Testing Siege AI in Campaign...

[Humble Warrior]

Logically, there's no reason they shouldn't be able to. At the end of the day, the primary differences between a navy and an army are the boats and training.

I wouldn't worry too much about the gameplay design perspective. Right now, armies can already fight on land, blockade cities, raid trading routes and the countryside....AND fight at sea relatively well and easily from no-cost, no-time transports. They have far more utility and flexibility than navies do already, and cost more.

I don't see a solid logical or design rationale for why you couldn't just allow navies light siege ladders. Armies already build ladders "instantly" upon laying siege; I assume this simulates them carrying the parts with them in the baggage train, and assembling them in the field. You couldn't fit the parts for at least a ladder or two in a trireme (at least enough to supplement from local foraging)?

Make it a two-turn process if it makes you more comfortable. On turn one, the navy blockades. On turn two, they could assault form land like any army; the intervening turn could simulate the time required to find a place to land in good order and build the ladders.

Sure, naval personnel would be trained in and used to a different sort of combat than their army brethren, but I feel like the reduced unit size of naval units already limits their combat effectiveness against an army to represent this.

I agree with Symphony here. In fact I'm pretty sure it's happened historically and I can see no reason why it can't be done, save for the fact that navy troops may not be as affective as proper armies. Also it's far more realistic than those torches and doesn't take away from gameplay at all. Win/win.

[Swamidude]

Hey read in another thread that you had trouble moving up into gaul with your testing campaign. Well I'm still in my testing campaign with the Arevaci, now the Iberian Confederation, and also went campaigning in Gaul. It was really epic, I felt like an Iberian Alexander, it was the first time I actually cared about my general actually, even without the politic system and family tree and the only reason was because the battles he was in where epic. An easy win battle doesn't make you connect to a general, but if you have several batles with different tactics and where you feel you're making important decisions it also makes a bond...

To make a picture of what is was doing, the Nervii had taken whole Gaul, except one faction, which was their ally, they also had all the German regions and where now moving into the balkan. I was afraid they would get control over the whole map and they would get to strong + it would get to boring if I waited to long. But the main reason was that my economy was bad and with the 4 turns per year hardcore version, buildings where expansive and some scouting showed that almost whole Gaul was undefended, they had their troops in Germany and on the Balkan wars. So there was a lot of money to be made and the decision was clear, for the first time I decided that expanding my territory wasn't the priority in this campaign.

1. they where to strong and I had to take as much territory before they reinforced the region, occupying would mean slow progress and lot's of units needed to keep public order and after that defeding against the massive Nervii stacks..

2. I needed money and sacking as much settlements as possible would be the best way to get it.

3. I didn't want a dragged out war between me and them, liberating and letting regions rebel would make sure that there was a nice and safe buffer between me and their stacks of doom that where now on the balkan.

So the campaign started and I went away with two full stacks and an extra general for picking up mercenaries if needed. Before patch 14 this would have been easy actually, but I decided not to autoresolve, unless 95% or more of my army would survive (so the really small towns). Because I needed to move on and didn't had unit replenishment every turn, I had to plan carefully.

The battles where epic, especially walled sieges, because non walled sieges are the most boring now that the AI always rushes out? The first time they took me by surprise, but now I just set up my army and wait for them to come, it's to easy, so this needs fixing!! Most of the times with walls I waited a turn to build extra siege equipment, but that wasn't always possible. Especially when I came to the Rhine the Nervii had build up forces there of 10 / 12 units and I had to combine stacks to make succesfull attacks. I liberated two factions and most of the other territories I occupied to let them rebel or I they rebelled from all the sacking.

And then I reached my final most EPIC siege. I reached the Suebi starting region. Where the Nervii had a full stack located and 20 units garrison. I arrived in spring and decided to build siege equipment until the fall and then attack when winter hitted. I had two full stacks, almost all units damages and like 70 / 80% left in each unit and the spare general that picked up a douzen of mercenaries before the siege started.

I used slingers and that light ballista thing that shoots arrows (damn forgot the name of it..) to soften up the troops on the walls and to destroy their towers, while reinforcements gathered. I had 5 ladders on one side, 3 ladders on the other and both sides a ram. After my slingers used up their ammunition I place them in range of his skirmishers with the spread formation, so they would take fire, while my ladders moved towards the walls. After a while the AI noticed they where losing on the walls and pulled back. There between two houses they made a new choke point. I tried other ways, but they blocked every way to the center on the exact right spot to effectively block my forces. The gates were captured or destroyed and my cav could move in, but there was no way I could use them to out flank them, because they defended every entry to the center very well. I even lost on one side and they started to move towards another side, not through the center, but around it to attack me from behind. Although this did leave them exposed for my 10 cavalry units standing there doing nothing, so it was a smart move, if not for my cavalry. With this action their win also turned into a loss, because the side I had lost the battle with my infantry, now became open for a full blown charge through the center into the back of the 3 other armies. I was winning anyway on the other fronts, but a human player wouldn’t have charged out of that perfect defending position, just to attack my forces that were trying to enter the city on the other side. Normally I would be glad with such tactical move, but a human player would have known that in this case with 10 cavalry units standing aside it would be smarter to close the entry into the village. Before this mistake my cavalry was useless, because there where spearunits everywhere and charging cavalry head on into a blob where your infantry is already engaged isn’t that smart either.. But for the rest the AI did excellent, it’s a real improvement and after liberating the Suebi and the biggest siege battle of the campaign I decided my campaign was over and I marched back to Iberia, riches and glory where mine, and in the years to come I can build up my economy. I now have 80.000 and still an income of 180 xD But two very experienced armies and for the time being no more battles, got tired of them a little bit, now I’ll rest a few days and do some good old empire managing, ow wait, Rome II offers nothing to little on that aspect

All with all siege AI is fixed for me, think I had arround 10 walled siege battles and allthough barbarian town pathfinding is sometimes a bit broken, they tend to find their way in a second or two and my experience is really good. Now I really need Carthage or Rome to declare war on me and them to throw everything they got against my walls But first I'll wait, because Rome seems to be finishing off Carthage and then they will probably come for me :O It would be the first campaign Rome has expanded outside Italy (except for 2 settlements in greece / illyria or africa)

[Humble Warrior]

Excellent report, Swamidude. Read it all, Great stuff.

I'm not able to get at my desktop for the time being, but I have found getting up Gaul hard. You've given me some ideas for my return. That big siege you had shows that the siege-fix in 14 is not just a one-off.

If only there was more depth so you could see more about your General and his family/Senate at home.

[Swamidude]

In the sieges against only garrison they try the same, but their troops just aren't up for the task and I outnumbered them and had better quality troops.. The CAI seemed to start recruiting armies and eventually send in their stacks occupied in the east. Still they seem to have a litte bit of bad empire management. I had a non-agression pact and trade agreement with them and I played by the rules by ending these and wait 10 turns. But they didn't react to that, then when I declared war on them it seemed to take 5 to 10 turns for them to really react and have their oiled warmachine turn to face the other front, by that time I had allready liberated and sacked half of gaul and the new recruits weren't a real match either. I could steamroll through Gaul without problems untill I came to the Rhine... After that it became hard and after 1 town and 2 walled cities I had to call off the campaign But that's CAI stuff, of course in ancient history a massive attack on a front where they didn't expect it could mess things up. But I hoped that when relations became worse and I ended the agreements they would act to it. Their spy saw my armies massing on the border, waiting for the turns to end, but they didn't act to it, what's the point of sending spies if the AI can't use this information? It seems that they can prepare an attack themself before they declare war, but they don't notice when another faction is preparing to declare war and so they don't react to it. If I see armies massing on my borders I make sure that I also start to reinforce that front, the AI should have done the same in this case.

I guess advancing through Gaul would have been a lot harder if there were different factions with each their own stack into their cities. I mostly fought against garrisons and even a 16 / 18 / 20 men garrison which I mostly encountered, their quality is just to bad.

To be at least a bit OT, the siege itself is fixed, I'm not really sieged yet, but in the CAI's tactical view there could be some changes, if they had send like 3 armies with only 8 quality units to the walled cities in gaul, it would allready been almost impossible to do with only one army. Don't know what happens if the AI will siege you and then more the campaign behaviour, will they send extra stacks to reinforce and will they wait to build siege equipment? I've read your stories and you seem to mention reinforcements quiet often, so I have hope on that part

And last little thing I noticed, if you are shooting at the units on the wall (don't know if this is in hellenistic or roman towns, just noticed it by barbarian towns) and you manage to rout one unit, then all the other units leave their place to reorganize, so that there isn't a free spot on the wall. Allthough this is good in some ways, because it keeps the lines closed. Reforming while under missile fire (in my case slingers) means you don't have the protection of the walls anymore. In the 20 seconds that they needed to reform (way to long and they moved way to far away from the walls) my slingers really shred them. They ran away from the walls, with their backs to my slingers and without protection of the walls and then run to their new spot. They could better wait till they aren't under fire, or reorganise when the ladders come close to the walls.. Well I don't know how to prevent it actually, but I've found myself using this 'tactic' by setting up my ballearic slingers just out of range for their skirmishers and towers and shoot at the weakest unit, when it routed I could shoot at the reforming units. It isn't a big complain, but still it can be exploited by players..