Army AI is utterly broken, unplayably broken.

Users who are viewing this thread

cadadr

Recruit
I don't know what did TW folks do to army logic, but currently armies are utterly stupid. They will walk up and down or wait in a city untill cohesion goes from 100 to 0, or flair in between towns or castles, never committing, and disband. This is not exactly new, would happen every once in a while, but now that I am on 1.6.0, it's way more than half of armies that are formed and disband without ever leaving friendly territory.
 

Ferisko

Knight at Arms
WBWF&SNWVC
You could send a save showing that army behaviour to @mexxico (campaign ai) so he can examine it after returning from holidays next week.
 

granitestone

Recruit
Seconded. AI armies are next to useless. The only useful thing I ever see them do is occasionally quell a rebellion. Rarely, they'll chase a weaker army off a siege. Mostly, they march around nonsensically. The most frustrating behavior is when I check what they're planning, it's a good plan, and I'm like "Yes, do that." Then when they are almost there, they change their mind and go do something stupid. This happens so many times. I just can't rely on the rest of my kingdom to help with war. Only my army does anything of consequence, so the best strategy when I have the influence is just to recruit everybody into a mega army. But that of course costs a mega fortune in influence.

And while I'm ranting, give me more than a week of peace time per year to tend to my kingdom!
 

CannonBoe

Recruit
What's most annoying to me is they can't predict the most obvious moves of incoming enemy armies. A big but slightly smaller than ours army is moving in the direction of the caste we're standing next to? Oh, yeah, let's just disband and spread out.
 

Antaeus

Sergeant at Arms
If you hover over an army, you can see what they're doing.

They always have a purpose, even if you don't understand what it is. Sometimes that purpose is out of your line of sight.

If they're "going to a point" they're usually gathering up parties - but those parties might be delayed by looters or an enemy party or some other engagement, or defeated in transit - so it might appear like the army is wandering without point - when in fact they're waiting.

There are a number of reason why an army that is attacking might stop and head off in another direction - that their original target might no longer be suitable, it might be taken, or sieged by another army, so they stop suddenly and head to another target. Or their original target might be too strong, so they stop suddenly and head off to find another one - this is often the case if you're lingering about - you're the thing that makes an average city, too hard...

Or the army might suddenly be tasked with defending one of their cities that has come under siege - only for that city to survive the siege, or for another army to get there first - which would definitely lead to seeming like it is wandering about. They might walk for 4 days in one direction to find their mission change, and walk 3 days in another direction.

These effects are exaggerated if the AI kingdom is large, or dispersed - armies can run out of cohesion while being in transit - stop, and reform with another leader... This is the nature of the game - with constant events happening in real time. It can seem like everything is just random wandering, when in fact the AI is responding to several different kinds of crises at once, that are constantly changing separately.

Just a few guesses. But the because the behaviours are scripted, they're always logical, even if you don't see the reason.

Grand strategy to effectively utilise the armies on the other hand... is something that the game needs.
 
Last edited:

Aurex

Regular
WB
Yes, without the mod the AI is braindead. It was better on release, from what I can remember.
And even the realistic battle mod has its limits, at its core the AI is still retarded beyond belief.
So we're left with a game that is now a fast-paced medieval battle simulator, but the battles are utter horses**t. Great, innit.
 
I hate armies in general. I think there should be fewer armies and they should have a set objective, either to attack fief or to attack at enemy army. There should be many single parties doing "other" stuff, both to keep up the illusion that they are things like the player and also to improve player's gameplay by having more single parties to fight in the early game. Sometimes you can look all over the enemy land and theirs no parties because everyone is in a couple blobs doing some BS somewhere.

I also think battles bigger then 400-500 total units are crap and NONE of the maps, commands, UI or troops AI support such large battles .
If they want big battles they need bigger maps and for troops to fight in many detachments in a more interesting formation X formation style, not just an even bigger cluster **** blob. Of course this type of thing was already shot down in the infamous "too complicated doesn't fit fast action" post.
 

cadadr

Recruit
If you hover over an army, you can see what they're doing.
I know, and I have been checking over a few saves (or more appropriately, noticing). The purpose you read there is often in line with how they are acting, and that is not what I am complaining about. It's more like the objectives are nonsensical.

E.g., latest instance: Sturgia and Vlandia at war. I'm a sturgian mercenary. Lord starts 1000 strong army, First job, head to Dunlangys. Stay there for a while. Head to Car Banseth. Stay there for a while. And back and forth. In the mean time, Nevanysk castle is besieged, and a new army is formed by another lord to go and help the siege. They are inevitably smaller than they could otherwise be, because we're enjoying a Battanian dream holiday here. The army is subsequently dispersed without ever setting foot into enemy territory.

This sort of stuff is annoying. I wish we had a way to vote on what the army does next and/or armies were started with an actual purpose like 'patrol here' or 'besiege Varcheg' or 'defend Varcheg'

I am only complaining because this is new. A couple months ago this was just the occasional nuisance, now if I see battle when in an army, it's the occasional lucky moment.

@Ferisko I can sent them one if they ask, I don't know if you can just send it without them asking first. But My game is vanilla and these are new 1.6.0 saves with no non-character cheats. They are also pretty fresh saves, the oldest has less than 100 days.
 

Antaeus

Sergeant at Arms
Your holidaying army may be low on food? A large army will generally take an entire city's foodstocks in one go - if the city is low on food, they'll go to the next city. While you're on holiday look for things that might be impacting on the army - low food, low party strength, carrying too many prisoners, commander with low skill??

It isn't on the holiday for no reason, it's doing stuff. If you can figure out what that stuff is, you might be able to help speed it on it's way.

I have to say, I've never let myself be commanded by an AI lord. That would be frustrating.
 

Dabos37

Sergeant Knight at Arms
I think there is always a reason for armies doing weird moves, and we cannot simply know/see it easily. Most of the time it is related to going low food reserves.

Anyway, I think you are overreacting a bit and armies are usually able to breaks sieges a defend properly. The best thing you can do is to send a save game to mexxico as people have suggested.
 

Pejot

Sergeant Knight
WBVC
If you hover over an army, you can see what they're doing.

They always have a purpose, even if you don't understand what it is. Sometimes that purpose is out of your line of sight.

If they're "going to a point" they're usually gathering up parties - but those parties might be delayed by looters or an enemy party or some other engagement, or defeated in transit - so it might appear like the army is wandering without point - when in fact they're waiting.

There are a number of reason why an army that is attacking might stop and head off in another direction - that their original target might no longer be suitable, it might be taken, or sieged by another army, so they stop suddenly and head to another target. Or their original target might be too strong, so they stop suddenly and head off to find another one - this is often the case if you're lingering about - you're the thing that makes an average city, too hard...

Or the army might suddenly be tasked with defending one of their cities that has come under siege - only for that city to survive the siege, or for another army to get there first - which would definitely lead to seeming like it is wandering about. They might walk for 4 days in one direction to find their mission change, and walk 3 days in another direction.

These effects are exaggerated if the AI kingdom is large, or dispersed - armies can run out of cohesion while being in transit - stop, and reform with another leader... This is the nature of the game - with constant events happening in real time. It can seem like everything is just random wandering, when in fact the AI is responding to several different kinds of crises at once, that are constantly changing separately.

Just a few guesses. But the because the behaviours are scripted, they're always logical, even if you don't see the reason.

Grand strategy to effectively utilise the armies on the other hand... is something that the game needs.

Play a little as soldier in AI party with freelancer mod and You will change your mind about AI objective.

100 days as regular soldier and I think AI is braindead. All decisions are total RNG without any consistency.
There's no long term decision plan.

AI is not paying attention to parties that are faster (weaker ones of course) and prefers to join an army that is going back and forth from single village. While enemy party that was ignored (it was too fast) is raiding villages.

While at peace. Instead of taking care of bandit parties (50+ man) that are stopping almost every villager from going into city they are raising an army that runs in circle.

Abandoning 3 sieges in a row and running around without purpose after each of them.

No reaction to city under siege (army that was besieging it was lower in nu.bers and with similar ratio of tiers). AI decided to besiege a castle than abandoned the siege and City was lost in the meantime. There was a second army that was far away and also didn't even try to help the city.

Army running deep into enemy territory just to turn around and go back. (cohesion and food were high)

And those are not single cases those are just examples of things that happen a lot.
 
Last edited:

Antaeus

Sergeant at Arms
Play a little as soldier in AI party with freelancer mod and You will change your mind about AI objective.
I can't for the life of me see why anyone would ever want to place themselves under the command of an AI general.

That's some weird gaming masochism right there.
 

Askey

Veteran
I can't for the life of me see why anyone would ever want to place themselves under the command of an AI general.

That's some weird gaming masochism right there.
Its a nice early way to develop your character from rp. Rather than, character appears with back story, you didn't see or play and grinds renown to eventually be a lord etc. It fits nicely inbetween, and you can walk away with nice armour and an alright rating with your chosen lord - with an honorable discharge.

Going back to AI, my oh my. I once saw Empress Rhagaea dive bomb her 100 troops into a 600+ strong army. No idea what that was about.
Also, although it was nice to be a part of a Siege as a lowly soldier, the AI s**ts the bed when it attempts to climb up the siege towers and then the pathing just goes out of the window as they stand at the top in a big blob (if they even manage to get up there in the first place) - thats just one example.

I have some serious concerns about this game, I know its early access but everything feels half-assed.
 

granitestone

Recruit
I really don't see what difference it makes whether the AI has logic and reasons, if they don't accomplish anything. In an average length war, my army can take 3 towns and destroy 2-3 1000+ armies. The AI armies accomplish exactly nothing, or at best they quell 1 rebellion. The fact they are driven by code, and thus "logic", means absolutely nothing if they can't help me.
 

Pejot

Sergeant Knight
WBVC
I really don't see what difference it makes whether the AI has logic and reasons, if they don't accomplish anything. In an average length war, my army can take 3 towns and destroy 2-3 1000+ armies. The AI armies accomplish exactly nothing, or at best they quell 1 rebellion. The fact they are driven by code, and thus "logic", means absolutely nothing if they can't help me.

Because logic and reason may help in accomplishing things. For example instead of mindless running around after declaring war they get a specific goal for each war.

It would be something like Vlandia declares war on Battania with a target to take Pen Cannoc. They put all focus in taking this settlement so all armies are raised to take the city and nearby castles and nothing else. And we get all Vlandia armies targeting specific location where Battania focuses on defending it. If Vlandia managees to take it they accomplish their goal. If Battania manages to defend it they are the ones who accomplish their goal. So no mindless running around attacking different places without any purpose. Wars should be declared with specific reason that is the goal of the war. This would make it slower For changes on the map and more focused. More fighting. Of course smaller parties might raid villages in other part of the kingdom to draw attention but in the end all main forces are focused on specific target. That is more logical approach than attacking anything in range.
 

geala

Sergeant at Arms
It's Artificial Intelligence as it's best. I'm glad to live in a time where cars controlled by such AI will soon dominate our traffic. :wink:

In earnest, I think there are a lot of complicated calculations going around and around behind the curtain, as a lot of factors have to be considered. The results do not always (or, not often) fit my strategic thoughts. But it is quite difficult to get a good AI probably.

Or maybe I don't see the big picture. For example, lately, army of 700 sieges important city with about 250 defenders for a longer time, then a castle which had changed owner often at the other side of the country was taken (again), the enemy left about 70 defenders, a second army of our faction of 400 was raiding near the castle. The AI abandoned the city siege and traveled almost to the castle, then turned around and traveled back to siege the city again. I wouldn't call the AI behavior very intelligent, but our wise leader certainly knows more than us.
 

mexxico

Sergeant Knight
You guys got mexxico for like one more week.
Probably its good I stop codding in last week especailly at these complex parts. Because if I do something wrong I will not be here to fix it. So time is up. In my last week I will try to prepare documents about AI & campaign codes to help collegues in future development. So no need to send savegames to me anymore.
 

cadadr

Recruit
I can't for the life of me see why anyone would ever want to place themselves under the command of an AI general.

That's some weird gaming masochism right there.
I fail to see how this is relevant to this thread. I am not even asking for a new feature, only reporting a regression. If it doesn't affect your gameplay, I am happy for you. But I like playing as a mercenary in battles and sieges, and don't see a reason for a solution to that would help me out to hurt your fun, so...
 
Top Bottom