AI in unscripted battles

**Swe_gamer** · October 28, 2006, 01:16 AM

I finally got to play the demo yesterday (athlon user) and I must say it will really kick RTW out of the water. The graphics, maps and motioncapture is really amazing imo. After playing the demo battles I decided to try the unscripted battles to get a better feel for the AI in this game (I am aware that this might not be the final build of the AI but it must be pretty close). I was looking forward to this as a lot of people had been prazing the AI and a few people even said we didn´t need any mods for this game. I disagree.

I have only played 10 battles with two scenarios but I must say that I have mixed feelings (mostly negative) from what I have experienced so far. CA staff Palamedes who is working with the AI said that if the AI has superiority when it comes to missiles it will keep firing and not force an attack. This is all well in theory and something I myself and any self preserving general would do in real life. From what I have seen this does not work well in practice. Even though the AI does not have missile superiority it will line up within range and on several occasions just stand there, even after I have targeted and destroyed their last remaining cannons/archers. I even had a huge army made up of english infantry attacking my remaining army consisting of 4 missiles and 1 cannon. What happened? They politely stopped in a neat line in front of my troops and was shot to pieces... I have seen examples of this in almost all my unscripted battles. Even if the AI has missile superiority I think it will be a lot of boring stand offs where the player does not want to attack the AI as the resulting dead from such an attack would be greater than to take some extra casualties from arrow fire. Ammo seems to last forever as well so I can see a real problem with this.

One time the AI lined up their troops in a perfect line some 20 m vertically from me rather than parallel to my army exposing their whole army to the flank... This might have been caused by the fact that I had an allied army far to my right and that the AI positioned itself according to their presence or something. Horrible bug though.

Not once has the AI tried to outflank my formations. Not even when I on purpose line them up on a flat plain and put my missiles/cannons without protection far behind a line of pikes/inf. They just line up in front of me and stand there like goats. If and when they do decide to attack they will run straight forward. Cavalry doesn´t seem to be quite as willing to run into pikes as in RTW and I am glad to see that pikes will not make an impenetrable wall against infantry.

Another thing I noticed is that it is very hard to order units that are in the middle of a hot spot to retreat where I want them. They more often than not will just remain engaged or engage another enemy resulting in too much micromangement and time.

I will offcourse keep playing these battles but from what I have experinced so far from this AI build I stand amazed that so many people seem to think the AI is good. So please tell me what you think of the unscripted AI and the positive and negative things you have been able to find.

Swe_gamer

**Gaius Julius** · October 28, 2006, 01:35 AM

Just remember you're playing a demo in a way that it's not designed to be played. WHo knows what is in the demo and not in the demo as far as AI goes. Reserve judgement until you recieve the final copy.

**Destraex** · October 28, 2006, 01:39 AM

are you still playing the scripted battles or the modded ones?
All the scripted AI do in the demo is follow what happened in the historical battle..... they don't really think like the finished game will

**Swe_gamer** · October 28, 2006, 02:52 AM

I agree with you guys and I am not saying that the modded versions that I am playing now will be the final AI. Can´t be too far off if this is a reent build though and if it is it just proves yet again that AI certainly isn´t a priority for CA imo. But this is the version that people in general seem very content with and that is why I am scratching my head.

I tried a mod on Pavia and wanted to see how two AI armies worked against each other. Spain lined up well on a ridge with cannons and missiles. The attacking english forces immediately went straight forward, not making any attempt to outflank or devide their forces. They sent up their archers waaay ahead of the rest of the main force. These would all have been destroyed by a players cavalry. Instead of staying or alternatively charge with cavalry the spaniards instead thought it was a good idea to charge with their musketeers in what quickly turned into a melee where they were destroyed. They also sent down their general (only cavalry they had) with these troops and he was offcourse killed as well (killed by his own cannons...).

I tried this twice and the exact same thing happened. I sure hope this is not the final AI. Somebody please tell me what is so great about this AI.

**God-Emperor of Mankind** · October 28, 2006, 02:59 AM

Well in Palamedes post he talks about the gold version of the game and he mentioned a bug where the AI would simply just stand there, it is possible that it is that bug that we see in the demo.
If so then we shouldn't worry since it is fixed.

**Spart** · October 28, 2006, 03:21 AM

When I tried those unscripted battles, the attacking enemy moved towards me at first, then got into formation and waited to be massacred by the arrows. No one can imagine that this would be the AI in final version, so no need to worry. I wouldn't even call that AI, they just know how to walk towards enemy. =)

**God-Emperor of Mankind** · October 28, 2006, 03:27 AM

That's why I removed archers in my custom battles atleast for the AI.
He can't use them properly in the demo.

**Swe_gamer** · October 28, 2006, 03:45 AM

Yeah I guess we will just have to wait a few weeks until we put the AI to the test (have my doubts though). I was just surprised that so many people were positive towards it. Would be glad if they responded to this thread.

Still as I said earlier it is quite clear that AI really isn´t a priority for CA management which is a real shame. When they start to fly in forum members to help them out in the last minute I think it is clear that your priorities are screwed up. Just imagine how awesome this series would be if they gave the AI more attention, I mean just look what a talented modder like Darth Vader can do on his own with hardly any tools, time or money... I think that says it all.

**God-Emperor of Mankind** · October 28, 2006, 03:47 AM

They flew in ER so he can help them with what the modding community needs, not the AI

That he could try out the game was more of a bonus.

**Swe_gamer** · October 28, 2006, 03:52 AM

Well he was apparently finding faults in the AI and affecting the way the AI turned out so I wouldn´t say he did not have a part in the AI as well. I think it is great that they did it though.

**God-Emperor of Mankind** · October 28, 2006, 03:54 AM

Originally Posted by Swe_gamer

Well he was apparently finding faults in the AI and affecting the way the AI turned out so I wouldn´t say he did not have a part in the AI as well. I think it is great that they did it though.

Except they had already spotted those faults before he came since they told him to try the new version and see if it is better and it seems it was.
Once again, nothing he did.

**Swe_gamer** · October 28, 2006, 04:02 AM

Originally Posted by TB666

Except they had already spotted those faults before he came since they told him to try the new version and see if it is better and it seems it was.
Once again, nothing he did.

"He played build 52 today and while doing custom battle tests found the AI defect in question. "

Sounds to me like it most likely was but this is not the main point of the thread so lets forget about this shall we and keep it on topic please?

**Lusted** · October 28, 2006, 11:29 AM

Actually im not sure how else you can interpret the text apart from "ER played build 52 spotted a known bug, we let him try the new build and the bug was gone".

**Swe_gamer** · October 28, 2006, 12:05 PM

Originally Posted by Lusted

Actually im not sure how else you can interpret the text apart from "ER played build 52 spotted a known bug, we let him try the new build and the bug was gone".

Yes after reading the text again I see that you are right, my mistake, I apologise for being so stubborn and blind

. But as I said this was not the topic of this thread so please respect that from now on if anyone is still interested in sharing their views on the unscripted AI.

Have a good weekend guys

.

**magickyleo101** · October 28, 2006, 12:29 PM

I'm not really sure why you guys are getting this odd AI behavior - usually it works pretty well against me and it doesn't make the kinds of mistakes that you're talking about. I've had it screw up once when it turned it flank towards me (I'm not sure why it did that) but usually when I give it a balance army it'll try to flank me and it won't break formation needlessly.

Maybe it has to do with the composition of the armies you give the AI? I imagine that AI behavior is optimized for certain balances of soldiers (probably the balance the campaign AI creates) and if you take it off that it seems kind of natural to expect that the AI won't perform well.

**Germanicus75** · October 28, 2006, 01:02 PM

Originally Posted by Swe_gamer

One time the AI lined up their troops in a perfect line some 20 m vertically from me rather than parallel to my army exposing their whole army to the flank... This might have been caused by the fact that I had an allied army far to my right and that the AI positioned itself according to their presence or something. Horrible bug though.

I've seen this exact same thing in unscripted demo battles. After some quite promising AI behaviour, I've seen more behaviour which is very disappointing indeed.

However, remember the demo wasn't made to be played this way and only a small part of the AI of the full game may have gotten into the demo, because it was not needed.