[56k Warning] Quirks from Patch (Agent Missions, Aggression, Passive)

[Spark]

Isn't attacking you at all costs what the AI at VH supposed to do? I've read people saying the at M is more challanging because the AI holds back and builds up.

There is some truth to this. I found the higher up I go in difficulty, the more the AI creates massive stacks of peasants, militia and low tech troops, which are pretty much fodder for your strong armies. Medium difficulty is unfortunately not at all challenging, whereas on VH difficulty, I find my good generals with professional heavy infantry and cavalry routing a sea of militia in every battle :\
I think H difficulty is pretty decent, although the AI still makes hordes of militia, it starts teching up later on in the game.

[OMGLAZERS]

There is some truth to this. I found the higher up I go in difficulty, the more the AI creates massive stacks of peasants, militia and low tech troops, which are pretty much fodder for your strong armies. Medium difficulty is unfortunately not at all challenging, whereas on VH difficulty, I find my good generals with professional heavy infantry and cavalry routing a sea of militia in every battle :\
I think H difficulty is pretty decent, although the AI still makes hordes of militia, it starts teching up later on in the game.

Exactly the problem. VH has now become wave after wave after wave at any cost, poor troops.

It's even worse than before.

Im going to start a new, Hard/Very Hard campaign and see if that makes any spit of difference

[gardibolt]

Hm, I'm playing at M/M, and the AI is creating about half-stacks of very good troops--no peasants or minor militia to be seen--and shipping them to my less-well guarded islands, which is causing me no end of grief. Maybe there is something to the M being more challenging than VH?

[Anubis King]

How is the calvary in the patch? Still super strong or is it balanced out?

[Chrisky]

Still strong, takes more losses on charges however, but if you manage it it is a LOT easier to get them to charge. However they still suck at chasing routers, spreading over the map or coasting along at 100 feet parallel to them.
They still get slaugthered when attacked by infantry from behind without fighting back automatically and sometimes let routers "drip off" their front without capturing them, just standing there. It's just horrible. I just discovered my old M:TW copy and am seriously thinking about installing to get some reference if that happened to be so messed up as well...

At least in M:TW the problem with retreated besieged units (now just standing there as sitting ducks) was eased by the keep shooting arrows, so you'd have to take down remainders fast.

I can't understand why towers in M2:TW don't shoot inwards, after all they were historically doing this. Maybe CA was unable to program the towers to fire cannons outside and arrows inside? hard to believe. Also, towers occupied by opposing forces can't fire at all anymore - silly.

I don't see how CA can seriously expect people who payed money for this bugged thing to wait another 6 weeks for another PATCH. That means 3 month waiting for a patch that fixes flaws QA should have definitely gotten.

[Barry Fitzgerald]

I have had the insane attacking AI...and well it isnt much fun. I am all for tasty battles and the like..but after 20 times defending the same settlement..fromt the same flawed attack..that always fails..tends to get a tad tiresome.

What I find even more interesting is post patch..how YOU are the ultimate target for all the surrounding factions..yet they rarely seem to have the same zeal for attacking other CPU factions in the same way.

As for Passive AI..no it isnt fixed..in some cases it is working better....not for seiges really. And the horrible pathfinding still grates...

Um cannot say I am overly happy....I would have liked a working much more game....before they shipped it...tending to play MP games a lot more now...just to enjoy the battles....

If there is a lesson to be learnt here...for CA..it is that the next TW game MUST be properly tested BEFORE..it goes out the door. Nobody expects no bugs at all....but this is still like some toddler was running round the CA office...deleting code on the main pc! lol

[Von Nanega]

There is some truth to this. I found the higher up I go in difficulty, the more the AI creates massive stacks of peasants, militia and low tech troops, which are pretty much fodder for your strong armies. Medium difficulty is unfortunately not at all challenging, whereas on VH difficulty, I find my good generals with professional heavy infantry and cavalry routing a sea of militia in every battle :\
I think H difficulty is pretty decent, although the AI still makes hordes of militia, it starts teching up later on in the game.

Well this may be a challenge. I had an unit of Viking Raiders wrecked by peasants in my Denmark game. Darn those Uber Peasanrs

Captain of Raiders: "My prince, here comes Peasants!"

Prince:"GOOD Kill Them ALL!"

C.O.R.: "But they are peasants!"

Prince: "Don't tell me you, desendants of the mighty Norse Raiders have become soft!"

C.O.R.:They have Kitchens knives your worship. We can not stand!"

Prince:"Charge"

Minutes later as the Viking raiders run, "God help us, the peasants are chasing us."

[sapi]

The trouble with the AI is that it does tech up, but it doesn't specialise, meaning that human players can get good units quicker because they don't build, say, 3 lvl2 troop producing buildings in one settlement but rather one lvl5 one. This means that the player is able to use his superior tactical skill and troops to smash both the AI's economy and professional army, forcing them to revert to militias.