Home Trending Latest threads New posts Developer diaries

Improving the AI and the Rollercoaster Conquest

Jump to latest Follow Reply
  • We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
unmerged(199)

unmerged(199)

Banned
Jun 12, 2000
885
0
www.fenrir.dk
Hi Hartman,

Thanks for the answer. Well, I'll have to see whether I can set aside some time to play around a little more with the game. Not much hope for that right at the moment, but will have to try...

One thing though - has the operational (strategy) AI improved significantly? From what I could gather in the announcements, there is some rewriting here, but it is unclear what the effect is.

Unless this has seriously improved, I don't think that the AI can be capable of handling a dedicated powermonger strategy unless it can militarily defeat him in a straight fight.

It's all very fine that the AI is wary about powermongers, but when I play the 'dedicated powermonger', I don't care what the AI thinks anyway - in fact I would be happy if they declared war on me, since it saves me from stability losses. The nationalism revolt stuff might help a bit, but at least in the 'Rule Britannia' game, I found that revolts really aren't that much of a problem (even the super-revolters) - a nuisance and an irritation - yes - but not something that can impede the conquest machine once it has been put in gear.

It is a strange fact of the game that the greatest impediment to a 'Conquer the World by 1650' game is actually not the huge alliances put together by France, Spain, Poland, or England, but rather the host of small independent states with no affiliations.

Back to operational AI, which I really think is the core problem of the game: I noted that the v1.06 patch returned it to the stupid strategy of storming fortresses even when strong armies were neighbouring which was supposedly fixed in v1.03. How does it perform now?

Regards,

Strategy
 
Hi again, strategy!

- To me it seems that the operational AI was also improved (at least a bit). E.g. yesterday, I was sieging a province and a neighbouring enemy force stood by doing nothing. As I had this before, I thought 'o.k., I´ll just ignore these stupid katatonic bystanders'. I was highly surprised to see that they attacked me when I finally decided to storm the fortress. Just a coincidence? Maybe, but then again maybe not...
- The AI is now backstabbing, which makes for a BIG improvement of it´s overall performance. I noticed, that it tends to declare war now, exactly when You´re most occupied.
- Revolts no problem? Try now! :D

Regards, Hartmann
 
I'd like to know what makes the revolts a bigger problem now than before (I fought a great deal of revolts during the 'Rule Brittania' game. What I used to do was to have one small army that moved around and handled all the revolts - usually a battle (cav+inf) army. Do the fortresses revolt more often now?

Backstabbing - this might weaken the AI as well. Except for the first 30-40 years, I was usually thrilled to have the AI DOW on me. Makes for more lands to add to the empire...

Hope you're right about the operational AI.

In any case, I shall be giving it a try again as soon as I've got the time.
 
There is still one problem with the AI: It still tries to occupy and besiege for example a fortress with troops of 80+, just to see all of them dying because it cannot support them. The same happens to it in the Winter- When I play one of the 'Eastern' nations, I just declare war before the winter comes, and stay back to see all of their troops dying... :D
 
Hidy Ho and three cheers to the Queen :D
Actually this issue of mass armys needs to me addressed. It kills the enemy in hostile weather more so then any other variable including battles, this is a serious issue, especally for nations that pay out the A** for cav and artillery. The AI needs to consider the target, IE fortress size and use forces based on this like twice the garrison etc. I know that historically attrition and disease was a huge killer of armys, but watching 80000 men get wittled down to 40 etc is insane. No commander well manybe one or two of that period would be so stupid, they understood the logistical requirements of thier armys and seldom stuck it out in sieges that saw thier army murdered by attrition like the game. Needs a fix bad.
Faruk
 
Perhaps attrition rate should be inversely related to the production cost of a unit for a given country. I wasn't disturbed to hear the high cost of units for England bc I figured that their units were somehow superior one-one compared to the inexpensive Russian units. Maybe unit cost could be somehow related to attrition rate? Has anyone noticed any difference at all based on this?

------------------
~ Salve ~
 
Originally posted by daboese:
The same happens to it in the Winter- When I play one of the 'Eastern' nations, I just declare war before the winter comes, and stay back to see all of their troops dying... :D
Click to expand...

That´s about the way I once managed to survive the Russian onslaught while playing Sibir. :) But don´t forget: The Russians can conscript like hell and the western countries do not suffer that much from attrition (because of improved wheather and more resourceful provinces).

Hartmann
 
Moreover, another problem- I am allied for example with other AI players, besieging a certain province. He has some troops starting to go through my territorty, and I always think: 'Uh no, here he comes', because the AI willput 80+ troops onto the provence I am besieging as well, and my troops will die because of his stupidity. :eek:
 
Originally posted by daboese:
Moreover, another problem- I am allied for example with other AI players, besieging a certain province. He has some troops starting to go through my territorty, and I always think: 'Uh no, here he comes', because the AI willput 80+ troops onto the provence I am besieging as well, and my troops will die because of his stupidity. :eek:
Click to expand...

Yes, in cases like this I´m often thinking 'Who needs enemies with friends like this?' :D

On a more serious note: You´re absolutely right, the AI should be tweaked to better take attrition into account. I will add this to the 'wishlist'.

Hartmann
 
Originally posted by daboese:
Moreover, another problem- I am allied for example with other AI players, besieging a certain province. He has some troops starting to go through my territorty, and I always think: 'Uh no, here he comes', because the AI willput 80+ troops onto the provence I am besieging as well, and my troops will die because of his stupidity. :eek:
Click to expand...

Actually that is one of the main reasons why I do not have allies unless absolutely necessary. I simply fear their 'help'. It is a strange that the AI of a historic game leads to the adoption of non-historic strategies, but unfortunately AI's are devilish hard to build.

Regards,

EoE


[This message has been edited by Emperor of Europe (edited 23-01-2001).]
 
''Uh no, here he comes', because the AI willput 80+ troops onto the provence I am besieging as well, and my troops will die because of his stupidity.'

Consider yourself lucky, for me the moron ally usually also start an Assault leading to my high moral troops dying in droves. I really wish you could at least
 controll wether or not to be in the assault.

------------------
/ Stefan Huszics
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back