Battlefield AI still incomprehensible

[Red Harvest]

I've been trying some multi-unit play/balance tests, and the AI is driving me NUTS! It is just awful sometimes...ok, a lot of the time.

Typical example: Trying to test legions vs. phalangites, 3 units each. No matter which side I play, the AI tries to reconfigure its line about 50 yards from my line. WTF? It had a quarter of a mile to do this, but noooooo, it waits until the men are in shouting distance, then does a keystone cops routine right in front of my line. Does it want me to slam into the flanks of its men, or what? Why in the world doesn't it do a "formation check" before it marches up to spitting distance? It always seems stuck in reactive mode.

When it has the phalangites/hoplites it likes to start with the 3 unit deep formation. WTF? Spears are meant to be used as a wall not a column. Even if I line up my legionaires three abreast (using the formation buttons before start of battle) it advances its units in column. And does it correct this horrendous default deployment before advancing? Of course not, it waits until each unit reaches the range where it switches to phalanx, then decides, "Hey, you need to go over there, and you go over there."

The only positive thing I can say about the test is that it does try to flank with the legionaires at the last moment. It advances with 2 in front 1 behind, then switches to 3 abreast in the "reaction zone" then starts to flank with the two outer units. It would be a lot more intelligent to advance 3 abreast and spread out earlier before reaching the reaction zone...

I'm still trying to figure out what CA fixed about suicidal generals...because in the campaign I've seen no evidence that the AI is less likely to charge with its general.

And why advance archers to the reaction zone in the inner half/third of their range before using them?

And why amble up slowly with cavalry vs. a lone unit of archers?

My head hurts...

[Colovion]

For these and other reasons that weren't addressed in the patch (kill speed etc...), I don't think I'll be playing much anymore.

[drone]

For these and other reasons that weren't addressed in the patch (kill speed etc...), I don't think I'll be playing much anymore.

I've been wondering about the AI and kill speeds. The AI does a lot of "stupid" things, if the kill rates were lower and the battles lasted longer, would some of the AI tactics have improved results? The outcome of a lot of battles is determined in about 10 seconds, then the chain routing begins.

Maybe the AI has a good tactics (let's give it the benefit of the doubt for a moment), but the fast kill rates and run speeds allow the human player to exploit maneuvers before they complete. I haven't modded much (I barely have enough time to play vanilla these days), but maybe reducing the run/kill speed might show better overall battle results for the AI.

Take this assumption (again with enough salt to seed Carthage), and then assume that the CA design team was told to increase the speed of combat at a late date in the development. Easiest way to do this: increase attack values, increase run speeds. Maybe the AI tactical adjustments were left behind.

I guess my question is: with a slow-modded R:TW (maybe RTR, haven't tried it), does the AI seem to work better because the battles take longer and there is more time to adjust the lines?

I have seen requests for kill rate slider bars, maybe this should include movement speeds as well. Or maybe I'm just talking out of my %$#@*.

[Come Together]

Also keep in mind (according to the previous threads) that the A.I. is worse in custom battles, for god-knows what reason. But i agree, the Battlefied AI is ok at best.

[_Aetius_]

Ive seen some evidence that AI generals are more intelligent, for example more often than not now there general unit goes for my one, and infact in a battle i just finished a few minutes ago it nearly suceeded in killing my general had i not seen it just in time.

However they do seem to get into the thick of the battle still, its very hit and miss, Im no modder and i know nothing about designing games or the AI but it surely cant be THAT hard to tell the AI charging your generals unit into phalanxs is a bad idea, and it surely cant be THAT hard to improve the time it takes for battles to take place, I just feel that everytime one problem with the game that ruined it is eradicated another even worse one comes up.

Id of gladly waited a couple of months longer for RTW if it meant the game would be rid of such irritations that make the £35 price tag abit steep since ive had to wait months for an at best hit and miss patch. This game even months after its release is still able to disappoint me in new and ever more idiotic ways.

[Red Harvest]

From the initial release of RTW (including the demo) there has been a stupifying tendency of the AI to rearrange its battle line just before it reaches the "charge zone" at 30 yards/meters (probably at range of 50 to 70 yards/meters.) It is a major fundamental flaw in the AI's structure. I can understand having some localized reaction in this zone, but major crossing of ones own lines directly under the nose of the enemy is a recipe for disaster. By this point the battle line is essentially "committed."

With cavalry and some fast units the blunder can be survivable for the AI, but with phalangites and most other infantry it is catastrophic. The only time it turns out well for the AI is when they player issues individual attack orders too soon. The lead computing will then cause the player's units to do a similar criss crossing. This is why I learned to "march through" with a grouped battle line. I issue my attack orders in the last few seconds as rapidly as I can, hitting the AI's most vulneralbe units first, and allowing my other units (that I don't have time to command) to walk into the fight.

I am very skeptical of the AI being fixed in an expansion pack this year.

[_Aetius_]

CA will do what they always seem to do, get rid of the annoying petty bugs and paper over the cracks of the real problems.

I have seen this reforming there lines just before a charge, infact I think it might be a tactic that has a use, i attacked a roman army with my greeks, I had as you can expect mostly armoured phalanxs etc.

The roman army had the usual threes line of infantry, just as i was getting to attack range i chose the target units for my phalanxs and they started turning slightly towards their targets. The roman did this reforming manoevre which looked like suicide but it sent my phalanxs going in a million different directions trying to follow there assigned targets, this confused me so much as i couldnt tell which unit id told to attack which roman unit and when they reformed my centre was wide open praetorian cohorts piled through and well my army wasmostly destroyed.

It was incredibly dissorientating, as i was tyring to reform my line the roman had already reformed and attacked, I think it has a geniune use in specific circumstances but perhaps the AI just doesnt realise that 1 tactics isnt useful in every situation.

[screwtype]

From the initial release of RTW (including the demo) there has been a stupifying tendency of the AI to rearrange its battle line just before it reaches the "charge zone" at 30 yards/meters (probably at range of 50 to 70 yards/meters.) It is a major fundamental flaw in the AI's structure. I can understand having some localized reaction in this zone, but major crossing of ones own lines directly under the nose of the enemy is a recipe for disaster. By this point the battle line is essentially "committed."

Hmm you may be onto something there Red. I have also noticed that phalanxes which are attacking me often seem to start overlapping and bunching up as they approach my line. Which is kind of weird.

I was thinking the other day that one of the problems with the AI seems to be that individual AI controlled units each select a unit to attack, and then carry out that attack regardless of the rest of the army. Essentially, instead of one big, coordinated attack, you get lots of little individual attacks, which are often quite easy to beat.

I think they need to add some sort of routine that enables AI armies to mount more coordinated attacks, at least when the AI is commanded by a reasonable general.

It would be a bit of a challenge to accomplish this, I'm sure, but surely not impossible. I've noticed for example that when as the human player you group units, they stay in exactly the same formation as when you first grouped them.

All that would be required to have the AI mount well coordinated attacks, then, would be for the AI to group its units and then, say aim its line of grouped units at the most centrally located enemy unit, or aim it at the area where the majority of enemy units are located.

Then you could have, for example, a majestic and perfectly coordinated line of AI phalanxes marching up to trash your army!

Of course there would be problems writing such routines. For example, at some point the AI would have to decide to decoordinate its line so that unengaged units would not just stand there doing nothing. Working out exactly when to decoordinate would be tricky, but not I think impossible.

I am very skeptical of the AI being fixed in an expansion pack this year.

I am sceptical of the AI EVER being fixed, since after all this is the fifth game in the series and it's still not noticeably better than in the first game. But we can always live in hope I guess...