Realistic AI mod is a must-have for everyone who loves sieges

Users who are viewing this thread

I saw there was a new update for the realistic AI mod that mentioned:
AI module: More siege improvements to defender positioning in some of the sieges, more to come later: Verescand castle and Varnovapol Ab Comer castle, Veron castle, Zeonica and Vostrum."
So I went on to try a siege in custom battle as defender in the Varnovapol scene (beautiful scene btw) & it's a massive improvement over vanilla imo, defenders don't just enmasse at one spot to do nothing anymore & actually use the siege scene to it's full potential, amazing work & thank you for making this mod @Marnah93 and @Philozoraptor!

 
The battles are horrible in vanilla in comparison to this mod. Incorporating more realistic battle formations, both for siege and field, into the original game is a must in my opinion. For immersion.
 
The battles are horrible in vanilla in comparison to this mod. Incorporating more realistic battle formations, both for siege and field, into the original game is a must in my opinion. For immersion.
want full immersion? Siege assaults should nearly wipe or completely wipe the attacking army. It'd be boring because real sieges were about forcing the castle / town holders to surrender, not to actually battle them, some sieges lasted more than 20 years.
 
want full immersion? Siege assaults should nearly wipe or completely wipe the attacking army. It'd be boring because real sieges were about forcing the castle / town holders to surrender, not to actually battle them, some sieges lasted more than 20 years.
That's obviously not what we are talking about. Poor cop out.
 
want full immersion? Siege assaults should nearly wipe or completely wipe the attacking army. It'd be boring because real sieges were about forcing the castle / town holders to surrender, not to actually battle them, some sieges lasted more than 20 years.
I wish there was a chance for a town/castle to surrender if it runs out of food and the defenders are massively outnumbered.
 
I wish there was a chance for a town/castle to surrender if it runs out of food and the defenders are massively outnumbered.
I've practically designed a system for that and posted here years ago, totally ignored.
The core of it would be that AI would take hefty casualties every siege within Auto-Calc, and personalities of leading lords would define if they'd take the risk of assaulting or not. This way giving room for real siege warfare where it's all about starving and demoralizing the defenders, while the defenders are actually trying to hold-out for backup armies.

If such a thing would be deployed alongside a decent diplomatic system extension, ownership of fiefs would determine war results and sometimes be the stake for peace treaties, as a Ransom for Royals (rarely), and if won either by assault or outlasting the enemy + not losing to the enemy's main army when it came to the rescue. Add in a chance of the lord that holds de fief deflecting as to not losing his lands, and expanding the siege mechanic to support realistic sieges, and there you have it. The interesting part is that it can fully take account of the noble's personality to determine how both sides handle it. Surrender+Deflecting, Surrender, Holdout as long as possible at the cost of garrison starvation, Holdout until supplies are over, than the Sally Out, flee to avoid capture or staying. If done right it'd add a lot of depth to the game because we'd start to pay attention to lords personalities for real. Adding a strong "de jure" system would help the AI negotiate peace treaties for extensive costly wars, as in they simply give the fief back to the rightful owner and bam, war's over.

Possible outcomes could be incredible. IE:
The guy's stubborn, holds out until the last straw, but is also calculating and simply deflects at the last minute, surrendering to the king but keeping their fiefs.
The guy's daring, honorable and practical, so he sallies out as soon as starvation comes in a heroic last-stand.
The guy's cruel, greedy and calculating, starts cannibalizing his own men allowing for them to outlast the attackers in food and supplies
The guy's cruel and calculating, he simply surrenders as soon as the siege starts if his relations with their liege are low.

so on so forth. With that and giving mini-missions on scene to take control of the water source and poison it, stop sneaking caravans of supplies from getting inside, sallying out with minor garrison numbers to skirmish and protect incoming supplies, use long distance siege equipment to lower defenders morale (indefensible from within the fort, but doesn't cause any dmg to walls), trying to negotiate and flip garrison soldiers to open the gates, etc. That'd be beyond perfection.

But to pull such a thing they'd need to fix the army food consumption on sieges + add a ton of intricate scenes that involve the fief but isn't an assault. And likely give a existing stance where assaults are diamond jewels, just make it 30% assaullts 70% wait-out sieges for the AI and we'd be golden. Taking into account that everytime an assault's succesful, it'd still ravage the ranks of the attacking army (something like losing 70% of the troops on average)
 
I wish there was a chance for a town/castle to surrender if it runs out of food and the defenders are massively outnumbered.
The only problem I see with that is in the end only the player would do it. Besieging armies often don't have enough supplies for a regular siege much less a protracted one. Taleworlds would have to make armies bring way way way more food or incorporate some kind of foraging system to mitigate some of the food loss for armies try to take a town/castle.
 
I've practically designed a system for that and posted here years ago, totally ignored.
The core of it would be that AI would take hefty casualties every siege within Auto-Calc, and personalities of leading lords would define if they'd take the risk of assaulting or not. This way giving room for real siege warfare where it's all about starving and demoralizing the defenders, while the defenders are actually trying to hold-out for backup armies.

If such a thing would be deployed alongside a decent diplomatic system extension, ownership of fiefs would determine war results and sometimes be the stake for peace treaties, as a Ransom for Royals (rarely), and if won either by assault or outlasting the enemy + not losing to the enemy's main army when it came to the rescue. Add in a chance of the lord that holds de fief deflecting as to not losing his lands, and expanding the siege mechanic to support realistic sieges, and there you have it. The interesting part is that it can fully take account of the noble's personality to determine how both sides handle it. Surrender+Deflecting, Surrender, Holdout as long as possible at the cost of garrison starvation, Holdout until supplies are over, than the Sally Out, flee to avoid capture or staying. If done right it'd add a lot of depth to the game because we'd start to pay attention to lords personalities for real. Adding a strong "de jure" system would help the AI negotiate peace treaties for extensive costly wars, as in they simply give the fief back to the rightful owner and bam, war's over.

Possible outcomes could be incredible. IE:
The guy's stubborn, holds out until the last straw, but is also calculating and simply deflects at the last minute, surrendering to the king but keeping their fiefs.
The guy's daring, honorable and practical, so he sallies out as soon as starvation comes in a heroic last-stand.
The guy's cruel, greedy and calculating, starts cannibalizing his own men allowing for them to outlast the attackers in food and supplies
The guy's cruel and calculating, he simply surrenders as soon as the siege starts if his relations with their liege are low.

so on so forth. With that and giving mini-missions on scene to take control of the water source and poison it, stop sneaking caravans of supplies from getting inside, sallying out with minor garrison numbers to skirmish and protect incoming supplies, use long distance siege equipment to lower defenders morale (indefensible from within the fort, but doesn't cause any dmg to walls), trying to negotiate and flip garrison soldiers to open the gates, etc. That'd be beyond perfection.

But to pull such a thing they'd need to fix the army food consumption on sieges + add a ton of intricate scenes that involve the fief but isn't an assault. And likely give a existing stance where assaults are diamond jewels, just make it 30% assaullts 70% wait-out sieges for the AI and we'd be golden. Taking into account that everytime an assault's succesful, it'd still ravage the ranks of the attacking army (something like losing 70% of the troops on average)
All of this sounds great.
The only problem I see with that is in the end only the player would do it. Besieging armies often don't have enough supplies for a regular siege much less a protracted one. Taleworlds would have to make armies bring way way way more food or incorporate some kind of foraging system to mitigate some of the food loss for armies try to take a town/castle.
Yeah, the AI is bad at buying enough food to do all that much... too bad they removed the foraging system.
 
I've practically designed a system for that and posted here years ago, totally ignored.
The core of it would be that AI would take hefty casualties every siege within Auto-Calc, and personalities of leading lords would define if they'd take the risk of assaulting or not. This way giving room for real siege warfare where it's all about starving and demoralizing the defenders, while the defenders are actually trying to hold-out for backup armies.

If such a thing would be deployed alongside a decent diplomatic system extension, ownership of fiefs would determine war results and sometimes be the stake for peace treaties, as a Ransom for Royals (rarely), and if won either by assault or outlasting the enemy + not losing to the enemy's main army when it came to the rescue. Add in a chance of the lord that holds de fief deflecting as to not losing his lands, and expanding the siege mechanic to support realistic sieges, and there you have it. The interesting part is that it can fully take account of the noble's personality to determine how both sides handle it. Surrender+Deflecting, Surrender, Holdout as long as possible at the cost of garrison starvation, Holdout until supplies are over, than the Sally Out, flee to avoid capture or staying. If done right it'd add a lot of depth to the game because we'd start to pay attention to lords personalities for real. Adding a strong "de jure" system would help the AI negotiate peace treaties for extensive costly wars, as in they simply give the fief back to the rightful owner and bam, war's over.

Possible outcomes could be incredible. IE:
The guy's stubborn, holds out until the last straw, but is also calculating and simply deflects at the last minute, surrendering to the king but keeping their fiefs.
The guy's daring, honorable and practical, so he sallies out as soon as starvation comes in a heroic last-stand.
The guy's cruel, greedy and calculating, starts cannibalizing his own men allowing for them to outlast the attackers in food and supplies
The guy's cruel and calculating, he simply surrenders as soon as the siege starts if his relations with their liege are low.

so on so forth. With that and giving mini-missions on scene to take control of the water source and poison it, stop sneaking caravans of supplies from getting inside, sallying out with minor garrison numbers to skirmish and protect incoming supplies, use long distance siege equipment to lower defenders morale (indefensible from within the fort, but doesn't cause any dmg to walls), trying to negotiate and flip garrison soldiers to open the gates, etc. That'd be beyond perfection.

But to pull such a thing they'd need to fix the army food consumption on sieges + add a ton of intricate scenes that involve the fief but isn't an assault. And likely give a existing stance where assaults are diamond jewels, just make it 30% assaullts 70% wait-out sieges for the AI and we'd be golden. Taking into account that everytime an assault's succesful, it'd still ravage the ranks of the attacking army (something like losing 70% of the troops on average)
Good suggestions! I would like to add a new siege duration for the keep holdout. This way there is a benefit to retreating to the keep, it would improved the chance for a friendly force to come to the rescue
 
I've practically designed a system for that and posted here years ago, totally ignored.
The core of it would be that AI would take hefty casualties every siege within Auto-Calc, and personalities of leading lords would define if they'd take the risk of assaulting or not. This way giving room for real siege warfare where it's all about starving and demoralizing the defenders, while the defenders are actually trying to hold-out for backup armies.

If such a thing would be deployed alongside a decent diplomatic system extension, ownership of fiefs would determine war results and sometimes be the stake for peace treaties, as a Ransom for Royals (rarely), and if won either by assault or outlasting the enemy + not losing to the enemy's main army when it came to the rescue. Add in a chance of the lord that holds de fief deflecting as to not losing his lands, and expanding the siege mechanic to support realistic sieges, and there you have it. The interesting part is that it can fully take account of the noble's personality to determine how both sides handle it. Surrender+Deflecting, Surrender, Holdout as long as possible at the cost of garrison starvation, Holdout until supplies are over, than the Sally Out, flee to avoid capture or staying. If done right it'd add a lot of depth to the game because we'd start to pay attention to lords personalities for real. Adding a strong "de jure" system would help the AI negotiate peace treaties for extensive costly wars, as in they simply give the fief back to the rightful owner and bam, war's over.

Possible outcomes could be incredible. IE:
The guy's stubborn, holds out until the last straw, but is also calculating and simply deflects at the last minute, surrendering to the king but keeping their fiefs.
The guy's daring, honorable and practical, so he sallies out as soon as starvation comes in a heroic last-stand.
The guy's cruel, greedy and calculating, starts cannibalizing his own men allowing for them to outlast the attackers in food and supplies
The guy's cruel and calculating, he simply surrenders as soon as the siege starts if his relations with their liege are low.

so on so forth. With that and giving mini-missions on scene to take control of the water source and poison it, stop sneaking caravans of supplies from getting inside, sallying out with minor garrison numbers to skirmish and protect incoming supplies, use long distance siege equipment to lower defenders morale (indefensible from within the fort, but doesn't cause any dmg to walls), trying to negotiate and flip garrison soldiers to open the gates, etc. That'd be beyond perfection.

But to pull such a thing they'd need to fix the army food consumption on sieges + add a ton of intricate scenes that involve the fief but isn't an assault. And likely give a existing stance where assaults are diamond jewels, just make it 30% assaullts 70% wait-out sieges for the AI and we'd be golden. Taking into account that everytime an assault's succesful, it'd still ravage the ranks of the attacking army (something like losing 70% of the troops on average)
That sounds amazing, do you have a link to the post so it can be revived?
 
RBM AI module is really a big improvement over vanilla (combat module I don't like that much) and I use it all the time.

If modders can achieve this, TW could do it too, and could make it even better. Because in many aspects combat also with RBM AI module is lacking, and I'm sure that's because they hit a wall of hardcoded stuff. For example it's annoying that the cavalry rally on the flanks really far away from the infantry in smaller scale fights, and even more that they are quite passive when attacked. TW could surely make them a bit less dumb if they wanted.
 
RBM AI module is really a big improvement over vanilla (combat module I don't like that much) and I use it all the time.

If modders can achieve this, TW could do it too, and could make it even better. Because in many aspects combat also with RBM AI module is lacking, and I'm sure that's because they hit a wall of hardcoded stuff. For example it's annoying that the cavalry rally on the flanks really far away from the infantry in smaller scale fights, and even more that they are quite passive when attacked. TW could surely make them a bit less dumb if they wanted.

Yeah I think that the mod has done what it can.


The team did an amazing job of helping address the issues that are still plaguing the game, but they are modders and don't have what the developers have.
 
I wish there was a chance for a town/castle to surrender if it runs out of food and the defenders are massively outnumbered.

I would love for something like that, where sieging depends on food resources, lord/npc personality etc. Sort of like how you can wait out sieges in Crusader Kings II. Unfortunately, devs that can't fix AI climbing ladders, will never look to or attempt something this "complex". Because they would have to design the AI to be able to do the same in somewhat of an intelligent manner, and that's probably way too much effort they want to apply.
 
There are a couple of good mods that improve the siege situation tremendously:
1. Improve Combat AI - not certain if it is the same mod mentioned above or if OP means the realistic combat AI module from RMB, but this one is excellent in many aspects (even gets archers to apply lead when targeting horse archers) and now much tougher to siege, defenders are much smarter

2. Surrender Tweaks - as mentioned above it as a suggestion, it will occasionally let a sieged settlement send out a parley party offering a (substantial) bribe to entice the siege army to go away, or (even better) depose their holding lord and offer surrender (when they run out of food - this is really cool - I have seen this happen a few times where you siege on of those 'rebel' factions, which I am sure are just there so you can grab a fief easily. But I digress - the citizens send a parley party end when you want to arrest the rebel leaders you notice they are mysteriously dead - and they "got lost" - so the militia basically assassinate or execute them in order to get the deal done. Cool feature).

3. Diplomacy has been mentioned, although it mainly deals with grabbing the fief as your spoils of war.
 
Last edited:
There are a couple of good mods that improve the siege situation tremendously:
1. Improve Combat AI -... (even gets archers to apply lead when targeting horse archers) ...

What??? I'll try this mod as soon as I'm at my PC again.


Edit: Now that I looked after the mod and read all descriptions and posts, I wonder how it can improve sieges, as it seemingly only increases the combat abilities of individual soldiers. RBM on the other hand allegedly increases siege AI behavior on a broader level. My problem is that I almost never played without RBM AI module, so I cannot judge about vanilla and how it gets improved by "Improve Combat AI".

I wonder wether one could combine both mods. RBM's blocking gods (i.e. all NPCs) are sometimes quite annoying.
 
Last edited:
@geala - Improved AI has troops blocking better, but not super human. You can hit their heads... I tried RMB but must admit it was not my thing. Improved AI does not overpower the game, enemy & friendly troops are just that little better. Cavalry seem to realize they have a lance, although they still don't always use it. And in sieges the overall things I observe is that archers don't line up NEXT to barriers, but actually behind it, so they are no longer just sitting ducks. Troops wait until siege engines are in position (in stead of walking directly behind it and getting sniped), and attack quicker using the siege towers.
 
Back
Top Bottom