VH post 1.02: still way too easy...

[Fisherking]

It may be easy for you but it sure is not for the AI.

When you look around all the factions are feeble and destitute and never recover.

The AI is having trouble adapting to the economic changes that made it more difficult for the players. So now instead of facing challenging opponents with large armies and fleets you only face meager opposition.

Before the changes I took the required provinces and had enough money to hold off any attacks. I would expand to perhaps 30 regions.

Now in order to build troops effective enough to hold may primary areas I have to take 50 or more regions to have enough money. So every campaign turns into world domination, even if that is not what I am playing.

The AI doesn’t have the funds to put up good opposition. It is stretched to the limit and can’t cope with the changes.

It is still the same game with the same battle AI so you are going to win, it just takes longer and there are fewer large fights, especially at sea.

The AI now builds churches everywhere because it can be developed to the top but it never has funds for higher level building of other kinds. It can not afford any more than anyone else to build the levels that cause unrest because there is no money for garrisons.

I do the same thing. I need field armies and not garrisons. When there was more money in the game it was no problem to do both. Now that it is tight the AI builds cheap troops and buildings that don’t require a garrison.

The AI and the game were balanced to the old values and now it need lost of rework.

Further changes are going to so weaknesses in much the same way. When one thing gets changed it causes a chain reaction. People will adapt but the AI is going to require a lot more work.

Let them sort it all out before you yell too much.

Yes I know I have done a lot of complaining about the changes because it slowed the game down so much. But now you are only beginning to see what needs adjusted so it can get back to the level it was before.

[Slaists]

It may be easy for you but it sure is not for the AI.

When you look around all the factions are feeble and destitute and never recover.

Unfortunately: quite true. However, there were three notable exceptions in my campaign: Marathas (they took out Mughals and Mysore), Spanish (in mid-game they suddenly 'woke up' and took out Morocco, 2 beber provinces + New Mexico and still had Florida by the end of the game), and French who managed to take out all their North American indian threats. All three of these factions were "terrifying and spectacular" by the end of the game. Unfortunately, they could not get their act together to challenge Russian domination.

The AI is having trouble adapting to the economic changes that made it more difficult for the players. So now instead of facing challenging opponents with large armies and fleets you only face meager opposition.

Before 1.02, post beginning years: there was no opposition whatsoever. The AI just went completely passive. So, I disagree with your point.

Before the changes I took the required provinces and had enough money to hold off any attacks. I would expand to perhaps 30 regions.

Now in order to build troops effective enough to hold may primary areas I have to take 50 or more regions to have enough money. So every campaign turns into world domination, even if that is not what I am playing.

Hmm, I disagree again. As you can see in my main post, I am holding 32 provinces not 50 and more... and still my treasury is overflowing even playing such an economic backwater faction as Russia. In fact, in the end-game I was granting AI factions 100K bonuses per turn, just to see if that would kick them into action. No luck there...

The AI doesn’t have the funds to put up good opposition. It is stretched to the limit and can’t cope with the changes.

It is still the same game with the same battle AI so you are going to win, it just takes longer and there are fewer large fights, especially at sea.

Hmm, I had plenty of large fights. True: not so much at sea, but then again, as Russia, I did not do much sea development until late in the game.

The AI now builds churches everywhere because it can be developed to the top but it never has funds for higher level building of other kinds. It can not afford any more than anyone else to build the levels that cause unrest because there is no money for garrisons.

The church part is true, but I disagree the AI is doing to minimize garrisons. Poland, for example had 3 churches in POLAND... That's their core province and they definitely did not need 3 churches to convert the populace. It's just AI stupidity.

I do the same thing. I need field armies and not garrisons. When there was more money in the game it was no problem to do both. Now that it is tight the AI builds cheap troops and buildings that don’t require a garrison.

Hmm, the Russian empire I described had no problem fielding 3 professional field armies (I did not need more) + garrison forces where needed. The central Russian holdings had no garrison whatsoever.

The AI and the game were balanced to the old values and now it need lost of rework.

Nothing was balanced before patch 1.02. The game was duller than dull unless one enjoyed fighting North American Indian melee supermen hordes; besides them - no AI did anything. At least now we see something happening in the first 30-50 years. My complaint now is about late game activity.

Further changes are going to so weaknesses in much the same way. When one thing gets changed it causes a chain reaction. People will adapt but the AI is going to require a lot more work.

That I cannot agree with more. The AI IS going to require a lot more work. I hope CA is up for the task...

Yes I know I have done a lot of complaining about the changes because it slowed the game down so much. But now you are only beginning to see what needs adjusted so it can get back to the level it was before.

Hmm, that I disagree with wholeheartedly. I personally would not want to see 'the level it was before'.

[JAG]

Fisherking you even play the game before the patch?... From the way you talk about it it seems you didn't and I seem to remember you saying you did not have the game when I was posting in here, what, 2-3 weeks after the launch.

Anyway, I think your points are not based on the reality of what the game was and is.

[anweRU]

The patch made the game more challenging by changing the economy. I think the changes went a bit too far, but it isn't insurmountable.

Patch 1.2 also made the minor nations more reasonable, in that Savoy (or Wurtemburg) didn't go and destroy France by 1720 or so... North America is more challenging, but the Natives are not nuts as they were pre-patch 1.2 (no more five-six full stacks from a two-region NA faction).

The diplomacy went to hell though. We're back to the irrational METW2 style AI. The AI at least had some glimmer of intelligence in the diplamtic routines pre-patch 1.2: maintaining its alliances, and trying to achieve its aims diplomatically (even if it was stuck in an endless loop, without any penalty to the player for refusing the AI offers...). I would much rather have the AI make me diplomatic offers to me for several turns, before declaring war - instead of the backstabbing allies from METW2 that have snuck into patch 1.2.

Overall, I'd rate the patch 7/10.

As for the late game being easy - the CA AI will never mount a challenge to the human player, unless scripted events occur. Note that it can't early in the game either. Instead of improving the AI, CA tried its best to hinder the human player artificially... I wouldn't be surprised if players 20 years down the line still make the same complaints. Artificial intelligence is not easy. That is a general truth, not anything particular to CA.

[Fisherking]

@ Slaists


LOL!!!

No one else ever has cash like that!

I was amazed when I looked at your totals.

I don’t think it is even the same game I am playing!!!

The commodity values are tremendously higher than any I have gotten and my ports are developed and I have more regions and more commodities.

I just finished as the French and it was not hard but the AI suffers form a lack of money.

We don’t want the AI to have all kinds of bonuses but it can not fight a decent game as it stands.

There has to be middle ground. Those who never have cash problems may not understand but it all hurts your opponents much more than you. And in single player it is the AI, and it just can not cope.

@ JAG

You are just too good. No mere mortals can compare.


I tend to agree more with anweRU‘s assessment.

[loony]

I think the real problem the AI faces is a buggy payback calculation of troop disbanding.

It counts like this:
if i disband this unit, i get 300 per turn, but in order to recruit it i need 1170, therefore, I effectively break even at turn 4. What is the % probability i would need the unit before then probablility=function(ongoing wars, unit location, enemy closeby, ability to transport the unit to required spots, population control requirements, etc). It is at war all the time, the function calc is improper, so it gets that it does not pay to disband a unit. it doesn't.

a human player thinks more like: if i disband this unit, i will cover what it does now with those other units I have, hence, risk is increased only marginally (e.g. i can keep both the rebellion down and defend against enemies with a single stack in a region, no need to sit in the city). I will probably need to recruit a unit soon, but i can invest the cash flow now, so I get paid back all throughout the campaign through wealth effect (or exports if it is a plantation.). moreover, I am not sure i will need the new unit in this precise spot as I have several hot zones. therefore, while money is more mobile than units (strategic benefit, hard to evaluate for the ai), I'd rather take the money

[Prodigal]

Dunno if this has been covered, but I'd like to see the AI get a steady income regardless of its trade etc. I guess an easy balance would be max 50% spend on troops with a stack cap based on number of territories, so 1 territory max stack would be lower than 2, 3, or more territories. Otherwise mid game would result in 8 stacks in hannover.

The AI is so stupid its almost painful at the moment, I hoped naval invasions would be a cure all, but that's failed, more aggression is good but still the behaviour remains horribly predictable.

The game actually feels smaller to me than MTW, mainly because you will encounter the same troop types, (with very slight variations), everywhere, the AI will always react in the same manner regardless of its strength, everywhere.

Sure its pretty, & has some interesting twists on the combat mechanic, but its got a massive void that previous versions did not suffer, the flags may be different but its all much of a muchness, which is a crying shame.

Anyway to conclude, I agree, it is too easy.