Your kingdom is playing to lose.

[Sir Frederic]

In the last update, from what I understood, the AI would have better intelligence on the map. Well, it can be noticed when an army suddenly changes course because you entered the castle that they were going to attack and they no longer believe they will be able to conquer it. One day I had an enemy army wander crazily from one castle to another until my allies arrived.

What I also noticed is that my allies play to lose, more than once I have seen allied armies fall directly into traps, being surrounded by 2 enemy armies.

More than once I have seen the following scenario: they form an army of about 800 men (which can be considered a small army), they are going to besiege a settlement, an enemy army approaches that is going to overcome them, they lift the siege and they are going to besiege another settlement, within enemy territory. They are surrounded by one or two armies and several small parties that prevent them from escaping. When in danger they don't flee to safe territory, they switch to a new target and go straight into a trap.

Is this happening to someone else?

 

[Spinozart1]

In the last update, from what I understood, the AI would have better intelligence on the map. Well, it can be noticed when an army suddenly changes course because you entered the castle that they were going to attack and they no longer believe they will be able to conquer it. One day I had an enemy army wander crazily from one castle to another until my allies arrived.

If you are referencing to the patch 164 and this

Combat

• Attacks now take into account the relative movement speed between the attacker and the target when deciding if an attack will bounce or not.
• A system that approximates local superiority has now been implemented.
  • This helps AI agents to distinguish a nearby lone enemy that they can kill from a group of enemies. They can then choose to fight or move towards their assigned tactical position in hopes of better odds.
  • A minor random element was also introduced that slightly influences decision scores.
• Fixed a bug that prevented units from using shields while being shot at by archers.

Then you are confusing AI in battle scene and AI on the map.
Last patch apparently didn't change anything to AI behavior on the map. So what you are seeing now is what we have since a few patches.

Regarding your question, I think it is just a question of personal perception.
Just like when you are queuing in a supermarket and you feel like the queue beside yours is going faster...

 

[Sir Frederic]

If you are referencing to the patch 164 and this

Then you are confusing AI in battle scene and AI on the map.
Last patch apparently didn't change anything to AI behavior on the map. So what you are seeing now is what we have since a few patches.

Regarding your question, I think it is just a question of personal perception.
Just like when you are queuing in a supermarket and you feel like the queue beside yours is going faster...

Yes, I was referring to that update.

When the army sees that he will not be able to fulfill his objective, he jumps for another that always ends up leading him to be cornered by all the forces that were going to stop the siege.

Instead of lifting the siege and retreating they will attack the next weakest enemy property and for them they will go into enemy territory. I saw battania many times besiege sargot, see themselves threatened, lift the siege and go besiege Charas, before arriving they are already outnumbered.

It will probably happen to all AI in general and as you say, I only see what happens to me.

 

[Spinozart1]

Yes, I was referring to that update.

When the army sees that he will not be able to fulfill his objective, he jumps for another that always ends up leading him to be cornered by all the forces that were going to stop the siege.

Instead of lifting the siege and retreating they will attack the next weakest enemy property and for them they will go into enemy territory. I saw battania many times besiege sargot, see themselves threatened, lift the siege and go besiege Charas, before arriving they are already outnumbered.

It will probably happen to all AI in general and as you say, I only see what happens to me.

I see the exact same thing. Battania switching between Sargot and Charas until a bigger Vlandian army decimate them all.
Unfortunately this is the best AI map we have at the moment (again not related with 164 patch).
Hopefully it will get some improvement in the coming patches...

 

[Sir Frederic]

I see the exact same thing. Battania switching between Sargot and Charas until a bigger Vlandian army decimate them all.
Unfortunately this is the best AI map we have at the moment (again not related with 164 patch).
Hopefully it will get some improvement in the coming patches...

Ok, I started noticing it just now. I thought it was related.

I put the title like that because in my campaign with battania that I abandoned it because I could not bear it anymore. I saw how Vladia with 6000 power against Battania with 15000, destroyed two armies that were practically going to be defeated on purpose.

Now in my new game with Vladia, I see them commit this nonsense hahaha.

 

[Ananda_The_Destroyer]

It's not new to 1.6.4. I would like it if they would commit sometimes too. They also will often have to go buy more food or possible even they lose a troop from a siege weapon being destroyed and the power drops so they want to recruit more. My early vassals did about 10 botched siege at first where they just made the camp, never attacked and went back to town and so on. Eventually they started to succeed with more vassals as I think they just had a little extra of everything.

I think when you're a vassal it's best to defeat enemy parties for loot, influence and renown and not worry too much. The AI is made to not want to expand too much at once so them not sieging too well can make the war last longer , which is better for you. Just build your resources and leadership and vote yourself what fiefs you can, but always have in mind that you will turn on them, so it's actually good for them to not be to big, rich and powerful!

 

[Sir Frederic]

It's not new to 1.6.4. I would like it if they would commit sometimes too. They also will often have to go buy more food or possible even they lose a troop from a siege weapon being destroyed and the power drops so they want to recruit more. My early vassals did about 10 botched siege at first where they just made the camp, never attacked and went back to town and so on. Eventually they started to succeed with more vassals as I think they just had a little extra of everything.

I think when you're a vassal it's best to defeat enemy parties for loot, influence and renown and not worry too much. The AI is made to not want to expand too much at once so them not sieging too well can make the war last longer , which is better for you. Just build your resources and leadership and vote yourself what fiefs you can, but always have in mind that you will turn on them, so it's actually good for them to not be to big, rich and powerful!

Lately I'm leaving the nobles free, they return to combat faster to give you things against their will, but with all the love for you :v

I'm playing as a mercenary from Vladia now, the game seems to become more peaceful by being and not being in a Kingdom. Fools look for castles, Chads turn influence into gold haha

 

[Antaeus]

I think that when you join a faction, you're most likely to be given a newly captured fief - usually on the border. So you're more likely to see the impacts of wars when they happen, and the movements of AI forces around your fiefs.

On the other hand if you manage to get a fief in the middle of the realm, away from frontiers, wars can come and go without you noticing.

I don't think AI armies behave differently when there is a human on their side. I think they have a set of math equations that they run, you're just there to see the results. I also haven't seen AI factions fight more or less with me there either. Same thing applies. Equations run, AI does something.

In this respect, the human is incidental to the world. They can affect things, and the world might respond according to the AI math, but if the human chooses not to affect things, things just happen all the same.