General's Stars not tied to AI Level

[Red Harvest]

I've seen several posts in several forums that claim that the level of AI "intelligence" is somehow impacted by the number of stars the enemy general has. This looks like a myth to me. I can find no evidence of it working this way in battles. Even in early campaigns when I face some generals with more stars than my own (up to 4 or 5 stars) the battlefield AI seems to do the same things over and over:

1. Conduct an initial charge with the general into the enemy line. (Almost every battle.)
2. Throw its cav in piecemeal until they are all dead.
3. Charge its skirmishers and archers into the front of my line to be killed in melee.
4. Attack piecemeal.

The concept of weaker AI with weaker generals would be an absolute bust. The only time it would make sense is if the AI was too strong for the human. You would need a strong AI to start with before there would ever be any reason to dial down the AI with weak generals.

Morale and other stats should be impacted by generals stars, and these could influence the AI movement choices to a degree, but the base AI appears to use the same method of employing troops regardless of the stars.

[professorspatula]

I'm also not convinced by the notion that more general's stars equals a better and more tactical AI opponent.

The only time I perhaps wondered if there was some truth to the theory, was pre 1.2 patch when some reinforcements with high ranking generals wouldn't just sprint onto the battlefield and get themselves killed, they'd actually slowly move up with the rest of their army. They were probably just rare events.

[The Stranger]

i fought high ranked generals many times, and if they do get smarter i didn't noticed it. they get slaughtered as easy as normal and the general first. charging his cavalry headlong in my gold chevron germanic lancers (not using RTR but i did used some of their units)

[The_Mark]

Yes, I remember one of those...

I was sieging a greek city with two stacks, one led by a several-star general and the other, much smaller one by a captain. Greeks sallied against the captain led stack with their about twice as big garrison of various hoplites and some cav. My small stack had just a few hastatis and two equites, my main army being in the general's stack. AI led, of course.

I sent two hastatis to the walls with towers while rest of my forces lured the first wave away from the towers. All went according to my plan, which was to capture the walls to let my reinforcements take the city, but my reinforcements just strolled towards the city, although in good formation, and stopped half-way there.

My men, fighting for their lives, held the hoplites outside the walls, but became overwhelmed by their numbers. Reinforcements just stood there and watched. I guess they had some sort of mass hallucination of being in Colosseum or something (probably due to lead poisoning gained from aqueducts.. that was a good thread ). They could've just marched forward a couple hundred meters and remove those pesky hoppers, but, you guessed it, they didn't. My men fought to the last, but they still did do quite lot of damage.

My remaining 3 horses were running around the hoppers in circles to keep them busy. Then, at last, the AI advanced. They just plainly killed the hoppers. They just could've done that a few minutes earlier..

Nevertheless, my remaining 20 hastatis on the walls had captured the gates, and the AI proceeded to capture the city. And they did.

[The Stranger]

yes snowplows in rome was good

[The Stranger]

if you've the patch installed you can choose yourself if you want to be in charge of reinforcements or not.

[The_Mark]

Just to clarify, the last was in reply to prof.spat.
[HINT]Only f I could edit my posts..[/HINT]

[The_Mark]

And no, my game wasn't patched back then. It was back then when we were still hoping that CA would make a second patch.

[The Stranger]

oh oke, but atleast this is fine now.

[screwtype]

I've seen several posts in several forums that claim that the level of AI "intelligence" is somehow impacted by the number of stars the enemy general has. This looks like a myth to me.

Yeah, I think so too. I haven't seen the AI do much that's smart, regardless of general's stars.

The concept of weaker AI with weaker generals would be an absolute bust. The only time it would make sense is if the AI was too strong for the human.

I agree with that too. The AI's already pretty dumb, the last thing it needs is to be dumbed down more. Stars should just give morale bonuses IMO.

[Simetrical]

Stars not only give morale bonuses, they also give attack bonuses (to all the general's troops, not just nearby ones). That's what represents the general's tactical abilities, since any attempt to actually change tactics is infeasible.

-Simetrical

[therother]

Stars not only give morale bonuses, they also give attack bonuses (to all the general's troops, not just nearby ones).

Yes, that's what JeromeGrasdyke said here. However, I'm having difficulty determining if this is working as it should - see here. The morale boost for being within the general's radius-of-effect is at least partially working.

[BeeSting]

Yes, that's what JeromeGrasdyke said here. However, I'm having difficulty determining if this is working as it should - see here. The morale boost for being within the general's radius-of-effect is at least partially working.

So according to what jerome is saying velites with a 10 star general could have attack plus 10 attack value? Nonsense! I really hope that part isn't working.

[Spetulhu]

My remaining 3 horses were running around the hoppers in circles to keep them busy. Then, at last, the AI advanced. They just plainly killed the hoppers. They just could've done that a few minutes earlier..

Nevertheless, my remaining 20 hastatis on the walls had captured the gates, and the AI proceeded to capture the city. And they did.

That was actually smart, wasn't it? Let the captain die so he can't claim the honor and glory of capturing the city!

[Simetrical]

So according to what jerome is saying velites with a 10 star general could have attack plus 10 attack value? Nonsense! I really hope that part isn't working.

I hope it is. Great generals always had tremendous advantages over lousy ones. Just look at Cannae—a textbook example of superior tactics overwhelming superior numbers (although I'm not saying no other factors were relevant to Hannibal's victory).

-Simetrical