The Positive aspects of Attila... Battles.
I`ve been fighting a fair few land battles against several barbarian factions and now the Sassanids and have a relatively good feel of how the AI works in them.
I must say that the land battle AI is very good. You can tell something is right when you`ve had several battles winning and losing and don`t actually feel annoyed at the AI for doing something stupid. I play with flags off and all that guff off, Realism mode on. This means seeing an enemy General is a little harder, but not impossible. I`ve always played like this and like it. Most silly issues I erased with mods, however, some like the siege mechanic, can`t be fixed with mods and I have to live with it.
The good:
1. I like how it will wait for reinforcements to come and join up rather than attacking you piecemeal. I once saw it attempt this with ships and a land army, but I intercepted it before it could finish. This sometimes forces Player to decide if he should attack straight away before he`s joined up or wait. Sometimes waiting can be a mistake.
2. It tends to keep its forces together, although it isn`t afraid to turn parts of it to cover flanks.
3. It uses its cavalry very well, often trying to hit your flanks or rear areas. If it has a lot of cavalry and you not much, it can be quite a threat.
4. Cavalry seems quite good at avoiding things it should, like spears. Although, if you`re lucky it`ll run over caltrops.
5. It tends to keep its General away from most fights unless really needed. This can leave it prone to a flanking cavalry attack though.
6. It will often know to reinforce threatened areas in a battle quite well.
7. The limited line of sight appears to affect the AI too as I`ll see it fast change its position once I come over a hill from a different direction. Makes scouts really useful.
8. Sitting on a hill actually works, although I don`t think archers have a longer range. AI knows to hill sit too.
9. Only had one battle across rivers, but the AI seems to know to use the alternate crossing if it is less guarded.
Battles details:
I like zooming into battles and here, the depth of animation is very nice. I like to go along the lines like a passing General and look at the men. On max details, it is impressive as the movement, minor interactions do make them look quite alive, even to the point of blinking. The minor speech is quite good, except for some notable exceptions, but I do grin when I hear someone say, "Is this a staring contest?"
Some of the speech is very context sensitive and changes quite correctly with what is happening.
I also like how your General actually looks like the guy on the campaign map and is recognisable. After the battle your men can be exhausted and they show this too. I like it, adds that Human element.
Unfortunately, actual battles still suffer from men slipping through eachother sometimes, especially through horses and when they go into the (now rare thankfully) long choreography. But battles look a little better `mass`wise than Rome 2 at least. They do `try` and keep their spacing. It looks really bad when they smunch up against a gate though.
Sieges:
While I have my issues with CA on sieges not being as good as they could be due to CA`s stubborness not to be authentic, the rest of it is also pretty good. I still haven`t had a full on siege with the AI attacking yet (except in one case where it failed), so will still need more time on it. however, the one siege where reinforcement AI of my Ally went straight for the gate instead of using siege equipment or the gaps in the walls is an issue that needs fixing. And the battle should end once all siege weapons used, if there is no breach, CA. Gates are also way too weak.
Anyway, the good:
1. The attacking AI does strike from several routes at you, forcing you to try and cover every possible approach. I often try to barricade areas and put most men where the AI is likely to funnel.
2. It`s quite good at reinforcing certain weak lines.
3. At one point the AI broke through my lines and was almost at the centre with only a few of my men left fighting desperately. I had some friendly reinforcements from outside heading for the besieged city. I was pleased to note that the AI actually had some spare spearmen blocking the entrance into the city opposite my oncoming relievers, therby holding off any rescuing of my desperate men inside. Nice touch.
4. The citizenry walking about is quite nice. I did have time to see them running into a small house on the onset of a battle. It does add a feeling that you are protecting the people as well as yourself, which is always a good reason to fight.
5. The basic artillery I`ve seen is not too bad. I turned tracers off and it looks pretty ok. Ammo is very low though, but I prefer less than too much.
6. Oh yes, and the cities are very detailed and realistic looking. They look like proper cities.
7. I really like the battle and siege adviser in battles. He reminds me of the MTW2 speaker.
That`s about it.
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by Son of Horus
but i wait a few more patches for the best experience. 
--------> 
improvement. I wasn't the person who decided to balance the game by making battles about killing the general.
