AI doesnt like to diversify its unit build?

[Veresov]

I've been noticing a common pattern of the AI building the same unit over and over again at the expense of building other units. For example, Genoese crossbowmen. Even though the Genoese crossbowmen are a good unit, wouldn't it make better sense for the AI to build some cavalry or some heavy infantry? These were available to the AI however it chose to build a full army of nothing but Genoese crossbowmen.

[Musashi]

The AI tends to just build whatever unit has the best stats/cost ratio available.

[Kraxis]

Yes, but also take note of the Milanese settlements. They are all cities.

No wonder it is the Genoese Crossbowmen that takes the brunt of the fighting.

In fact I have met Milanese armies with merc knights quite often, so the AI tries to make up for this lack of heavy cavalry.

[PureMassacre]

All the polish armies I fought seemed to consist of just crossbowmen and 6 or more catapults.

[Barry Fitzgerald]

I noticed this too, though not as bad as some people.

Def needs some work here IMO...

Wouldn't mind but the AI most of the time just lets his archers sit and take a beating. Feels like I dictate the battles all the time.

[Quillan]

The AI does diversify its build, except for artillery, in my experience. However, it does vary depending on circumstances. As stated, if Milan has no castles, they can't build any castle troops. The troops they can build in cities are limited, and since those Genoese Crossbow Militia are probably the best, they spam them. In my Spanish campaign, the French only own one coastal province at the moment, Marseilles. That has to be hurting their economy, and sure enough, I've scouted two large armies of theirs composed 2/3 of Voulge Militia. When they had money, there was a much better mix of infantry and cavalry.

I have to defend Acre against an Egyptian assault next time I play, and that army has 3 trebuchets, 2 catapults, 3 Tarbardriyya, and a nice mix of peasant archers, saracen militia, mamluk cavalry (both lance and bow types) and javelinmen for the remainder of the 19 units in the stack. It should be a truly interesting fight.

[mr.blonde]

I have to defend Acre against an Egyptian assault next time I play, and that army has 3 trebuchets, 2 catapults, 3 Tarbardriyya, and a nice mix of peasant archers, saracen militia, mamluk cavalry (both lance and bow types) and javelinmen for the remainder of the 19 units in the stack. It should be a truly interesting fight.

i hope you really have a enjoyable fight but i am a little bit sceptical because in my fights with the Egyptians in Acre always they have a spy in the fortress and the known bug appears... (:

[nameless]

I destroyed an army that was full of Pavise Crossbowmen. Afterwards, the next full stack army was a mix of spearmen and mercs. So the AI does try to diversify a bit.

Though I would like to mod out the seige weapons when I can, the AI seems to like spamming them all the time. Did the same with RTW. Plus, I hate seige weapons, leaves less men to kill.

[andrewt]

Part of the reason for Genoese Crossbowmen is the 100 upkeep. I'm not sure if that's for both the militia and the regular unit. Heavy infantry and cavalry are 225 and 250 respectively for Milan.

[GrandInquisitor]

I've noticed this with the Byzantines and, to a lesser extent, France. Most armies I've fought are fairly diverse, often very dangerous, with me on the defensive. The Byzantines, however, seem to love their horse archer line. I'm not saying it's a bad army at all, but after I destroy their first army or two of diverse units in the field, that's all they put out -- sometimes with some siege weapons or a token Byzantine spear unit. But by God/Allah, their field armies have ten or more horse archer units, period.

And maybe France just glitched in my game. I slaughtered one of their main mixed armies as the HRE. The following few turns, after I'd recovered and went on the offense, they sent armies of...peasants...led by one or two knights of some sort. The peasant armies of France dealt some serious damage to my veteran, high tier armies before the siege bug cropped up. I was contemplating quiting that game just on the peasant bit alone. It's happened similarly in a Venetian game and as the Turks (spies saw them).

[BigTex]

I've found the AI to do quite well at raising armies. But it has learned to work within it's funds, so diversity is sacrificed alot of times by the AI for cheap troops when their in a bind. Prior to major conflicts the AI tends to have nice well made armies, after being crushed though they tend to quickly build lots of cheap troops to get an army out fast. It is definately alot better then in RTW. Were they would bankrupt themselves and have a small force.

The Milanese will always have lot of genosese crossbowmen becuase they have a majority of cities. Those are by far one of the best units they can train there. I've seen them build alot of dismounted men-at-arms latter on in campaigns when they tech up their castles.

They do seem to have a habbit of spamming artillery though, been there since RTW though. Once an AI faction gets rich though they'll start making nearly all knight armies, with just a handful of dismounted knights for a kicker. Those are nasty nasty things to stumble across in the open, or even in a city with good walls.

[Quillan]

For the Byzantines, that's not lack of diversity, that's smart play. As Byzantium, I fielded armies of 19 horse archers. Until you get to a level 4 barracks, the infantry sucks. The horse archers are the best units you have until you get well teched up. They don't work too well assaulting fortifications, but they beat most armies in the open field.