AI still bad?

[josak]

Based on that new nile video, I didn't see a hint of any improvements. Usually historical battles are pretty scripted anyway, but the AI looked dumb as a rock.

- AI charging tiny units of light infantry into full stacks of heavy Roman infantry.
- Elephants randomly walking every which way
- Enemy never reformed their lines or responded tactically to what the player was doing
- AI generally didn't use any of the massive tactical advantages it had


The AI were in a hugely advantageous position. They had siege equipment, and from what I saw par from one instance none of it was used effectively. The enemy sat there at the top of the hill, threw a few weak infantry down, failed at using their siege / range effectively, and just waited and let the player charge into them.

Overall there was no sense of strategy to the entire battle. It was just a random blobby mess for the most part -- typical Total War gameplay.

Thoughts?

[hrissker]

"Usually historical battles are pretty scripted anyway" lets see a gameplay vid where this isnt an implemented mechanic, and then judge the game

and MODS, if you dont like what you see, then please OH GOD PLEASE wait for mods

[josak]

"Usually historical battles are pretty scripted anyway" lets see a gameplay vid where this isnt an implemented mechanic, and then judge the game

and MODS, if you dont like what you see, then please OH GOD PLEASE wait for mods

Well if the AI still looks bad during scripted gameplay, that wouldn't give me high hopes for how the unscripted gameplay will look.

[Jester]

what do you mean with "still bad" ?

it s long ago since i saw the ai acting like this in a TW game (always playing on highest difficulty though)

also what are you guys expecting anyway? there is no ai in any RTS which is able to play like a human player, that s why they re always cheating on higher difficulty levels.

that said, the ai in Shogun2 gave me a harder time and more often than most human players i faced in MP though.

[Toho]

what do you mean with "still bad" ?

it s long ago since i saw the ai acting like this in a TW game (always playing on highest difficulty though)

also what are you guys expecting anyway? there is no ai in any RTS which is able to play like a human player, that s why they re always cheating on higher difficulty levels.

that said, the ai in Shogun2 gave me a harder time and more often than most human players i faced in MP though.

well as long as campaign drop ins are populated then I really dont care about BAI... the problem is the CAI... I hope it is better than shogun 2.

[Kinjo]

Drop ins are not a reliable substitute for the BAI and are barely populated.

[SughdianWarrior]

well as long as campaign drop ins are populated then I really dont care about BAI... the problem is the CAI... I hope it is better than shogun 2.

It's not like drop ins always work. Battle AI is important. But it seems, Battle of the Nile demo was heavily scripted and wasn't a correct representation of it.

[josak]

what do you mean with "still bad" ?

it s long ago since i saw the ai acting like this in a TW game (always playing on highest difficulty though)

also what are you guys expecting anyway? there is no ai in any RTS which is able to play like a human player, that s why they re always cheating on higher difficulty levels.

that said, the ai in Shogun2 gave me a harder time and more often than most human players i faced in MP though.

Really? How long have you been playing Total War ( just curious). AI issues have been prevalent througout the lifespan of this ENTIRE series (7 iterations now, not including expansions)

No, not all of the issues have been fixed. Army composition is still terrible. Diplomacy still has problems. Bugs and glitches still abound. And basically, the AI is still dumb as a rock. It does not provide a challenge, unless you play on VH wherby they receive cheap, massive buffs.

What we're expecting is a good, chalenging, semi-realistic AI system. Is this too much to ask for at this point? Nobody is expecting perfect, human-like AI behavior. The fact is CA have a track record of completely dropping the ball (ignoring) on the AI issues, and flat-out lying about it. They do not deserve the benefit of the doubt - and fans should be holding them under the fire on this. I'm baffled that people aren't constantly talking about this. In every CA interview, the AI hardly ever gets mentioned. Are we so concerned with shiny new graphics and features, that we're content with a subpar, terrible AI system that has had 7 iterations now to be fixed?

You need to stop making excuses for them. You should be concerned about CA earning YOUR trust back.

This is the same company who said Empire had the most advanced AI system to date. You know, the game that had the most broken AI of the entire series, and never got completely fixed.

Then they said the problems would be fixed in Napoleon. Another lie. Much of the issues were still prevalent.

They finally, kinda, told the truth in Shogun 2 by essentially saying the AI would functional. Yeah.. great job CA! Give yourself a pat on the back for that one, it only took you 7 games plus expansions to make a semi-functional, not completely broken AI.

[Candy_Licker]

Really? How long have you been playing Total War ( just curious). AI issues have been prevalent througout the lifespan of this ENTIRE series (7 iterations now, not including expansions)

No, not all of the issues have been fixed. Army composition is still terrible. Diplomacy still has problems. Bugs and glitches still abound. And basically, the AI is still dumb as a rock. It does not provide a challenge, unless you play on VH wherby they receive cheap, massive buffs.

What we're expecting is a good, chalenging, semi-realistic AI system. Is this too much to ask for at this point? Nobody is expecting perfect, human-like AI behavior. The fact is CA have a track record of completely dropping the ball (ignoring) on the AI issues, and flat-out lying about it. They do not deserve the benefit of the doubt - and fans should be holding them under the fire on this. I'm baffled that people aren't constantly talking about this. In every CA interview, the AI hardly ever gets mentioned. Are we so concerned with shiny new graphics and features, that we're content with a subpar, terrible AI system that has had 7 iterations now to be fixed?

You need to stop making excuses for them. You should be concerned about CA earning YOUR trust back.

This is the same company who said Empire had the most advanced AI system to date. You know, the game that had the most broken AI of the entire series, and never got completely fixed.

Then they said the problems would be fixed in Napoleon. Another lie. Much of the issues were still prevalent.

They finally, kinda, told the truth in Shogun 2 by essentially saying the AI would functional. Yeah.. great job CA! Give yourself a pat on the back for that one, it only took you 7 games plus expansions to make a semi-functional, not completely broken AI.

Well, I get your point and I agree to a certain extent. AI always has been an issue, atleast since the first Rome. But it's not true that neither CA nor the fans care about AI and are distracted by shiny graphics. Many players care about AI, and CA gave us a Rally point completely dedicated to BAI.

A good AI is probably the hardest thing to do when it comes to gaming, and in a rather complex game like Total War it's even harder. It's a general trend over the last decade that graphics have become better and better while there has been no progress on AI. I saw an improvement with Shogun II, and if they can build up on that, I'm satisfied.

Yeah the Battle of the Nile looked bad in many ways, but I'll wait for release before I give my judgement.

[Jester]

Really? How long have you been playing Total War ( just curious). AI issues have been prevalent througout the lifespan of this ENTIRE series (7 iterations now, not including expansions)

No, not all of the issues have been fixed. Army composition is still terrible. Diplomacy still has problems. Bugs and glitches still abound. And basically, the AI is still dumb as a rock. It does not provide a challenge, unless you play on VH wherby they receive cheap, massive buffs.

What we're expecting is a good, chalenging, semi-realistic AI system. Is this too much to ask for at this point? Nobody is expecting perfect, human-like AI behavior. The fact is CA have a track record of completely dropping the ball (ignoring) on the AI issues, and flat-out lying about it. They do not deserve the benefit of the doubt - and fans should be holding them under the fire on this. I'm baffled that people aren't constantly talking about this. In every CA interview, the AI hardly ever gets mentioned. Are we so concerned with shiny new graphics and features, that we're content with a subpar, terrible AI system that has had 7 iterations now to be fixed?

You need to stop making excuses for them. You should be concerned about CA earning YOUR trust back.

This is the same company who said Empire had the most advanced AI system to date. You know, the game that had the most broken AI of the entire series, and never got completely fixed.

Then they said the problems would be fixed in Napoleon. Another lie. Much of the issues were still prevalent.

They finally, kinda, told the truth in Shogun 2 by essentially saying the AI would functional. Yeah.. great job CA! Give yourself a pat on the back for that one, it only took you 7 games plus expansions to make a semi-functional, not completely broken AI.

i played every title and addon since the 1st Shogun. and that s why i find it always strange when people claim there was no progression at all concerning the ai. from game to game it gets harder and harder to beat the ai when severly outnumbered. there were some unbelievable stunts i pulled off in RomeI or Medieval2 which just doesnt work anymore in Napoleon or Shogun2.

i dont say it s perfect yet but denying all the clearly improvements over the years is wrong too.
also, to call sth bad you need to have a couple examples or at least one which is far better but there is none. i also play a lot of other RTS games like Starcraft or Company of Heroes and in these games the ai cheats like crazy on highest difficulty. it has infinite ressources, is able to look through the fog of war, spams units in crazy numbers but you re still able to win the match. what does it say about that ai?

developing a really good ai is just an incredible hard task and i dont expect any major breakthrough in the next 10 or 20 years. from no one

about the diplomatic ai... well that one seems really irrational sometimes but that s just because it s Total War and not Civilization where you can also win in a pacifistic way. the reason why the ai factions behave illogical is because they re supposed to give the player a hard time and that s it. they dont want to win and the smaller factions dont care if they get killed as long as they distract and harass the player long enough so that he cant focus on his real threats. it might not be the most sophisticated solution but it works for that kind of game.

call that a lame excuse or call me a fanboy for all i care but i m simply honest and realistic. i have no problem to admit when there is something really bad and there would be an easy way to make it better. the game speed in Shogun2 would be such an example. i really hated it and Shogun2 is actually my least played TW game so far. it was a stupid design decision and i hope they wont repeat that mistake in RomeII

[Captain W. Handberg]

what do you mean with "still bad" ?

it s long ago since i saw the ai acting like this in a TW game (always playing on highest difficulty though)

also what are you guys expecting anyway? there is no ai in any RTS which is able to play like a human player, that s why they re always cheating on higher difficulty levels.

that said, the ai in Shogun2 gave me a harder time and more often than most human players i faced in MP though.

I agree that the AI in Shogun 2 was rather tough at occassions. Especially when you would conquer Kyoto and everyone forms a Union against you.

[josak]

I agree that the AI in Shogun 2 was rather tough at occassions. Especially when you would conquer Kyoto and everyone forms a Union against you.

Only tough because your getting ganged up on by multiple factions. When's the last time you've actually had a tough time in a fair fight (unmodded, without giving the AI huge buffs)? The AI throughout this series is usually not smart enough to hold a friggin line or formation.

[alstl]

what do you mean with "still bad" ?

it s long ago since i saw the ai acting like this in a TW game (always playing on highest difficulty though)

also what are you guys expecting anyway? there is no ai in any RTS which is able to play like a human player, that s why they re always cheating on higher difficulty levels.

that said, the ai in Shogun2 gave me a harder time and more often than most human players i faced in MP though.

AI was improved in Shogun 2, no question.

[Sebt1890]

That video was premiered over a month ago, the battle itself was probably recorded a few weeks before hand.

They are constantly working on it, just like they are on other aspects such as the arrow trail.

SAVE JUDGEMENT TIL THE GAME IS RELEASED.

[Modestus]

That video was premiered over a month ago, the battle itself was probably recorded a few weeks before hand.

They are constantly working on it, just like they are on other aspects such as the arrow trail.

SAVE JUDGEMENT TIL THE GAME IS RELEASED.

Can we call that Judgement day then ?

[LEGIO_XXX ULPIA]

SAVE JUDGEMENT TIL THE GAME IS RELEASED.

it's a very difficult concept!!!

[TotalWarker]

This is not a new topic, been at least 10 threads this last week.

I'll say the same as always, cant judge the BAI till I've fought it 10-20 times, cant judge the CAI till I've got a solid 75% of a campaign under my belt

[Noif de Bodemloze]

Hard to believe yet that people judge this game already as it is not released yet and nobody has played it. Useless topic.

[d4g4n]

I agree watching that video has my faith in a better AI somewhat demolished. But of course I reserve final judgement of that until release.

But I agree campain map AI is way more important to me, especially since I've used BAI mods for all TW's I've played.

[josak]

Just watched the rally point on Battle AI. Sounds like more of the same. "The most focus we've put on AI in any TW game". Yeah haven't heard that one before.

But in all seriousness, it looks like they still don't get it. They don't get how these armies are supposed to behave in combat. They keep focusing on 'unit vs. unit', rather then the cohesive whole of the army. They don't understand the importance of formations and holding a line. If they keep coding on the idea of small units vs. small units the AI is always going to suck.