The strategic AI is still making really bad decisions at times in 1.8.0 and needs work when multiple armies are in the fray

[CrazyElf]

If you follow the streams, the AI seems to be making very poor decisions.

Take a look at this clip (I've put it in the exact time at 1:23:40)



There is a Sturgian army sieging a town of 900. There is a Vlandian army of 300 and another of close to 1000 under Derthert.

In this case, Derthert's army chooses to engage the player army, It's a small party that can't possibly be as valuable as the 900 sieging the settlement. As a result the Vlandian party of 300 is defeated and Derthert's party is defeated chasing the player.

This really needs to be addressed.

The party of 900 Sturigans is far more important for the 2 Vlandian armies to defeat. Both Vlandian armies were defeated when they could have defeated the Sturgian army of 900 and kept the settlement.

 

[SGT_Night]

Yeah, it really still need some improvements, i saw cases where armys would chase party’s of less than 50 men, leading to a loss of time or the defeat of an ally army, Also they removed the reaction from army/party besieging, they never break a siege/raid if a bigger enemy aproach…
They also are very offensive, even if loosing alot, wich leads to army after army getting rekt

 

[Spinozart1]

I could notice that armies tend to target weaker parties more often...
And sometimes armies will obsessively chase your main party... it doesn't make any sense because of their slow speed, no chance they would catch you up...

 

[Madijeis]

The AI has become a lot more aggressive, which results in furious siege sprees, but also in them being basically aimless. It's maddening to see the army that's supposed to relieve your besieged fief just go back and forth and back and forth, continously changing the target between the actual objective and random 40 men parties it manages to see, accomplishing nothing in the end

 

[lukethisup]

I think AI decision making is not great for lords in 1.8.0, I'm also finding it common myself that armies will bounce between targets.
I'm unsure if this is behaving as intended but it sure isn't much fun for the lords to be so bad at reading an easy situation. Parties reinforcing other parties should be one of their top priorities. I'm sure it already has some priority in their decision making, just probably not high enough if they are able to chase after a player party like in the video with a fight nearby.

Lords also endlessly stream into my party, like I haven't been slaughtering their new recruits like it was most of my job (it is). They need some simple self preservation tactics like "don't try to attack this party unless you're defending yourself, a fief, or are in an army" after they have been beaten into the dirt 3 times in a week. I agree that they're so aggressive it makes them aimless

 

[Spinozart1]

If you follow the streams, the AI seems to be making very poor decisions.

Take a look at this clip (I've put it in the exact time)



There is a Sturgian army sieging a town of 900. There is a Vlandian army of 300 and another of close to 1000 under Derthert.

In this case, Derthert's army chooses to engage the player army, It's a small party that can't possibly be as valuable as the 900 sieging the settlement. As a result the Vlandian party of 300 is defeated and Derthert's party is defeated chasing the player.

This really needs to be addressed.

The party of 900 Sturigans is far more important for the 2 Vlandian armies to defeat. Both Vlandian armies were defeated when they could have defeated the Sturgian army of 900 and kept the settlement.

Report this in the bug section maybe?
Clearly something is not right.

 

[SGT_Night]

Maybe @SadShogun can take a look too, i think he works with the Campaing AI aswell

 

[CrazyElf]

Yeah, it really still need some improvements, i saw cases where armys would chase party’s of less than 50 men, leading to a loss of time or the defeat of an ally army, Also they removed the reaction from army/party besieging, they never break a siege/raid if a bigger enemy aproach…
They also are very offensive, even if loosing alot, wich leads to army after army getting rekt

Yeah - there needs to be a prioritization system where the AI picks the strongest nearby enemy that it can take on.

Plus a stronger party is likely to have more units and be slower (hence easier for a larger army to catch, especially if they are disorganized from sieging or a fight nearby).

 

[CrazyElf]

Maybe @SadShogun can take a look too, i think he works with the Campaing AI aswell

Yeah that would be very helpful - maybe it could be resolved in 1.8.1 or 1.8.2 or a later patch.

 

[Julio-Claudian]

Yes, I've seen this behaviour too. 800 strong army watched a 500 strong army attack and get killed by an 800 strong enemy and didn't attack until the 500 strong army was destroyed.

 

[Spinozart1]

So I came across a WE army of 500+ nearby Rhotae and they started to chase me (my party has like 80 men, clearly faster).
I managed to lure them until first town of Vlandia, Sargot... Long run for an army... I think I could even keep playing with them until Pravend...
What a waiste of ressources... Of curse it ended up in a disband of the army (probably ran out of food).
That's no good.

 

[SGT_Night]

@Ananda_The_Destroyer i see that you play alot, have u experienced any of this?

 

[Ananda_The_Destroyer]

@Ananda_The_Destroyer i see that you play alot, have u experienced any of this?

Yeah but I like it Stupid AI. Get ****ed. Player Clan Superiority! The AI does chase you much further and sometimes seems almost like a swarm, like if multiple parties were alerted when 1 saw you. As to why the big party chases in the OP vid.... idduno... maybe it calculated the fiefs + 300 should defeat the besieger? I do think the smaller party attacked believing the larger party would join though. Not to nitpick but this streamer does have a module miss-match when they load their game, so there could be some issue there as well if this is save from an older version or removed mods.

I will say I notice strange loitering behavior of the AI though, such as much standing at villages for a long time. This could be allied or enemy villages which is weird. I wonder if there is something they're supposed to be checking for next action but it's blocked by the fog or war, so they just sit there until something changes? Of course this makes them easy prey! Good times for me!

I also see the enemy more likely to engage in battle at equal power, where as in older version they would often wait until they could be bigger then you. This means if you siege something you get a conga line of moderate armies and parties rather then a massive dog pile, which is much better gameplay as large battles don't fit on the map, the UI only works near you character, the reinforcement system is not so a-nice and so on.

In my player faction my vassals seemed much better then in older versions and the army team up made them able to start taking fiefs autonomously much earlier then in older versions. The AI's preference for a weaker target means that if you use a moderate army you can attract them to you own siege and destroy them while you vassals siege un-interrupted. Of course once my faction got going we were hit with new vassal-defection bug where vassals with money and 100 relations just flip to a much weaker faction they have no relation with...because.... so that game is shelved until it gets HOTFIXED.

Anyway I think there is improvement overall but as usual kinks to sort out. I like the army team up and it does help the game progression actually change more. Although it may be unintended, having some un-armied parties hanging around is very useful for the player starting out to have single parties to battle! Although these things for sure need to be worked on, because the AI cheats so much (in my opinion) **** em, anything that makes them not put endless armies together every other day is good, even if it's from bugs.

 

[SGT_Night]

Yeah but I like it Stupid AI. Get ****ed. Player Clan Superiority! The AI does chase you much further and sometimes seems almost like a swarm, like if multiple parties were alerted when 1 saw you. As to why the big party chases in the OP vid.... idduno... maybe it calculated the fiefs + 300 should defeat the besieger? I do think the smaller party attacked believing the larger party would join though. Not to nitpick but this streamer does have a module miss-match when they load their game, so there could be some issue there as well if this is save from an older version or removed mods.

I will say I notice strange loitering behavior of the AI though, such as much standing at villages for a long time. This could be allied or enemy villages which is weird. I wonder if there is something they're supposed to be checking for next action but it's blocked by the fog or war, so they just sit there until something changes? Of course this makes them easy prey! Good times for me!

I also see the enemy more likely to engage in battle at equal power, where as in older version they would often wait until they could be bigger then you. This means if you siege something you get a conga line of moderate armies and parties rather then a massive dog pile, which is much better gameplay as large battles don't fit on the map, the UI only works near you character, the reinforcement system is not so a-nice and so on.

In my player faction my vassals seemed much better then in older versions and the army team up made them able to start taking fiefs autonomously much earlier then in older versions. The AI's preference for a weaker target means that if you use a moderate army you can attract them to you own siege and destroy them while you vassals siege un-interrupted. Of course once my faction got going we were hit with new vassal-defection bug where vassals with money and 100 relations just flip to a much weaker faction they have no relation with...because.... so that game is shelved until it gets HOTFIXED.

Anyway I think there is improvement overall but as usual kinks to sort out. I like the army team up and it does help the game progression actually change more. Although it may be unintended, having some un-armied parties hanging around is very useful for the player starting out to have single parties to battle! Although these things for sure need to be worked on, because the AI cheats so much (in my opinion) **** em, anything that makes them not put endless armies together every other day is good, even if it's from bugs.

Much aprecciated! Thanks a lot for the feedback!

@Dejan This is a very good thread with very direct feedback, i think you should take a look when you can...

 

[Dejan]

Much aprecciated! Thanks a lot for the feedback!

@Dejan This is a very good thread with very direct feedback, i think you should take a look when you can...

Indeed, thank you all for your feedback. Forwarded to the relevant developers.

 

[SadShogun]

Hi,
We are investigating the issue, if you have any saves when this kind of situation happens could you please forward them to our ticket system Support Tickets as this helps us to pinpoint issues much faster. You can ignore the hardware specs and similar extra stuff for this topic.
Thank you for your feedback!

 

[five bucks]

I gotta say, really liking the progress that has happened on AI thus far, seeing them team up for sieges is good.

 

[MostBlunted]

I gotta say, really liking the progress that has happened on AI thus far, seeing them team up for sieges is good.

Yep, huge improvement compare to before, not perfect yet though.

 

[CrazyElf]

Hi,
We are investigating the issue, if you have any saves when this kind of situation happens could you please forward them to our ticket system Support Tickets as this helps us to pinpoint issues much faster. You can ignore the hardware specs and similar extra stuff for this topic.
Thank you for your feedback!

Thanks - I can message Jackie Fish about this if he has the save.