I agree totally - there is a fundamental problem when designing AI behaviour for this kind of game - there are two things that need to be addressed which are fundamentally incompatible - i.e. do you want to:Originally Posted by slippybee
(1) Have the AI play like a 'realistic' medieval nation would do. I.e. the AI is roleplaying a medieval king.
OR
(2) Have the AI play the game to try and win, try to make it play as much like a multiplayer game as possible. i.e. the AI is simulating another player.
So is the AI roleplaying, or does it 'know' its playing a game? Note that YOU CANT HAVE BOTH. A roleplaying AI is at a disadvantage to the player, because the player knows its only a game - a gameplaying AI will often do things that arent 'realistic'.
CA have (sensibly IMO) implemented a gameplaying AI.
A lot of the complaints about the campaign AI on this forum seem to be of the form "the AI wont do what i want it to do". Why the hell would it? Newsflash: ITS TRYING TO BEAT YOU. People want the AI to be hamstrung in ways they wouldnt be, e.g: "ooooh the AI just broke an alliance cos it felt like it", "boo hoo the AI keeps bribing my armies its not fair" - but at the same time you as a human player want carte blanche to do all of these things to the AI with impunity.
Bookmarks