AI too passive

We’ve moved over to the paradox forums. Please come visit us there to discuss:
You can still read the collective wisdom - and lolz - of the community here, but posting is no longer possible.

Home Forums Age of Wonders 3 Discussions AI too passive

This topic contains 47 replies, has 24 voices, and was last updated by  overlorddarkslash 6 years, 10 months ago.

Viewing 30 posts - 1 through 30 (of 48 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #211388

    Hey everyone,

    I’m fairly new to Age of Wonders 3. The game contents and design of the game are top notch and I’ve really enjoyed playing this against a friend of mine.

    However, as we can’t always find time to play, I have started to play against the AI (AI Lord) and have been quite disappointed.

    I don’t have the DLCs yet and am undecided right now for the below reasons…

    The tactical AI does a good job, from what I’ve noticed. It also does well in building up it’s cities and armies and in clearing out areas around it’s cities. However, the AI is just too passive overall and is not challenging.

    The AI, typically, just seems to stay in, and around, it’s cities, only occasionally venturing off and capturing towns. I also have yet to see it build a city of it’s own (although I can’t confirm that). In my latest game, I have had two to three times more cities than the AI by the time I meet them.

    What’s more, when at war, it doesn’t come to attack you, even when it has a large force to do so; it simply sits in it’s cities and waits for you. This is incredibly easy to defeat as you can simply pick off cities one by one.

    I have to say I am completely let down by this. Everything is there for the AI to work well except it just doesn’t expand or attack. It understands how to group units together and attack with multiple armies. In the scenarios that I have played, where things are scripted, it will attack and do so well, with large forces. However, when it’s not scripted, it just doesn’t seem to attack.

    I really hope to see this change. It would not be that difficult to make the AI more aggressive. Without a competent AI, the game really has no life in single player, without scripted events.

    #211396

    pikaq
    Member

    You can have the new version and play agianst the emperor AI.Select team victory then the AI won’t ally with you.
    If you play a large map,Select team victory against 4-5 allied AI,I think you will feel challenging.

    #211398

    pikaq
    Member

    The emperor AI is very aggressive.It depends on your choice.

    #211438

    NuMetal
    Member

    As pikaq said.

    Increase the difficulty and make predefined teams if you don’t feel challenged enough.

    Once you are bored by Emperor AIs come and post here again and I’ll propose new challenges 😉

    #211460

    Bouh
    Member

    The problem is that the AI will not attack you without clear superiority. So if you develop enough, or if you threaten her too much, she will freak out.

    Also she will usualy do nothing before turn 50.

    That’s sad indeed. But as other said you can artificialy increase the difficulty with more ennemies. You also will want emperor AIs, because lord is useless now.

    #211462

    Sartharina
    Member

    I don’t think the OP’s concern is “Challenge” as in actual difficulty, as much as it’s “Challenge” as in “Actual Opponent”.

    Why does wanting to face artificial players that expand, compete for resources, harass your units and outposts, keep you engaged, and otherwise act as worthy opponents have to come with the Emperor-level resources, tactical battle prowess, build order mastery, etc?

    I know I personally want to face active, but not necessarily skilled enemies that are just as proficient at Strategic Derping as I am.

    #211463

    emky
    Member

    Sartharina got it right for how I interpreted what the OP — and myself! — want. I wonder if the devs considered AoW3 would be played more multiplayer than it is; with fewer AI than it is.

    I wish the AI were active, participatory in the game — not necessarily more challenging, though, I recon, they’d go hand-in-hand. The AI can’t very well compete if it doesn’t expand to up its income and prevent the players from grabbing all the territory.

    If the devs need to, I’d GLADLY accept another “cheat” in the AI where the reds won’t attack an AI’s cities [armies are okay…] so the AI can be more comfortable expanding.

    #211480

    Yes, the last two comments are more on what I was saying. My point was that the AI should be more aggressive in order to make the game more challenging and interesting. Putting 4 or 5 Emperor AI on a team and playing against them, in order to get a challenge, is ridiculous. I was hoping to play a 4-way FFA with my friend and a couple AIs but it’s pretty obvious now that that won’t be challenging.

    Any good strategy game has a good AI (GalCiv II and Civilization IV are the ones that come most to mind). In any of those, you put an AI on high level and they will be challenging.

    My idea of fun is not having to play an incredibly huge team of AIs. A large FFA match is what these types of games are all about.

    #211485

    NuMetal
    Member

    Well, putting 4 Emperors in one team is extreme. Just increasing the difficulty by one or two levels however is not and since the AI will have more bonuses which will make it build more which will make it feel more powerful it will move out more and be more aggressive.

    #211488

    rohirrimelf
    Member

    Matialdoctor,

    Civilization 4 does not have a better AI. It just cheats more. The ai is challenging but not only in a good way.

    #211489

    esvath
    Member

    I notice that the AI is cautious after Patch 1.6. If it has fewer units than yours, it won’t attack you. Instead, it will regroup and try to build more units before attacking. At my current game, I am fighting a High Elf Sorceress who declared war against me ten turns ago and not doing anything but suddenly attacking one of my cities using a stack of Phoenixes!

    While I don’t think this behaviour is a problem, I think a little bit random personality will spice the game. Ideally there should be AI players which are cautious, AI players which are less cautious (rush now, think later) and AI players which are more cautious than the norm (turtle/builder type which will hit you with Tier 4).

    IIRC, Tombles said something about AI personality before Patch 1.6 went live. I don’t know whether it is included in the patch or not.

    #211501

    Gaslov
    Member

    I agree. Tactical AI is competent most of the time. Strategic map AI needs work.

    #211570

    Wallthing
    Member

    While I don’t think this behaviour is a problem, I think a little bit random personality will spice the game. Ideally there should be AI players which are cautious, AI players which are less cautious (rush now, think later) and AI players which are more cautious than the norm (turtle/builder type which will hit you with Tier 4).

    IIRC, Tombles said something about AI personality before Patch 1.6 went live. I don’t know whether it is included in the patch or not.

    My understanding was that AI already had such personalities assigned before 1.52, though I don’t know how – randomly for each game? I rememeber discussion about how some AI personality types are homebodies that patrol and defend their own domain while others are more aggressive in different ways.

    I had a necro AI declare war on me and all he seemed to do was plague a city of mine and scurry off. When I marched my leader stack into his domain and got my scouts close enough to have a good look at him, he seemed like he had two recently-conquered cities. An AI personality that was programmed to bite off more than he could chew? Or did he just check his odds and turtle up when he spotted my leader stack?

    #211573

    pudge81
    Member

    Seems to be worse after 1.6, even on emperor.

    AI walks around the map in tiny groups with no purpose. Doesn’t even bother attacking your cities.

    #211762

    shifted
    Member

    A lot of people just want to build an empire for 100 turns and don’t want to fight anything until they have stacks of the best units. If those people were upset that the AI keeps starting shit, there wouldn’t really be a fix for it. Fortunately you can just crank up the difficulty…

    Play against two AI’s teamed up against you (emperor IMO), you’re constantly on the defensive.

    #211791

    CHIEF DRUID
    Member

    I don’t know what game you have been playing but the AI in my game on LORD settings certainly comes calling when we are at war. A rogue ai came with a monster army and destroyed my capital. I think the AI is pretty aggressive myself. Early in the game if you have independent and roaming armies on you’ll face some challenges from that faction of AI.

    It really depends on how you setup your game. I like to use large maps and give the ai time to build up. I don’t do these grunt rushes some players do as it’s more important to me to have a good game of it. I probably can stop the ai in a grunt rush but I have a house rule of at least 50 turns sometimes 100 before “I” will attack at the ai. Now, it can come at me at any time. I just give it time to get ready.

    Some games have ended in disaster with stacks and stacks of ai coming at me from all sides. SO, just play with the settings some more and give the ai time to build up, you’ll get your challenging game then. 🙂

    #211794

    CHIEF DRUID
    Member

    Matialdoctor,

    Civilization 4 does not have a better AI. It just cheats more. The ai is challenging but not only in a good way.

    Have to agree here. Even the guy who made the Stairway to Heaven mod (yeah I know that’s not the name of it lol) said that the AI in Civilization “cheats” but it’s a FUN kind of cheat. All the players know it cheats and it’s overcoming those cheats that are fun.

    But, a game with a passive ai even with cheats yes I know cannot be fun or challenging. You’re just wasting your time going through the motions. Much like the Total War games after Medieval Total War I. I found that a very good ai to play against. Napoleon TW has a good ai though Empire TW doesn’t. Shogun 2 is pretty good also and takes away that need to build ladders and siege engines. Ai plays a lot better not having to do that mess.

    This game has an excellent tactical ai there’s no doubt about that. Perhaps it could use another aggression feature. I wouldn’t be using it though. 😉

    #211796

    quo
    Member

    The AI is basically psychic. It tends to know exactly which towns are lightly defended and strike there. If you see an AI army gathering at your borders, you know that generally you should retreat from the city to save the forces there, then come take the city back later. If you reinforce, the AI will run from you. So in war in particular, it can seem like the AI is passive even though its trying to be aggressive. Its problem is actually it sometimes knows too much and won’t engage in a fight it will lose.

    RE: Civ 4. I agree the AI isn’t better. Civ 4 has the advantage of having very abstract combat. The combat there is basically like if you used Auto Combat for everything in this game except instead of there being a map and an actual fight it basically used the “preview” feature to guess who would win. In Civ 4 Stack A will defeat Stack B very reliably. Not the case here.

    #211808

    NuMetal
    Member

    Its problem is actually it sometimes knows too much and won’t engage in a fight it will lose.

    I think this might be spot on.

    Of course there is a reason why the AI knows how well defended all cities are (because with concealment it’s possible that the AI would be stuck in a loop in front of a city “cool, I can take this city” – sees hidden units – “damn they are too strong, I have to retreat” – repeat) but if we could fix that issue in another way (e.g. it remembers garrisons for 5 turns) this wouldn’t be the case anymore and the AI wouldn’t have to know at all times how well defended a city is.

    Besides that not attacking when you think you are going to lose is a smart thing and should be kept in principal.
    However in another big expansion or AoW4 it would be nice to have different moods like the ones described earlier or for example Berserker who also attacks when he can’t win but can at least kill some units or even the Assassin which builds stacks good for sniping and engages when it thinks it can kill the unit (e.g. leader/hero) it wants to kill regardles of if it will win the fight.
    Creating such personalities for the AI would be taking an incredible amount of ressources and time though and therefore is very unlikely to happen.

    #211809

    esvath
    Member

    @sikbok, how about AI players being passive or maybe over-cautious that some players observed in this thread?

    These – and other AI reports – seem highly dependent on map settings, the map the rmg comes up with, playstyle of the human player, what people think AI should be doing, etc.
    For the linked topic, there are systems in place for AI to expand, go capture far away targets, etc. So the AI is capable of performing the desired actions but is deciding not to.

    Well. I guess AI’s cautiousness is part of its intended behaviour.

    #211952

    Chipley
    Member

    Matialdoctor,

    Civilization 4 does not have a better AI. It just cheats more. The ai is challenging but not only in a good way.

    No way. Sure the AI in civ 4 cheats, but emperor AI in Age if just ridiculous.

    Not only does it get all the production/resource bonuses like in civ, but it also gets full map vision, extra move distance, more damage, more resists, heaps more spell points, it ignores all chance %’s and makes up it’s own blah blah blah.

    #211977

    Gloweye
    Member

    full map vision,

    Nope.

    extra move distance

    Nope.

    more damage

    Nope.

    more resists

    Only vs independent sites.

    heaps more spell points

    Nope(though it has more as a consequence of it’s higher research)

    it ignores all chance %’s and makes up it’s own blah blah blah.

    Nope.

    All in all, sounds like you recently bit of more than you could chew…

    #212379

    RBarros03
    Member

    I’ve been playing AOW series since the first game more than a decade ago and this franchise has always suffered from passive and easy AI’s. I bought AOW III with high expectations, feeling that maybe the AI would be improved or at least made difficult, but I was wrong. I gave up playing this game because I couldn’t ever end a match without feeling frustation with the lack of challenge. Thus, as a well experienced player that knows exactly what your feeling is, I tell you that unfortunately theres no solution. Triumph will never fix this, which is odd, since improving the AI bonuses is a simple measure that would at least make the game playable.

    #212384

    zlefin
    Member

    AI is never a high a priority for game companies; but they do what they can. The market for high quality ai is just not that big though; as most players aren’t that good. The people who frequent forums tend to be unrepresentative of the larger community. It’s quite possible to make better ai’s of course; it’s just not worth the money it would take.

    I volunteer to write a better ai; and/or improve the existing one. Since my offers to do so for any game have never been taken up, it feels like a rather safe offer to make 🙂

    #212469

    emky
    Member

    zlefin, I’m not good at the game, by any stretch, and I want better AI. It’s not necessarily that I want HARDER AI (though they usually go hand-in-hand), I just want AI that’s fun to play against. Participatory AI. It’s just not fun to play against AI that never founds new cities or expands through neutrals, no matter what resources they have. It’s fun to engage with the AI, no matter who wins, occasionally while out on the map instead of it just always turtling in and waiting to die.

    #212474

    Ragic
    Member

    I think you need th play with resurgence for all Heroes on. That way the ai can level up its heroes easier and be mor aggressive as a result.

    #212484

    Chipley
    Member

    All in all, sounds like you recently bit of more than you could chew…

    All in all, it sounds like you have NFI what you are talking about.

    Keep playing knight AI bro 🙂

    #212501

    emky
    Member

    I think you need th play with resurgence for all Heroes on. That way the ai can level up its heroes easier and be mor aggressive as a result

    I do typically play with Resurgence for Heroes, at least for autocombat. It’d help, if the AI would send out the heroes to level up. It’d sit on them until they have a nice layer of dust and are still level 3 when the human players’ heroes are 10+.

    #212528

    Gloweye
    Member

    All in all, sounds like you recently bit of more than you could chew…

    All in all, it sounds like you have NFI what you are talking about.

    Keep playing knight AI bro :)

    Sooo….let me get this straight. You come on these forums, create a whopping 3 replies, among one of which is solely to claim that I don’t know the game I’m playing (King for relax, emperor for challenge)?

    Sure, to each his own, but the AI only cheats in well-defined ways, and it seems like you have absolutely no idea which those are. Therefore I suggest you refrain from posting to avoid making yourself look even more stupid in front of the internet.

    #212606

    Socratatus
    Member

    I dunno. I gave my capital city a defending second crew, went off to explore and before I knew it, I had Independents besiege it and take it! This was early game and I was only on Squire!

    AI seems pretty active at the right times for it, I’d say even telepathically so. How`d they know my city was just right to take? I suppose ‘a wizard did it’ applies here.

    At the moment I can`t complain about the AI, but I also have the 2 excellent DLCs which may make a difference.

Viewing 30 posts - 1 through 30 (of 48 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.