Campaign AI worse than in RTW Vanilla!

[TheSavage]

I agree that a better diplomacy system is needed in future total war games. I would almost like to see a merge between the ideas of Europa Universalis games and Total War games. Where yor faction incurrs a Stability/Tax penalty for remaining at war and even for declaring war. Once war is declared, the player or the AI can win the war by winning victories on the battlefield/highseas and by capturing provinces. The victories and captured provinces will yeild a warscore that can then be settled by giving or demanding things through a peace agreement.

This is the engine behind the Europa Universalis series and it works well. Wars and Diplomacy are more predictable and the AI is very capable. It would be awesome to combine that with the battles fought in TW games. That would be the ultimate game.

I agree completely. TW has a fully developed battle system, but the diplomacy is a joke. In EU it's the other way around. It would be awesome if a watered down, simplified version of the EU campaign was in TW... some sort of stability system, more dynamic rebellions, and a richer, more logical diplomacy.

[gracul]

My AI, mongols not scripted + danes so big cuz im playing norway
edit: where did my image go?

[Bearhugger]

wow. this starts to be a popular thread. Many people wrote here.

I must say I agree with those who say the AI in total war games is getting worse and worse. It needs to be aggressive and expansive to create a challenging and satisfying game. So far, it isn't.

Lets hope for the future!

[Tacitursa]

There needs some kind of population cap aswell Genoa having more stacks than HRE and portugal having more stacks than spain for instance just shouldnt be possible untill they have the same size empire. Thats one of the reasons AI isnt expanding so much i beleive.

The problem is balance , For instance historically HRE should be bigger than it is on first turn and more powerfull. Give factions there true size and true strengh i.e no unit balances between factions. Sure playing HRE would be easy but dont you think it should be? It works both ways too though because if u dont play them there harder to destroy.

Some factions should be alot easier than others that difference at the moment is just far too close and almost non existant i find Genoa is no harder to play than HRE or France which is just so so wrong.

[Capital]

There needs some kind of population cap aswell Genoa having more stacks than HRE and portugal having more stacks than spain for instance just shouldnt be possible untill they have the same size empire. Thats one of the reasons AI isnt expanding so much i beleive.

The problem is balance , For instance historically HRE should be bigger than it is on first turn and more powerfull. Give factions there true size and true strengh i.e no unit balances between factions. Sure playing HRE would be easy but dont you think it should be? It works both ways too though because if u dont play them there harder to destroy.

Some factions should be alot easier than others that difference at the moment is just far too close and almost non existant i find Genoa is no harder to play than HRE or France which is just so so wrong.

STOP BALANCING THE DARN UNITS!

New mod:

"Unbalanced, Realistic Factions & Units"

[Point Blank]

STOP BALANCING THE DARN UNITS!

New mod:

"Unbalanced, Realistic Factions & Units"

The units are not 'balanced'. They are given stats that correspond exactly to how they are depicted as armed and armored.

[magraev]

I don't mind helping the AI along. I just don't want to have to fight the same enemy every time I play. it should be sometimes swarms of longbowmen and other times swarms of chivalric knights. I'm sure someone will get the balance of spawned armies right some time.

I also rarely finish a campaign, but that is because the administration gets a bit tedious, not because I'm bored with the battles.

[Seether]

Just as a side note, the HRE was not that much of a superpower. When they weren't combating civil strife, rebellions, breakaway barons, and other internal issues, they were barely making any headway against the Italian city states. Sure, Barbarossa was one of the few shining examples of men that could unite the empire, but all in all, the HRE was too fractured and autonomous to ever become the dominate force in Europe. Having a "united" HRE in M2TW games is a bit on the fantasy side.

Egypt, too, was never a true superpower. Egypt was weak, and had Saladin not conquered it for his Turkish Lord, the Crusader states would have done so. Egypt only became a power after Saladin consolidated power of all the Turkish and Egyptian domains in the Levant. They were never dominate on their own.

[thesmiter1]

try chivalry II. i'm at turn 200 in the dark age campaign, around 1020 ad. the turks have most the east and south Mediterranean region, France has destroyed the holy roman empire and controls much of western europe and is moving towards italy and greece, russia has been destroyed by, uh, someone, and many factions are clinging to life. its crazy fun.

[biohaker]

I don't really like the Empire Total War era. But maybe I will install it, to see the new gameplay, graphics, naval battles, etc.

I agree that the RTW AI was better than the M2TW. I think the only faction that is destroyed by the AI is Lithuania. I'm not sure though.

M2TW gave us super beautiful graphics and the SS, the most well-worked and biggest mod.

But it is it's size that make it so boring, each time u press the "turn" button. But many people worked on it, still working and are fascinated by the arts of war during medieval period.

Way too much, I like the RTW era, the Persian, Greek and Roman arts of war, because it thrills me that before 2500 years those people achieved so much in comparison with us, which the only think that matters is to speak more on the mobile and to pay less...

As for the main question, I think ETW would be too much boring, with huge Empires to rule vast regions, packs of people to shoot each other and grand cannons to demolish enemy fortification like paper and naval battles like to see the "Mr Jack Sparrow in new adventures"... ...

The question about CA, is why CA is making so shallow the vanilla games, with no historical accuracy, not too much settlements, no depth in faction unit roasters etc...

Do they say... "We have the Modding geniuses to do the rest?"

I cannot understand...

[Darkshanks]

As for the main question, I think ETW would be too much boring, with huge Empires to rule vast regions, packs of people to shoot each other and grand cannons to demolish enemy fortification like paper and naval battles like to see the "Mr Jack Sparrow in new adventures"... ...

[I]]The question about CA, is why CA is making so shallow the vanilla games, with no historical accuracy, not too much settlements, no depth in faction unit roasters etc...

Do they say... "We have the Modding geniuses to do the rest?"

I cannot understand...

Exactly. Creative Assembly is EXACTLY what it is. They have built such a following, we created this forum and many others. They have a database(the forums) of every single man who WILL buy the next total war title whether they want to or not (which you mentioned above). Ive been playing since shogun development videos started hitting gamespot.com, and that game just did it for us! It does not compare to the rest of the titles. You are right sir, they are a business and they know what they are doing, I would not doubt most of them are the modders.

Personally, I say the concept is all I need. I love the napoleonic era, im reading a lot of Austerlitz right now. You can't put what warfare was in that time without diminishing its beauty for lack of more humane words. I can't even begin to imagine what a game would require in artificial intelligence. Even still I am TOTALLY buying that game when it hits the shelves and most likely upgrading my comp for it.

Buy it, the mods will come. The AI is a seperate issue of us not knowing what our opponent needs to think. We know what the AI thinks and this is why we do not consider the AI the opponent. We all will agree though, the mods have made some great strides.

[Achilla]

I don't really like the Empire Total War era. But maybe I will install it, to see the new gameplay, graphics, naval battles, etc.

I agree that the RTW AI was better than the M2TW. I think the only faction that is destroyed by the AI is Lithuania. I'm not sure though.

M2TW gave us super beautiful graphics and the SS, the most well-worked and biggest mod.

But it is it's size that make it so boring, each time u press the "turn" button. But many people worked on it, still working and are fascinated by the arts of war during medieval period.

Way too much, I like the RTW era, the Persian, Greek and Roman arts of war, because it thrills me that before 2500 years those people achieved so much in comparison with us, which the only think that matters is to speak more on the mobile and to pay less...

As for the main question, I think ETW would be too much boring, with huge Empires to rule vast regions, packs of people to shoot each other and grand cannons to demolish enemy fortification like paper and naval battles like to see the "Mr Jack Sparrow in new adventures"... ...

The question about CA, is why CA is making so shallow the vanilla games, with no historical accuracy, not too much settlements, no depth in faction unit roasters etc...

Do they say... "We have the Modding geniuses to do the rest?"

I cannot understand...

What I expect of CA is to make a capable game engine and means to manipulate it - infinite possibilities are fertile ground for modding scene. What I don't expect them to do is to make their game as deep as said few existing already mods like EB for RTW or BC for M2TW. Competition in game industry is high and tbh CA's vanilla games ARE meant to be easy, a bit brainwashed and dull compared to the expectations of people like me or you. Casual M2TW gamer is still a guy that has no idea about modding and doesn't even know that this forum exists.

[BruceAlmighty]

I made a post here about the cruddyness of the AI. I would like to take back a majority of it. After play more games i've found that the AI actually is being agressive. the most intresting case i've seen was when i found Ireland had 2 of frances provinces.

[ricebowl]

Sup to all, just alittle of my taste, I found Lusted's Campaign AI mix with Xyrex's XBAI 3.2 together give very good result, battle very challenging, should give it a look~

[biohaker]

I just saw the map above. Mongols never expanded in my game so far. I think it is scripted or fake.
Mongols destroyed Turks and persians and came to anatolia? And danish rule whole of eastern europe except Greece? POland, Lithuania, hungary, Germany and Novgorod are dust by the Danish? It is scripted...

[lordextra0]

I just saw the map above. Mongols never expanded in my game so far. I think it is scripted or fake.
Mongols destroyed Turks and persians and came to anatolia? And danish rule whole of eastern europe except Greece? POland, Lithuania, hungary, Germany and Novgorod are dust by the Danish? It is scripted...

just try graculs patch and you'll realize that it's not scripted

[Tacitursa]

[i]]The question about CA, is why CA is making so shallow the vanilla games, with no historical accuracy, not too much settlements, no depth in faction unit roasters etc...

Do they say... "We have the Modding geniuses to do the rest?"

I cannot understand...

Actually they dont say that. They say hey lets go hire great modders to help us with the next game.

Lusted now works at CA and he created one of the best Campaign and battle AI's for Vanilla and stainless steel not to mention some really great mods. So its very promising that a great modder like lusted from this very forum working on Empire Total War. Im fairly certain they wont make the same mistakes again at least not with Lusted on payrole.

[Prince Vinc]

In my SS61 only Muslim factions make alliances between them,why??I have Lusted Campaign

[iksterminator]

I agree that it's becoming a bit boring, I start every campaign with smallest faction, very difficult campaign and battle, but in 50 turns it's a boring one, you can practically smash whatever you want.

Although there is an exception. I played Broken Crescent mod with Georgia (I'm Georgian, here's the choice) and got stunned by difficult level of the gameplay. Those hordes of kypchags, seljuks and abbasids absolutely knock out RTW roman aggression. And we are so poor and it needs so much investment in economy. And diplomacy also makes sense, as far as you don't increase badboy rating you're fine, but as soon as you just start spying and assasinating not to say conquering, you're next Iraq or Georgia today

Go try for all ya hardfighters!

[penquin11]

lol I had the opposite problem..the HRE or bzyantine would almost always conquer rome, hold off an entire 15 stacks of crusaders, while dealling with turkey Jihading or Russia being russia. Not to mention that somehow the Aztecs would end up in Europe, beat off spain because it used like 79 stacks at once (yes I always activated the Aztecs early in the game!) and then plunder Africa and parts of the ME...