Home Trending Latest threads New posts Developer diaries

AI Cheats - Facts and misunderstandings

Jump to latest Follow Reply
  • We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
Europa Universalis IV 81899 EUIV: Bug Reports 448 EUIV: Suggestions 19148 EUIV: Technical Support 6720 EUIV: FAQ & Strategy Guides 235 EUIV: AAR's, Let's Plays, and Fan Fiction EU IV: Alternate History Short Story Contest Contr 29
Show only dev responses
Useful info, wish i had a link to this yesterday when watching some guy on twitch go into a full on rage about how the a.i was cheating against him lol.

Edit: so the a,i also pays for forced march? It's late 1600's in my current British game and it seems most of the a.i nations are using forced march. (little flashing boot?)
 
- AI is willing to use up its last diplorelation for a human (it reserves one for humans so you're not always getting 'can't afford another relation').

I actually had this happen to me. Had the mission to get friendly to Alsace as Ottomans, but they did not accept my alliance because maxed out diplorelation.
If interested I can add a screenshot.
 
Wiz said:
- AI can see through fog of war, but pretends it can't in most cases.
Click to expand...

I noticed this very quickly, when a Spanish army of about 5k ran from Portugal, around all my 20k stack armies, and went into homeland France to kill all the 1k new units I had just built and was trying to merge. There's something disturbing about how ravenous the AI is about taking out these little new units. It reminded me of a National Geographic documentary about reptiles eating babies.

Thanks for explaining the AI a bit.
 
I didn't see anything for or against the historically lucky nations (England, France, Austria, Ottomans) getting fantastic rulers even with lucky nations off. Is there truth to this? Even with the turks in a regency council, their council was 5/4/6 while literally all of my councils have been between 0-3 in all stats. Typically with one 0
 
Good info. Most of it sounds reasonable - not sure about the fog of war cheat though.
 
Wiz said:
- Humans can save and reload when things go badly (unless you're playing ironman).
Click to expand...
Brad Wardell, CEO and head AI programmer at Stardock, once joked that he wanted to introduce a feature in Fallen Enchantress that let the AI reload a save game whenever it lost one of the tactical battles, just to give it another shot at beating the player.
 
Tbh, I am quite impressed at how little crutches the AI needs. Excellent job, PI!
(I am more inclined to reduce the human cheating. Hmm ... couldn't we ban humans from the game? It is quite an unfair advantage they inherently possess.)
 
still feels a bit....uncomfteble knowing that AI has no naval attrition and therefor can do as it please at sea. while my weakend navies can say hello to the ocean floor.
 
Wiz said:
- Humans have a human brain.
Click to expand...

GG?

I'll admit that from time to time I actively avoid manipulating the AI's idiocy, less of an issue in MP where its basically a race to screw over the AI faster than everyone else so you can stomp them later, because it wouldn't be... sporting.

Wardok said:
still feels a bit....uncomfteble knowing that AI has no naval attrition and therefor can do as it please at sea. while my weakend navies can say hello to the ocean floor.
Click to expand...

By the time it gets to the mid-1500's for me, as a naval power like GB at least, have a enough colonies and appropriate ideas to make naval attrition trivial. Given that the AI is unlikely to prioritise keeping its fleet as healthy as possible, going by some of the ridiculously stupid route calculations that the computer decides to send your fleet on (I usually just shift-click the route), it makes sense to give them a slight advantage there.

Remember also that the AI is rarely going to have a fleet as large or well positioned as yours.
 
I feel kinda stupid to ask this, but I will anyway - there is no bonus for AI in getting generals?
I mean - if AI is constantly at war - they probably get more army tradition then me + I don't always pay attention (right after the war, while army tradition is still high, I should hire a new general, but I don't do that). But still, in ma-a-a-ny cases I see some crazy gens at AI armies.
Or I'm just whining? :)
 
ShaTiK said:
I feel kinda stupid to ask this, but I will anyway - there is no bonus for AI in getting generals?
I mean - if AI is constantly at war - they probably get more army tradition then me + I don't always pay attention (right after the war, while army tradition is still high, I should hire a new general, but I don't do that). But still, in ma-a-a-ny cases I see some crazy gens at AI armies.
Click to expand...

The AI probably optimises spending and earning military points better than most players, so it'd make sense. That said if you're a naval power, going by your post you are, then you can probably win a war against a nation like Spain or France without ever even seeing a significant AI army within striking distance of your invasion.

Just pop around to where you don't want to invade, drop a stack with enough artillery for the +5 bonus and leader with siege (if you can), and take a province or two there. The AI will leave where they should be defending and commit the majority of their forces to taking back those provinces. They won't even stack their main army on them if the attrition change from you holding them is significant enough to put that army into damage range, it usually just sits there next to a smaller army slowly taking the fort.

Grab a +Fort defence advisor for an extra punch.
 
ck2plusdlacc said:
The AI probably optimises spending and earning military points better than most players, so it'd make sense. That said if you're a naval power, going by your post you are, then you can probably win a war against a nation like Spain or France without ever even seeing a significant AI army within striking distance of your invasion.

Just pop around to where you don't want to invade, drop a stack with enough artillery for the +5 bonus and leader with siege (if you can), and take a province or two there. The AI will leave where they should be defending and commit the majority of their forces to taking back those provinces. They won't even stack their main army on them if the attrition change from you holding them is significant enough to put that army into damage range, it usually just sits there next to a smaller army slowly taking the fort.

Grab a +Fort defence advisor for an extra punch.
Click to expand...

I played a game as the vassal Mongol Khante and attacked my liege the Oriate horde on day one. I hired a regular leader (0-0-1-0) and made my Khan into a ruler (1-1-1-1), When I entered combat, I checked their ruler/general (5-6-3-1)

Don't all countries start the game with the same amount of Army tradition? Lucky nations was off, and everything else was set to no bonuses anywhere.
 
zedyue said:
I played a game as the vassal Mongol Khante and attacked my liege the Oriate horde on day one. I hired a regular leader (0-0-1-0) and made my Khan into a ruler (1-1-1-1), When I entered combat, I checked their ruler/general (5-6-3-1)

Don't all countries start the game with the same amount of Army tradition? Lucky nations was off, and everything else was set to no bonuses anywhere.
Click to expand...

I don't know how Ruler -> General points are calculated. Nor do I know if everyone starts with the same Army Tradition. What I can observe however is just like the AI can sometimes have both good and bad generals/admirals, regardless of any other factors, I can get similar. My current GB game had a 4-4-2-0 general pop when I had around 20 army tradition.

Perhaps that particular leader general is scripted to be that badass?
 
So an AI for rebels/heretics that manages to conquer 3 or 4 provinces and suddenly can add 15k units to its army within a month doesn't cheat with manpower? And how come rebel stacks are always created proportionally to your army size - no/small army = 3-5k stack, medium/large army = 10-15k stack, massive army: 20k stack? That's not cheating? :p
 
Dunbal said:
So an AI for rebels/heretics that manages to conquer 3 or 4 provinces and suddenly can add 15k units to its army within a month doesn't cheat with manpower? And how come rebel stacks are always created proportionally to your army size - no/small army = 3-5k stack, medium/large army = 10-15k stack, massive army: 20k stack? That's not cheating? :p
Click to expand...

That's scripting, if that wasn't the case the challenge wouldn't be proportional to the ability of the player to deal with it. Alternatively if you play your cards right then you just shouldn't be seeing many (or any) rebellions unless they explicitly come from events that you have no choice in. And those tend to be small based on the events that I've seen.

I'm at 1568 with a game where I formed GB, colonised a lot of the Carribean then decided that I liked the bonuses from Reformed and converted. It was close but I didn't get a single heretical rebellion... yet, I'm still four provinces off complete unity.

EDIT: Even the Scottish and Irish converted to the English culture without so much as a peep as long as I kept my stability up, managed it when it got taken down by an event, and avoided all the +revolt risk decisions.

EDIT2: And if you want a "this is why this is the case" plausible reason for that happening then I guess I should point out that just because a province is willing to send you/you can levy X amount of manpower doesn't mean that the province and it surrounds are then devoid of anyone or anything else you don't have control over.
 
zedyue said:
I played a game as the vassal Mongol Khante and attacked my liege the Oriate horde on day one. I hired a regular leader (0-0-1-0) and made my Khan into a ruler (1-1-1-1), When I entered combat, I checked their ruler/general (5-6-3-1)

Don't all countries start the game with the same amount of Army tradition? Lucky nations was off, and everything else was set to no bonuses anywhere.
Click to expand...

IIRC, the values a ruler gets if you make him a general are based on his MIL score, not army tradition.
 
Wiz said:
- AI can see through fog of war, but pretends it can't in most cases.
Click to expand...

Smart AI: Sire, our god like view of the world shows a massive Prussian army heading this way, should we combine with our larger allied force and make a stand in the mountain pass?
AI: No! We will all move our separate armies to different locations that have no strategic value, and allow the 30k Human army to attack them one by one. That plan always works.
Smart AI: But Sire...
AI: SILENCE, and let us also declare war on the French, so that we may destroy both hulking juggernauts at the same time!!!
 
zedyue said:
I didn't see anything for or against the historically lucky nations (England, France, Austria, Ottomans) getting fantastic rulers even with lucky nations off. Is there truth to this? Even with the turks in a regency council, their council was 5/4/6 while literally all of my councils have been between 0-3 in all stats. Typically with one 0
Click to expand...

Would like an answer for this too.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back