Battles in Attila TW lack challenge (BAI analysis)
Hi, everyone! Some of you might remember a similar thread I made for Rome II where I compared battles in R2 and M2 noting that I was unsure as to why exactly battles were so easy in R2. This time I won't compare battles of Attila to other games, but I will do some analysis on very specific issues with BAI. Just to be clear, since there was a bit of confusions in the previous thread, I'm not trying to bash this game in any way whatsoever, in fact I like this game a lot and think it has a lot of potential for greatness. For me personally the AI is the main issue keeping me from fully enjoying this otherwise amazing game.
I will discuss only open field battles in this segment, touching only the very basics of combat. All battles fought are with identical troops, no mods, normal difficulty, plains map.
1. Clumping infantry.
Any TW veteran or indeed any player who has at least played a campaign or two knows that the best way to engage enemy infantry is in a single straight line. The worst thing you can do is bunch up all your units and charge into the center of the enemy line, thus letting your soldiers become flanked and surrounded. This is and has always been one of the most basic rules of combat in TW. There are two levels of clumping: macro - where multiple units attack the center of the enemy line and get surrounded by the collapsing wings, and micro - when a unit has a smaller rank depth but greater width than the opposing unit which will become partially or completely surrounded when the two units clash. The AI in Attila is plagued by both of these issues.
In the below video you will see this in action. Our units have longer ranks which is why we completely surround the enemy units upon clash. This means they take increased casualties due to fighting on multiple fronts, netting us an advantage where it should not exist. A depth of 3-4 ranks (on Smallest unit scale) is enough to surround the enemy who is 8 ranks deep and not worry about the enemy breaking through our center. A battle that should have gone down to the wire ends up being a Decisive Victory. I will note though that this issue is less painful on Large and Huge unit scales due to the gaps between AI units being smaller relative to unit size. The outer flanks still become significantly surrounded though.
Spoiler Alert, click show to read:
What needs to be done:
The AI must stop having gaps between its infantry units. The AI must stop using such unnecessarily deep ranks. The AI must stop randomly disengaging their infantry (losing men in the process) only to charge back in again after a short while (unrelated but shown in the video).
2. Focusing missile fire.
Often in TW Attila focusing all your missile fire onto a single unit is more effective than letting each unit target a different enemy unit. If there's enough firepower, this will let you quickly rout a single unit giving you immediate advantage. The AI almost never acknowledges this.
In the video below you will see all our missile units target separate enemy units initially to break their "force fields" that all units in Attila have. Once they become vulnerable, we target a single unit with all our missiles. Moments later it is brought down to 7 men and routs. Rinse and repeat and a few left-clicks later all enemy missile units are destroyed or routed while our own units have suffered only minor casualties. Again, a battle that should have been close ends up being an easy win. Results might differ depending on what type of units you're using, the higher the missile damage, the better this will work.
Spoiler Alert, click show to read:
What needs to be done:
The AI should prioritize using several missile units on a single target. If the player has almost exclusively missile units, the AI should start the battle in loose formation by default. If the circumstances allow, the AI missiles should prioritze units that are NOT in Defensive Testudo or Loose formation. The AI should be less willing to friendly fire when there are targets that are not engaged in melee. (Latter two are unrelated but important)
3. Missile cavalry - when to prioritize fighting over skirmishing.
Cavalry - a very mobile and deadly force. Great at flanking enemy lines, performing repeated charges and running down routing enemies, but not so great in prolonged melee especially when surrounded or outnumbered. The AI in Attila more often than not knows how to use its cavalry when you have none yourself, you will get flanked almost every time. However, if you have equal numbers of different types of cavalry, the picture becomes different. The AI is scripted to keep its horse archers at bay whenever possible which essentially means they will try to avoid melee even if it means losing the battle.
In the below video you can see this happen from the very start of the fight. At 00:20 the AI sends one of its cavalry units into two of ours who are backed up by a third moments later. On the other side, another of the AI's units has charged into two of ours as well. All the while the two AI cavalry archers are hanging back shooting toothpicks at us. At 00:55 both surrounded units are destroyed, all our units are free to do whatever they want with the now outnumbered enemy. Now and only now does the AI decide to send one of its horse archers to melee us, we counter-charge with two of our own and enter a prolonged fight during which the AI's second horse archer unit stands almost next to their surrounded comrades doing basically nothing. Yet another Decisive victory made possible by the AI's terrible decision making.
Spoiler Alert, click show to read:
What needs to be done:
The AI missile cavalry must know when to prioritize melee, especially when the AI's other units are being outnumbered or flanked, and especially when the player's missile cavalry has already engaged in melee.
4. The big picture.
All of this is very bare-bones and captured in a very controlled environment. However, I can prove that all of the above is very true in any battle. Below is a video with the last custom battle. It has all the variables thrown together - infantry, missile infantry, cavalry and missile cavalry. At 00:40 you can see the AI throwing its cavalry into a fight they can't win again, while their missile cavalry hangs at the back. At the same time, you can see how long our infantry line is compared to whatever that clump is that the AI is using. Notice at 01:00 we issue all the attack orders for the infantry and have two units left over on either side that can do free flanking. We have the same number of infantry as the AI, yet we're able to flank them... with infantry. 01:15 - AI's general completely ignores two spear units running at it and gets caught. He continues to fight outnumbered against our cav and spears for the rest of the fight, not even trying to disengage. By 01:35 three of their outnumbered cavalry units have been destroyed, finally one of their horse archer units decides to charge into our cavalry... nope, they stop 3 feet from us and continue to fire. 2:00 - our focused fire has broken one of their foot missile units, another one breaks at 2:21, shortly followed by a third one. I'm not sure what the enemy archers were targeting but our archers haven't incurred a single casualty. This means the AI did a lot of friendly fire because whatever they fired at was fighting in melee. Not that it matters in the end, the whole battle was just a formality after the AI charged its cavalry into our greater numbers and got annihilated.
Spoiler Alert, click show to read:
That'll be it for now. This might get updated with more analysis at a later time. For now feel free to comment away.
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by Neige Noire
It's not the dump AI, it's the player cheating using too thin a line to be practical in reality. Of course you can say why did CA not implement disadvantages for thin lines or why isn't there a command like "always copy player unit line lengths". But although you can blame CA (as usual) you can also easily solve the problem by using the given unit depths. Or change it generally like in the WOFE mod. Otherwise it's a bit like R2TW players complaining about the soo easy battles they have with their all elite units armies begging for AI changes instead of using more naturally composed armies themselves. 
