How is the AI overall?

**TinCow** · 03-26-2011, 15:11

I stopped buying TW games after ETW due to too many disappointments with the AI. I've read several of the threads here where people are saying the AI is improved over previous versions, but I remember similar comments about M2TW shortly after it came out. With M2TW, there was a veneer of competent AI that people saw for the first few days of playing, but after a while major AI problems became apparent.

So, now that this game has been out for 10+ days, what are your impressions of the AI, both Campaign and Battle? Do they work well in coordination (i.e. does the CAI build good armies and attack with them sensibly, and does the BAI then use them properly on the field)? Is there any purely stupid AI behavior going on (i.e. AI leaving cities on a hostile border undefended, or Suicidal Generals)? Above all, is this game challenging? If you crank the difficulty up to the highest level, will you lose?

**Kagemusha** · 03-26-2011, 16:18

I think that both the Campaign and battle AI is best so far in the series and yes i have lost both battles and campaigns. I dont think i have lost an battle after MTW and a campaign since STW before this game.

**Monk** · 03-26-2011, 16:32

Campaign Ai is a son of a

. It builds good armies based on the infastructure it has atr the ready. At around turn 25 don't be surprised if you see stacks with 6-7 samurai units each.

Battle AI is hit or miss but still vastly improved over ETW/NTW. Easily the best battle AI of the 3D total war era. It makes dumb decisions from time to time and is open to exploits but, as i've said in another thread, it's passable and provides a good challenge.

If you crank the difficulty up to the highest level, will you lose?

Play on Hard your first game without any practice or strategy and you'll lose. I promise you.

**therother** · 03-26-2011, 17:11

Yeah, both AIs are much better, especially CAI which doesn't appear to have any major holes and handles itself well. It's a real test for the player on the harder levels.

BAI I have less experience with, but I noticed last night it's very passive when you are fighting with an AI ally against an AI enemy: I had two such battles, one a siege, the other an open battle. The siege was a disaster, with the allied AI just sitting in range of the towers for the most part, only making one paltry assault, which was easily repulsed. The open battle was more ridiculous: combined we had 30 good units versus one unit of peasant archers. In this case, the two AIs literally danced around each other, without firing or attacking each other. They are almost touching by the point I decided to intervene, but the enemy archers routed and only then did the ally AI attack.

I realise that these are specific occasions, where the AI has probably been told to let the human do the heavy lifting, but on both occasions I was assisting the attacker: I wanted my vassals to win, but didn't want to risk my troops unnecessarily without any gain.

Otherwise, the other battles I've played, the BAI seems competent enough to give you a decent fight, if a little heavy on the archers for my tastes.

**Rothe** · 03-28-2011, 09:58

My complaint vs. the CAI is that it tends to assault fortifications (towns) with equal numbers compared to me, which means the AI will certainly lose.
And usually it does not have a back-up army to re-assault me in the near future. That usually means I get an easy win and then I march on his castle and take it easily.

On open field battles it seems to work fine, and I have lost a few battles although none with equal stacks of equal quality troops. (I am a TW veteran though)

Reinforcements are seriously bugged, but I think it will be fixed pretty soon.

Overall, the AI seems to do pretty well with matching its units vs. yours (e.g. RPS effect works) and using its archers to hit your most expensive and vulnerable troops if it can. It perhaps lacks some tricks like proper flanking moves, and I am not sure if it uses its general's inspire properly, which makes for quite a difference - I use mine often and it really helps.

**Daevyll** · 03-28-2011, 12:49

In all, much impoved AI both campaign and battle.

My main thing with the AI at the moment is that it is not careful enough with its general. It isnt nearly as bad as it used to be, with lone generals doing a suicidal charge into your spears, but still the AI would fight more effectively if it kep the general out of combat and behind the main force to use his inspirational abilities. Now I often kill the opposing general and start a chain rout, in what would otherwise have been a close fight.

Another thing is sieges; I can accept assaulting the walls with a major superiority in force (like 3-1 or so), but otherwise it should just keep my army under siege forcing me to attack/relieve. I've not seen it do so even once so far. With the result that sieges become a 'cheap' way to kill of opposing stacks.