since, is it also not possible that the port was blockaded by a fleet working in conjunction with an army moving up from either the Italian Peninsula or the Adriatic Coast.

What makes you so sure that a Naval invasion happened, esp. since we no longer have toggle_fow to verify AI actions, and even that did not show armies that were temporarily in ambush position due to it stopping in an forested region.

I am afraid I will have to ask for screenshots or independent anecdotal evidence before I accept what you have stated.

Btw are you playing Austria/Prussia??

[Polemists]

I am playing Austria.


I can't guarentee it did happen.

It could have been

Since, is it also not possible that the port was blockaded by a fleet working in conjunction with an army moving up from either the Italian Peninsula or the Adriatic Coast.

It could be they blockaded the port and a Italian force had moved forward. Though that would mean Venice would have had to move through Ottoman lands and if I understand the AI right that would have meant a war I think. Since Venice and Ottomans weren't at war, it seemed the army that was there right next to my port had come from the ship.

Next time I see it i'll take a screenshot, though my pc is pretty slow, so it won't be pretty I imagine, even on fraps.

The only island error I encountered was at one point I sold Prussia a island (Sardina maybe?) it moved a half stack down to southern Italy (maybe to reinforce) but they never actually got on the prussian ships to sail down to the island. Though I assumed that was a bug at the time.


As for the Spainish army in cuba, I assumed they had come from Hisponla, but I guess they could have just been a left over from our trade. I assumed tho the Ai disbaned island armies after a trade.

Just some thoughts, could be wrong.

[amritochates]

I assumed tho the Ai disbaned island armies after a trade.

AI has incapable of manually disbanding armies since STW, figure that out.

Since the 3-D campaign map of RTW, on acquiring a settlement by bribery or diplomatic means the native force is merely expelled.

Which is why on selling/donating a settlement it is better to either manually disband your troops or to shift them out of the settlements before doing so.

It reduces pressure on the processor and reduces chances of a CTD, just as counting to 100 at the end of each battle before reverting to the campaign map.

[knoddy]

Again this goes back to what you want from your AI, and what people. Want I have lost battles, I have lost cities.

This isn't to say the game shouldn't provide some challenge for all levels, but remeber these forums are by and large veterans. People who play strategy game, after strategy game and never feel the AI is "good enough". The only way to satisfy most of those people I assume is to let them fight each other on MP.

The AI, is AI, it is not a person, it will never be as good as a person can be for years and years.

I find the game challenging and fun, not impossibly easy. I think the average gamer (who CA is trying to cater to do to the fact that apparently veterans and hardcore don't have enough of a market) will enjoy the game.

The fact it has resounding reviews and lots of fan faire I think is good. Is it perfect no? Is there a easy battle from time to time? Sure. By and large though I think the average gamer (Guys used to play M/M, will find it a nice challenge.

The AI at least has some tactics this time, which to me anyway, is a vast improvement over MTW2.

Again, I found MTW2 challenging at times. So take it all with a grain of salt.

couldnt agree more. most battles i fight are very close, do i win alot? yes, do i lose occasionally ? yes
most people would find a game that beats u every time frustrating and not fun at all.
AI will NEVER EVER be as good as human so dont expect it to be.

lets talk about the AI my gC, marthras on H/H.

one of the single province factions i was at war with near russia, i was marching my army up what i thought was the only pass to their town when lo and behold a small force marches up from a diff pass which i didnt know was there and besiges my town and attacks straight away. they had 2 units of cavalry and some militia i had my armed peasants and some melee militia so i setup and ambush with my melee guys waiting in the woods to ambush the ai as they ran at my peasants.

enemy advanced they got close enough to spot the ambush and quickly retreated out of range and sent their cav to deal with my hiding units. it was a hard fought battle which my units barely won with both sides wavering at the end their militia also charged at my peasants and the only thing that saved me was their general dying and cavalry routing in time for me to save my peasants with a flank charge. i lost bout 70% of my men and all my units were wavering when i won.

eg 2. i attacked the spanish on sardina with a smaller force and had a hard fought battle against all the odds and won i think simply cos of my military techs :D

eg 3. i lost naples to an emergent faction cos they rebelled and beat my garrison down.

i hear alot of people whining about how enemies send single stacks and plunder all their improvements and how this is Bad AI, this is the stupidest thing ever, every time they pillage you lose some wealth and as such some income for that turn and u have to pay to repair it. i had persian stacks roaming my territory when i was fightin them i was losing probs 3-4k worth of income from them, and i couldnt deal with them cos if i moved troops out of towns to stop them they took teh towns i had to wait to bring up more troops to deal with them.

the ai fights when it has the advantage just because it still loses doesnt make it bad.... it makes it AI it will never be as good as a human end of story.

i dare any1 to find AI like this in earlier games cos it hasnt existed until now. is it perfect...no nobody is saying it is, but it is vastly improved and quite challenging.

do i think the ai should be more aggressive yes particularly towards each other, several factions have been at war for ages in my game and only exchanged 1-2 provinces and pirating each others trade routes.

BACK TO THE DAYS OF MEDIEVAL 1 I DEMAND 20 full stacks of Moors lawl.

wow thats so long i dont remember half of what i wrote hah

cheers knoddy

[Fisherking]

I am just curious, is anyone who thinks it is too easy playing with small unit size?

I have been lead to understand that the AI handles small units better than large one.

I could be totally wrong, of course. I am still waiting for my copy to arrive, while you guys have already been playing for a week.

I can’t say I will be too disappointed if the AI is not an insane warmongering conquer which will never make peace on any terms. I have had that in the last several games. One that looks out for its best interests may be a good thing.

By the same token, naval invasions are risky to undertake with a lot at stake if anything goes wrong. So if the AI isn’t spamming fleets and armies to invade every scrap of land, that is ok too. If you go cranking it up you are going to wined up with the silly junk you did in M2. Iceland will be attacked by the Barbary states on turn 2, and so on.

Who the heck launched massive sea invasions in this era or any other? If you mess with this too much you will have totally ridiculous happenings and it is just best tweaked a tiny bit or just left alone.
Armies far from home need continued support to win. Leave it to the human players to do that.
I am sure it will be fine when we get the MP campaigns and you can be worries that someone real will be on your doorstep with 3 fleets and full stacks.

Changing some of the AI’s aggressiveness is going to wreck a lot of the history. You may or may not care but some do. It will spoil a lot for the newer players and those who RP the games, and you are still going to beat the AI some how. If you couldn’t the game wouldn’t sell.

Use some imagination to make it harder for your self! Don’t tech up and use small armies.

Napoleon managed to do much the same thing as you are managing to do, so no big deal and no surprises there.

Maybe I will be singing a different tune once I have played for a week, but for now, I just see it as a bit of boasting.

[knoddy]

who remembers what M2TW was like when they increased the frequency of naval invasions ?

playing as marthras (SP>?>>????) i have never been invaded from the ocean BUT mughal dominated me on the sea for many years because i didnt have a fleet and couldnt build one with them blockading my ports. aside from that everyone ive been at war with has been able to invade by land cept teh spanish BUT they were at war with england and their navy got smashed.

i would rather not have every state going crazy with naval invasions but thats just my 2 cents

[amritochates]

Concerning Naval invasions:

It is a major problem because now there are three theatres of war instead of a single unified camapaign map, that are connected only through naval fleets. So if the AI is incapable of transporting fleets it implies that for the GC the AI factions will be restricted to their respective theatres, incapable of reinforcing one theatre from the other.I doubt that you think it desirable that I can besiege and take over Paris,France while the AI retains 20 stacks in new France.

Also since the AI is ignorant of the fact that it cannot transport units, it tends treat Islands as normal provinces building up large stacks that then do nothing for the remainder of the campaign except suck up army upkeep and will only come into play If and whwn the player decides to invade.

Read a more detailed expose in my thread:

https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?t=114186