Passive AI is not fixed.

[Bijo]

Well, I've played on M/M and haven't noticed any passive AI.

In battle they are very aggressive and respond reasonably properly. Even tried to lure me out by going up to them (after/during long skirmishing). When my heavy infantry marched forth theirs retreated to higher ground giving me a disadvantage, as their missiles also retreated in skirmish mode to pepper my oncoming infantry (- I had only short-range missiles). I knew standing there would be useless I had to charge and so did they going downhill having better ground.

Their heavy cavalry also broke through my infantry line sometimes flanking units. Of course they take advantage of weak spots: my missiles were in the back undefended. They sent cavalry at them so I quickly responded sending some own after them from the battle's side.


When the AI attacks in sieges it sends its infantry with ladders, towers, and the ram (or two). They get on the walls and I repel the schwein (I'm playing HRE ;) But(!): they send in the rest of infantry and cavalry through the main gate - all of them! Hoping for a forceful breakthrough. And as far as I've seen on M/M it's always the same maneuver.

During one siege where it attacked, they had reinforcements coming from the other side. Unfortunately this army didn't have siege equipment so it took a long slow walk to get to the front too late when their comrades were slaughtered already.


So I conclude this: the AI ain't the smartest, but it ain't the dumbest either. At least there is no passive AI on M/M in battles as far as I can see.

[Vlad Tzepes]

Well, I've played on M/M and haven't noticed any passive AI.

When the AI attacks in sieges it sends its infantry with ladders, towers, and the ram (or two). They get on the walls and I repel the schwein (I'm playing HRE ;) But(!): they send in the rest of infantry and cavalry through the main gate - all of them! Hoping for a forceful breakthrough. And as far as I've seen on M/M it's always the same maneuver.

So I conclude this: the AI ain't the smartest, but it ain't the dumbest either. At least there is no passive AI on M/M in battles as far as I can see.

Try a sally, before they attack.

Agree, AI is good... some times... but could use a hand... many times.

[Bijo]

Try a sally, before they attack.

Agree, AI is good... some times... but could use a hand... many times.

The way I understand it: when you sally out of your city/castle you are attacking the besiegers, right? This means the player is the one who has to engage them. No wonder the AI just waits for you: it'll wait until humanity has colonized Mars
I'd do the same if were in that position. They choose to attack so I defend and if they do nothing, I win (and continue to starve them out).

Unless you mean I have to sally when I'm defending?

[grinningman]

The way I understand it: when you sally out of your city/castle you are attacking the besiegers, right? This means the player is the one who has to engage them. No wonder the AI just waits for you: it'll wait until humanity has colonized Mars
I'd do the same if were in that position. They choose to attack so I defend and if they do nothing, I win (and continue to starve them out).

The problem is that the AI doesn't 'defend', it just stands there while you send a unit behind its formation to attack its general, or destroy it with missile units. No one is saying that the AI should charge you at any cost.

[econ21]

My impression is that there were two "passive AI bugs":

1) When sallying out, the AI scarcely moved (as described in the post above).
2) When attacking against superior missiles, the AI would advance in range, stall and get shot to death (despite have superior numbers and a good chance of overwhelming the defender).

I never experienced (1), although it is being reported both pre and post patch.

(2) killed my pre-patch English campaign: it just got ridiculous, slowly shooting down ranks of excellent AI melee troops on parade. I have not seen sight of it post-patch, but it's early days./

[Brighdaasa]

I abandoned my turks campaign over a week ago because of the ai's fear of running it's melee troops at my archers and ha's, and it's inability to turn around and at least face the ha's shooting at it's back.

When i started a new turks campaign after the patch my disappointment couldn't have been bigger finding out this isn't fixed in any way. Playing a archer heavy campaign like the turks and probably the russians becomes very boring: encircle the enemy with ha's and shoot the opposition to pieces, then charge in and insta rout the enemy.

It gotten up to the point where i was genuinly surprised and taken off guard seeing a cavalry unit charge straight at my ha's after the enemy sallied from the town i was besieging.

[Bijo]

The problem is that the AI doesn't 'defend', it just stands there while you send a unit behind its formation to attack its general, or destroy it with missile units. No one is saying that the AI should charge you at any cost.

Oooooh, now I get it. I seriously thought people... well you get it :)

Well, haven't tried to pull off an easy trick like that. I usually just take them head-on if I sally out and flank them if possible. So far the AI (M/M) hasn't given me any annoyances on that. Actually, if I even come close enough they sometimes start to move and come after you.
I'll try the "picking off the general move" then.

Maybe this isn't as stupid as it seems on the first glance.
The defenders get a bonus defending the walls but I'm not sure if the same applies to the gate area. If they don't get a bonus in that area, the AI actually makes sense rushing the gate because chances are that a pushthrough can be made easier than on the walls, where peasants can repel DFK's.

R'as

It looks like the breakthrough is more effective indeed. The only way I noticed to repel them is to just put spearmen all in front of it in half a circle and then put to guard, and have some extra infantry or cavalry to just back them up. Very messy.
But even better if you add some heavy cavalry to it from their rear. It's nice to deploy some cav near the other gate and have them march around the outside walls, and strike them when they try to break through. Always works.

[Vlad Tzepes]

Sorry if it was confusing: what I'm talking about is the situation when the AI is besieging a city and I, Zee Human Player, am defending the said city/settlement/castle whatever.

If and only if the AI has missile troops (archers, mounted missile, artillery) it will attack and try to hamper your movements. Meanwhile all the foot units just stand there. If no missile troops exist, then the AI doesn't move at all.

Yesterday I was besieged by Spanish AI. They had Jinetes, some catapults, some archers or so and foot units (pretty well balanced stack anyway).

I, on the other hand, was relying heavily on Cav - Mailed Knight and Mounted Sergeants, and some militia to man walls. I exit the castle with cav only and deployed all my cavalry behind AI's line, while the AI used it's missile units to harass me. Okay up to now, quite logical.

Then all my cavalry is lined for the charge behind the AI's foot units, which still face the castle. A couple of missile units still fire upon me, they're the only ones that turned to face the new threat.

I start the charge, single-click, cav starts moving slowly towards the AI's foot units. Still no move.

Cav lowers lances, starts running, death imminent. AI calmly awaits. (maybe AI's suggesting I'm a coward if I try to attack their back? )

Impact. Bodies fly. Short melee. AI foot units routs. Jinetes counterattack, but too late.

And it happens all the time (I play m/m), in every siege, pre or post patch.

I too feel we're witnessing unfinished business here.

[PureFodder]

My main worries with the post patch AI are...

If you sally forth, the computer sits its units just out of archer range, but if you stick a unit of archers on the raised bit between the two towers above the gatehouse, the extra height brings the enemy archers into range and lets you pummel them. Once the archers are dead you can circle missile cavalry round the back of the enemy to have some jolly good fun, followed up by a heavy cavalry assault (again from the rear).

If the enemy has no ranged units or shorter than you ranged units they sometimes won't react to a single unit of archers wandering into range and unloading all their ammo.

The AI is sometimes too aggressive. It'll lob an entire army up a narrow pass on an almost verticle hillside despite having archers raining arrows at them, a line of spears to welcome them and a load of heavy cavalry ready to decimate anything if the spearmen get bored.

As the Moors I was assaulting my way through France and grabbed Angers, sacked it, noticed the 2 full stacked armies on the boarder with Paris and thought bettter of it. Sold all the buildings and retreated back to Bordeaux. One full army then charged across Angers...... all the way to engage the English in Rennes. They won and headed off to take Caen. Despite there being no defence force at all and being at war they left it alone, it didn't even rebel, so 4 odd turns later I reoccupied it.

I appears to me that if a huge army is on its way to kill one of your provinces, you can retreat all your units out and sell the province to the Pope. Once done the computer continues its assault on the now Papal state. Happened twice so far, but as I was Moorish at the time it's difficult to see what exactly was happening. Next turn Milan lost a whole lot of Alliances....

[R'as al Ghul]

When the AI attacks in sieges it sends its infantry with ladders, towers, and the ram (or two). They get on the walls and I repel the schwein (I'm playing HRE ;) But(!): they send in the rest of infantry and cavalry through the main gate - all of them! Hoping for a forceful breakthrough.

Maybe this isn't as stupid as it seems on the first glance.
The defenders get a bonus defending the walls but I'm not sure if the same applies to the gate area. If they don't get a bonus in that area, the AI actually makes sense rushing the gate because chances are that a pushthrough can be made easier than on the walls, where peasants can repel DFK's.

R'as

[SirGrotius]

From what I've seen so far post-patch, the AI is almost too aggressive, but I don't want to confuse the conversation!

[Spino]

The Passive AI bug has gone from horrible to strangely inconsistent. Playing as the Sicilians I had a sally battle last night where one unit of Sergeant Spearman, three units of Peasants and three units of Peasant Archers sallied forth against a Moorish army consisting of three units of Desert Cavalry and one unit of Desert Archers. FYI, I am using the 1.1 patch.

Prior to sallying out through the gates I was impressed to see the Moorish army maneuver further back and the three units of Desert Cavalry deploy to the rear and flanks of the Desert Archers. I was hoping to see them keep their distance and use their superior missiles to inflict as much pain on me as possible before retreating. As I tried to deploy outside the gates of my wooden castle the Moorish army suddenly charged forward to exploit my lack of readiness with it's Desert Cavalry coming alarmingly close to my flanks to fire while its Desert Archer unit kept its distance and loosed fire arrows into my ranks. My ranks were quickly being depleted by their arrows and I was personally shocked to see such an aggressive move on the part of the AI. Had the AI possessed heavier cavalry I might have lost everything right there. I quickly recovered by dispatching some of my Peasant units to charge the Desert Cavalry and keep them 'honest'. The AI then retreated it's army further back... only to close the distance and try again! I was ready for them this time and with my army fully deployed I put all my units in open formation and marched forward. However, just when I thought this was going to be a 'normal' battle the Passive AI bug kicked in and one of the AI's Desert Cavalry units simply decided to stop and do nothing... no harassment, no skirmishing, no missile fire, no nothing. I assigned one unit of Peasant Archers to take it out and sent the rest of the army forward. It was a bloodier battle than I expected, both the AI and I lost our generals (both captains) but I still won due to the Passive AI bug and the fact that the AI was too stupid to call it a day and retreat.

It was nice to see the AI try to make a go of it with its unusually aggressive opening moves but it was equally depressing to see the Passive AI bug kick in for no reason. The second patch cannot come fast enough.

- Oops, forgot to add that battle took place during a campaign game on Hard/Very Hard difficulty.

[Orda Khan]

Have CA lost the plot or something?
We were told CATEGORICALLY that they were aware of this bug and that THEY HAD IT FIXED.Then they held back on the patch so they could include a load of other stuff that was wrong.
Now I read in this thread that the passive AI is both fixed and not fixed So much for the patch then. What happened to the flippant " AI on VH will really test a TW vet" statement? Just what will the AI test? Your patience?
It sounds like this game engine is too complicated to understand

........Orda

[Comrade Alexeo]

Have CA lost the plot or something?
We were told CATEGORICALLY that they were aware of this bug and that THEY HAD IT FIXED.Then they held back on the patch so they could include a load of other stuff that was wrong.
Now I read in this thread that the passive AI is both fixed and not fixed So much for the patch then. What happened to the flippant " AI on VH will really test a TW vet" statement? Just what will the AI test? Your patience?
It sounds like this game engine is too complicated to understand

........Orda

Do you EVER have anything HALF-DECENT to say about CA?

[maestro]

What happened to the flippant " AI on VH will really test a TW vet" statement? Just what will the AI test? Your patience?
........Orda

I've played TW since conception and concider myself a vet, but I've never thought myself an expert or anything. Problem is; I've only ever lost 1 battle, and that was when my loan general was ambushed. In a stand-up fight, seige attack or defend, I've yet to fail to win. Sure, I'm choosy about when to attack and try to use overwhelming force when necessary, but even when I get surprised by a full stack of Danes attacking Antwerp I still manage to win - it just means getting an heroic victory instead of a clear one. Ho hum.... maybe they'll add a VVH level?

As far as Passive AI goes, even post patch I get to annihilate armies with my longbows whilst they just sit there. I've noticed occasionally that they'll charge me (and die) or just move back a little and wait for me to reform and fire again (much better than before) but still - many, many armies are almost wiped out before my infantry engage.

[Steinfeld]

In my opinion a difference must also be made between battles on open field and sieges. The passiveness on open ground has been greatly reduced (!). The passiveness in sieges still is there.
I have besieged about ten settlements since the patch. Everytime I was successfull with the following tactic.

1. Shoot a hole into their walls
2. The AI will send troops to that hole and keep them there.
3. March some crossbow-units in front of that hole.
4. Line them up.
5. Ready
6. Aim
7. Fire!

So far, the AI never attacked my by moving thorugh the hole, even if my crossbows were NOT backed up by some other unit.

[Bijo]

I don't get it. I've seen NO passive siege AI at all when I sally out, but I will try it again, to see what happens. I might also check that piece of code, Jambo, but the way it is now it's basically good.

1. Shoot a hole into their walls
2. The AI will send troops to that hole and keep them there.
3. March some crossbow-units in front of that hole.
4. Line them up.
5. Ready
6. Aim
7. Fire!

So far, the AI never attacked my by moving thorugh the hole, even if my crossbows were NOT backed up by some other unit.

To add to this: I've done the same from 1 to 7, but they all moved out of the way to avoid missiles.


Can't they just make it with this principle: if shot at unit has better stats and enemy missile unit is unprotected then engage? I'm not a coder, but y'all get the point.

But what I've seen so far with the siege when you are the attacker, is that they really defend. I can understand that a shot at unit doesn't go out and attack, because it would be too far from the rest and the safety of the walls.

[Whacker]

What happened to the flippant " AI on VH will really test a TW vet" statement?

My $0.02. I seem to recall you saying that you don't game Orda except for the TW series... While this statement is subjective, it's really just marketing hype and crap which is to be summarily dismissed, you get used to it after awhile. I never listen to marketing types anymore because most of what comes out ranges from patently untrue to highly subjective legal-esque statements that will vary in interpretation depending on who's reading them. I remember seeing the amusing threads on rpgcodex where the forums took all of the hype statements for Oblivion and summarily dismantled them piece by piece, it wasn't pretty. To me, the bottom line is that there are a (fairly large) number of TW players who are "vets", and will never get a decent challenge out of the game AI even with the computer "cheating" to gain advantages. The human mind is just too devious, tricky, and conniving and the limited abilities of programmers, code, and today's hardware means that there probably won't be a real challenge for a long time. Given there are currently a number of opportunities for improving the game AI right now, even all said and done there are still going to be a good deal of folks who just won't get a challenge except possibly in multiplayer. /shrug Take that as you will, and with a grain of salt.

Back on topic, oddly enough I've never experienced the passive AI, except maybe once or twice pre-patch in custom battles. I've done a good number of siege battles since the patch, both me attacking and sallying, and the computer has never just stood it's ground during any of those, it's always done something to attempt to bring me under fire or attack. Interesting reading about others experiences though, perhaps I'll encounter this sometime in the future. I suspect though that without a very in-depth, detailed analysis we probably won't be able to deduce under what conditions this occurs.

Cheers!

[mrbrownstain]

Playing Danes defending Brughues against French siegeThey had ladders, a tower and a ram. When assaulting, a spy had opened the gates for them. They dropped the ram, climbed the walls with tower and ladders, ignoring the opened gate.
Meanwhile, I was preparing to defend the square with my inappropriately small force of viking raiders and dismounted huscarls. I was expecting my anihilation and ready to enjoy watching my own army's destruction.
The french force stood on the wall doing nothing. All they had to do was either archer me, or rush me with its infantry and Knights. It did nothing.
Although I like a good fight I'll never give up an advantage no matter how unfair. So I waited til the clock almost ran out, knowing I would win this thing, and in the last 3 minutes advanced toward the wall to see what was going to happen.
Half way there some of the hundreds of Frenchman came down "en masse" (full on) to charge my bunch. I WIN!!!

The French sued for peace. This sort of thing affects the game immensely when you consider the domino effect on future turns.