About the AI

[Darkwing88]

Well I certainly dont regret my purchase of great mage (50$) edition. I did it to support devs and I do think they might fix gameplay of the series in the future.

As of now game is still too easy because of the AI Just as I feared.
I do admit AI got better from the first game but it looks like there is still much to do.

 

[UncleJJ]

I am 100+ turns into an impossible huge sandbox game as well. I could have easily wiped out all the other mages by now but what I am looking for is the higher tier units.

So far none of the 6 mages I can see have made any of the 2nd tier units the ones that require a training ground or military academy. Most of them have not even built either of these structures. One mage at least has a military academy but again has not made any of the higher units. They have plenty of gold because I can see it in the diplomacy screens.

The AI needs to prioritize getting these structures built and churning out the bigger units. It is severely hamstrung at the moment.

I was hoping to see the AI actually focusing on capturing holy ground so it could make the temple units and am extremely disappointed to see it not even able to build the veteran/elite units.

Is anyone seeing these units showing up?

I don't have Warlock 2 yet, but the Warlock 1 game I'm playing certainly achieves T2 units as early as I can. I am facing mages, vampires, Veteran skeletons and so on. In other Warlock games on impossible I've met a lot of T3 elite units such as Magisters and temple units are gained from quests and built in their cities with temples.

But the AI does not use its T3 units or Lords very intelligently. It does not seem to save its gold and concentrate the best and most expensive perks on the best units, like a human players does. It also tends to expose its elite units to risky situations so human players can get rid of them fairly easily. This seems to be a problem for AIs in all games that use 1upt, it is very hard to program an AI to use valuable units properly and effectively.

 

[Mardagg]

Well I certainly dont regret my purchase of great mage (50$) edition. I did it to support devs and I do think they might fix gameplay of the series in the future.

As of now game is still too easy because of the AI Just as I feared.
I do admit AI got better from the first game but it looks like there is still much to do.

+1 to this.
Also I agree with MadDjinn, that currently diplomacy is a major problem of the AI, its handling that matter worse than in W1.

@Man-At-Arms

While I share the same opinion on some of the things you say, I do definitely think that you have been extremely unlucky with your test game regarding AI perfomance,for whatever reasons.The AI is better than you make it to be,not a lot better but definetely better.
I recommend playing big maps on impossible vs just a few AIs and with great land or supercontinent setting+ wrapping map.
If you wait 3 weeks ,until release date ,the modding tools will be published and it will be very easy to mod the impossible AI to not get actual damage bonuses.
For example I am currently planning to do such a thing somewhere in April,but my mod is planned to give the AI a much bigger bonus to production times and resource output in exchange.

And while I,too, think that its probably too late for big AI improvements there is still the fact that its about 3 weeks pre release right now and we might see some patching in the future months/years that can at least do something about the AI.

Also some more things will be pretty easy to alter with Editor/Mod abilities.
For example , the priority of the AI to build ships or settlers is a simple xml value that can be changed.

Still, we have to make sure to keep on reminding the devs about how important the AI is,to get what we all want:
A very enjoyable and challenging playing experience.

But it is rather common knowlegde that it is extremely hard to get a decent AI done for such a complex game.
So if you really were hoping to get an AI,actually being the more proficient player than yourself,you should probably start playing multiplayer games instead, because that will just never happen.

 

[Darkwing88]

@Mardagg

Agreed with probably everything you say. I remember some dev mentioning that its different to make AI that plays to win compared to one that plays to provide challenge. Personally I find more fun against second because its really NOT fun at all to be killed by superior artificial intelligence that can analyze hundreds of outcomes.

I can settle with AI providing mediocre challenge. Biggest problem tho is that right now all AI plays pacifist. Let me give example.
I met few great mages, all of them made alliance with me by themselves, probably only dragon queen didnt. I asked her anyway and she said yes. Im on turn 120 or so and I didnt had even single serious war going on. Raajh or whatever is his name declared war on start when ive met him by alliance sharing view, and he didnt even sent one unit against me. Then new Aztec kind of mage declared war on me and sent his fleet of 3 units + 2 archer units against me. Oh the terror.

Basically if I dont declare war on everyone on impossible and never make peace I have ZERO challenge. Like I feared.
And actually declaring war on everyone cripples AI because they send endless wave of low tier troops so they cant build more settlers and expand in reasonable way when all their units are busy battling you.

 

[Man-At-Arms]

Agreed with probably everything you say. I remember some dev mentioning that its different to make AI that plays to win compared to one that plays to provide challenge. Personally I find more fun against second because its really NOT fun at all to be killed by superior artificial intelligence that can analyze hundreds of outcomes.

Yes, you are right. But as I described in my last post, the first game I played wasn't challenging, it was easy tactical build up and then slaughter all mages down far too easy.

I hope you, Darkwing88 and Mardagg are right, but I didn't think you can get much better AI only from modding. This was not possible in W1 and in W2 the problems of AI pointed out in my posting and some other posting are not solvable with XML files, which influence build order. Some points need changes in gaming AI algorithm, I think the modding possibilities will be small here. But again, I hope you are right. ;-)

By the way, in the meantime I have structured my last post on page-1 a bit more. Now there are 16 points and for challenging AI, most have to be fixed. Some would be "must have" some are more additional. All were already in W1.

Yes, you see I am very disappointed at the moment. It's because same problems exists already in W1 and I really hoped for improvements. For example in the last big suggestion thread for W2, all the thing are pointed out before (BTW completely very good thread). Even in W1 forums the problems were pointed out long before. Here e.g. is my list with improvement suggestions" out of suggestions for W2. Not to mention again giving more details for AI improvements on other ways. But yes, I hope you are right, and the big AI issues will be fixed and it will be a challenging game in sandbox mode and on every map size, also S and M Maps, and (without cheating AI, without spamming AI) even when player plays good tactics and strategy. I think with this thread I will be up-to-date even without play it by myself. :-D

 

[Annex]

One of the biggest failures of the AI is that it doesnt learn from its mistakes, and as such it never tries something different. It will send 10 units at you, the player knows whats going to happen so declares war first to get first strike, annihilates the army on the 2nd day of the war, beats the AIs subsequent feeble attacks, then asks for peace. Some time later it will bring a new army to the exact same spot, do the exact same thing, and get beaten yet again. Im playing on challenging and ive just watched my neighbour do that 3 times in a row. My units level up and just get stronger and the AI will never try anything different.

 

[Samael187]

Man-At-Arms, completely agree with you.
The whole game seems to be no more than a really great add-on to W1 and it's really sad(((
I've played W1 for 500+ hours (even bougth it to support and ensure Warlock 2, though Ukraine is a country of torrents and piracy),
modded W1 in all aspects that were possible due to tools and, just like you, was able to play around 15 hours now in W2 with early access.

You've highlighted the most important features, but i'd like to add primitive (a.k.a unchanger, just tweaked a bit) diplomacy (6300+mana + 2tier spell from AI for 300+gold + 4tier Volcano spell is a cruel reality.
You WILL find a bunch of high tier spells past turn 70+ but it will be nearly impossible for the player to accumulate 6300+mana on impossible by that time... well, problem solved) and the most frustrating thing for me personally - level up tables.
Is it SO hard to make each unit unique via level ups? Just imagine the variety of combinations!!! Two identical units can be TOTALLY different in tactic...
Needless to add, a dragon with "pathfinder" or a vampire with mixed death resist level up perks...

The sad thing is that all the charming beauty of game visuals, incredible style and fabulous art is darken by the unwillingness of Paradox to amend all listed above.
I know for sure that Ino-Co is capable of doing all that stuff.
So what the matter?
I live in one of the world's poorest countries and I'm, and a lot of people i know, READY TO BUY Warlock 2!!!.... but not the another Warlock 1 add-on((

 

[Gaslov]

I really like the game, but very disappointed by how easy it is. And no one will join my multiplayer game.

 

[Pinstar]

I encountered a rather silly bout of AI war logic in my current game. So I'm the elves, I bump into the Svarts. At the time, he has many more troops in our meeting location than I, so he declares war. Once I mass my troops and push back against his attacks, I dive into his portal and start taking the fight to him in his home plane. While I'm sieging down one of his major cities, he sues for peace. I accept it.

The whole reason my troops were away was because I was on the 2nd quest to stop the guy spamming the terriforming spells and I wanted to finish that ASAP. As soon as I move all my troops off of his plane... he makes an insane demand for gold and mana. It is as if the moment my troops left his field of vision, he thought I suddenly became weak even though my 5 mages were JUST burning his city down 2 turns earlier.

 

[JorgenB]

Thanks for your feedback and thank you for buying Warlock 2! We will of course look in to what we can do (and as usual, no promises since the future is always blurry). As many of you have pointed out: AI is not a trivial thing so it might be a bit unfair to compare this project (relatively small, albeit very good, dev team with relatively short time) to much much bigger games.

 

[Redrunner]

Thanks for your feedback and thank you for buying Warlock 2! We will of course look in to what we can do (and as usual, no promises since the future is always blurry). As many of you have pointed out: AI is not a trivial thing so it might be a bit unfair to compare this project (relatively small, albeit very good, dev team with relatively short time) to much much bigger games.

Thanks Jorgen for an amazing game! I realize that it is not like chess where there are only 64 squares to deal with. Any AI improvement will be great but I would be happy with a x2 option where the AI mages make twice as many units. Most players might not like it but for me it is fun to try and hold off a raging AI army.

 

[Darkwing88]

Thanks for your feedback and thank you for buying Warlock 2! We will of course look in to what we can do (and as usual, no promises since the future is always blurry). As many of you have pointed out: AI is not a trivial thing so it might be a bit unfair to compare this project (relatively small, albeit very good, dev team with relatively short time) to much much bigger games.

Thats reason why a lot of people buy Warlock 2. They liked Warlock 1 and they count on AI upgrades along the project lifetime. If I may mention - it took stardock few years since initial release of gal civ 2 to make it really competive - probably 5 or so? Their newest product have same issue - mediocre/poor AI because game is only like 2 years on market. They do however constantly talk on forums with players how they play to root out most common tactics and create counters for them or make AI use those tactics.

Personally I think biggest issue right now is AI diplomacy settings. Its just really, really bad and predictable. AI mages have predefined psychology (anna the benign will always make pacts as soon as possible), and on top of that they operate on very predictable analyse patterns. It looks like "if more units than player then declare war" wchich doesnt really make sense because often player can create handfull of response units and in worst case he will loose only one town that he can regain quite fast and even conquer 2 or 3 cities from AI. Thats pretty boring after seeing it happen 20 times

 

[saroumana]

Thanks for your feedback and thank you for buying Warlock 2! We will of course look in to what we can do (and as usual, no promises since the future is always blurry). As many of you have pointed out: AI is not a trivial thing so it might be a bit unfair to compare this project (relatively small, albeit very good, dev team with relatively short time) to much much bigger games.

That true, and why we have asked to open IA to modding during W1. In the editor in the begining of the beta, we got a IA section. But it was only to change parameter or set definited action from trigger which is was not enough to make a difference.

 

[Fenryder]

. If I may mention - it took stardock few years since initial release of gal civ 2 to make it really competive - probably 5 or so? Their newest product have same issue - mediocre/poor AI because game is only like 2 years on market. They do however constantly talk on forums with players how they play to root out most common tactics and create counters for them or make AI use those tactics.
)

The Galciv 2 AI was a total facade that didnt know how to use many of the in game systems like racial building and tech. In that case it was all the talking about the AI that made it seem better than it was. AI's are just lists of scritped events and are never going to be able to compete with a human mind. Gamers have fantasy exceptions for AIs and its often these devs that talk up their work that led people there.

 

[Darkwing88]

The Galciv 2 AI was a total facade that didnt know how to use many of the in game systems like racial building and tech. In that case it was all the talking about the AI that made it seem better than it was. AI's are just lists of scritped events and are never going to be able to compete with a human mind. Gamers have fantasy exceptions for AIs and its often these devs that talk up their work that led people there.

I do agree with you it is hyped as better than it is. But fact is diplomacy worked hundred times better than in Warlock and AI never declared pointless wars if it was tens of squares from you. Im talking about last game version.

Warlock is a lot more funny game, its just AI here that puts me down from playing it all the time. Im kinda counting on editor and being able to give AI extra perks/capabilities, shorter build queues to actually put up a fight against me.

 

[Ezumiyr]

I find it better than the Civilization 5 AI. It knows when you have left a flank unguarded and will attack/demand something of you as it should. Of course the focus of the game being war, I'd be worried if the AI was unable to know it's chances when considering attacking you. It does need to be said though that the Civ AI CANNOT do this, even the most hostile leaders will leave unguarded cities alone in that game.

Mmmm... Of course not. I'd say the AI is better now, but far behind the Civ5 AI.
AI in Warlock 2 is still stupid, but evrything that could be done to make it better has been done:

1. The worlds are tinier, which mean the AI can handle them and expand
2. Destroying the other players is no longer your main goal, 'cause you will often play in exiled mod. So the AI doesn't need to be good at planning wars.
3. The city limit reduces the power of the player's econony, making the AI more challenging
4. Other things already said

BUT I actually never saw the AI be successfull. It can survive, but generally progress slower in the map than the player.

 

[Zanze]

I find it odd that people can complain about the AI being too weak and then they are not playing on the harder difficulties... Personally speaking, yes it is unfair the AI get bonuses, but it makes a for a whole different game. One, they expand quicker versus monsters and lose less units (less time replacing enchantments, more time casting real spells), two, a match up of equal armies (you vs ai) will require a little more strategic thinking to come out on top(which is what we want in a strategy game, right?), and three, it makes it much more difficult to steam roll the ai by turn 60ish. Its like the people out there playing the total war games complaining that ai factions are too weak and then blitz them in their opening moves. Let the AI settle, play on a difficulty that is not easy, but not too difficult for you either, and when in doubt mod yourself some penalties / add dremers. (For penalties, think HOI style -> Less resources/production, etc)

Edit: Also, if you find the AI not terraforming enough, send them a decent spell for it. In exiled I usually throw fertile lands at every AI I see. Makes the AI nice enough to have their entire shard being fertile lands instead of burnt lands, magic plains, volcanoes, etc after Elspiritster is done with them.

 

[JIntegrity]

I find it odd that people can complain about the AI being too weak and then they are not playing on the harder difficulties...

The AI is a joke on impossible too. The only difference is that, on impossible, they have a never-ending stream of weak (not perked, buffed, or upgraded) units, and, on lower difficulties, they run out of units long before then. Even when they deploy powerful heroes, they tend to just stand there and let themselves be beaten to death.

The biggest problem I've noticed is the improvements to the AI (actually trying to get in to a good position before attacking) leads to the AI doing a lot of reorganizing units, and not a whole hell of a lot of attacking. Even if the code was modified to say it will use all the movement it can to get in to a good position, but always keep enough to attack, then do so, it'd make the AI far more deadly.

 

[Darkwing88]

Impossible is even easier because once you hold off initial stream of attacks and units AI sends, you can start blackmailing them for peace and take advantage of their 4x resource generation.
They need faster build queue on impossible, not more resources. 2x bonus to resources and maybe 0.5 build time would be fine and make for very challenging game. But main problem would still be there underlying - issue of AI not being capable of waging proper war strategy.

 

[player1 fanatic]

Impossible is even easier because once you hold off initial stream of attacks and units AI sends, you can start blackmailing them for peace and take advantage of their 4x resource generation.
They need faster build queue on impossible, not more resources. 2x bonus to resources and maybe 0.5 build time would be fine and make for very challenging game. But main problem would still be there underlying - issue of AI not being capable of waging proper war strategy.

I remember doing this a lot in W1 before they patched in newer diplomacy system with responses in next turn and chance to be rejected.

Get alliance early and thebndo unfair gold mana trades. Best on immortal.