The Daily Update at the Com

[Husar]

Well, i like higher AI aggression if it means that they are more likely to actually attack when they're at war but I hope they will be more diplomatic and choose their wars more carefully and ACTUALLY MAKE PEACE. Oh, I became a bit loud there I guess but I still haven't seen the AI make a single peace treaty(and they might actually want to stick to it for a while after they got beaten into a bloody pulp by their adversary), though recently Sweden offered me peace, didn't even know we were at war but it was a progress.

[Mailman653]

"For those of you wondering how we're progressing, let's just say I've now seen a Marathan eastern seaboard of the United States with both as AI factions".

That doesn't surprise me. I've seen them take over almost all of Eastern Europe in 1.2. I suppose having almost whole continent to yourself has it's advantages.

[A Very Super Market]

Eastern Europe =/= USA

I suppose he means naval invasions that actually work? Or factions trading provinces?

[Fisherking]

I get nervous when I here “more aggression”. It usually turns out badly in game terms.

The CAI does NOT need more aggression. The Diplomacy needs the rework. Then the CAI needs to act on its diplomatic status...attack if it thinks it is at war... The level of aggression is too strong now with all the ridiculous DoWs and most factions should not be trying to take on the world and expand to everywhere.

They had best be careful with the naval invasions. We don’t need more absurdities in this game.

Having the Indian factions invading the Americas is just as silly as having the Cherokee invading France or England.

Most factions need limited expansion priorities. England and France would have the largest areas I think, and maybe Spain and Portugal.


Battle AI is a different story. Some have trouble with it and others don’t.

I think most people here have problems with the proposed Naval Changes and would rather not see it.

[Durallan]

I don't know if i'm terribly bothered about the maratha's expanding into america, if they build a really big empire and wish to do so well thats up to them. On the peace point I actually had my first peace offer from the AI! it was a complete shock, I had to take a breather and look at the screen again! the maratha's offered me peace, and they offered ME money!! it was a shock and I agreed to it. However the random routine that didz mentioned still seems to be there much more covert than before, but one turn my allies the united provinces and prussia declared war on each other, which meant that if I sided with the defender EVERYONE would hate me for the rest of the game. Neither did they share borders which was strange aswell. Anyway reloaded and presto, no war declaration, but Issac Newton died, but I'd rather lose him than lose any scrap of reputation my nation has left for defending an ally.

[Fisherking]

I don't know if i'm terribly bothered about the maratha's expanding into america, if they build a really big empire and wish to do so well thats up to them. On the peace point I actually had my first peace offer from the AI! it was a complete shock, I had to take a breather and look at the screen again! the maratha's offered me peace, and they offered ME money!! it was a shock and I agreed to it. However the random routine that didz mentioned still seems to be there much more covert than before, but one turn my allies the united provinces and prussia declared war on each other, which meant that if I sided with the defender EVERYONE would hate me for the rest of the game. Neither did they share borders which was strange aswell. Anyway reloaded and presto, no war declaration, but Issac Newton died, but I'd rather lose him than lose any scrap of reputation my nation has left for defending an ally.

If you love ridiculous sea invasions then go back to M2TW for a while.

I don’t like the ridiculous and outrageous invasions any more than I like the silly DoWs.

If you were offered peace and money than chances are you were not fighting them any way and you betrayed an ally by signing the peace agreement.

Just wait until you have idiots invading everywhere and carrying huge armies on one brig.

[Daveybaby]

The CAI does NOT need more aggression. The Diplomacy needs the rework. Then the CAI needs to act on its diplomatic status...attack if it thinks it is at war... The level of aggression is too strong now with all the ridiculous DoWs and most factions should not be trying to take on the world and expand to everywhere.

While i agree that the diplomacy needs work, the campaign AI does need more aggression outside of diplomacy. At the moment, it's hardly an issue that the diplomatic AI DoW's left right and centre, because it rarely follows these DoWs with any actual aggression.

Basically, at the moment, the AI isnt aggressive, it's passive-aggressive.

They had best be careful with the naval invasions. We don’t need more absurdities in this game. Having the Indian factions invading the Americas is just as silly as having the Cherokee invading France or England.

Why? What's the point of having a CAI at all if all its going to do is stick to 'realistic' historical events? I can understand that some people think that its important to have historically accurate units and weapons, but if you have a historically accurate CAI then you dont actually have a game any more.

And how is the CAI supposed to perform historically accurately when the player isnt similarly constrained? How is napoleon going to conquer most of europe if the player has eliminated france?

[Peasant Phill]

Like others said:

"A more agressive CAI would be welcome as long as the CAI would be more sensible in there DoW's and peace acceptings/offerings"

The systems are there:
- The CAI offered and accepted peace more easily (more sensibly) in previous versions.
- The nation relationship ratingsystem works and has at least some influence on CAI behavior. So why can't that be the biggest influence on the CAI?

I admit, there should be some natural agression against bordering nations and some randomness in DoW's. BUT what use is diplomacy if it takes the backseat in comparisson with borderagression and randomness?

[Daveybaby]

It depends on what they mean. The first one is probably good, unless it winds up as RTW/MTW2-style 'invasions' consisting soley of the 1st Imperial One Legged Peasant Division.

Except that theres an item specifically mentioning stronger army composition, isnt there.

The second one probably means MORE DoW's. The campaign AI doesn't need to be more aggressive, it just needs to act on its current aggression.

Youre confusing the word 'aggressive' with 'hostile'. At the moment the CAI is too hostile, but it isnt nearly aggressive enough when it comes to acting on that hostility.

[Fisherking]

Much more of AI behavior needs to be faction based rather than campaign based.

Give the factions some personality rather than having them run by a random events generator that is out to screw the player.

An aggressive and hostile France is much different than an aggressive and hostile Saxony or other one region faction. The minors first need to insure their survival before going to war with all the world.

There is nothing wrong with some few factions being extremely expansionist but it should not be every faction in every campaign.

I totally agree that once war is declared it should be prosecuted. Declaring war and sitting there until attacked or declaring war without the intent of conquest is much too extreme a measure.

As to naval invasions, having everyone wandering the seas with a stack of troops looking for some place to unload is shear rubbish. I is another nuisance factor that this game certainly does not need. There are more than enough.

Invasions for the purpose of attacking an enemy in the far away is much different. So is trying to snap up some great trade asset but invasions of every rock or floating log just take away from a game that seems to have lost a lot of its feel to the silly AI already. The invasions should be purposeful and not random wanderings or targets of opportunity.

The thing in the game that should be most historically accurate are the units and their capabilities. Most of the rest is up for grabs at least within reasonable limits. There is nothing wrong with Mexico emerging and trying to take over the Americas. There is nothing wrong with the Cherokee trying to drive out the Europeans and expand into other native areas. But it would be a bit over the top if they invaded Europe or India.

The game is not a fantasy realm but is instead historically based. There are enough fantasy games without turning this one into one.

[Durallan]

If you love ridiculous sea invasions then go back to M2TW for a while.

I don’t like the ridiculous and outrageous invasions any more than I like the silly DoWs.

If you were offered peace and money than chances are you were not fighting them any way and you betrayed an ally by signing the peace agreement.

Just wait until you have idiots invading everywhere and carrying huge armies on one brig.

I will not go back to medieval 2 total war for awhile, I do love medieval 2 total war but I'm playing empire right now. I must say that I resent your rather hostile attitude. At any rate you misread my post.

Okay I'm Great Britain. My Allies are Prussia and The United Provinces. At the end of a turn the United Provinces declares war on Prussia. I select - Side with the Defender, Prussia. This now turns everyone that I had an Alliance with into HOSTILE, INCLUDING PRUSSIA. How is that betraying an ally? The United Provinces betrayed me and Prussias trust by declaring war on them in the first place? How am I public enemy number 1 by wanting to stick up for an ally that gets attacked?? By the way I haven't seen alot of rediculous invasions in my campaign yet.

I do not mind if Marathas or Mughal decides it has heard about the fantastic wonders of America and wants it for its own, if it sends a large invasion force, with enough protection and makes that its primary goal that would be a good campaign AI. however if it sent its army on one brig and got lucky landing it on east coast USA and doesn't seem to have any further interest int he region that would annoy me. Like Wars in this game, Invasions should be taken very seriously by the AI and made its primary concern to ensure success.

This 'Game' is about empire expansion and conquest in the 18th century, whos to say maratha can't invade america? Or the United States invade india if it so desires to spread its ideas of peace freedom and mom's apple pie at sword point? everything after 1700 is meant to be up in the air, otherwise it would get rather boring. I have to say that I would disagree to native americans launching invasions of europe or india, because their war canoes wouldn't survive the trip, but then i've never seen them launch a naval invasion let alone build a ship.

[A Very Super Market]

There are certain things that should, and shouldn't happen. If the Marathas have completely taken over India, there is little else they can do but expand out of their original theatre. Historically, the various European powers got in there and messed thing up, but there is no such thing happening in ETW. Likewise, if Prussia manages to take over Germant early, they could feasibly try and colonize, with their excess wealth and, now secure, location.

[Slaists]

There are certain things that should, and shouldn't happen. If the Marathas have completely taken over India, there is little else they can do but expand out of their original theatre. Historically, the various European powers got in there and messed thing up, but there is no such thing happening in ETW. Likewise, if Prussia manages to take over Germant early, they could feasibly try and colonize, with their excess wealth and, now secure, location.

Yup, I agree

[Hooahguy]

new update

Hi guys,

With 1.3 we added in an error reporting system that sends mini crash dumps to us to enable us to track down and fix more crashes.

An example of how this system is helpful is that thanks to these dumps we discovered that one problem was causing 25% of all crashes, far higher than any other cause. The specific problem was to do with system memory trying to allocate a texture in the sprite cache. This system has now been changed to use a lot less memory so the frequency of this crash happening has been massively reduced.

So with these minidumps we can get a lot more information on crashes people get, and they also allow us to focus on the biggest crash courses and fix those problems to provide you with a more stable game.

Have a good weekend,

Mark O'Connell
(aka SenseiTW)

[TB666]

There are certain things that should, and shouldn't happen.

I rather have random things then going by historical events or reasoning.
After you end turn 1 anything goes which has been the Total war way since it was created.
So there is no "certain things that should and certain things that shouldn't", there is only "this is happening" which is exactly what makes Total war so fun.
One of my best games in MTW1 for example was when Aragon managed to conquer all of europe.
It was sudden and random and I loved every minute of it.
The less you can prepare yourself the better it is.
That was one of the biggest flaws of RTW, it was always the same factions that got big. It made the game predictable and boring.

As for the update.
Well I encountered a game-stopping CTD in my Marathas campaign, hopefully my countless crashes produced some results.

[A Very Super Market]

What I meant was, if Poland has a single coastal province, a crappy economy, and a war with all it's neighbours, they shouldn't try something like colonization, or declaring war with the player.

[TB666]

What I meant was, if Poland has a single coastal province, a crappy economy, and a war with all it's neighbours, they shouldn't try something like colonization, or declaring war with the player.

Why shouldn't they try colonization ?
In one game as Prussia I went for a province in the americas and it saved my economy.
If Poland feels that doing that will give them more money then yes they should go for it. It also provides them with a extra province and a safe-haven from destruction.

[A Very Super Market]

Is it possible? Yes. Reasonable? Absolutely not. No nation in history would have done something like that. One of the problems of TW AI is their fixation on certain things, provinces, that force them to do unreasonable things like leave capitals undefended, declare war on nations so much more powerful than them, or against allies.

[TB666]

Is it possible? Yes. Reasonable? Absolutely not.

already pointed out why it's reasonable.
If they are poor why should they not try and go for a more rich province ?
Hell that is believed to be one of the reasons why Sweden joined in the 30 year war, to get control over rich ports.
It was one of the reasons(could even have been the sole reason) why Russia agree to declare war with it's allies on Sweden during the start of ETW period, to get a hold of a good port.
Also if they are with war with all of the neighbouring factions, well getting a island in the caribbean for example would not only maybe save their economy, it would save them from destruction.
Again a reasonable thing to do.

[A Very Super Market]

To the Russians, St. Petersburg is not equivalent to a Caribbean island, nor Lubeck to the Swedes. For one, they aren't separated by an entire ocean and required (Comparitively) less effort to make a determined effort for them. A land war would be fought, and land exchanged, and it would be over.

An overseas colony not only requires a significant navy to maintain, but troops to garrison it as well, as most colonization areas are already taken up by the 1700s. While you're under attack by 4 different factions (This is assuming the AI at it's best, btw) would it really be the best course of action to invest a good deal in some ships, pack some of your much needed military on it, and send it through the narrow baltic, to a place where you might not even succeed in colonizing?

If you are at war in Europe, and you lose, it doesn't matter if you had taken over everybody's colonies, in the whole world. You have lost in your base of power, and they can demand whatever they want from you. Even talking in ETW terms, a nation is destroyed if they lose all their provinces in their home theatre, so they couldn't possibly be saved.

[sassbarman]

I gotta side with a very super market on this one, you first have to secure your power base before you even consider going after rich colonial territories. It would bother me to no end to see prussia for example sending out fleets packed with troops bound for jamaica while she's in a bitter struggle against half of eastern europe.

[Slaists]

Is it possible? Yes. Reasonable? Absolutely not. No nation in history would have done something like that. One of the problems of TW AI is their fixation on certain things, provinces, that force them to do unreasonable things like leave capitals undefended, declare war on nations so much more powerful than them, or against allies.

I gotta side with a very super market on this one, you first have to secure your power base before you even consider going after rich colonial territories. It would bother me to no end to see prussia for example sending out fleets packed with troops bound for jamaica while she's in a bitter struggle against half of eastern europe.

Well, take Courland as an example. They were poor. They were miliarily weak. The DID NOT have a strong and secured home base. But they DID have colonies... Tobago and a territory in today's Gambia. Those colonies helped to boost their economy quite a bit in history.

[A Very Super Market]

Again, take my scenario. You're in a bloody four-front war in an unstable location, with no colonial record to speak of, would you colonise?

[sassbarman]

Well, take Courland as an example. They were poor. They were miliarily weak. The DID NOT have a strong and secured home base. But they DID have colonies... Tobago and a territory in today's Gambia. Those colonies helped to boost their economy quite a bit in history.

I understand if done intelligently colonising could be very beneficial, but i think you and i can both agree that the current AI isn't capable of such things, especially with a one province minor. I would much rather see to use your example courland conquer a few neighbouring countries first giving itself some breathing room before attempting any colonisation.

[Slaists]

I understand if done intelligently colonising could be very beneficial, but i think you and i can both agree that the current AI isn't capable of such things, especially with a one province minor. I would much rather see to use your example courland conquer a few neighbouring countries first giving itself some breathing room before attempting any colonisation.

I agree, the current AI is not able to do that, as well as it's not able to do almost anything remotely reasonable. The only thing that makes the AI to have a remotely reasonable appearance at times is the huge cash boost it gets on VH campaign difficulty...

As to Courland, the real life example I mentioned did not involve conquering any neighboring territories. They just went and colonized some sugar producing territories. In the end though, they got ''gobbled up" by Poland and eventually Russia... So, I guess, your advice might have come handy to them in the XVII century :)

[Zenicetus]

Again, take my scenario. You're in a bloody four-front war in an unstable location, with no colonial record to speak of, would you colonise?

You would if it helped fund the war through taxes, and overall wealth created through greedy merchants pursuing profit overseas.

The main reason I like the idea of naval invasions, if they're done well, is the potential for shaking up the mix of ownership on the map, so each grand campaign plays out differently. It would be boring (IMO) if the same superpowers expanded the same way, every time.

Another thing.... the game world is compressed. A faction like Maratha can't expand into more logical areas like Southeast Asia or Sub-Saharan Africa, because they're just not in the game. Where else can they go, except for the Caribbean basin and North America? It's a lot more profitable than expanding through that northwest corridor out of India, across vast (and resource-poor) wastelands, and then running smack into the Ottomans. I think some suspension of disbelief is necessary, due to CA's decisions on which areas to include in the game, and which to exclude. Many of the minor European factions might have set up colonies in places like Africa or sub-equatorial South America that just aren't on the game map.

On the other hand... I don't want to have to heavily garrison all my coastal cities against random, low-strength invasions that are just nuisances. Especially if I'm playing a faction with a long coastline to defend. So it's a question of whether CA can make the naval invasions seem logical, and a good way to shake up the campaign map, or just haphazard and annoying. It's a tricky balance to get right. I suspect the best result would be with some heavy "if X then Y" conditional scripting -- i.e. if the AI has expanded to a certain number of provinces and wealth status, then start looking for offshore colonies.

Unfortunately the AI seem to make mostly short-term decisions based on immediate circumstances, instead of long-term planning. "Hey, that province waaaaay across the water is under-garrisoned, so let's see if I can take it, even though I'm not in any condition to hold onto it, for more than a turn or two!"

[antisocialmunky]

Yeah, the AI lacks any reasonable foresight most of the time. I'm not sure what you can do about it, I know the 'conditional statement' response seems like an easy solution but CA talked touted a goal based AI...

I suspect that if indeed CA actually implemented something like, the problem is structural. The issue would be that the AI doesn't analyse a set of options after each iteration, instead it just picks the one.

For those not familiar a basic goal based AI can be described as follows.
-You have a set of X choices that can be performed at each step with a reward function(for strategic thinking, I think a long term and short term function would be best).
-During each step, the AI selects the option in which after evaluating the reward function results in the best reward and adds that action to its todo list.
-It steps through Y amount of times and then starts to execute the to do list.

The problem with this though is that it results in a very miopic AI in that it will invariably pick the list that results in the most immediate benefits.

The simpliest way of fixing that is to take Z sized set of the best options at every step so instead of a list, you generate a tree. After Y steps, you select the single path in the tree that results in the highest reward score. So once you adjust the AI to look at a set of decisions, it gets more intellegent. This is why Chess AIs take forever. They are analyzing all possible good moves.

Now, I can't really tell if this is actually the problem but it seems like this might be part of it. It could also be the function that picks the set of actions for picking 'attack' every time or the reward function for each decision is seriously screwed. I dunno.

[Fisherking]

I will not go back to medieval 2 total war for awhile, I do love medieval 2 total war but I'm playing empire right now. I must say that I resent your rather hostile attitude. At any rate you misread my post.

I didn’t mean to sound hostile.

Sea invasions are a contentious issue and so far CA has maintained a cautious approach in this game. I find that promising and would rather see it under done than over done.

Too often though, the changes get grossly over done.

A small change can open new horizons and ways of play but the same thing taken too far can spoil a lot too.

It can be like spicing a dish of food. A tiny amount of red pepper can bring out flavors you would not expect and make a bland dish wonderful, but a lot of red pepper ruins the flavor and makes it uneatable for most people.

[Durallan]

well I'm glad you didn't and I didn't meant to sound so frustrated, just a friendly forum discussion!, so we can leave it at that, but at any rate, they should probably have more than just the grand campaign (one of the CA employees modified M2TW to be able to have mutiple different campaigns before kingdoms came out), and have a historical one so maratha doesn't go colonising america or russia decides it needs to set up some good property deals in the carribean (aren't enough individual islands to fight over in the carribean anyway) and then one where its a little more randomized so maybe spain suffers a terrible setback and portugal or austria take over the spanish main, actually in my most recent great british campaign, the pueblo nations have taken over new mexico and are assimilating the spanish main! so much for the spanish!

[antisocialmunky]

I think its funny when Maratha conquers America because of the word 'Indian.' Columbus was right afterall, 300 years after the fact.