CA: This has got to STOP! (AI Control is simpley a source of Frustration)

**SpencerH** · 11-02-2004, 02:59

Dont get too excited, I cant find the thread to refresh my memory. Someone suggested the toggle idea as a way to fix the suicidal generals. Someone from CA said that was an idea they had thought about using before and that maybe they should look at it again. That doesnt mean it will happen though, but clearly they are aware of the problem and that may be a simple solution.

EDIT found the thread (looking for something else of course)
https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?t=38916

**Akka** · 11-02-2004, 11:17

I fully agree. It's utterly annoying to have the AI controlling your own troops.
I don't want to. If I'm playing a faction, it's precisely to control them, not to watch an AI slaughter my own soldiers and generals by doing what I don't want.

It's a feature that, like the timer, should be entirely optionnal.

**Bob the Insane** · 11-02-2004, 11:24

The AI is capable of acting normally... Last night in my present Julii campaign I fought battle like this one rescuing a settlement from being besieged. My attacking army was slightly weaker than the Briton Army I was attacking but then so was the army in the Besieged settlement and between us we where stronger. The two armies both with decent Generals, I chose to engage with the better general in command of the relief force and setup the attack so I hit the rear if the enemy pinning it to the city so the re-enforces would hit it from the rear (givig my AI general a fighting chance I figured)..

Fighting the battle I figured the enemy AI might rush my smaller army before the re-enforcements arrived (it's what I would do) so set up well back in the deployment area. The battle started and I moved my battle line in good order towards the enemy trying to stay on their flank as they moved to try and face both armies. I tried to match the pace of my re-enfocements to hit the enemy at the same time but guess what, there is the AI general (5 star) charging ahead of his troops straight at the enemies line...

So I detach my cavalry and charge my men into battle but it is too late... Though we do win the battle...

I thought "bugger... let's try that again" and reloaded...

This time it was the same setup but I was more aggressive, setting up at the front of the deployment zone and immediately running my men (still in formation) into missle range of the enemy to intiate the attack... This prompts the enemy to fall on us but use of the pilum, deep formation with reserves and moving cavalry round to flank works it's magic especially as the enemy have held some troops in resver to face my re-enforcements...

But speaking of my re-enforcements, no sign of the suicide general this time, this time the there is a line of Hastati moving towards the enemy with the AI general troting along behind?!?!?!

WTF!?!?!?

**SpencerH** · 11-02-2004, 13:08

I think the 'kamikazee generals' are a function of cav having slightly faster walk speed than the inf. When an army has had a long walk the cav inevitably end up forward of the inf. We correct this but the AI doesnt, so the first units committed to battle are the cav including the generals.

**warlordmb** · 11-02-2004, 14:08

I totally agree with the cooments made about better CONTROL of AI forces.
I mean, think about it, - you are the senior commander. Reinforcements are on the way. And You can't co-ordinate their attack with yours. P-L-L-EASE!!

1. Having the option to give simple tactical commands to an AI General led army is dead right. I've had to tailor my Campaign tactics to ensure that I didn't get my high ranking city governor and his rubbish city guard and peasants involved in a combat which the army I was commanding was more than capable of handling.

2. There should be an option on the pre-battle screen which allows you to choose wether you want to be supported by troops in a nearby square.

Come on CA this is an absolute must to change.

**Bob the Insane** · 11-02-2004, 14:19

Personally I do not mind not controlling my reserves when they are under the command of another General, I think it is fun...

As has been stated the issue really is the poor performance of the AI in this situation and the suicide General syndrom...

I would love to see this improved even to the point that the AI (whether ally, enemy or reeforcements) adapted its tactics based on the stats and traits of the General concerned.. i.e. using more intelligent and complex formations when it is high command rated general and doing bizarr things if he is an unhinged loon... Even to the point of forgiving suicidal tendencies if he is suffering from the bloodlust range of traits...

This would mean that even choice of supporting generals would be important as would finding out the enemy General's traits (as in Know Your Enemy)...

Sorry for the preeching....

**TheDuck** · 11-02-2004, 20:17

Originally Posted by Bob the Insane

Personally I do not mind not controlling my reserves when they are under the command of another General, I think it is fun...

As has been stated the issue really is the poor performance of the AI in this situation and the suicide General syndrom...

I would love to see this improved even to the point that the AI (whether ally, enemy or reeforcements) adapted its tactics based on the stats and traits of the General concerned.. i.e. using more intelligent and complex formations when it is high command rated general and doing bizarr things if he is an unhinged loon... Even to the point of forgiving suicidal tendencies if he is suffering from the bloodlust range of traits...

This would mean that even choice of supporting generals would be important as would finding out the enemy General's traits (as in Know Your Enemy)...

Sorry for the preeching....

This solution is also OK with me also. Oh Sharp Chapeau'd one. As long as I can coordinate even in a broad manner, its better than the way it works right now.

And I think the general comments on AI behavior by all are spot on. That said I think the design of good AI for the real-time battles is still something of a black art and made the more difficult by pressures to just survive in a highly competitive games market. Kudos to CA for both the previous games and any efforts made to improve things in RTW. I for one will always be a devoted fan. :)

**A.Saturnus** · 11-03-2004, 22:11

I think Bob´s idea is good. Although it´s nothing new. I think I heard that one first a few month after MTW came out. But be realistic, there´s no way in hell CA would implement such a complex system in a patch. So I´d be satisfied if only the worst misbehaviour of the AI would be fixed. Said that, some days ago I won a quick battle by pressing ctrl-A and clicking somewhere in the enemy centre so maybe it´s not that bad a strategy

**warlordmb** · 11-02-2004, 14:22

Just remmbered something else.

I realise I had gotten into the habit of removing other generals from nearby stacks before going into battle with re-inforcements. The reason for this is simple. If the supporting re-inforcements have no general/family member commanding them, command of the re-inforcements automatically goes to you as long as there are enough slots available within the 20 slot limit. You get to co-ordinate them as you want which works brilliantly because you can co-ordinate your attack with theirs and flank and rear assaults by your re-inforcements can be devastating, even by small numbers of troops if you time their attack right.

This makes flanking marches on the campaign map a very useful strategy. You just have to make sure there are no more than one General/family member present.

While this is good there is a problem. Leaving part of your forces under command of a captain leaves them vulnerable to bribery. Too many times I get that annoying pop-up telling me that my highly trained and experinced mini army has betrayed me and gone back to the fields.

AAAARGH!!

So again. C'mon CA - help us poor armchair generals and earn yourself kudos from us little 'ol peasants.

**warlordmb** · 11-02-2004, 14:30

Hello Bob,

I like your idea about tailoring AI re-inforcements to generals command traits. That would just add to the game experience. Having to choose wether to risk sending a supporting army into battle under the command on 'an un-hinged loon' is a choice to be faced with.

Anything has got to be better than the current situation where players are having to tailor thier gameplay because of a small piece of unfinished?? programming in what is by far the best strategy game to date.

**SpencerH** · 11-02-2004, 15:25

I too agree with the pointy-helmeted-ones suggestion. Given that this AI appears to have gone backward in time (especially compared to VI), does anyone believe it could be implemented. So far the best tactic I've seen the AI use is not to move its units within range of my archers when I attack a beseige-ing army from a city. Other than that, and assaulting a city on a wide front, I've seen no evidence of any AI tactics at all.