In Napoleon, Will Armies Actually Retreat When Hopelessly Outnumbered This Time?

Read the title ^_^

Yes, they will. Send Chuck Norris over to CA and get Empiires fixed ASAP!

Thank Christ for small mercies.

According to some of the previews, yes, armies will retreat when outnumbered and/or very outclassed.

Not only this, but according to the same previews, if the AI is losing on the battlefiled, supposedly they will sometimes make a tactical withdrawal.

If this is all true, CA has gotten their act together.

Originally Posted by Thoragoros

According to some of the previews, yes, armies will retreat when outnumbered and/or very outclassed.

Not only this, but according to the same previews, if the AI is losing on the battlefiled, supposedly they will sometimes make a tactical withdrawal.

If this is all true, CA has gotten their act together.

That's a big if, because we heard this before.

@ Humble Warrior - Chuck Norris could fix Empires AI with his love. Only problem is, Chuck Norris doesn't love, he kills.

@ Thoragoros - that is a very good relief to my ears, and some part of me has hope for this game.

I doubt it, what if the "casual gamer" wants to have the enemy army and pull a custer last stand every battle, dont want to let the casuals down so i wouldn't think there would be anything like that within the game. Would it be nice to have in the game yes, would it be in i highly doubt it, but just have to wait and see eh

Originally Posted by Darth_Revan

I doubt it, what if the "casual gamer" wants to have the enemy army and pull a custer last stand every battle, dont want to let the casuals down so i wouldn't think there would be anything like that within the game. Would it be nice to have in the game yes, would it be in i highly doubt it, but just have to wait and see eh

Not sure what you mean here. The AI will retreat its own armies, not yours. If you want to make your men fight to the last, that's your decision, but the AI will retreat armies that in essence have no chance of winning against vastly superior opponents.

Chuuuuuuck Rules!

The problem I've noticed with player tactical withdrawal in Empire (yes I've tried it a few times) is that when the battle is over, regardless of whether you got all your men off the field safely, the AI will often calculate huge losses for your army anyway...once my army was wiped out simply for withdrawing. Needless to say I reloaded and re-fought the battle and will never try that tactic again.

Originally Posted by Thoragoros

Not sure what you mean here. The AI will retreat its own armies, not yours. If you want to make your men fight to the last, that's your decision, but the AI will retreat armies that in essence have no chance of winning against vastly superior opponents.

This is simply not true. One of the decisions the AI can now make is a "delaying tactic". If you are approaching a city with a large army, and it has a small army in between, it can decide to attack you even with a smaller force. Basically what it is doing is two things. First its a war of attrition, and supply lines are much more meaningful in NTW. If it can knock 10 or 20%% of your army out by sacrificing some units, then it buys time for the city to recruit new units and move other units into the area. If you do not have adequate supply lines to replace your lost troops then it becomes a much more even battle.

Originally Posted by GrnEyedDvl

[/COLOR]

This is simply not true. One of the decisions the AI can now make is a "delaying tactic". If you are approaching a city with a large army, and it has a small army in between, it can decide to attack you even with a smaller force. Basically what it is doing is two things. First its a war of attrition, and supply lines are much more meaningful in NTW. If it can knock 10 or 20%% of your army out by sacrificing some units, then it buys time for the city to recruit new units and move other units into the area. If you do not have adequate supply lines to replace your lost troops then it becomes a much more even battle.

But that sounds suspiciously like the developers covering up the *never retreat* aspect of the enemy AI...

Originally Posted by Emperor Xenophon

But that sounds suspiciously like the developers covering up the *never retreat* aspect of the enemy AI...

I don't think that's quite true. In my personal experience (which obviously doesn't constitute the ultimate truth, so we need more feedback here), the AI in Empire didn't attack armies on the battlefield when the odds were heavily against them; instead, the flaw we were seeing was that the AI wouldn't retreat from said battles when the player attacked them.

Small armies attacking would very well indeed represent delaying tactics (and a smart decision by the AI), as assuming you're invading a far-flung territory, it doesn't matter if the AI lost 4 whole units to you losing half-strength of 2 units; they can replace 4 in a matter of a turn or two, while you would be unable to even replenish your half-strengthers. Over time, unless you end the war or capture your target quickly, you're going to lose this war of attrition.

Especially if we see the AI being more successful at forming firing lines. All of you who could kill 1,000 Russians while losing only 10 Frenchmen in Empire will be losing a ton more men, because the best commander in the world can't magically deflect musket balls .

CA and the dudes from Sf and NY said: YES!

But what's left, in terms of obvious flaws? Sieging? Melee bug? Diplomacy?

I suspect these issues won't be solved - but merely improved upon (where "improved" is entirely relative).

Ultimately, I hope CA goes back to a much earlier time period where the "flaws" are not as obvious. I would love to see a remake of Shogun, or Rome - based on this engine. The melee bug would fit perfectly at home in the older titles!

Green Eyes,

There's one simple problem with your post. AI armies in RTW, MTWII, and their expansions, retreated in reasonable situations where a retreat would be expected, and then occasionally did not, as would be expected.

The AI armies 'never' retreating in ETW was a simple bug that should have been caught the minute it propped up, because it was something CA had already accomplished, so really, the 'It's hard work' argument doesn't quite cut it in that area.

Also, as to delaying tactics, nobody is complaing about those...except that we didn't see anything even approaching delaying tactics in ETW, or even skirmishing tactics for that matter. The BAI, without fail, formed 'globs,' did not advance in formation, and sometimes simply ran back and forth.

Again, in RTW and MTWII, while the BAI there was far from perfect, they AI at least put up a fight, advancing in formation, and occasionally pulling off an upset. But no such luck in ETW.

But, if all the hype is true, NTW will opefully at least bring us back up to MTWII AI standards, which were themselves far from perfect, but lightyears head of what we have now.

Originally Posted by Thoragoros

Green Eyes,

There's one simple problem with your post. AI armies in RTW, MTWII, and their expansions, retreated in reasonable situations where a retreat would be expected, and then occasionally did not, as would be expected.

Again I know there are issues with ETW, and I am not trying to gloss that over. I myself did not buy ETW for quite a long time because of the issues reported, and because of the lack of modding resources.

My post above was merely to demonstrate to some people how complex the situation really is, and ETW is FAR more complex than RTW and M2TW is especially where economics is concerned, as well as with campaign map movement.

The AI armies 'never' retreating in ETW was a simple bug that should have been caught the minute it propped up, because it was something CA had already accomplished, so really, the 'It's hard work' argument doesn't quite cut it in that area.

I have seen the AI retreat, but as you say not as often as I expected.

Originally Posted by GrnEyedDvl

I have seen the AI retreat, but as you say not as often as I expected.

You have seen the AI retreat? On the campaign map?

Well, you are the first person I have ever heard say that. Respected modders such as Darth, Hip63, L33tr (sp?) etc.. have said that AI does 'not' retreat on the campaign under any circumstances, and after playing ETW on and off since its release, I will say that I share their experience.

Regardless, you did an excellent preview, and if what you report is what is released, I think ETW's shortcomings will be forgotten overnight.

Originally Posted by Thoragoros

You have seen the AI retreat? On the campaign map?

Yes I have, but again its not often.

Regardless, you did an excellent preview, and if what you report is what is released, I think ETW's shortcomings will be forgotten overnight.

Well I doubt anything will be forgotten overnight. And I also expect there will be some issues with NTW. Its almost impossible to not have some issues. I as pleased with the experience I had, but it was a single day of playing and I didnt really play any campaign more than 20 turns or so. There was just too much ground to cover in a short amount of time. What I reported is as honest as I can report it, but it should by no means be taken as gospel. What I reported is what happened, but once a campaign gets up to 60-70 turns and the situation is a LOT more complex then there are a lot of things that can happen.

We will see how things run long term, but I would call NTW a definite step in the right direction and am optomistic about its performance long term.

Originally Posted by Thoragoros

Green Eyes,

There's one simple problem with your post. AI armies in RTW, MTWII, and their expansions, retreated in reasonable situations where a retreat would be expected, and then occasionally did not, as would be expected..

That`s what i loved about the AI in MTW2. It retreated most of the time, but every now and then it didn`t, even when it seemed it should. this, for me, added that extra litttle bit of the `Human` factor. sometimes people don`t always do what you`d expect and stubbornly fight even when in a losing situation.

Originally Posted by Thoragoros

The AI armies 'never' retreating in ETW was a simple bug that should have been caught the minute it propped up, because it was something CA had already accomplished, so really, the 'It's hard work' argument doesn't quite cut it in that area.

Also, as to delaying tactics, nobody is complaing about those...except that we didn't see anything even approaching delaying tactics in ETW, or even skirmishing tactics for that matter. The BAI, without fail, formed 'globs,' did not advance in formation, and sometimes simply ran back and forth.

Again, in RTW and MTWII, while the BAI there was far from perfect, they AI at least put up a fight, advancing in formation, and occasionally pulling off an upset. But no such luck in ETW.

But, if all the hype is true, NTW will opefully at least bring us back up to MTWII AI standards, which were themselves far from perfect, but lightyears head of what we have now.

I find myself agreeing with you more lately. This is also true.