Welcome

Please register for Total War Access to use the forums. If you're an existing user, your forum details will be merged with Total War Access if you register with the same email or username. For more information please read our FAQ’s here.

Categories

Battle AI seems to have been improved for the first time in TW

VirantoViranto Junior MemberPosts: 442Registered Users
edited January 27 in Total War General Chat
I have look about 10 Videos about the Liu Bei Campaign and found this one youtu.be/3N55nSVlWec?t=1125

At mark 18:46 you can see the ai attack from 3 different sides on this salt lake base. I never seen such things in Total War before. The AI always attacks from on spot and this was sooo bad. It seems ca have improve the ai for the first time. I really hope they hold her strategists behind the lines and use her units meaningful.

Comments

  • Whiskeyjack_5691Whiskeyjack_5691 Posts: 2,184Registered Users
    edited January 27
    I've never really followed Cody Bonds, but this video was packed with info I haven't seen anywhere else!

    The dynamic loading screens that recap the progress of the campaign is an awesome addition, they add a wonderful touch of narrative!

    Minor settlement battle maps are now dependent on the resource of the settlement. I like that, sounds like there'll be a healthy amount of variation. I'm glad minor settlement garrisons make a return too. Sounds like they'll strike a good balance between being strong enough to fend off small raiding parties, but weak enough to be handily defeated by even a slightly larger force.

    Unit replenishment and recruitment is now dictated by the local population and Character rank. I'd delighted to see population now has an actual impact on your military! Hopefully it's a first step towards a proper "Manpower" mechanic in future games.
    Higher tier units are now accessed by reaching a higher rank with a respective character. I think that's an interesting change, but I can see problems with late-game AI armies arising because of it.
    I keep seeing and hearing about this "Seasonal Recruitment" mechanic, but I'm still not sure on how it works.

    "Man of the Hour" is back! Love it!

    Not only have we got special events that occur during the campaign, but they have CINEMATICS!!! This is awesome, the unique events of ToB could really change up a campaign and made it feel more alive! Here's hoping that they're spread throughout the campaign, and not mostly clustered in the early game though.
    And the addition of cinematics is just icing on the cake for me. I really hope we get cinematics for events like defeating other Warlords, declaring yourself Emperor, and even a Campaign Victory cinematic.

    The late game "Rival Emperors" mechanic sounds awesome, especially as it's no longer just a case of "you vs the world" anymore. It sounds like any minor characters/factions that are still around by that point will automatically align with one of the three Emperors. Glad we don't have to "paint the map" anymore.

    Supplies are returning and sound like they're even more impactful! Excellent.

    The Buildings look to have plenty of branches with a myriad of different effects, which is good to see. The limited building options in ToB made it feel more like you were just busy-clicking than actually building your empire.

    Unit formations! Can't wait to get stuck into them! I was never a big fan of the "arcade-y" special abilities of units in Rome 2. Good to see maneuvering and formations are going be vital.

    I'll be honest, I've always been skeptical of the Duel mechanic, and I'm now convinced that it's going to be a detriment to the battles. They disrupt everything going on around them, require a lot of micro in an already micro-intensive situation, and are going to drag your attention away from the rest of the battle.

    Sorry for the stupidly long post, there was a lot of info in that video!
  • RocketlegionRocketlegion Member Posts: 621Registered Users
    Yes, this was the video that got me the most excited about the game. I am surprised more people haven't seen it yet, he provides lots of good info on stuff we haven't seen yet.
  • makar55makar55 Posts: 1,440Registered Users
    Btw the map shown in this vid looks crazy good.
  • ArecBalrinArecBalrin Posts: 1,466Registered Users
    People have thought the AI improved before when it hadn't. Warhammer 1, people thought the AI was improved. What had happened was the game got dumbed-down and re-designed more around what the AI was already good at. A CPU can issue more orders faster than any human can, simultaneously to all units. So the design was around making battles absurdly micro-intensive and removing any scope for actual decision-making from the player.

    Looking at the video in the link, I see immediately the problem. I tried going back to earlier in the battle, but there was just a completely different battle. This battle at 18:40 is actually right at the start, so the AI has not manouvered those units into splitting and making a 3-pronged attack; it has deployed in that way. This is something the AI was doing way back in Empire and Shogun 2. It's not new.
  • tfwoods3tfwoods3 Posts: 844Registered Users
    He got Zhuge Liang pretty early I guess.
  • tfwoods3tfwoods3 Posts: 844Registered Users
    edited January 28
    @Whiskeyjack_5691 on the duels I will probably refuse them most of the time and attack them form horseback and regular hits.

    That way I can attack or disengage when I see fit
  • Commissar_GCommissar_G Senior Member Posts: 9,947Registered Users
    Those Zhuge Liang buffs are really strong. Map-wide archer damage increase.
    "As a sandbox game everyone, without exception, should be able to play the game exactly as they see fit and that means providing the maximum scope possible." - ~UNiOnJaCk~
  • tfwoods3tfwoods3 Posts: 844Registered Users
    The battle just before shows Summer 195 at the bottom left, the Zhuge Liang battle just says summer at the bottom left.
  • EfixEfix Posts: 258Registered Users
    edited January 28
    I have watch two videos where the siege AI was Rome II release level if you want me to crush your hope I can link them.
  • GingerRoeBroGingerRoeBro Senior Member Posts: 2,749Registered Users
    Efix said:

    I have watch two videos where the siege AI was Rome II release level if you want me to crush your hope I can link them.

    Please do. I'd rather not waste 60$ on a game that might not be good.
    Bigger Budget for game 3?

    They're gonna need it for all of the monogod glory.
    Which will be the "4 distinct gods representing the different aspects of Chaos such as Khorne, Slaanesh, Tzeentch, and Nurgle." :blush: ^CA quote

    Thank you CA for seeing them as what they truly are.
    Let the Games Begin!
    https://warhammerfantasy.fandom.com/wiki/The_Great_Game
  • ThedossbossThedossboss Posts: 139Registered Users
    tfwoods3 said:

    @Whiskeyjack_5691 on the duels I will probably refuse them most of the time and attack them form horseback and regular hits.

    That way I can attack or disengage when I see fit

    It is a good way at sniping enemy generals that you know would lose in a straight out fight, like an inferior class or a low-level non-legendary character. If time they are In melee is also time they could be spending killing your units or targeting your weaker characters, so it's a win-win if you are familiar with the duel mechanic
  • ThedossbossThedossboss Posts: 139Registered Users
    Now, in relations to the video, from this very brief look at the three-pronged assault, it is actually nothing new. In shogun 2, the AI often split it's forces to attack forts from up to five or six different angles. Sometimes they would go all out at one angle, sometimes three, sometimes five or six. At first I thought maybe this AI was better because it groups all of its generals in one attack, meant to draw forces away to defend from the other two angles and break the third with the characters

    Then I remembered the AI did the same thing in shogun 2, grouping all of its generals with one part of their army. The only difference is that they were cav so waited until their main forces were mostly destroyed before dismounting and scaling the walls. That is just a difference of mechanics, as the characters in 3k are specifically meant for frontal engagements

    So ultimately, this assault by the AI is nothing new, and should not be praised as such
  • asyncasync Junior Member Posts: 50Registered Users
    edited January 28
    Hey guys... dont want to be the party pooper but you have to look the video from "Arch Warhammer" with the title "Three Kingdoms AI is Looking Dreadful! And Buggy to Boot!" This looks bad again guys... :'(
    **Edit: youtube
  • ThedossbossThedossboss Posts: 139Registered Users
    async said:

    Hey guys... dont want to be the party pooper but you have to look the video from "Arch Warhammer" with the title "Three Kingdoms AI is Looking Dreadful! And Buggy to Boot!" This looks bad again guys... :'(
    **Edit: youtube

    ANOTHER ONE! Damn, this is the fourth time I need to use my exact same statement. I guess I should just permanently save it on notes or something

    "My advice is to take whatever he says with a grain of salt. Some youtubers have rose-tinted glasses, but he has blood-tinted glasses. He twists and makes implications without context or full information and understanding

    For example, the graphic issue is due to the graphic setting available. CA said they will smooth the sharpness and apply more bloom by launch. As for bugs, the build was several months old by the time the youtubers got their hands on it. There are many visual differences you can see between their build and the one CA used for their video

    As for the battles, he failed to recognize the use of characters. CA specifically increased their effectiveness so the youtubers can have more fun with them and battles wouldn't take up too much of their 3 hour time limit. They will be properly balanced by launch. The reason why so many units break soon is because of an ability one of the characters has, which applies -100 morale to enemies. This will also be properly balanced and probably already has been

    As for counting generals as units, Arch had no problem counting lords and heroes as units in warhammer. If he applied the same logic There, then he would complain about armies only having 19 units or 17 depending on how many heroes are in the army. His logic is inconsistent and his stance changed to fit the anti-CA mindset, probably even subconsciously, but you cannot complain about one without complaining about another. In every post-Rome 2 game there is a maximum of 19 units per army if Arch was consistent with his logic. Not to mention in classic mode they will be cav units as well, so there is absolutely no excuse to not call them units

    So as a result, we actually have 21 units per army, not 18

    Considering all the information we have, we cannot take anything that the youtubers showed as the final product. We need to wait until they get their hand on it again before release in a more current build"
  • ArecBalrinArecBalrin Posts: 1,466Registered Users
    Not watched Arch's video, but when armies became chained to Generals in Rome 2, there was criticism of it. That criticism was less about the number of units and more about the fact that CA gone even further down a path of taking options away from the player.

    By doing this, Generals were no longer just another unit, but in contradiction CA also removed the family tree and introduced a politics system that meant killing off your own family members was presented as sometimes being desirable. The overall result is they are now like the Agents as characters, but you had even less reason to be attached to them.

    By over-complicating and then fudging what a leader was in the series, CA removed their 'Hero unit' perception and made each one a potential burden, not an asset. In Warhammer, they bring it back with over-the-top Lords in the role but the actual Hero units are badly-implemented, without the clear sign-posting of their purpose that Spies, Priests and Police archtype agents had and certainly the rock-paper-scissor interaction was missing when making actions against each other on the campaign-map.

    Now each leader brings a retinue that is pre-defined, you need at least 3 leaders(I've not seen if you can bring more) to bring a full-sized army and it looks once again like CA are defaulting to feature-stripping. They keep taking options away and can't seem to help themselves.
  • IcestrugleIcestrugle Junior Member Posts: 1,122Registered Users
    People like Arch make money from attacking games and raise fear for his followers. Than his followers are going in their crusade to tell all people, burn CA, burn CA, all their games are reskin, medieval 2 its the only great game, there were 100 units of 1000, graphics are better than from Thrones of Britania and warhammer, the AI was amazing, amazing strategies and campaign AI was so great like he didnt exists, the models were truly unique, battle maps like forest 100% maps were amazing, playing with american indians was so great and diverse.
  • Whiskeyjack_5691Whiskeyjack_5691 Posts: 2,184Registered Users
    async said:

    Hey guys... dont want to be the party pooper but you have to look the video from "Arch Warhammer" with the title "Three Kingdoms AI is Looking Dreadful! And Buggy to Boot!" This looks bad again guys... :'(
    **Edit: youtube

    Did you actually look at any of the other threads or the dozens of comments that basically say "Arch is once again talking out of his ass and is full of ****"?
  • ThedossbossThedossboss Posts: 139Registered Users

    async said:

    Hey guys... dont want to be the party pooper but you have to look the video from "Arch Warhammer" with the title "Three Kingdoms AI is Looking Dreadful! And Buggy to Boot!" This looks bad again guys... :'(
    **Edit: youtube

    Did you actually look at any of the other threads or the dozens of comments that basically say "Arch is once again talking out of his ass and is full of ****"?
    Nah mate that would require actual factchecking. This be the internet. Everyone takes everything they see at face value and then joke about how you shouldn't trust what you see on the internet
  • Whiskeyjack_5691Whiskeyjack_5691 Posts: 2,184Registered Users
    edited January 28

    async said:

    Hey guys... dont want to be the party pooper but you have to look the video from "Arch Warhammer" with the title "Three Kingdoms AI is Looking Dreadful! And Buggy to Boot!" This looks bad again guys... :'(
    **Edit: youtube

    Did you actually look at any of the other threads or the dozens of comments that basically say "Arch is once again talking out of his ass and is full of ****"?
    Nah mate that would require actual factchecking. This be the internet. Everyone takes everything they see at face value and then joke about how you shouldn't trust what you see on the internet
    I know right?

    "Lies! None of these Youtubers can be trusted, they're completely biased and the game is totally broken!"
    "Who told you that?"
    "This one other Youtuber who showed only brief snippets of footage taken from a dozen other full-length, unedited videos from several different sources."

    I mean... my God... that "logic" is just mind-boggling.
    Post edited by Whiskeyjack_5691 on
  • ArecBalrinArecBalrin Posts: 1,466Registered Users

    People like Arch make money from attacking games and raise fear for his followers. Than his followers are going in their crusade to tell all people, burn CA, burn CA, all their games are reskin, medieval 2 its the only great game, there were 100 units of 1000, graphics are better than from Thrones of Britania and warhammer, the AI was amazing, amazing strategies and campaign AI was so great like he didnt exists, the models were truly unique, battle maps like forest 100% maps were amazing, playing with american indians was so great and diverse.

    Once again, not seek his vid but will look at it soon. Remove the hyperbole and exaggeration from this though because you are unlikely to find a direct quote like "all their games are a reskin", then looking at some of those points on their own merits; there's nothing inherently wrong with them.

    Arch is not the only person to comment and be critical of CA's habit of re-using assets for new games, sometimes re-skinning them and in at least one case charging for them as DLC. After he left CA, Darren was bound by an NDA but this was one of the things he could say he had raised with others whilst at the company and they simply did not see a problem. It went on and on, the things Darren raised and which others at CA simply weren't interested in knowing until it was too late and backlashes happened. CA has an awful record on responding to and assessing feedback and it's made the more vocal part of the fanbase who enjoyed the older games quite reactionary.
  • MarcusLiviusMarcusLivius Senior Member Posts: 637Registered Users

    People like Arch make money from attacking games and raise fear for his followers. Than his followers are going in their crusade to tell all people, burn CA, burn CA, all their games are reskin, medieval 2 its the only great game, there were 100 units of 1000, graphics are better than from Thrones of Britania and warhammer, the AI was amazing, amazing strategies and campaign AI was so great like he didnt exists, the models were truly unique, battle maps like forest 100% maps were amazing, playing with american indians was so great and diverse.

    Once again, not seek his vid but will look at it soon. Remove the hyperbole and exaggeration from this though because you are unlikely to find a direct quote like "all their games are a reskin", then looking at some of those points on their own merits; there's nothing inherently wrong with them.

    Arch is not the only person to comment and be critical of CA's habit of re-using assets for new games, sometimes re-skinning them and in at least one case charging for them as DLC. After he left CA, Darren was bound by an NDA but this was one of the things he could say he had raised with others whilst at the company and they simply did not see a problem. It went on and on, the things Darren raised and which others at CA simply weren't interested in knowing until it was too late and backlashes happened. CA has an awful record on responding to and assessing feedback and it's made the more vocal part of the fanbase who enjoyed the older games quite reactionary.
    I mean, you have been critical of CA. Are you referencing yourself? How someone can bitch and moan about CA year after year, but still keep coming back for more is beyond me.


    As to the actual topic of the thread, I did not notice anything from any of the playthough videos that made me think the AI was substantially better.
  • dge1dge1 Moderator Arkansas, USAPosts: 18,168Registered Users, Moderators, Knights
    Moved to Chat.
    "The two most common things in the universe are Hydrogen and Stupidity." - Harlan Ellison
    "The right to be heard does not automatically include the right to be taken seriously." - Hubert H. Humphrey
    "Never argue with an idiot. They will only bring you down to their level and beat you with experience.” - George Carlin
  • mitthrawnuruodomitthrawnuruodo Junior Member Posts: 1,619Registered Users
    How can anyone blame CA for ignoring feedback? Rome 2 was rebuilt from the ground up based on feedback. The Warhammer team is defensive sometimes, but I have no complaints about the historical team.
  • ArecBalrinArecBalrin Posts: 1,466Registered Users

    People like Arch make money from attacking games and raise fear for his followers. Than his followers are going in their crusade to tell all people, burn CA, burn CA, all their games are reskin, medieval 2 its the only great game, there were 100 units of 1000, graphics are better than from Thrones of Britania and warhammer, the AI was amazing, amazing strategies and campaign AI was so great like he didnt exists, the models were truly unique, battle maps like forest 100% maps were amazing, playing with american indians was so great and diverse.

    Once again, not seek his vid but will look at it soon. Remove the hyperbole and exaggeration from this though because you are unlikely to find a direct quote like "all their games are a reskin", then looking at some of those points on their own merits; there's nothing inherently wrong with them.

    Arch is not the only person to comment and be critical of CA's habit of re-using assets for new games, sometimes re-skinning them and in at least one case charging for them as DLC. After he left CA, Darren was bound by an NDA but this was one of the things he could say he had raised with others whilst at the company and they simply did not see a problem. It went on and on, the things Darren raised and which others at CA simply weren't interested in knowing until it was too late and backlashes happened. CA has an awful record on responding to and assessing feedback and it's made the more vocal part of the fanbase who enjoyed the older games quite reactionary.
    I mean, you have been critical of CA. Are you referencing yourself? How someone can bitch and moan about CA year after year, but still keep coming back for more is beyond me.


    As to the actual topic of the thread, I did not notice anything from any of the playthough videos that made me think the AI was substantially better.
    Well if you have followed me for year after year, then you already know why and what my thoughts for the future are.

    How can anyone blame CA for ignoring feedback? Rome 2 was rebuilt from the ground up based on feedback. The Warhammer team is defensive sometimes, but I have no complaints about the historical team.

    Six years after the first complaints about battle-pacing, CA finally acknowledged it in Warhammer 1 but pretended it was the first time they had heard of it. Some of the largest threads on their forums were about just this topic, for Shogun 2, Rome 2 and Attila. They somehow didn't notice.

    Go check out the Republic of Play channel on Youtube to hear for yourself what ex-CA employee Darren had to say about CA's approach to feedback.
  • TyphoonBlazeTyphoonBlaze Posts: 93Registered Users
    But have you seen the enemy ai make a reserve group when he know that we heavily outnumbered, in Rome 2 ive seen that rare case only twice this is happening in minor settlement battle from hundred battles i fought and i feel that that was something new . They knew and they wait my force exhausted from fighting their cheap unit they reserve theirs best and crush my exhausted unit down to the earth , this is the best experience ive ever had
Sign In or Register to comment.