how does the campaign/battle AI compare to newer TW games?

[dknight237]

How does the campaign/battle AI in MTW:VI compare to say MTW 2 or RTW? I assume that it is much better than Empire TW

Personnaly, I'm more concerned about campaign AI- movement on the strategic map, diplomacy, buildings, training armies, etc

If the campaign AI is better than MTW2 and RTW I might just give this game a try

[Xerrop]

Well generally speaking I think the campaign AI is superior to the two following games. Aside from the fact that the AI always trains peasants en masse (so a mod might be a better idea when you are used to the game).
Due to the risk style there are some differences on the campaigns. One example are rebells: when they pop up in Rome they stay only around in your province. You can wait for reinforcements to match this rebells and defeat them. In MTW two armies from different factions in one province result in an instant battle by pressing end turn.

It seems atleast to me that peace can be better kept by having equal armies on the borders, or even better bigger ones on the players side, resulting in a "Cold War". Oh and risk style means also all armies in a province participate on the battles. So the AI seems maybe only superior cause even when splitting the armies in ten stacks with only two units each they all fight together in the battle and can´t be defeated one by one á la Rome or M2:TW. :

Diplomacy is very reduced to only alliances and peace treaties. No trade agreements (trade happens automatically with all factions not at war with) or map informations. And it seems you can have peace more easy. In Rome I end up at war with factions until they are destroyed, they never accept any peace. In MTW it was somewhat easier to convince the AI.

And two important things cancelled in the two following games are civil wars (some generals with low loyalty and nearly half of your provinces turn into rebells - but there has to be large dissatisfaction under your nobles, one or two men alone á la M2:TW is not enough) and reappearing factions. When an underage AI heir of a defeated faction matures and you have their former provinces with low public order under your control he might start a rebellion and starts a new dynasty.

p.s. just some notes: the game is very old now. You might face some problems with your PC. I can wish you only luck getting it to run without problems.
And moving your troops during the battle is very unhandy for me compared to Rome and M2:TW. Plus the camera movement is also strange and difficult. So you need some while getting used to that.

[caravel]

To add to what Xerrop has said - the campaign AI in MTW is not better than that in later games - it's simply different. STW/MTW's campaign AI only had to deal with a set number of simple provinces where a move involved transferring a piece from one of these provinces to another and hitting "end turn".

The campaign AI for later TW games has to deal with a much more complex map, economic and diplomatic model. This really did show in RTW/M2TW where it was clear that the AI could not handle the map nor many of the additional campaign map features. Also in RTW/M2TW the diplomatic and military AI were two separate entities often working at cross purposes - this is why you'd have e.g. an Egyptian diplomat asking for a ceasefire every season while an Egyptian army repeatedly laid siege.

The campaign AI in MTW also does some stupid things. Most notably, it is unable to effectively direct and coordinate trade shipping lanes. It also doggedly techs up a province, often putting itself into the red, to fill the requirements for training the provincial valour bonus unit (i.e. Chivalric Knights from Toulouse, Nizari from Syria, etc). There is also the problem that single province factions such as the Aragonese usually end up stuck in their starting province and bankrupted from supporting all those heirs, etc. The campaign is also full of serious imbalances with regard to the unit rosters and starting positions of factions. Features that the AI cannot exploit such as retraining, disbanding, razing buildings and hiring of mercenary units also add to the problem. These features become nothing more than "toys" if the AI opponent cannot also use them against you.

Battle AI is another matter, this has been covered countless times, but the battle AI in STW/MTW is notably superior to that found in RTW/M2TW.

I may well be biased, but it's my firm opinion that STW original had the best balance in terms of unit roster and equality of factions. The problems began in the Warlord Edition where "features" such as retraining, disbanding and razing were first added to the game and imbalanced units introduced.

In my humble opinion, the best TW game would be STW (original) built on the MTW game engines with retraining/razing/disbanding and v&vs either removed or made to work correctly for both the player and AI.

[Lordbuxton]

To add to what Xerrop has said - the campaign AI in MTW is not better than that in later games - it's simply different. STW/MTW's campaign AI only had to deal with a set number of simple provinces where a move involved transferring a piece from one of these provinces to another and hitting "end turn".

The campaign AI for later TW games has to deal with a much more complex map, economic and diplomatic model. This really did show in RTW/M2TW where it was clear that the AI could not handle the map nor many of the additional campaign map features. Also in RTW/M2TW the diplomatic and military AI were two separate entities often working at cross purposes - this is why you'd have e.g. an Egyptian diplomat asking for a ceasefire every season while an Egyptian army repeatedly laid siege.

The campaign AI in MTW also does some stupid things. Most notably, it is unable to effectively direct and coordinate trade shipping lanes. It also doggedly techs up a province, often putting itself into the red, to fill the requirements for training the provincial valour bonus unit (i.e. Chivalric Knights from Toulouse, Nizari from Syria, etc). There is also the problem that single province factions such as the Aragonese usually end up stuck in their starting province and bankrupted from supporting all those heirs, etc. The campaign is also full of serious imbalances with regard to the unit rosters and starting positions of factions. Features that the AI cannot exploit such as retraining, disbanding, razing buildings and hiring of mercenary units also add to the problem. These features become nothing more than "toys" if the AI opponent cannot also use them against you.

Battle AI is another matter, this has been covered countless times, but the battle AI in STW/MTW is notably superior to that found in RTW/M2TW.

I may well be biased, but it's my firm opinion that STW original had the best balance in terms of unit roster and equality of factions. The problems began in the Warlord Edition where "features" such as retraining, disbanding and razing were first added to the game and imbalanced units introduced.

In my humble opinion, the best TW game would be STW (original) built on the MTW game engines with retraining/razing/disbanding and v&vs either removed or made to work correctly for both the player and AI.

AI in MTW is the best in the entire series hands down.