using AI to control sections of your army

**Dutch_guy** · 05-08-2005, 14:04

yes they act independantly, I would not recommend letting the AI control a part of your army.
Even if that would mean that you would be outnumberd.
You will probably lose less troops than if you let the AI command, at least that is my experiance

**Azi Tohak** · 05-08-2005, 18:43

I used to think the idea of having two full armies combine to crush one enemy army would be fun. Until my second general impaled himself on pikes. Ever since then, if I want to do two armies on one, I make each one ~10 (but combined no more than 20) so I can control everything.

But for the tactical battles, deploying any portion of my army under AI control seems like a disasterous thing to do. Hell, the AI can't even skirmish properly.

Azi

**Tigranes** · 05-08-2005, 18:54

I cry when I forget to uncheck the AI control of reniforcements in a major battle. I break down and cry.

**screwtype** · 05-09-2005, 06:07

Originally Posted by Tigranes

I cry when I forget to uncheck the AI control of reniforcements in a major battle. I break down and cry.

LOL, it sucks, doesn't it!

I always seem to do it when I've won four or five battles in a turn already, so I can't just reload the turn without having to fight all those battles again.

**screwtype** · 05-09-2005, 06:30

I just thunk a thought.

Wouldn't it be cool if you could switch control of which units you controlled in the middle of the battle?

So if you have say 30 units onfield and 10 of them are being controlled by the AI, the AI just controls the 10 units you touched least soon?

In other words, if you take control of an AI controlled unit (just by clicking on it), one unit from your 20 listed units at the bottom of the screen drops out, to be replaced by the unit you just clicked on. The unit dropped being the one which got a command from you longest ago. That unit then becomes controlled by the AI.

But whatever unit is dropped off still completes your last order before being taken control of by the AI. This way, a skilful general could keep command of a much larger army than is the case now, by simply getting back to units before they have completed his orders.

Or something.

**pezhetairoi** · 05-09-2005, 07:13

that is swell. But it'd never happen, though. :-( I realised that in my case as long as there's a general in the other army I cannot control my reinforcements even though our units added together make up less than 20. Which sucks. So I NEVER fight reinforcement battles, even if I have a spare fullstack nearby.

**screwtype** · 05-09-2005, 14:04

Originally Posted by pezhetairoi

that I realised that in my case as long as there's a general in the other army I cannot control my reinforcements even though our units added together make up less than 20.

No I don't think that's right. If the second stack has a general in it, you are given the option of either letting the general control it or controlling it yourself, provided the total units comes to 20 units or less.

At least that's how I recall it working. Maybe I'm wrong, it's a while since I last played.

**Marcus Maxentius** · 05-08-2005, 18:57

I think if you give them an order they follow it, then go back to AI control. Actually giving control over to the AI is pretty helpful depending on the unit. It actually makes better use of velites and gets more kills than I could manually. When I turn on AI control they all form a line on my left wing in between the cavalry and infantry. It's kind of cool to see them move to flank the enemy and then retreat. If I use AI cavalry, they run over anybody who tries to go for the bait.
Don't use AI controlled archers, the computer tends to make them charge into melee rather than fire arrows.

One more big thing. Under AI control, the unit only moves on its own when an enemy is near, so it won't go running on its own that way. It makes it perfect to guard the periphery of your battle line when you can't focus everywhere at once. It works great for defensive cavalry and non-archer missles. Don't use the AI to attack the enemy front lines though.

**Wishazu** · 05-08-2005, 19:01

cool, i might try it with my skirmishers then, i was only really asking cos im trying to come up with ways to make the battles more challenging so i might try and do a campaign using only the "general camera" whilst in battles, so i see everything from his point of view. thanks guys, and thanks marcus for the tips :)

**Colovion** · 05-08-2005, 21:03

they're not terrible with defensive units or skirmishers

but I wouldn't trust them with a full wing of the army, only a number of "throw aways"

**Oaty** · 05-09-2005, 03:54

Where it can be really helpful is on a unit already engaged. Group all your engaged units, put them in guard mode and then put them under A.I. control. I can say that the A.I. control works really good with guard mode.

In this situation it is (nearly?) impossiple to watch a unit get slaughtered piecemeal because it advanced too far and got slaughtered.

Wich is one of the few places the A.I. excels at...... mobbing an isolated unit.

**Colovion** · 05-09-2005, 04:59

I've seen a single unit of skirmishers run all over the battlefield taunting a unit of elephants which eventually routed after getting exhausted from chasing the AI controlled fleet-of-foot troops

**Marquis of Roland** · 05-09-2005, 05:11

I hate not being able to even give simple orders to an allied army in battle. Everytime I have more than 1 army in a battle, the "genuis" AI general charges straight at the enemy, sometimes even straight into a phalanx. Needless to say, many of my generals got wasted when there was no question as to who was going to win. I never keep my armies close anymore, the AI might do something stupid with my generals and get them killed.

Is there any way to tell them during the pre-battle screen to just stay out of it???