I must give a gripe after all (AI doesn't try to win)

[bb82]

I thought I read it somewhere or something before I bought the game, that the AI actually tries to win. But after a lot of testing I don't believe it to be true. The AI expands more than it did in previous titles but why it stops is beyond me. Worse is when it reaches a certain size or area on the map it literally falls apart (not functioning and other AI eats away at it until the same lines on the map keep forming in the center). The most that I've seen an AI get for long is in the 30s.

This must be intentional as there is clearly a lack of AI behavior after a certain point. Why did they do this?

I'm one that likes to take a long time to expand and eventually would like to face a 50+ in size AI player even if it ends up destroying me. I've tested it on hard and very hard and always there is a center line that eventually forms where two big AI players don't cross for long. And it seems that if a 3rd or 4th tiny player is destroyed another will pop up in its place. Which seems to mean that they tweaked the game so that a few AI clans would always be around.

I must say that I thought I saw a lot of replay potential but this game seems to have the same major flaw as other TW games in that it wont try to win so eventually you can do pretty much do whatever you want and will "win" as long as you survive the start. An AI that doesn't expand beyond 30s even if at war with other tiny AI clans means it's not very functional either, which leads to easy pickings when the human player eventually steps in for battle. It's not bad that eventually the human will always win, we are dumping our times into this after all. I do think the difficulty levels should tell you how "hard" it is to win though. What I do find very bad is a non functional AI clan that should be a beast the higher in cities it gets.

The AI should try to wipe out all other AI clans to consolidate forces, then depending on relations with the human, go to war or wait for the human to. At that point endless stacks should be attacking trying to take the map..

Very lame and a big disappointment imo .

[daelin4]

I dunno, sounds pretty realistic that a big player gets too big and gets taken apart by opportunistic gnats. Reminds me of the Roman Empire.

The AI merely focuses too much on one area, and once things fall apart at their rear provinces they can't re-organize themselves against the new threat, and so loses the provinces. Worst is that their armies tend to stay close together and losses can become more decisive. The AI also rarely attacks fully garrisoned provinces, but also means armies would simply go for empty provinces instead, depriving of resources for enemies. It's not so much they don't try to win but they don't really try to consolidate- the majority of provinces under AI control tend to be backwater, two-tier castles, with maybe a few gems of Fortresses with all the samurai buildings.

[Tyer032392]

I've seen the AI win plenty of times, it just depends on their situation.

[bb82]

I dunno, sounds pretty realistic that a big player gets too big and gets taken apart by opportunistic gnats. Reminds me of the Roman Empire.

That's more than a cop out for bad AI behavior. How could you think something as subjective as why the Roman Empire collapsed could have anything to do with the topic at hand? The topic is poor AI behavior in a game. On hard or very hard their empire "crumbling" shouldn't be a factor.

The AI merely focuses too much on one area, and once things fall apart at their rear provinces they can't re-organize themselves against the new threat, and so loses the provinces.

This isn't true either. I've seen 20+ clans fall apart from the front where they are assulting the last couple AI provinces while their back is safe. I've seen 30+ at war with all but me (meaning their back is safe) fail to grow past the line that forms slightly to the right of the center.

Or if it is true then other factors need to be tweaked (i.e. free huge garrisons the bigger in size the AI gets, better autocalc odds, etc).

I've seen the AI win plenty of times, it just depends on their situation.

I've tried half a dozen on both hard and very hard and always see the same thing. I even take only the islands to help with pathfinding and such. You have seen an AI take 60 cities? I can believe maybe it would temporarily get 40. 60 I just can't believe it would even come close. It quickly gets chopped down to size soon after it gets into the 30s. Or at least it doesn't grow much at that point.

Perhaps it tries as was implied, but that should just point out other areas that need tweaking to allow for an AI to win too.



Just sucks as I was really looking forward to a lot more TW gaming. Now I just don't see the replay value especially with their roleplaying value being quite limited too, considering my preferences. I'll probably take a couple more years off from TW to see what TW comes up in the future . Oh well. I still think it was a great game. But a lot of the same issues of the previous titles are still there. Just wish they focused more on the guts of the game than the eye candy.

[Rex-Romanorum]

I've seen the AI win plenty of times, it just depends on their situation.

Is that to say that, without the player going to war with the Ashikaga or even triggering Realm Divide, will an AI clan on its own make a bid for the Shogunate?

[bb82]

Is that to say that, without the player going to war with the Ashikaga or even triggering Realm Divide, will an AI clan on its own make a bid for the Shogunate?

I've seen it take it before and become Shogun. But not long afterwards the old Shogun clan comes back.. Then it usually stays at peace with the huge AI clan surrounding it. Maybe another war later but once again the Shogun clan comes back soon after it is killed.

The game seems to be scripted solely for the human player. On hard and very hard the AI should actually be trying to win, depending on diplomatic relations of course. Still very nutty to see a very friendly clan attack solely to attack.

The areas where the AI falls apart should be tweaked. But I think the issues are less about needing tweaking and more that it is designed that way on purpose. It seems scripted a certain way to force a certain gameplay style on the human's side. Always an error to give less meaningful options to the player.

[Rex-Romanorum]

Yeah that's what everyone's complaint is - that the game is scripted around the player, everything from diplomacy to the AI to Realm Divide is about creating a very manufactured playing experience for the player. I personally haven't played the game long enough to feel the effects of this myself but I've read enough from people on this forum to get the gist of it. It's a shame :/ I'm big into the role-playing element that's hinted at in Total War games but its hard to immerse yourself into that when the only option is war, war, war.

Does anybody know of any mods to tweak the AI to make it more of an even experience in terms of, all clans, whether AI or human, are treated equally?

[bb82]

its hard to immerse yourself into that when the only option is war, war, war.

The worse is when players insult our intelligence by saying "but it's TOTAL WAR". We get that war is the intent and we know to take the map we eventually need to war. But the total war cop out is solely just to try to hide the issues with the AI that keeps plaguing the TW games.

Actual total war gets old real quick, not to mention the many ways they could add more roleplaying value to the game. They did make improvements in that now diplomacy is much more meaningful. But the AI still needs to be scripted to try to win and should be harder to kill when 30+ in size than when only a small clan. The way it is now the AI seems harder to kill the smaller it is. I'm not talking about taking advantage of obvious AI issues either (i.e. attacking the area where it has no defenses, blitzing all it's cities before it can respond, etc). I'm literally talking about that the AI seems broke when it gets big and just doesn't do much but empty it's cites and wait to be crushed (which destroys a lot of roleplaying and replay potential). I just don't think they put any time into scripting large AI clan behavior.

[daelin4]

That's more than a cop out for bad AI behavior. How could you think something as subjective as why the Roman Empire collapsed could have anything to do with the topic at hand? The topic is poor AI behavior in a game. On hard or very hard their empire "crumbling" shouldn't be a factor.

There's nothing "cop-out" about what I said. The topic at hand is not only realistic but a natural consequence of being too big in the game without the means to sustain it. If you expand too large, you'll need to keep up with the added load. The added load being more frontiers, more enemies, and the need to have more armies to fight these enemies. They "stop expanding" because they don't know how to handle it, not unless they have no enemies left and they own an entire corner of Japan. The AI is not very good at this, period.

This isn't true either. I've seen 20+ clans fall apart from the front where they are assulting the last couple AI provinces while their back is safe. I've seen 30+ at war with all but me (meaning their back is safe) fail to grow past the line that forms slightly to the right of the center.

First of all I don't see how this nullifies what you quoted. I already said they can fail at assaulting in the front AND have a tendency to leave gaps so enemies can go in and seize all their empty provinces. I forgot to leave out unrest and my favourite tactic of religious conversion and incite revolt.
If you've seen a "30+" (a very large faction?) at war with everyone except you, well that only sounds exactly what I described- they go to war with everyone and their own armies. They tend to focus themselves into large stacks and that means they can only fight so many at a time. While one unfortunate clan gets pounded into the dirt everyone else takes their provinces.

You're going to have to elaborate on what you mean when you say things like the "line slightly to the right of the centre". It sounds like you're taking quick casual glances on what's going on and already come to conclusions on what's actually happening.

The AI should try to wipe out all other AI clans to consolidate forces, then depending on relations with the human, go to war or wait for the human to. At that point endless stacks should be attacking trying to take the map..

In other words, you want the AI to leave you alone? On Hard/Very Hard? That's the difficulty setting where they start picking on you for being the player.

I'm also wondering about the extent to which you did your testing. Half a dozen campaigns is not a lot, especially if they're not completed or late-game. Honestly it sounds like a few efforts here and there. I will agree with you on one thing though: they don't really try to win, since they tend to get cheats at higher difficulty.

Your argument that the AI doesn't try to win isn't necessarily wrong, because they tend to not try and get very inconsistent. The reasons you're stating however are not the real reasons why. It is not so much lack of AI behaviour but rather a flawed and primitive one.

[bb82]

About a dozen, all of which near or after 1600.

Through diplomacy you can have relative peace with most clans (no matter the difficulty level). That's an improvement imo. I was just pointing out that the AI breaks down after a certain size. Of course it has more issues bigger than smaller. It's just that those issues obviously haven't been addressed.