Attila Complaint Thread

[Butan]

Raiders units are to me a very interesting unit: mediocre auto units which fires and somewhat helps the attacks but at a cost (destroying your possible future buildings, like sacking/exterminating), and sometimes not very efficiently (because not controllable).
What I really dislike is the idea that, as you said, fortifications just fell "after a time" and then its a complete street fight: barricades should somewhat balance the issue of having nearly useless walls but I really have poor hope on how well CA will balance everything together for the unmodded release version.

I dearly hope it wont become the only way to go through siege battles... many have complained of "siege AI" and "too many settlement fights" but the solution CA offers seems like exchanging an evil for another. Will need to test the actual game before being definite on the issue.

[AnthoniusII]

Strange! In the entire HISTORY walls fallen only under attacks that defenders repel but they are unable to restore them!
Without any ATTACK I see NO REASON why a wall should fall appart in ONLY one year or so!!!!
An iteresting IDEA would be the option for AI and Players to start an attack and then withdraw from battle WITHOUT braking the siege!
Sorry I forgot that CA AI developers can not do even the basics!!! Sorry about this idea!!!!
Ofcourse not a chance for siege towers, siege rams, tunnels...All those are dificult to be coded!!!! Like is dificult to CODE anumber of prefixed ORDERS to reinforcement armies like M2TW Kingdoms players can DO!!!!!!!!!
Damn what am I asking for ..i am such a fool! I ask elementary AI codding!!!!!!!!!

[Cope]

Strange! In the entire HISTORY walls fallen only under attacks that defenders repel but they are unable to restore them!
Without any ATTACK I see NO REASON why a wall should fall appart in ONLY one year or so!!!!
An iteresting IDEA would be the option for AI and Players to start an attack and then withdraw from battle WITHOUT braking the siege!
Sorry I forgot that CA AI developers can not do even the basics!!! Sorry about this idea!!!!
Ofcourse not a chance for siege towers, siege rams, tunnels...All those are dificult to be coded!!!! Like is dificult to CODE anumber of prefixed ORDERS to reinforcement armies like M2TW Kingdoms players can DO!!!!!!!!!
Damn what am I asking for ..i am such a fool! I ask elementary AI codding!!!!!!!!!

This is pretty much spot on.

We have magically collapsing walls, but what about the total basics like being able to retreat from a siege assault whilst still maintaining the siege itself?
What about having siege battles end when all siege weapons are destroyed instead of having torches?
What about having the ability to use agents to open the gates or demoralize the defenders? (I mean they can burn down whole cities and repeatedly poison armies to death but can't coerce or bribe enemies to open their gates...wtf)
What about having animations for the movement/use of siege weapons?
What about having morale drop for the defenders depending on the length of the siege?
What about having onagers/ballistae be constructable during the course of the siege instead of having to lug them around the map with you?
Better yet, what about having siege escalation only cause wall destruction if the attacking army has onagers/ballistae in it?

All of these things are fairly basic but good ideas and yet I hear nothing from CA on any of these points.

[AnthoniusII]

This is pretty much spot on.

We have magically collapsing walls, but what about the total basics like being able to retreat from a siege assault whilst still maintaining the siege itself?
What about having siege battles end when all siege weapons are destroyed instead of having torches?
What about having the ability to use agents to open the gates or demoralize the defenders? (I mean they can burn down whole cities and repeatedly poison armies to death but can't coerce or bribe enemies to open their gates...wtf)
What about having animations for the movement/use of siege weapons?
What about having morale drop for the defenders depending on the length of the siege?
What about having onagers/ballistae be constructable during the course of the siege instead of having to lug them around the map with you?
Better yet, what about having siege escalation only cause wall destruction if the attacking army has onagers/ballistae in it?

All of these things are fairly basic but good ideas and yet I hear nothing from CA on any of these points.

Good post.
I would add:
Atrition of besiegers only after 2nd year of siege!
Attackers have the free move to plunder the country side while on siege.
So if the game will have 1 turn per year attrition for besiegers must start after the 2nd turn, if 2 turns per year attrition must star after 3rd turn!
Remember though...We are sking to much from CA AI developers. If they can not code basics how could the code and script complicated scripts????

[Causeless]

I suspect you are right!
In Rome II AI coding is Hardcoded feature. Rome II was the 1st TW game with AI as hardcoded!
Remember the HUGE DISPUTE that broke up when Darth Vader claimed that he fixed Shogun II AI behaviur and the answer of CA developers back then that this was a lie!
Was it a lie though? If trully an AI "fixer" like Darth Vader was simply liying then WHY AI is hardcoded in Rome II????
I can safely quess that AI developers of previus TW games left the "ship" called CA and there for those that succeded them were UNABLE to simply copy paste realy usefull AI features the EXISTED in previus TW games! That is the ONLY logical explanation and so far -in the last year- we have no evidence to prove it wrong!
Rome II is far worst in AI behaviur than Rome I, Medieval 2TW but also comparing to Shogun II one that was the most recent game and in an odd way had a decent AI!
Simply "see" the details!
In ETW and Shogun II that are games with fully naval battles, AI and Players can capture enemy ships, repair them and use them as theirs!
Rome II no such feature.
In Shogun II , Horsemen can dismount and then follow infantry units in assaulting walls!
In Rome II not such feature!
In Shogun II two or more armies could asault a fort from several directions.
In Rome II -after a year- this feature is simply "broken".
I am ussing the Shogun II as example simply because its the most recent game and it would suposed that the expirience of its development is not lost!
If we need to compare Rome II AI with Rome I we will embarass MORE the CA AI developers of Rome II and we do not want that!!!!!!!!
Map, AI and many other features that were "free" to mod are hardcoded in Rome II and i suspect they will be in Atilla too!
Those that do not wish durect comparissons avoid competition! BTW were are the modding tools CA promised for Rome II about map, cities etc????

Except for, y'know, that fact that's bs and AI has never been scriptable in any TW game I know of.

[Garensterz]

Except for, y'know, that fact that's bs and AI has never been scriptable in any TW game I know of.

Really Bad AI mod (BAI) by Germanicu in Medieval 2 Total War

[AnthoniusII]

Really Bad AI mod (BAI) by Germanicu in Medieval 2 Total War

I would add:

1: Lusted's Terae Expugnandae ( Jack Lusted by "improving AI in Rome I gained a place in CA)
2: XAI/BAI one of the most extensive AI behaviur in M2TW, transformer that is also one of the oldest! The start was made in a mod known as The long Road and expanded as indipentant project!
3: Ultimate AI

I wonder...If those projects were not true then:
1: Why CA did not warn modders that they are scams
2: How CA chosen a modder -that claimed that he improved the game AI/ the one that many still claim that is not scriptable- and made him member of the last TW games developers???
Was CA that damn to hire someone that would claim a false feature in a project that it was of its own??
If yes then why exept that modder CA "invided" back then the "other" modder that now many claim that he was lying about his abillity to improve AI?
Was CA a fool twice?????

[Causeless]

They can modify the AI variables, but not completely re-script it, as far as I'm aware.

I may be wrong with some of the earlier games - none-the-less, you stated that Rome 2 was the first TW game with hardcoded AI. I'm about 90% sure that Shogun 2, Empire and Napoleon had hardcoded AI too.

"1: Why CA did not warn modders that they are scams"

They did. There was some controversy a while back when Darth claimed he had re-written the AI, and CA came in and clarified that the AI modifiability was very limited.

[texoman81]

They can modify the AI variables, but not completely re-script it, as far as I'm aware.

I may be wrong with some of the earlier games - none-the-less, you stated that Rome 2 was the first TW game with hardcoded AI. I'm about 90% sure that Shogun 2, Empire and Napoleon had hardcoded AI too.

"1: Why CA did not warn modders that they are scams"

They did. There was some controversy a while back when Darth claimed he had re-written the AI, and CA came in and clarified that the AI modifiability was very limited.

of course Empire, Napoleon, and Shogun 2 have hard coded AI's like Rome II, they are all TW3. TW2 (Rome I and Medieval II) was much more moddable. I remember Stainless Steel allowed you to choose between Gracul, Savage or Lusted AIs. Not sure how much of the script they actually changed or just modified values, but definitely drastically improved performance either way. Definitely wouldn't consider it a scam, its just a technicality and ego fueled debate between CA and modders over credit. Don't see how CA can point out that modders are just modifying what CA created when thats all CA has done too since Empire. At least the community modders aren't charging for their mods like CA has been. The only reason CA has changed things that unofficial mod have not is legal limitations and what CA decides to allow us to modify. Compare vanilla Rome I at release to current version of M2 mods to see how much a TW engine can be improved with the combined effort of CA and the community. Unfortunately we are not getting that effort from CA anymore instead its an endless stream of DLC (and DLC they pretend are separate titles) to give us cut content and unlocking factions, as well as a few new campaign maps.

[HysGaidheal]

Scrap the engine if not now then after the game for sure and more realism, mix up the colour schemes on the units we need variety! CA addressed that issue and said no more pajama Parthians and guess what? We still got pink and cyan pajamed Parthians and bright yellow and red Romans.

[AnthoniusII]

They can modify the AI variables, but not completely re-script it, as far as I'm aware.

I may be wrong with some of the earlier games - none-the-less, you stated that Rome 2 was the first TW game with hardcoded AI. I'm about 90% sure that Shogun 2, Empire and Napoleon had hardcoded AI too.

"1: Why CA did not warn modders that they are scams"

When you defend CA again learn to do it in our entire posts!
Jack Lusted was not a modeler or a texturer you know , mr wise guy! He was a modder that CLAIMED that HE made RTW 1 AI better!!!!!!!!!
If AI could not be better by any one then why CA hired the one of the TWO (2) that claimed such a result????
When Jack (one of the best modders in RTW 1) was invided for a place in CA development team confronted Darth Vader!!!!!
Search old posts about that "competition"
IF CA hired someone that made AI better then how this justify his JOB in CA?
There are two options!
AI can/could be modified and fairly Jack earned a place in CA dev team.
AI can/could not be modified and CA made a HUGE mistake by hiring someone that became FAMOUS by modifing something that in your opinion could not be modified!
Of course the third option is much better !Yes there is a third option!
AI could modified , Jack FAIRLY earned his place in CA but CA team (Jack is not alone i am afraid) FAILED to make a good AI and to avoid the embaracement they published a text claiming that everyone that claims an AI modification is a scam! But CA forgot that untill Shogun II they DID NOT make such a statement EVER BEFORE!!
The CA team's failure became more obvius when we saw a game (Rome II) that COULD NOT reach the standards not of Shogun II (most recent game) but the standards of a ten years old game (Rome I)!

[Causeless]

When you defend CA again learn to do it in our entire posts!
Jack Lusted was not a modeler or a texturer you know , mr wise guy! He was a modder that CLAIMED that HE made RTW 1 AI better!!!!!!!!!
If AI could not be better by any one then why CA hired the one of the TWO (2) that claimed such a result????
When Jack (one of the best modders in RTW 1) was invided for a place in CA development team confronted Darth Vader!!!!!
Search old posts about that "competition"
IF CA hired someone that made AI better then how this justify his JOB in CA?
There are two options!
AI can/could be modified and fairly Jack earned a place in CA dev team.
AI can/could not be modified and CA made a HUGE mistake by hiring someone that became FAMOUS by modifing something that in your opinion could not be modified!
Of course the third option is much better !Yes there is a third option!
AI could modified , Jack FAIRLY earned his place in CA but CA team (Jack is not alone i am afraid) FAILED to make a good AI and to avoid the embaracement they published a text claiming that everyone that claims an AI modification is a scam! But CA forgot that untill Shogun II they DID NOT make such a statement EVER BEFORE!!
The CA team's failure became more obvius when we saw a game (Rome II) that COULD NOT reach the standards not of Shogun II (most recent game) but the standards of a ten years old game (Rome I)!

Jack Lusted modified Rome 1's AI. Not Empire, Napoleon or Shogun 2's AI.

[LestaT]

All the AI is hadcoded as they reside in the executables.

However from M2TW onwards until Rome II more variables can be access compared to RTW (I don't know about STW and MTW as I have never modded them).

It may be semantic but when modders claim they 'change' the AI it means they use different variables than vanilla which can be access via modding due to many stuff that can't be access before (as in RTW) can be access (more with M2TW and then a lot more for TW3 games.

If any mods actually 'modified' the AI then they will not be able to be hosted here as it involves cracking the executable. When modders said they 'scripted' or 'coded' the AI it means they are using different combination than vanilla.

Let's say the CA coded them from A-Z and 0-9. The vanilla game use combination of B7 for vanilla but this mod use M2 and that mod use X5 instead. Due to the use of different combinations (which is called variables here) it sometimes make the AI react differently which makes some people think that the modders creates a 'new AI' and become a demi-god.

That's it folks. A simple explaination from me who just made this up who have no knowledge of programming at all but I believe more logical than many wild speculations here. Maybe someone with actual programming and coding knwoledge can explain better ?

[Jack Lusted]

Blimey my name isn't half being thrown around in here. Thought I'd drop in and clarify a few things.

• I didn't mod the AI for Rome I. My mod, Terrae Expugnandae, was a gameplay mod with a bunch of new models and textures thrown in. All I did AI wise was included a modded group formations file and gave all factions a ton of starting money to help the AI out.
• I did mod the AI for Medieval II. Medieval II AI modding is a couple of files for the battle AI with values that can be adjusted and a more flexible file for the campaign AI that allows for more refinement. I won some mod awards for that work, though the focus of most of my Medieval II modding was on the gameplay for my Lands to Conquer mod.
• Whilst there has been areas of the AI that have been adjustable since Medieval II, there have still been some claims that some modders have made that just aren't possible, though that also goes for other changes as well at times.
• I wasn't hired because of my AI work, I was hired for my work on gameplay. I'm a designer, more specifically Project Lead of the New Content team, but started out here as a games tester. I have no coding experience so I leave the AI programming to the experts in it

Hope that clears up a few things.

[Garbarsardar]

I would much prefer if no one addresses the actions of members who are unable to reply here.

[Causeless]

Blimey my name isn't half being thrown around in here. Thought I'd drop in and clarify a few things.

• I didn't mod the AI for Rome I. My mod, Terrae Expugnandae, was a gameplay mod with a bunch of new models and textures thrown in. All I did AI wise was included a modded group formations file and gave all factions a ton of starting money to help the AI out.
• I did mod the AI for Medieval II. Medieval II AI modding is a couple of files for the battle AI with values that can be adjusted and a more flexible file for the campaign AI that allows for more refinement. I won some mod awards for that work, though the focus of most of my Medieval II modding was on the gameplay for my Lands to Conquer mod.
• Whilst there has been areas of the AI that have been adjustable since Medieval II, there have still been some claims that some modders have made that just aren't possible, though that also goes for other changes as well at times.
• I wasn't hired because of my AI work, I was hired for my work on gameplay. I'm a designer, more specifically Project Lead of the New Content team, but started out here as a games tester. I have no coding experience so I leave the AI programming to the experts in it

Hope that clears up a few things.

The man himself! Thanks for clearing everything up

[Marines]

While NTW was enjoyable to an extent, it was still pigeon-holed by it centralized and narrowly focused campaign. They're just doing the same with Attila.

After RII, I certainly hope no one is falling for this again.

[sgz]

Campaign Map: A grand strategy game needs a great map where you can quickly survey your kingdom, see armies and agents easily and have an option to play without the "fog of war ". Like a huge board game. The zoom needs to be much further out - as was the case in Napoleon TW and SSHIP for M2TW. I see CA claims you'll be able to zoom out more but looks like a very marginal improvement from R2. I'm encouraged by the statement that map filters will be possible. This is an obvious improvement as seen in the Paradox games. Filters like diplomatic relations, empires, unrest levels etc should be able to be applied to the main map and left on while moving units if you so desire. I'd also like to tone down all the 3d mountains and ludicrous size of cities. And get rid of those dam clouds that only serve to cause motion sickness ! A map should be a thing of beauty - somewhere b/w an aerial photo and a classic parchment map - not a google earth diorama.

[Cyclops]

I am suspicious because there's a seemingly high quality vid and the game isn't finished. Looks like another CA snowjob.

[MadManYo]

Anyone else disappointed by Total War: ATTILA?
I know a load of people were hoping for a Empire 2 or Medieval 3 including me. My main disappointing features of Attila are that basically the same map area of Rome 2 and the same kind of units ie swords,chariots, you cannot explore the Americas or Asia and have colonial wars, there is no early or late power weapons or unit types. Something around the 1450s-1700s would have suited a load of people.

What were you hoping for?