Leave that to the Backroom.....he doesn't

Because, in the eyes of many people here, it is!

Reply

So maybe it really was , I think comp was more agressive on the camp. map.

Reply

Yes, It actually beat me sometimes, and reacted to the situation and sometimes with missle troops it handled itself very well. Also it countroled calv much better.

Reply

I can't really imagine a worse AI...

Reply

Yes the MTW AI was better.

The MTW AI could co-ordinate its forces much better and would often spend much of the battle trying to force you to cede the higher ground. It wasn't perfect, but it outshines the RTW AI by a mile. And when it was defending a bridge and it had superior units, damn it would make you frustrated. Always it moved its units out of missile range so you had to come across the bridge, and then, and only then, when you tried to move across the bridge, it would block the way with a tough spearman/pike unit and cause your cavalry to die horribly, all whilst its own missile units relentlessly rained down their arrows on your men stuck on the bridge. Evil. It also seemed better at using missile cavalry. It would deliberately flank your army and make you nervous so that you wanted to break up your defensive wall and pursue them. The poor old RTW AI has less confidence and conviction with missile cavalry and flanking units in particular.

Reply

Yes

Reply

In men experience Medievil Total War's AI sucks. I've only actually lost the game twice, once was with the Mercians and the other was when I had a chronic attack of girl babies. About a month ago I wasted an entire Mongol Army with Arbelasters and Pronai Alegion. They just stood there and got shot down. Only on Expert have I ever had any problems and that was simply because by battle line routed first. In Rome I have lost Generals and hole armies in about a minute.

Maybe I have the computer-which-changes-all-games.

Reply

RTW's AI has never provided a serious challenge to me. Most of the time the AI just breaks up its formation and attacks in multiple direction in an attempt to exploit your "mere human" ability to only look at and respond to one place at a time. The inevitable result is that you destroy the entire AI army in detail, a few pieces at a time, and then spend most of your time chasing down helplesss routers.

Reply

On expert the AI could and did put up a good fight in MTW. They would sweep over my line at times. Facing an army of the same size and same general quality on expert was a tough fight in MTW. On contrast with RTW's VH (very hard) I rarely lost battles. Typically only 1 out of 50 or 100. Often I took the field with half as many men or even a third or fourth and still won. Not only that but most wins were so lopsided as to be entirely unchallenging.

Did MTW's AI do stupid things? Most assuredly. It's siege attacks on certain castle types were terrible. Unfortunately, I can't say that RTW handles things all that much better. It does better on smaller wooden walls but its handling of larger fortifications is not a challenge.

RTW has a massive fundamental flaw in its AI: It tends to rearrange its line at a distance of 50 to 80 yards. This destroys its cohesion. It also likes to charge skirmishers into infantry. It charges its cavalry and the general/captain into pikes. It fails to use skirmisher lines as skirmishers.

The RTW AI seems to be largely ignorant of terrain and elevation. It is child's play to take the high ground away from RTW's AI, even if it is sitting on it at the star.

Reply