CA's definite answer on the Loadgame "issue"

[hoom]

Theres nothing wrong with having the AI review its actions on load & thus have reloaded games come out differently than a continuous game.
The justification given for that is adequate and quite acceptable.

The problem is the explanation of the seige lifting.
Its true that it would be reasonable to lift the odd seige if the AI considered there to be more pressing need for the troops to be doing something else.
The problem in the arguement lies in the provability that the AI (almost definitely) always lifts seiges then reinstates them on the next turn unless something actually changes that really requires the soldiers to do something else.

maybe those guys [us who don't find this an acceptable answer] should be doing something more useful...

like playing a different game

[SpencerH]

Theres nothing wrong with having the AI review its actions on load & thus have reloaded games come out differently than a continuous game.
The justification given for that is adequate and quite acceptable.

Why? Surely the AI should make the same calculations whether or not it is ending a turn that started from a save game or an ongoing game. The idea of the AI performing some 'xtra calculations' with a save game is nonsense. The most simple answer is that the info that was used for the calcs to trigger the seige/aggressive behaviour/etc has not been saved in the save game and the AI must start accumulating info from scratch.

[Puzz3D]

Theres nothing wrong with having the AI review its actions on load & thus have reloaded games come out differently than a continuous game.
The justification given for that is adequate and quite acceptable.

There is a problem. There shouldn't be a need for the AI to ever review its decisions. I can't believe that the AI is somehow getting confused as the game goes along, and has to be reset periodically. It makes the best decision based on the data it has at the time. The AI is changing it's decision upon a reload, but the strategic situation hasn't changed. There is no reason for it to change its decision. So, which one is the right decision? The one it makes regarding sieges if you don't reload looks like the correct decision. The one it makes after a reload delays the taking of almost all cities currently under siege by at least 2 turns. That's not good, and has a significant negative impact on the progress of all the AI factions over the course of the campaign.

[Swordsman]

Look into my eyes You are getting sleeepy. Verrrry sleeeepy. :

When you wake up, you will be convinced that it makes perfect sense for the AI to lift all sieges (not just one or two randomly). You will bow to the southeast 2.5 times daily in homage to the omnipotence of the all-seeing, all-knowing developers who do not err....

Of course, who among us haven't taken a car to the dealer with an ear-splitting noise coming from somewhere (your choice: engine, brakes, body, transmission) only to have the PhD mechanic say: "Noise, what noise? Oh, THAT. It's normal, they all sound like that... What did you say? Speak up-- I can't hear you over the NOISE!"

[Intrepid Sidekick]

Dear Hoom

quote from Hoom's posts
maybe those guys [us who don't find this an acceptable answer] should be doing something more useful...

like playing a different game

I have to take you up on this. If you are going to take quotes from Creative Assembly at least use them in context!
We did not refer to any human being in this fashion at all and you know it.
Who ever you are, you appear to be deliberately trying to stir up discontent and ill will. The full context of that statement is in reference to how the AI thinks on the campaign map and has nothing to do with how we feel about our customers.

Here is the actual text in context:

The decision was made that this was a reasonable and sensible thing for the AI to do as well: the loading of a game seemed like a good point to get the AI to sit back and go "hmmm... what's happening?... maybe those guys should be doing something more useful..."

[player1]

Well, It's not strange why there is some bashing.

While I'm against that, and more tolerant, it is still one of the consequences how CA staff handled save/load issue.