Lets assume that AI is not fixed, ok?

[babydoc]

Im still buying the damn thing!
Despite "retarded AI" I had/having tons of fun with TW-games.

Theres a risk that AI is not that good as we want it to be.
Im basing that thought on the fact that CA hasnt bragged about it, simple as that.
If the AI was good then Ill bet my car that CA would have been posting movies or in some otherway been plastering the interwebs with info on the super AI.

[Caledoni]

I'm not too bothered how good it is but then i don't play it for a challenge.

im sure it will be fine enough not to stop me enjoying it

always have multiplayer for a human enemy as an option too

[BunnyPoopCereal]

I'm not too bothered how good it is but then i don't play it for a challenge.

I dont even...

[omzdog]

I dont even...

The PR people have done a great job.
They want every update up to the minute, they want to hear about the voice acting, they want to hear that its fun and see people playing flashy bright animations, but the only thing that matters can be damned of course. A victory by the public relations team at Sega, bread and circuses for all.

[-Concrete-]

=babydoc;13068986
Theres a risk that AI is not that good as we want it to be.

This much is pretty much guaranteed. We all, fanboys and whiners, want Hannibal-like AI. It's not likely though, maybe not even possible. Here's hoping it's the best AI yet.

[Semper_Fidelis]

If I for a fact knew that the AI was going to be like Empires then I would certainly not preorder it. Hmmm come to think of it, maybe one of the reasons they are not releasing a demo is because they don't want people to see the horrid AI. But I have talked to some of the people who have previewed the game at gaming conventions and they said it was pretty competent, thought those were scripted battles I guess.

[xjlxking]

I just vassal states to not betray me firstchance they get and diplomacy to be better. I could care less if battle ai is stupid. If I want a match, I'll pay mp or other games with real players not AI.

[omzdog]

AI's one of those things where complete sporadic lunacy could be beneficial.
TW has this terrible habit of making AI strategy numbingly redundant thus predictable and exploitable.

[Toho]

well, as long as the lobby is always full and I can get drop ins then I wont be bothered as much but seriously the AI should be able to do some bare necessities like land naval troops on my shore without sitting in some lake or river being completely useless... imagine if you cant find a simple battle because the enemy navy is just sitting there and you cant touch them.

no one think they are going to get Hannibal AI, we want a functional AI.
shogun 2 delivered that.

[Ichon]

well, as long as the lobby is always full and I can get drop ins

I want to see Steam stats of how many people play with dropins. I've had a load of fun in some battles where you drop in all unknowing what army you'll get to command and I almost always try to get a drop in battle when capturing Kyoto or the final largest battle near end of a campaign but damn... hard to get those without waiting forever lately.

[Toho]

I want to see Steam stats of how many people play with dropins. I've had a load of fun in some battles where you drop in all unknowing what army you'll get to command and I almost always try to get a drop in battle when capturing Kyoto or the final largest battle near end of a campaign but damn... hard to get those without waiting forever lately.

well... I think skilled drop in players are part of the problem and so is shogun 2.

in shogun 2 armies are pretty much spammed and if you lose even one army then chances are you are screwed but with rome 2 hopefully more meaningful battles mean that dealing with stack spam is no longer an issue.

[General Maximus]

For myself, I don't care much about the AI if it is the same from Shogun II. They did a pretty grand job with Shogun II AI, it was very good.

Although my biggest wish is for Rome II to have an AI as marvelous as the first TW game, Shogun 1. It was simply excellent and was capable of defeating even experienced humans in most battles.

[-=PHX=-Hades]

no one think they are going to get Hannibal AI, we want a functional AI.
shogun 2 delivered that.

For myself, I don't care much about the AI if it is the same from Shogun II. They did a pretty grand job with Shogun II AI, it was very good.

I thought I was the only one that actually thought the AI in Shogun II was good lol. Nice to see I'm not.

The battle AI was a bit predictable at times, but still good IMO. I thought the campaign AI was excellent. They did a great job at attacking my weak-points. The only AI that I thought wasn't very good was the siege AI.

And I'm not going to freak out about the AI in Rome II until I play it. All we have right now is a single guy who played the prologue on easy saying the AI isn't very good. That's nowhere near enough to worry me. But not surprisingly, it seems enough to worry everyone else on this site.

[Toho]

I thought I was the only one that actually thought the AI in Shogun II was good lol. Nice to see I'm not.

The battle AI was a bit predictable at times, but still good IMO. I thought the campaign AI was excellent. They did a great job at attacking my weak-points. The only AI that I thought wasn't very good was the siege AI.

And I'm not going to freak out about the AI in Rome II until I play it. All we have right now is a single guy who played the prologue on easy saying the AI isn't very good. That's nowhere near enough to worry me. But not surprisingly, it seems enough to worry everyone else on this site.

it was never so stupid to ruin the game like Empire or M2TW (medieval was not so bad but it still had issues)
btw easy does not make AI behave that way, the AI on easy basically ignores what you move around and always rushes you. it does not run around in circles for no reason, thats a bug that clearly shows the unit is not able to spot the attacker or cannot find a path to them.

this might be a major bug or a bug fixed by a simple code line, we dont know.

[Huberto]

I think I can put my finger on at least part of the problem here. Pre-orders. People here have gotten deeply invested in the success of this game, most have already committed to purchase it, and now many are so dug in they are stating that the BAI quality will have no impact on their enjoyment, or at least on their purchase decision.

So we see why there is no demo, why the AI never seems to improve much, why the Let's Plays aren't really about playing and why what seems to matter most to fans are graphic buffs and "free-LC"

If we could pull back for a moment, cancel our pre-orders, be patient and not get so invested...and wait to see if the game turns out at release to be any good before deciding to buy it.

Then I think things would be better all around. CA/SEGA would have more incentive to take their time and make a quality release, fans would probably get a better game without having to invest in it before hand, and the discussion here would be less contentious and more focused on actual game quality.

Just kidding.

[Rhomphaiaphoros]

I think I can put my finger on at least part of the problem here. Pre-orders. People here have gotten deeply invested in the success of this game, most have already committed to purchase it, and now many are so dug in they are stating that the BAI quality will have no impact on their enjoyment, or at least on their purchase decision.

[...]

Just kidding.

Kidding or not, your theory might have a grain of truth to it. But not in my case, as I haven't pre-ordered; I'm actually planning to buy the game from my trusted retail store when it appears on the shelves there . Although I admit that I find the Greek factions interesting, they're not enough to make me pre-order. No, I'll get the core game as soon as it's out, but the DLCs can wait until all of them have been released - then I'll just wait for a steam sale, and get them all in one go. The core game should keep me busy until that.

[Manuel I Komnenos]

I think I can put my finger on at least part of the problem here. Pre-orders. People here have gotten deeply invested in the success of this game, most have already committed to purchase it, and now many are so dug in they are stating that the BAI quality will have no impact on their enjoyment, or at least on their purchase decision.

So we see why there is no demo, why the AI never seems to improve much, why the Let's Plays aren't really about playing and why what seems to matter most to fans are graphic buffs and "free-LC"

If we could pull back for a moment, cancel our pre-orders, be patient and not get so invested...and wait to see if the game turns out at release to be any good before deciding to buy it.

Then I think things would be better all around. CA/SEGA would have more incentive to take their time and make a quality release, fans would probably get a better game without having to invest in it before hand, and the discussion here would be less contentious and more focused on actual game quality.

Just kidding.

Personally the only thing I pre-order is the Battlefield series, because it's basically the same thing, just with better graphics each year or so. For strategy games, there are many expectations, AI, map, historical accuracy (or not), available factions etc so I'm kinda cautious.

[Sherm]

For myself, I don't care much about the AI if it is the same from Shogun II. They did a pretty grand job with Shogun II AI, it was very good.

Although my biggest wish is for Rome II to have an AI as marvelous as the first TW game, Shogun 1. It was simply excellent and was capable of defeating even experienced humans in most battles.

Agree

[Legion_IX]

That's true. Even with a crapped AI I'll have a lot of fun with this game. However I can understand that for many people, maybe the majority, it is a very serious issue.

[Jester]

would be ok for me if the ai would be like in Shogun2. playing the Uesugi campaign on highest difficulty was a pretty good challenge. i think with current technology and knowledge you cant ask for much more. no other dev can offer it either

also, it s the 3rd game with that engine (the 5th if you count Napoleon and FOTS in) so i d assume it was even slightly improved for Rome2