Originally posted by Puzz3D
I think Jerome is wrong about the battle AI in RTW/BI being the best of the Total War series. Of course, he wasn't with CA when the older, first generation Total War games were designed. The older battle AI was well suited to the battle mechanics used in the older games which had greater tactical depth and a more statistically robust combat model than the newer second generation battle engine. The main deficiency of the older AI was it's inability to utilize ranged units to best effect, although, there was nothing wrong with its choice of targets. The problem was that the AI moved its ranged units too much.
I agree and yet because the engine is different it might have to do with the 3D men; i mean re-enacting the AI of STW/MTW and working from there might not be possible for ETW that will feature the 3D men and associated mechanics much like the RTW/M2 engine.

On top of that its interesting to hear CA saying that the RTW/BI was "the best AI" after all the marketing M2's AI has received; apparently it wasn't as enhanced as advertised i guess.

Originally posted by Puzz3D
The PR for the game emphasizes the graphics. CA has said before that they have limited resources. There is a competition for resources between graphics and gameplay, and despite Jerome's best intentions, he has to do what Mike Simpson decides. Right now Mike Simpson thinks that being able to aim cannonballs at the men on the decks is a good feature worth spending time implimenting. It's rubbish from a tactical gameplay perspective because you couldn't aim cannonballs that accurately. Much more important would be talking about how you are going to prevent the AI ships from colliding with one another because, if they all just try to cross the T of enemy ships, it's going to be a mess.
Developing two tactical AI's (naval and land battles) will definitely require lots of work and i hope that they'll dedicate the resources and hours for the task. The TW AI has never excelled in using shooters; as you said he can't provide support to firing lines while keeping their movement at a minimum to utilise and maximise fire output. AI shooters start by default on skirmish so far that really kills off AI use of them, especially for the more short range projectiles (grenades, javelins).

Also "hybrids" that is, shooter/melee units controlled by the AI so far needed to empty their shots before they engaged on; the era ETW is set will require alternate use of the melee/shooting capabilities many times possibly during the course of the battle as appropriate.

All this makes disciplined line tactical warfare impossible for the AI in all earlier TW releases. MP battles only can feature this sort of tactical play where the shooters keep the front aided by melee lines and cavalry harass and cover the flanks. The AI's timing in taking out shooters at the presence of enemy units is too early and that was part of the reason why shooter use wasn't effective. The so far TW AI is at its best in making melee matchups i feel and at producing a decent flanking every now and then.

I am really curious to see how all this will be adressed - if its done well it will offer great tactical depth for the SP game and interesting modification options for many periods. However if the AI isn't properly tuned with firing lines and the like the whole may end up too easy in the SP game.

Noir