Best AI, please.

[paleologos]

How can I get the best AI, with BI or with Alexander?
I suspect this has been discussed but I am still relatively new to EB.
Thanks.

[lionhard]

Iv tried both, Alexander for over a year and BI for the last month. I personally prefere BI because the AI is more aggressive. Ill give you a short list of what each BI and Alex will offer you

BI:
Better AI campaign movement
Better use of ships
Units can swim
Units can use sheild wall
Night fight

Alex:
AI retrains its units
AI acts more sensible in battle (Not sure if i would agree)
Night fight


As a whole what we say is, if you want better AI movement and a better campaign experience go for BI

If you want a better battle experience, go for alex.

Im not deadly sure if BI retrains units, im sure iv seen the AI in my seleucid campaign retrain units. If they do its definetely not as excessive as what alex does.

[Ludens]

I have never seen a difference in campaign A.I. between BI and vanilla R:TW, so unless Alex actually has worse campaign A.I. I don't think this would be an advantage of BI. The only strategic advantage of BI I know of are the navel invasions, which I consider a mixed blessing. Sometimes you get a serious invasion by a serious rival, but I've also seen small, undermanned, pointless attacks by factions that otherwise would have been at peace with me.

[paleologos]

I 've never played Alx but I had an inconclusive campaign in BI vanilla with the Saxons. I remember I could keep West RE (and everyone else for all that matters) from attaking me by simply placing troops at river crossings and/or bridges. The AI would obstinatelly avoid fighting at those locations (who can blame them?). All provinces along the Baltic coast were mine plus Britain and Ireland and I discontinued before destroying the Romano-Brittish who had just emerged. I played that at medium difficulty for battles and very hard for campaign. I remember reading somewere that the Saxons were supposed to be a hard to play with faction but that was not my impression. If I play EB on BI will I be abble to stop the movement of AI armies by placing mine at bridges?

[anubis88]

You will stop armies on bridges even if you play with Vanilla RTW... An army can't pass if another army guards the bridge...

Like Ludens said, BI gives mostly naval invasions... Hovewer they are without sense sometimes. I remember in my Pontos campaign, Epeiros, with whom i shared no border by a longshot, kept invading Sinope whit full stacks... It was just wierd.

It adds a new dimension however, if you play with factions who have islands. It's a must practicaly. Without EB, you could always keep your fleet and Island army to a minimum, with no fear of them attacking you. With BI.exe on the other hand, you must always have a strong navy, and a respectible force on islands

[lionhard]

The biggest problem i had with using vanilla and Alex with EB is that the romans never launched naval invasions against corsica and sardin, or north africa for that matter. That simple fact turns me away because, i am now playing a seleucid campaign and it would be nice if the romans actually got their reforms, but they dont in vanilla or alex cas they dont use naval invasions which the first reform requires the capture of sardin or corsica.

So far in my campaign iv had so many naval battles iv lost count, the romans invaded greece with 2 fleets, drove me back to the east and returned to italy. I personally have not experienced nothing like that when it comes to aggressive AI, fingers crossed my BI campaign will bring more fun to come :)

[paleologos]

Could I have a link to that map depicting all the coastal provinces that can build fleets? I intend to misbehave .

[Mediolanicus]

Could I have a link to that map depicting all the coastal provinces that can build fleets? I intend to misbehave .

Odd place to ask. Try looking at the odd place you'd expect it least, like the stickied thread titled EB maps.
https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showt...19-EB-1.1-Maps

[Ionotkoiamor Not Suelisabmys]

The AI in Alex.exe also perform Naval Invasions. The Koine Hellenon Faction Leader on Krete sailed to the Lesbos and slaughtered my Lesbians on my Makedonia Campaign, after I took Athens and Sparta.

[lionhard]

Yeh koinon hellion performs naval invasions on all the mods and vanilla. Sorry to break ya trumpet :(

[paleologos]

Ok, guys
I remember in my second campaign with vanilla RTW I was Greek Cities and when I kicked the Romans and the Carthaginians out of Sicely they were both trying to invade it. Repeatedly that is.
Since I did not have the strenght to immediately ivade both Italy and Africa -while I already had two fronts in the balkans and Asia Minor- I would need either a fleet around, or a standing army on Sicely, so I opted for a naval defence.
What I'm saying is that if it hadn't been for the posts in this thread, I would suppose the AI takes to the sea regularly in all versions provided it is after a particular objective.
The problem with the AI is that it doesn't match the strength of it's fleets with the naval strenght of it's enemies and many times the Romans and a fewer the Carthaginians lost a five to seven unit army because my three bireme fleet would destroy their one bireme fleet.
Ergo my original question. So, if one choses KH in EB which AI will be the greatest challenge, or at least the least stupid?
Thanks.

[lionhard]

Hard to say becasue it depends on each factions start. I.e in greece its a coin toss between which factions have the best amries and generals and usually the faction that loses greece in my campaigns is the faction that trys to take corinth first, because they lose the battle and then get beat by the opposing faction they are already fighting. Id say if you were KH the epeirotes or the romans are the biggest worry. You can rush mac and drive them into lydia at the start easily enough.

Edit: in my BI campaign, pontus are the biggest threat. When it comes to random invasions. They took thodes off me, invaded dacia and even reached as far as italy with random full stacks. This is all whilst they are still only Still counquering modern day turkey

[Zarax]

Personally I'm partial to the BI exe, although it really shines in situations where far more specific modding is allowed...

[oudysseos]

Uh, lionhard, the signature bars that say "Member" on them are reserved for team members. You will have to change that ASAP.

[Cute Wolf]

Uh, lionhard, the signature bars that say "Member" on them are reserved for team members. You will have to change that ASAP.

lol.... poor lionhard... maybe you better ask for a first before using the signature pikkie... as we are only regular visitor here...

[Ludens]

In my experience: playing the KH with BI.exe will give you both proper and pointless naval invasions. The pointless ones are when the Romani send a few crappy units to siege Corinth (this occurs even when they still haven't taken Taras). The proper ones happen when your alliance with the Ptolemaioi is broken (which happens inevitably when they take Halicarnassos: they never garrison it properly and it rebels to you) and they land a huge stack on Rhodos.

[paleologos]

So, generally speaking BI is somewhat smarter than Alx?
In the big picture is it the most challenging?

[Zarax]

I wouldn't call it smarter, it just has bias on different functions.

[paleologos]

Does BI get to be more challenging?

[Ludens]

Does BI get to be more challenging?

Yes, but not always in a good way. As I wrote, the A.I. can do strong naval invasions, but they will also start wars by making stupid, undermanned attacks, like the Romani on Corinth in my campaigns. Since we had no land borders and the Romani weren't in a position to hold Corinth, the war was over as soon as I wiped out their petty forces, and the attack was essentially pointless. However, it did mean I had to patch up relations or lose a trade-partner, and a few dozen turns down the line they would try it again. For me, that's frustrating rather than challenging.

I am sorry that I can't give you a clear yes or no: it depends on your tolerance for such things. I switched back to vanilla R:TW. I imagine, though, that when playing a faction that would require naval invasions (Carthage and Rome for the Punic wars, Casse and nearby factions), BI could be an improvement. I maintain, though, that there is no other difference between the A.I. of R:TW and BI.

[Mediolanicus]

Yes, but not always in a good way. As I wrote, the A.I. can do strong naval invasions, but they will also start wars by making stupid, undermanned attacks, like the Romani on Corinth in my campaigns. Since we had no land borders and the Romani weren't in a position to hold Corinth, the war was over as soon as I wiped out their petty forces, and the attack was essentially pointless. However, it did mean I had to patch up relations or lose a trade-partner, and a few dozen turns down the line they would try it again. For me, that's frustrating rather than challenging.

I am sorry that I can't give you a clear yes or no: it depends on your tolerance for such things. I switched back to vanilla R:TW. I imagine, though, that when playing a faction that would require naval invasions (Carthage and Rome for the Punic wars, Casse and nearby factions), BI could be an improvement. I maintain, though, that there is no other difference between the A.I. of R:TW and BI.

I play mostly play with M campaign difficulty and with BI. All I got are fullstacks of factions I'm at war with on my coasts.

I did play some campaign on H or VH and even my allies constantly shipped over 2-3 unit stacks...

[lionhard]

lol.... poor lionhard... maybe you better ask for a first before using the signature pikkie... as we are only regular visitor here...

sulk :(

[oudysseos]

Well, sorry, but "Member" means member of the Team - and that is pretty well known everywhere. But no biggie as I'm sure it was an honest mistake. There are lots of legitimate signature bars for you to choose from on the EB website.

[paleologos]

I play mostly play with M campaign difficulty and with BI. All I got are fullstacks of factions I'm at war with on my coasts.

I did play some campaign on H or VH and even my allies constantly shipped over 2-3 unit stacks...

I suspect that a higher campaign difficulty level does something to the default "personality" of AI factions. You know, transforming a "comfortable Napoleon" into an "unpatient Hitler" or something. I don't know how to confirm or disconfirm this.
I wonder what the more experienced programmers/scripters would have to say about this, perhaps conjure up a solution.

[Ludens]

It's possible. Personally, I think it has something to do with auto-deteriorating relations. A CA programmer mentioned that in M2:TW the relations between an A.I. faction and the player automatically deteriorate over time, and that this goes faster at higher difficulty levels. So unless positive interactions take place, the A.I. will eventually hate the player. I think the same applies to R:TW, and it would explain why I didn't see any differences between diplomacy at H and VH difficulty. I always pay neighbouring factions a small, regular tribute, so the deterioration does not occur. Not everyone has reported success with my method, however (and the diplomatic A.I. remains stupid).

This is, BTW, not an area of the game-engine that is accessible to modders, so I am afraid there won't be any solution.

[paleologos]

This is, BTW, not an area of the game-engine that is accessible to modders, so I am afraid there won't be any solution.

Yes, but isn't the original personality affecting the strategic behaviour, like how much the A.I. faction will built up before attacking and isn't that modifiable?

[Zarax]

Personality affects building and training bias, which are more useful for balancing what a faction will be more likely to train rather than it's overall behavior.

[paleologos]

Personality affects building and training bias, which are more useful for balancing what a faction will be more likely to train rather than it's overall behavior.

Even so, if all A.I. factions build up their infrastucture and then begin training good quality units and then attack it won't be as easy to hold them back with garisson quality troops. I suspect that would be more of a challenge, what do you say?

[Zarax]

Of course, but take into account that most mods will already have tuned the training bias to the faction's roster, so that's most likely a given.
In the end AI will still build most if not all infrastructure, what you change is their priority.

[paleologos]

Of course, but take into account that most mods will already have tuned the training bias to the faction's roster, so that's most likely a given.
In the end AI will still build most if not all infrastructure, what you change is their priority.

I would suppose so. I would also suppose that stuctures already built affect ability to wage war, the sustainability of aggressiveness on their behalf, although I would suppose that Alx ability to retrain would more effectivelly sustain aggression.
Have we reached any conclusions yet? What is the margin to gear up challenge by modifying A.I. behaviour?