Battle AI Blog

**Beskar** · 11-16-2009, 23:54

But the 500 USD/Copy games only sell to a specific audience opposed to the mass market, where such a price would be dropped anyway.

The sales for 500USD a copy game would probably be 1,000 or so, CA with E:TW is looking at near the million mark, or which ever it is.

Also, couldn't they look at the source code of such a simulator anyway?

**Owen Glyndwr** · 11-17-2009, 01:09

All I know is that I was promised modding tools, so I want modding tools.

In a choice between online multiplayer and modding tools I'd have to go with the tools. At this point, mods are the only reason I play ANY of the TW games anymore.

**AussieGiant** · 11-17-2009, 19:33

As usual, I hope we are all aware of what exactly we are all talking about.

Try and imagine the Intellectual Property of "human realistic" Artificial Intelligence in a game code...

....just take a few short "crack induced" moments to comprehend that.

Excellent...

now ask yourself what part of the military or scientific multi billion dollar industry would pay for it?

Great...so lets get it straight...IF CA actually did manage to code "human realistic" AI in their game, we'd bloody well know about it, or maybe they would just disappear because DARPA buy's them out for lets say....1 Billion dollars!!!

Christ on the cross people.

It's 50 dollar game and your equating a section of CA's code with something that would be as valuable as what the quantum physic coders make for billion dollar investment companies to predict the stock market.

**Cecil XIX** · 11-18-2009, 01:39

It's true that AI is a difficult thing to achieve properly. But I think most, if not almost all, of the people complaining about ETW's AI also think that the AI in the first games was markedly better than that in Rome onward. So I think most people aren't asking CA to come up with new, hyper-intelligent software. Most are asking for a return to the competance of Shogun and Medievel. To focus on AI, rather than graphics.

Perhaps that's unreasonable as well, but it's not asking for a miracle. They made a living with those games as well.

**antisocialmunky** · 11-18-2009, 01:43

TW has always been a primarily singleplayer experience so it needs a decent AI.

**Claudio** · 11-18-2009, 03:13

Originally Posted by AussieGiant

As usual, I hope we are all aware of what exactly we are all talking about.

Try and imagine the Intellectual Property of "human realistic" Artificial Intelligence in a game code...

....just take a few short "crack induced" moments to comprehend that.

Excellent...

now ask yourself what part of the military or scientific multi billion dollar industry would pay for it?

Great...so lets get it straight...IF CA actually did manage to code "human realistic" AI in their game, we'd bloody well know about it, or maybe they would just disappear because DARPA buy's them out for lets say....1 Billion dollars!!!

Christ on the cross people.

It's 50 dollar game and your equating a section of CA's code with something that would be as valuable as what the quantum physic coders make for billion dollar investment companies to predict the stock market.

CA promised a revolutionary new AI, never before seen. In the demo of the game, when playing as the British, it seemed like they had made good on their promise. The American troops defending the fjord stayed in place and ripped any units you sent at them to pieces. If you moved troops to cross the undefended fjord, they would swing around 60% of their army to meet your troops, and march toward you in order, engage you in order, mimicking tactics of the day, and would put up a bloody good fight.

All scripted behaviour, deviously designed to fool people into buying Empire. If we played that battle with the AI we have now, the American soldiers would charge at you over the first fjord, the one they have fortified, and abandon their excellent defensive position. If you crossed the second fjord, you would be lucky if they sent a unit of cavalry, and if they did send a unit of cavalry it would charge head-on into a 4-rank deep unit of line infantry with bayonnets equipped, getting ripped to shreds.

The rest of their army would then bunch up into a huge cluster, unable to make a decision, and be annihlated.

If CA can't make anything but crap AI, then they ought to just admit it, not lie to me and talk about revolutionary this and revolutionary that, and then let sympathizers like you try to convince me (unsuccesfully) that they did the best they could with the funding available.

Once again, perhaps they did do the best they could with the funding available, but the AI is not revoltuionary, nor is it an improvement on Rome or M2, and it is a hell of a lot worse than MTW1, which I find funny, considering that was released... 9 years ago?

**gollum** · 11-18-2009, 03:23

7 years ago...

**peacemaker** · 11-19-2009, 02:47

Peh. I just want an AI that can stand and shoot, not cluster up 10 feet from my men and do the chicken dance. It doesn't have to outsmart me, just make me believe that it isn't as stupid as it may actually be.

**Nobunaga** · 11-19-2009, 08:03

CA just fails... so badly...

And no it ain't rocket science it is much much easier than that...CA just can't make good AI so there marketing policy is to tell poeple that a good AI is not doable

Just look at the campain map AI for example and compare it with that of paradox games and you will see why CA fails...

**Alexander the Pretty Good** · 11-19-2009, 08:56

Originally Posted by peacemaker

Peh. I just want an AI that can stand and shoot, not cluster up 10 feet from my men and do the chicken dance. It doesn't have to outsmart me, just make me believe that it isn't as stupid as it may actually be.

'Zactly. No one's saying we expect the AI to outwit us at every turn. But at least be plausible. I didn't lose a whole lot in MTW but that's because I picked my battles when I could, in an attempt to bring more and better troops to bear against the AI. Not because I could just plow through their flanks with cav and insta-rout or whichever cluster

the AI is engaging.

**Wishazu** · 11-19-2009, 11:07

Shogun Total War for the win

The last game they did with at least reasonable AI was RTW: Barbarian Invasion. I had high hopes for ETW but since I bought it at launch I have yet to finish my first campaign, in fact I havnt played it for about 6 months. I thought that perhaps the AI would improve over time with patches etc. but if that is going to happen it looks like I`ll have a long wait...

I have gone back to playing Shoggy again and even after all this time it is still an engaging all round experience. I actually lose battles from time to time