Give control to the player and other suggestions

[BarrosRodrigues]

I am going to speak bluntly, if ATM you can´t make an AI that is capable of:

- Not falling asleep
- consistently obey a simple attach order
- Keeping its war exhaustion down by buying it down and/or effectively managing its armies.
- Dealing with unrest and local autonomy that ATM triggers huge rebellions that will forfeit the land if the player does not babysit them.
- Consistently knowing how to siege (the AI does not know how to carpet siege, it sieges 1 or 2 provinces per tag at a time depending on its army size) or simply when it is time to assault (100k sieging a 200 garrison instantly comes to mind).
- knowing when to combine into a huge stack and when it is time to disperse to avoid attrition (low attrition is easier on the economy and generates much less unrest)
- knowing that it should send its armies to fight Russia instead of sending them all to fight a OPM
- not going home ignoring the war goal because the enemy peace out with one of their foes

Then I propose that the control of the vassal armies should be given to the player in times of war. Why? Because you’ll save your customers the pain of watching just how bad this AI is and you’ll keep their frustration low until you can figure out how to make the AI better and eradicate its sleeping tendency for good.

A very small sample of what I am talking about (at some point I was so upsed that I simply su):
http://youtu.be/kqdiT5T0zpY


Here are other suggestions to improve the game but in my mind they are somewhat secondary by comparison with the biggest problem in-game:

- In the peace negotiation screen please add not only the OE generated by the current offer but also include the sum of the existing OE.
- Please include an “ignore enemy X” or “focus on enemy X” button or for vassal control but implement it in a way that the vassals will follow that command no matter what.
- In the appropriate screen please make unrest and LA sortable. It would also be useful to add a reduce/increase LA in all provinces below/above X button.
- Please allow the “build all mercenaries” to be used in occupied provinces.
- Make “detach siege” customizable because I don´t always want to leave behind 2INF+1ART.
- Please include an option to allow diplomats to auto improve relations with X people if idle for more than X time. It is tedious job to keep sending the diplomats to improve relations with the same people over and over again.
- Please allow the army builder to build units on non-contiguous provinces as long as it is in the same continent and you have military access to the rally point.
- Make the automated transports return to a port when their mission is done especially if the target is outside of the naval supply range.
- Sort vassals and allies in alphabetical order in the "transfer occupation" and "allied objective" tab.

 

[calvinhobbeslik]

Maybe just give the option of controlling the vassal armies? Them maybe I can take control of the big vassals' armies, and let the small vassals do whatever do keep micro to a minimum.

 

[Yorkie-GBR]

These look to be in relation to vassals so I will answer these with that in mind, please feel free to correct this assumption.

I don´t want to be insulting but I am going to speak bluntly, if ATM you can´t make an AI that is capable of:

- Not falling asleep

This is being addressed in 1.9 patch

- consistently obey a simple attach order

This is a suggestion, not an order. Vassals have some degree of autonomy.

- Keeping its war exhaustion down by buying it down and/or effectively managing its armies.

Don't go to war if your vassals have high WE, as for buying down the WE, maybe they can't afford it, but AI does by down the AE.

- Dealing with unrest and local autonomy that ATM triggers huge rebellions that will forfeit the land if the player does not babysit them.

Agreed, however I believe this is being addressed.

- Consistently knowing how to siege (the AI does not know how to carpet siege, it sieges 1 or 2 provinces per tag at a time depending on its army size) or simply when it is time to assault (100k sieging a 200 garrison instantly comes to mind).

It could be tweaked, however is open to player abuse.

- knowing when to combine into a huge stack and when it is time to disperse to avoid attrition (low attrition is easier on the economy and generates much less unrest)

Agreed

- knowing that it should send its armies to fight Russia instead of sending them all to fight a OPM

Only if they have teh troops to complete with the target, would you send in your 10k stack against the 60k? Would you take out the OPM who can roll your back lines?

- not going home ignoring the war goal because the enemy peace out with one of their foes

Can you elaborate on this please?

Then I propose that the control of the vassal armies should be given to the player in times of war. Why? Because you’ll save your customers the pain of watching just how bad this AI is and you’ll keep their frustration low until you can figure out how to make the AI better and eradicate its sleeping tendency for good.

This would be game breakingly OP.

Here are a few other non-balance suggestions to improve the game but in my mind they are somewhat secondary by comparison with the biggest problem in-game:

- In the peace negotiation screen please add not only the OE generated by the current offer but also include the sum of the existing OE.

This could be useful.

- Please include an “ignore enemy X” or “focus on enemy X” button or for vassal control but implement it in a way that the vassals will follow that command no matter what.

You want to take the autonomy away from vassals, what is the Historical context for this?

- In the appropriate screen please make unrest and LA sortable. It would also be useful to add a reduce/increase LA in all provinces below/above X button.

A good suggestion which has already been picked up on by Wiz. See Arumba's suggestion post for more details.

- Please allow the “build all mercenaries” to be used in occupied provinces.

I thought this was the case, since I am in game I shall defer to you for now.

- Make “detach siege” customizable because I don´t always want to leave behind 2INF+1ART.

It could be useful but something a little planning would not solve.

- Please include an option to allow diplomats to auto improve relations with X people if idle for more than X time. It is tedious job to keep sending the diplomats to improve relations with the same people over and over again.

The you get people complaining that the Diplomats are improving relations with your next target and you get a stab hit for DoW.

- Please allow the army builder to build units on non-contiguous provinces as long as it is in the same continent and you have military access to the rally point.

No.

- Make the automated transports return to a port when their mission is done especially if the target is outside of the naval supply range.

Agreed, provided that the transports are in port before the order is given and that port is the return to port.

 

[Santoes]

A player at war has the option on a unit to attach allies to your army. It is almost guaranteed to work if you are in the same territory as an allied stack. You can't split them up, but it gives you control where they are. I've been able to have multiple ally stacks controlled this way. Why don't you use this?

I made a suggestion to give control of vassal, by the attach command in times of peace. This is my only problem with them as they go off on there own and un-siege when I want the rebels to win, or they come and assist fighting rebels when it is way to late. My suggestion was not noticed as I used the suggestion sub forum, so I suggest we just delete that sub-forum. Sorry, I had to say it!

 

[BarrosRodrigues]

This is being addressed in 1.9 patch

That has been said before but the AI still falls asleep in 1.8

This is a suggestion, not an order. Vassals have some degree of autonomy.

That would be fine if they were not as dumb as they are now; their stupidity really affects my ability to enjoy the game. It does not matter how big or small I am they are always stupid.

Don't go to war if your vassals have high WE, as for buying down the WE, maybe they can't afford it, but AI does by down the AE.

It does not matter if they start with 0WE because as soon as they start piling up in huge stacks sieging a province their war exhaustion will go through the roof due to the huge attrition.

Agreed, however I believe this is being addressed.
It could be tweaked, however is open to player abuse.

There won´t be any room to abuse if the opposing forces pose no military threat (i.e. have no army).

"Only if they have teh troops to complete with the target, would you send in your 10k stack against the 60k? Would you take out the OPM who can roll your back lines?

Yes please watch this video (only the initial 1 or 2 minutes)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=luP9hwN0WQc

Can you elaborate on this please?"

Yes watch the following video from 14:15
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=czvdE5uktZw&lc=z134g1q5bviyelwkl23wzdcbelekf1roo04

This would be game breakingly OP.

Not really anyone that revokes is OP; IMO what is game breaking is to watch this AI perform.

A good suggestion which has already been picked up on by Wiz. See Arumba's suggestion post for more details.

Arumba was talking about something else.

It could be useful but something a little planning would not solve.

IMO no amount of planning can avoid the extra clicks needed to leave custom sieging forces by comparison with such a tool.

The you get people complaining that the Diplomats are improving relations with your next target and you get a stab hit for DoW.

I believe I was misunderstood; I get to pick the people that they should improve relations with.

 

[BarrosRodrigues]

A player at war has the option on a unit to attach allies to your army. It is almost guaranteed to work if you are in the same territory as an allied stack. You can't split them up, but it gives you control where they are. I've been able to have multiple ally stacks controlled this way. Why don't you use this?

That only works half the time and not everyone attaches, that is why whenever I want to increase my chances of seeing them all attached I have multiple regiments in the same province with the attach order enabled.

 

[yerm]

- Please include an “ignore enemy X” or “focus on enemy X” button or for vassal control but implement it in a way that the vassals will follow that command no matter what.

You want to take the autonomy away from vassals, what is the Historical context for this?

This is the most damning flaw currently in EU4. This is the single biggest weakness of the ai, bigger than it getting stuck, bigger than bad peace deals, bigger than failing with fleets, bigger than anything else.

The ai can and will go 100% apeshit on everyone in every war it fights unless it is incapable of doing so, due to lack of access or aforementioned fleet ineptitude. There is no way for the computer-controlled nations to just sit a war out, take a loss, hide, support in name only, stop supporting, or otherwise do basically anything besides deplete all of its money and manpower in every conceivable way until peace is reached. The fact that humans are capable of simply not being an enraged animal when war comes up is one of the sole reasons this game is so much easier for a human player. Almost every strategy for OPMs and other difficult starts involves allying with a major power and leveraging their idiotic bloodlust to defeat far superior opponents, and get little or usually nothing in the peace deal. The computer has literally no awareness of the fact that is completely against its best interest to participate in a war after it decided to accept or decline. Combined with the lack of incentive for aggressors to allow unwanted defenders to just peace out early, and similarly defenders with no stake in a losing fight unwilling to drop early, you end up with every ai war being a bloodbath that leaves anything but the most lopsided engagement with every side in debt and out of manpower.

This is what we see in our vassals. This stupidity comes up any time a human player goes to war and then groans as their union/vassal/march sends it troops across attrition to be slaughtered by an enemy the human player had no intention of engaging, only to borrow money to rebuild that army and promptly send it right back to die again. It's especially frustrating when the human player declares war on someone and its subjects promptly march off to attack their irrelevant ally instead.

We don't just want a way to tell our subjects to stop attacking someone, or focus on a particular enemy, and have them actually do it. We want the ai to make similar decisions. I don't even want to approach the subject of the historical context for a country that declares its military support, or enters into a war, but doesn't actually participate (or only sends a token force, or quickly withdraws, etc.) The current system of a vassal engaging in separate military enterprises without the consent or support of the overlord is so ahistorical I cannot wrap my head around it - no, it makes ZERO sense from a historical standpoint to have your subjects march off and attack someone without a reason (claim/cores) and without instruction (we have war targets now). There is simply no grounds for how this stands except that the ai is bad.

 

[BarrosRodrigues]

This is the most damning flaw currently in EU4. This is the single biggest weakness of the ai, bigger than it getting stuck, bigger than bad peace deals, bigger than failing with fleets, bigger than anything else.

IMO that is its 2nd worst flaw because its worst problem is falling asleep. I noticed that behavior pretty much instantly around 2 years ago when an expansion for HOI III TFH was released and it is still around in EU IV more than one year after release. In many ways the AI adaption of EU IV is worse than in a 5 year old game not because the AI is smarter but because it was much better though out. In HOI III TFH the frustrations caused by equally dumb allies can be almost always eradicated by carefully placing "allied objectives" that unlike EU IV they will actually make your allies focus on them to the best of their abilities or give you an expeditionary force that is pretty much what I am asking in my OP.