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

Anti Player Rubbish

epic_160095107267RzXYm7Mepic_160095107267RzXYm7M Registered Users Posts: 351
edited April 8 in Rants and Raves
Playing Malekith, I'm military allies with Hag Graef who's suddenly decided to declare war on the World Walkers who are on the other side of the map.

Why? I doubt they have even met!!

This game is simply rubbish.

Its nothing but scripted anti player bias. In this case its so Norsca can invade, rather than declare war themselves due to reasonable relationship system?

Why even bother with a diplomacy system when the game ignores it?

Again well deserves the negative review I've given it on steam. Pretty skinned fan boy trash at its heart.
Post edited by dge1 on
«1

Comments

  • Mogwai_ManMogwai_Man Registered Users Posts: 4,576

    Playing Malekith, I'm military allies with Hag Graef who's suddenly decided to declare war on the World Walkers who are on the other side of the map.

    Why? I doubt they have even met!!

    This game is simply rubbish.

    Its nothing but scripted anti player bias. In this case its so Norsca can invade, rather than declare war themselves due to reasonable relationship system?

    Why even bother with a diplomacy system when the game ignores it?

    Again well deserves the negative review I've given it on steam. Pretty skinned fan boy trash at its heart.

    Yeah the AI sucks, the singleplayer game is more about spectacle than strategy. Multiplayer is a lot more enjoyable but it unfortunately doesn't get proper support.
  • GoatforceGoatforce Registered Users Posts: 5,848
    Errr, ok? Thanks for that
  • PatriksevePatrikseve Member Registered Users Posts: 1,966
    The diplomacy is a criticism the game has recieved for a reason. If you enjoy the game despite the diplomacy theres some mods that can actually help you.

    Mods like this
    https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=1308223665

    And this
    https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=1712979975

    Might be stuff you could look into. The community has tried to find ways to help bypass the weakest part of the game. CA have said they are going to make improvements to it in Warhammer 3 togheter with Sieges another aspect criticized. So lets hope they can do something about it :)

  • ShiroAmakusa75ShiroAmakusa75 Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 30,784

    Playing Malekith, I'm military allies with Hag Graef who's suddenly decided to declare war on the World Walkers who are on the other side of the map.

    Why? I doubt they have even met!!

    This game is simply rubbish.

    Its nothing but scripted anti player bias. In this case its so Norsca can invade, rather than declare war themselves due to reasonable relationship system?

    Why even bother with a diplomacy system when the game ignores it?

    Again well deserves the negative review I've given it on steam. Pretty skinned fan boy trash at its heart.

    That's not an example of "anti-player" at all.

  • DraxynnicDraxynnic Registered Users Posts: 9,982
    I think if you're military allies they've technically "met" because your allies can see everything you can.

    But yeah, they probably shouldn't be declaring war on somebody when they have no realistic ability to prosecute the war themselves. Problem is that when you're military allies with somebody, they assume that you'll come into any fight they pick with everything you have and this makes them get really gung-ho.
  • davedave1124davedave1124 Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 13,191
    I was under the impression you have to physically meet faction before being able to interact with them. Are you sure there wasn’t a skirmish off camera?

    I’m not sure this is a huge issue to worry about.
  • VandicusVandicus Junior Member Registered Users Posts: 218
    It's not scripted. AI diplomacy decision making may be a mess but it's not scripted for Hag Graef to declare war on the World Walkers. They just did that randomly. if you look at the diplo screen of most AI they tend to be involved in a bunch of random looking wars. This is why people advise to not form military alliances.
  • zagumaarzagumaar Registered Users Posts: 47
    Ah yes the salt
  • JadawinKhanidiJadawinKhanidi Registered Users Posts: 1,420
    Not a case of anti-player, but still dumb AI.

    There is no reason to ever have a formal alliance with the AI. Make only NAP's. I only do alliances at the very end of the game to fulfil the victory conditions. Enfuriating part about that is by then your free-loading friends are all safe and strong because you protected them, which causes them to not actually agree to an alliance - they only want an alliance if they are weak or in a losing war with very low power rank. So you have to bribe them with hundreds of thousands of gold to get an alliance.

    From all I've seen, and I pay a lot of attention to how the AI plays, war decs are completely random. They are not in any form based on good reasons, like whether
    -the war target is realistically beatable for the aggressor
    -owns land that the attacker covets or needs for strategic reasons
    -target has especially valuable assets like weak, rich settlements to be sacked
    -is an imminent threat (e.g. massing troops close by -> pre-emptive war)
    -the target is close enough to actually reach their lands
    -the attacker maybe already has enough other problems on their hands

    The only factors are
    -diplomatic attitude (and even that can be bypassed by 'Join War' and actual anti-player bias on VH/L which I've both modded out)
    -in some cases actual valid reasons connected to the factions (their victory regions held by the target, e.g. Ulthuan for HEF and DEF)
    -there appear to be some limits related to how many wars the attacker and/or target already have going on (can be exploited to avoid getting attacked by a strong AI - have wars with multiple weak AI's)

    AI factions also wage war in the dumbest way imaginable. Instead of first massing an invasion force and declare war on the same turn they actually start a massive assault, they declare war first and then slowly muster some armies to actually move towards the target.

    Bottom line, this area is probably the weakest part of campaign AI.
  • PedePede Registered Users Posts: 281
    Sounds a lot like the guy who recently made a similar salty tantrum, about how norsca broke his non-aggression pact and attacked him.

    Very similar..
  • GBoneGBone Registered Users Posts: 557
  • SaandroSaandro Registered Users Posts: 19
    I played a Morathi campaign recently. I decide to invade Ulthuan, together with Rakarth and Malekith. The AI sends stack after stack after stack onto me, while my allies capture the whole island. I was still barely holding on to a settlement and they never defended their flank from Malekith.

    A while ago I palyed Mannfred. Thorgrim is under attack by Grimgor. What does he do? Declares war on me and sends stack after stack onto Drakenhof. Grimgor gets him down to 1 settlement, and he just confederates Belegar and keeps on sending stacks until Grimgor eliminates him.

    The AI will drop everything just to mess with the player. And yes, I am sure it is designed in a way where allies will drag you to war, like the OP described. Same as with offering a peace treaty, and then immediately starting to raid a territory, attempting to provoke the player.
  • ConanthelibrarianConanthelibrarian Junior Member Registered Users Posts: 177
    While the OP's example is a silly one to give a whole game a negative review over, We all agree that diplomacy is no the strong point of the game.

    I dont see anything inherently wrong with Hag Gref going to war with the WW. They arent that far apart by ocean. Its not like Maz declared war on Throt in a ME campaign.

    But I do wish the AI would have clear, reasonable, and achievable goals for going to war. If Hag Gref needs iron, and the WW are the closest enemy with it, then take the province and then sue for peace. OR they are weak and Hag Gref feels it can do an easy land grab, I get it.

    Or if Morathi wants to wipe Alith Anar from the earth, go for it.

    Or Throt declares war on Kislev to gain access to a port.

    But each war should have a reason and a goal, and once that goal is reached, it tries to sue for peace. If it cant get peace, then add more war goals against the faction, up to annihilation.

    It should also have a reason for when to raze when to sack, and when to take a city. And that would be determined by its war goal/goals.

    But the OP's complaints are silly and capricious.
  • GoatforceGoatforce Registered Users Posts: 5,848

    While the OP's example is a silly one to give a whole game a negative review over, We all agree that diplomacy is no the strong point of the game.

    I dont see anything inherently wrong with Hag Gref going to war with the WW. They arent that far apart by ocean. Its not like Maz declared war on Throt in a ME campaign.

    But I do wish the AI would have clear, reasonable, and achievable goals for going to war. If Hag Gref needs iron, and the WW are the closest enemy with it, then take the province and then sue for peace. OR they are weak and Hag Gref feels it can do an easy land grab, I get it.

    Or if Morathi wants to wipe Alith Anar from the earth, go for it.

    Or Throt declares war on Kislev to gain access to a port.

    But each war should have a reason and a goal, and once that goal is reached, it tries to sue for peace. If it cant get peace, then add more war goals against the faction, up to annihilation.

    It should also have a reason for when to raze when to sack, and when to take a city. And that would be determined by its war goal/goals.

    But the OP's complaints are silly and capricious.

    Yeah this is basically my thought on the matter. Diplomacy was never the strong point of TW and AI is extremely difficult to get right in such a game, which is not to say the game couldn't do with improvements in these (in fact I am really hoping we get some of the 3K Diplo options ported over to game 3), but a rant about how the game is terrible and "fan boy trash" just because of a shortcoming in something that was never the series focus is a little pathetic.
  • epic_1597952609284Ly7qlkepic_1597952609284Ly7qlk Registered Users Posts: 60
    Pede said:

    Sounds a lot like the guy who recently made a similar salty tantrum, about how norsca broke his non-aggression pact and attacked him.

    Very similar..

    I thought this too
  • IronsunIronsun Registered Users Posts: 12
    Quite salty mate.

    Honestly though, can't you deal wit hit? Game's called Total War for a reason you know? Someone declared war on you? Pound them into the ground till either they submit or wiped out.
  • General_HijaltiGeneral_Hijalti Registered Users Posts: 2,954
    Well I am Playing Malekith, I'm military allies with Hag Graef. And they haven't declared war so it's obviously not scripted
  • Mr_Finley7Mr_Finley7 Junior Member Registered Users Posts: 5,735
    Draxynnic said:

    I think if you're military allies they've technically "met" because your allies can see everything you can.

    But yeah, they probably shouldn't be declaring war on somebody when they have no realistic ability to prosecute the war themselves. Problem is that when you're military allies with somebody, they assume that you'll come into any fight they pick with everything you have and this makes them get really gung-ho.

    Anytime I’ve had a military ally the AI immediately starts punching waaaay above it’s weight with the assumption that I’ll drop everything and win their war for them. I never make military alliances anymore it’s just not worth it
  • Man2008kindMan2008kind Bucharest, RomaniaRegistered Users Posts: 1,449
  • DraxynnicDraxynnic Registered Users Posts: 9,982

    Draxynnic said:

    I think if you're military allies they've technically "met" because your allies can see everything you can.

    But yeah, they probably shouldn't be declaring war on somebody when they have no realistic ability to prosecute the war themselves. Problem is that when you're military allies with somebody, they assume that you'll come into any fight they pick with everything you have and this makes them get really gung-ho.

    Anytime I’ve had a military ally the AI immediately starts punching waaaay above it’s weight with the assumption that I’ll drop everything and win their war for them. I never make military alliances anymore it’s just not worth it
    Yeah. I generally stick to defensive alliances unless there's a reason I'm willing to put up with that behaviour.
  • ArsenicArsenic Registered Users Posts: 6,192
    Total War:Warhammer may as well go the whole hog and remove every diplomatic option besides "Declare war" and "Peace".

    None of the others make much difference, the AI ignores non-aggression pacts when it suits and suffers no penalties, only a fool would ever sign a military alliance due to the uselessness of AI allies and the AI's curious ability to declare war with a faction that just so happens to have a stack right next to your nearest unwalled and undefended settlement, and "united against us" I don't think anyone needs hear me criticise it, as we've all experienced it's awfulness. Trade is also fairly irrelevant to everyone except the player, as the AI has an aristocratic attitude to money and considers it beneath it to worry about such things, and churns out multiple stacks that would bankrupt you in two turns.
    "Ours is a world of fleeting glory. But it is glory, nonetheless."
  • GoatforceGoatforce Registered Users Posts: 5,848

    Draxynnic said:

    I think if you're military allies they've technically "met" because your allies can see everything you can.

    But yeah, they probably shouldn't be declaring war on somebody when they have no realistic ability to prosecute the war themselves. Problem is that when you're military allies with somebody, they assume that you'll come into any fight they pick with everything you have and this makes them get really gung-ho.

    Anytime I’ve had a military ally the AI immediately starts punching waaaay above it’s weight with the assumption that I’ll drop everything and win their war for them. I never make military alliances anymore it’s just not worth it
    They should really implement a Paradox style system where full military allies need to both agree to go to war before an offensive war is declared.

    This might also help with the Ordertide a bit as big allied groups like Empire and Dwarfs would find it harder to offensively expand... Wouldn't solve the issue but I think it would improve it.
  • SnoopacSnoopac Registered Users Posts: 230
    Ahaha, I 100% know the feeling! Just recently I was playing the Vampire Counts where I allied up with Drycha and she just declared war on every Empire state around her, on Azhag, on Kislev, on the Norscans and on Clan Moulder. Not good. Also, just yesterday I was playing the Dwarfs and allied up with all of the other factions: one turn later Greybeard Prospectors declare war on a Bretonnian faction I just declared a non-aggression pact with and my reliability rating is STILL Very Low like 20 turns later.

    I've sworn off millitary Alliances, TBH.
  • RazeAndBurnRazeAndBurn Registered Users Posts: 198
    For me the Campaigns falls apart after completing the intial challenge by turn 60-100. After that it's just Doomstacking vs endless hordes of another super power AI without any significant strategical part behind it.
  • ArsenicArsenic Registered Users Posts: 6,192

    Pede said:

    Sounds a lot like the guy who recently made a similar salty tantrum, about how norsca broke his non-aggression pact and attacked him.

    Very similar..

    I thought this too
    So?

    The AI gets no penalties for breaking non-aggression pacts, and should. It's a legit complaint if certain mechanics only exist to handicap the player.
    "Ours is a world of fleeting glory. But it is glory, nonetheless."
  • DraxynnicDraxynnic Registered Users Posts: 9,982
    edited April 7
    Goatforce said:

    Draxynnic said:

    I think if you're military allies they've technically "met" because your allies can see everything you can.

    But yeah, they probably shouldn't be declaring war on somebody when they have no realistic ability to prosecute the war themselves. Problem is that when you're military allies with somebody, they assume that you'll come into any fight they pick with everything you have and this makes them get really gung-ho.

    Anytime I’ve had a military ally the AI immediately starts punching waaaay above it’s weight with the assumption that I’ll drop everything and win their war for them. I never make military alliances anymore it’s just not worth it
    They should really implement a Paradox style system where full military allies need to both agree to go to war before an offensive war is declared.

    This might also help with the Ordertide a bit as big allied groups like Empire and Dwarfs would find it harder to offensively expand... Wouldn't solve the issue but I think it would improve it.
    Or just make it so that when your ally is the aggressor, you can choose not to get involved with no more than a relationship hit, but the aggressor also gets the opportunity to cancel their declaration if one or more of their allies decline to get involved.

    Planetfall has an interesting system where you have three turns to respond to a call for help from an ally rather than having to decide on the spot - which also has the effect that at the very least you have some time to redeploy your forces beforehand, assuming that your ally's enemy doesn't declare war on you first.
  • GoatforceGoatforce Registered Users Posts: 5,848
    Also on a sidenote Vassals should not be able to declare war, and should automatically join the war of their "master" (unless they declare war on their master in order to break free).

    The WoC campaign often has nonsensical situations where your vassal Norscans declare war on each other for no apparent reason for example.

    You should also have a fair degree of control in directing your vassals military actions.

    But yeah, just a thought on diplomacy and how diplomatic relations should be made more impactful.
  • KelefaneKelefane Registered Users Posts: 2,989
  • DwarfMasterRaceDwarfMasterRace Registered Users Posts: 2,353
    In my experience AI factions usually (almost always) declare war on other AI factions around them. This is because they usually only come into contact with them, and they cannot declare war on those they have yet to discover. That can change when you have a military alliance with them as they can now see everything you can see, and if you have come into contact with a faction far away from them, they now have contact with them too.

    It's not scripted for them to go to war, but it's not entirely random either. They will have attitude modifiers that will make them more or less likely to declare war. They will also assume you will join the fight too, so if you have territory near the hostile faction AND you have a really high strength rating, your AI ally will drag you into such wars. This can be annoying but it's the price you pay for having reliable allies backing you up in your own conflicts.

    An exception to this is the Chaos Invasions, which ARE scripted. They happen after a certain number of turns and a certain amount of territory is obtained, and they forcibly put you at war with a bunch of Chaos factions and also radically alter diplomacy by giving Order races the 'Shield of Civilisation' trait which compels them to ally. This is intentional and but can be avoided by turning off the Chaos Invasions before starting your campaign.

    I do think the diplomacy in this game is a bit rubbish, but the game overall is decent. You're being a bit harsh.
    Justice for Kiwi123, neodeinos and FungusHound, the mighty Troll Slayers.
  • KlausTheKatKlausTheKat Registered Users Posts: 556
    Having allies.. or even worse... having multiple allies (doesn't matter if only DA or full MA) is basically saying to the AI - "Please declare war on me as soon as you can, but not directly, do it through my ally/vassal so that none of my other alliances will come into effect."
Sign In or Register to comment.