This game gets better, except AI

I thought AI was stardock's claim to fame. Is it really that bad? 

I see changes only in tactical AI - mages use spells, archers choose their targets, and that's good. But strategic/diplomacy AI have no significant changes since WOM - it's absolutely not fun.

Ideally AI programming should get some time just prior to release - there is no benefit to making an AI player that can do feature X well, if feature X gets changed in the next iteration of the beta.

That said, the computer players are getting further behind in my games quite fast. It would not surprise me if it was partially to do with unit choices - spears and axes seem to have had a huge buff with new abilities, but the computer players often seem to favor hammers and maces, for which the buff is quite small.

The AI has issues, but fantasy games are 10 times as hard to AI as space games.

If you compare the AI to other games in the genre, it's quite good.

The mechanics changes in LH wlll benefit the AI.

No it's not. Also this is the same myth that i heard during the WOM and FE betas, but nothing changed after release. It's a myth, you dont need details to program the fundamental AI things. For example - if AI know that he loose all his cities - then he must surrender, and cities is a core game mechanics. If AI see big enemy army near his city - he must gather his troops to stack and attack/defend, ect. This AI mechanics can be implemented even during early alpha, and at the moment we have second addon beta - that said, it is time just prior the third release.

Agreed LH improved alot of the essential things but unfortunately they seem to think that AI isn't that important. In FE they said things would improve after the release and it did but not nearly enough and I fear the same is true for AI in LH. I am not sure why they don't realize that everything else is shaping up nicely while the AI is way too bad for an otherwise good and maybee even great game if AI is even remotely competent.

The money they save on not working enough with the AI must surely be lost by people who lose interest and it's a shame since Stardock as a company deserves success considering their great support and commitment towards their playerbase.

Brad perhaps you are good at AI programming I really don't know but for some reason AI is not on the same level as the rest of the game.

AI need much more love. Game is to easy on hard...

Then keep turning up the difficulty. If you hit insane and can't ever lose a game then it's time to whip out notepad and edit some XML files or play a multiplayer game. May I suggest DOTA 2? It's deeper than you likely think. Sure you can play it without thinking but it rewards thought and has the depth to justify it.

This is consumer grade software running on a home computer. It does not think. Consumer products are not going to possess intelligence in the foreseeable future. Wishes are not horses.

I pretty much buy every 4X that comes out. None of them have better AI except Civ and that's after multiple big budget iterations with a big team behind it. Hell, AoW:SM, one of my favorite games of all time basically had no AI at all. In order to function it was heavily scripted and had to be given sight of all units on the map including invisible units. You were forced to play campaign only because in skirmish(random maps like FE/LH uses) it just sat in the corner and drooled on itself. Max difficulty gave it tons of units to do unfathomably stupid things with - mostly involving drooling.

I'm not trying to say people should not report AI bugs or make specific suggestions for improved AI responses. I am saying that expecting a huge leap in AI performance is unrealistic.

Instead of complaining, why not help? Since it is still in Beta, you can help them a lot by posting in the LH support forum.

Things to post might be something like.

I've attached a dropbox save from a game, if you try trading (or whatever you mean by diplomancy) then in this situation it makes a very poor decision (y). (If you want, you can add suggestions about thing the AI might consider that make this a bad decision by by AI.)

or

I've found that on the following type of map (list settings) that by doing the following (research warfare only, use axes, rush units, start wars early. whatever) that the AI can't keep up and falls behind very quickly. (If you want, you can add suggestions about thing the AI might do against this strategy.)

After the release, it's fine to post bashing the product, but since you're taking the time to play a beta why not give them feedback they can use instead?

Unfortunately, we can't really improve the AI unless people give *specific* examples of what they're talking about.  If you're really good at strategy games, you'll probably need to turn up the difficulty level.  

But we can improve the AI greatly if people post specifics.  

Nice post.

I'd go further than that. NO products are going to possess intelligence in my lifetime. Within very narrow domains, they can operate successfully, but for even something as seemingly simple as playing a 4X, they will always struggle.

Look at Go, a game with very simple rules. The only way computers can beat humans (sometimes) is by looking many move ahead, that's not the way that humans process the board at all, just using brute force. With a 4X, the number of possible moves for a turn is very, very large, so this approach doesn't work very well.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_Go

This is good feedback.  To  me, this sounds like a design issue rather than an AI issue. That is, the AI is predicated on the basis that each tree has its own pros and cons.  Hence, if going up the warfare tree becomes easy to beat the AI on, then we need to look at that. It would be bad if the AI were simply told to research the warfare tree and rush.  

Also, map size and number of units matters a lot too.  The game plays very differently based on just those two variables.

There is a lot of *specific* examples, just search this forum for "AI" word.

For example

https://forums.elementalgame.com/437178

https://forums.elementalgame.com/435350

https://forums.elementalgame.com/431957

https://forums.elementalgame.com/435038

https://forums.elementalgame.com/441172

https://forums.elementalgame.com/438336

There is a lot of topics, i think you can make a nice todo list with them.

Ok, the first link is a complaint that the AI set up near a monster. Which players can do and if they can protect the city should do.

The second link is from October and says the AI never attacks.

The third link is from before the game was even released and is a complaint that the AI is too hard and thus must be cheating.

I stopped there.

I have trouble beating the AI on challenging. I'm sure there are players who are far better than I am at the game. But I'm going to need some actual, specific, examples.

Because when I have investigated "The AI sucks" posters who have sent games or made videos they're doing things like buying unlimited salted pork and kiting around tactical battles.  That's not an "AI" bug.  That's more of a design issue.  Similarly, if someone has figured out a killer tactical combo, that's a design issue as well.  Or someone who has mass bought quest scrolls and used them to massively level up their champions to steam-roll.

What would be helpful would be specific examples where the AI has performed blatantly poor.  A good example would be spells the AI should be using or army configuration tips, etc.  

Every "game challenge" report has to be evaluated as either something we address through game design or something we address through improving the AI.

while i agree with your point, you should think about posting a small notation for convenience of the developers. this will make you look informed and not condescending. anyway, the biggest thing for me is the AI likes to "Raze Quit" when its losing. This is lame, because I might have just begun my invasion or counter invasion and the AI PM's me to tell me it took the suicide pill and burned all of its cities. Even with never surrender on.

This is problematic because part of the fun is "getting to pull it off" when you get to that point and the disappointment comes when the AI just throws itself under a train and takes it away from you. Its like playing chess with a little kid who throws the pieces all over the board and stomps off when you take his knight.

Ok, quotes from links: 

First link:

"The Ai has this annoying habbit of setting up anywhere and everywhere it wants to."

Second link: 

1) i was NEVER once attacked by one of the 8 insane AI enemies

2) all my relation to the enemies is on close, though i often move through their territory (when asked to leave, i always press "Yes") + seldom trade with magic know-how against money

Third link: 

"the factions just "snowball" way too quickly with so many early settlements"

Fourth link: 

"I have seen the AI build an outpost next to a facking dragon (right next to it I swear) and that dragon then proceed to treat the outpost like it's baby.. Eventually attacking me!"

Fifth: 

"I enjoy crushing my enemies, seeing them driven before me... etc. just as much as the next guy.  But when I am the one crushing and driving, sacking city after city, I expect a little... groveling from those who seek my mercy.  "

Link number 6: 

"I've been war declared upon by AI sovs a half dozen times in the last half dozen games, and never has an enemy stack appeared, let alone attacked me. " and tons of other feedback. It's all in LH. 

So you really can't find any specific examples in this topics?

I'm afraid not. 

If you honestly would like to see improvements to the AI, you should be able to come up with a few specific things.

Let me give you some examples I've seen from Beta 1 of LH:

1. It doesn't seem like the AI players are training very good units. Were the units from FE transferred to LH for the AI to use? Middway through the game, I still see the AI training and using Militia.
2. The AI seems to be slowing down in its build up due to training pioneers. It would be better if the AI waited until at least level 2 before training a pioneer.
3. The AI players seem to be biased against researching warfare techs. Even the "Warmonger" players have relatively little warfare tech middgame.

That's the kind of thing I'd be looking for.

   Then i know why it is so poor. 

Yep.  Perhaps you should find another game.

Ok! Nice to meet you )

You created a thread blasting the AI with no specifics. When asked to give specifics you create a series of links to half-year old posts that provide virtually nothing I can act on.  

If you just want to vent about something, let me know. But since you posted this in the Legendary Heroes forum, I assumed you were looking to provide actionable feedback.  

I enjoy working on the AI.  I'm sorry that our efforts aren't sufficient to satisfy you.  Other than turning up the difficulty level OR providing some specifics there's not a lot I can do.

Frogboy:

one of the issues mentioned above is AI related. I am not sure, but does diplomacy belong to AI or to design?

If diplomacy is AI field, i have examples from recent games of AI declaring war, not doing anything for 100 turns, making peace, and then declaring war/making peace every 10 turns or so. Never met a guy, and he got destroyed. Generally speaking, when war is declared on me, i am attacked 1 in 3 times, and then attack comes after 25 turns or so. It happens that i am attacked by guys who i do not even know where they are, their scout just passed through my territory.

Thus, AI should not take just ranking into account before declaring war, but also distance, whether they have a war already going, and if they have army to fight it. Right now low ranking means automatically a war.

People like ID make the forums a lot less enjoyable. 

Wow people are strange.  You tell them what you are looking for and then they act like jerks.  OH well...I guess thats the way it is.  My one question is, Are mobs(creatures and whatnot) suppose to attack my troops, units, and other sov's troops and cities, because I dont see this happening at all.  I had that huge big Ogre dude wandering around and he would come close to my city and then turn away...now thats nice and all, but hardly realistic.  He should have come in and crushed me, but it gave me enough time to get some troops and then I hunted him DOWN!!  Love that Scythe too haha.

I do have the AI of the sovs at beginner, because I want to see how they play as I move it up.  Right now Gilder is spamming pioneers with 2 of them running around, right by mobs galore(im playing on a high creature amount).  I feel they should be squashed by the mobs, which I do like in Civ 5.  Watching the AI actually guard them in that game is kinda neat.  I know PIo's are a constant subject that is talked about, but what making Pio's have another cost to where they were made from and that cost doesnt go away til they were used?  Prolly a dumb idea, but thought Id throw it out.  

All in all, im enjoying what you have done so far, though on huge maps i really run into other sovs so fast.  Playing on 9 of them and just thought we'd be spread out more.