The AI is not taking attrition during circumnavigation?

[IIWW]

The AI does not take naval attrition due to the fact that it is not very good at managing attrition, unlike the player who can actively manage it. I agree, however, that the circumnavigation mission should be an exception to this rule, as the player cannot manage attrition during circumnavigation either, so the AI would be on even footing with the player in that regard.

Yeah, boviously I'm not against the "AI is not taking attrition" as a whole. But what You said: circumnavigation should be an exception. I hope that the dev's would be kind enough to have a look at this issue (cause the fleet not reinforcing in ports, like trade fleets do, is also a problem)

 

[Squirrelloid]

Well, I'll say it: I think the AI should take naval attrition.

Not taking naval attrition leads to stupidity, like Portugal sailing around in indonesia when it has *no ports within 3000 miles* (happened in current game), or France patrolling the Caribbean with 150 light ships when its closest port is *Canada* (happening right now, stealing half my trade), or random Indian nation sailing its meager fleet around Africa to Northern Europe to land 3 infantry with no port access anywhere in-between (multiple instances from my current game). Or blockading your ports with ships for years while being significantly out of supply range. These are things the player *can't reasonably do*, or can't even do at all. Full stop.

The AI should not:
*Park ships outside of supply range. No blockades outside of supply range. No sitting longer than necessary to disgorge troops.
*Patrol for trade outside of supply range.
*Sail halfway around the world from its closest port, under any circumstances. Even if it's not bound by supply range, it should be bound by *some sort of range*, so it can exceed supply range, but not more than by 2 or 3x. The player cannot effectively operate outside of that kind of range either. And when it does exceed supply range, it should complete the reason it is there (engage fleet or disgorge troops) and then return to supply range immediately.
*Calculate how much attrition they expect a task to take, and only do that task if it won't sink ships. This is something the AI can do a lot better than a human. (Particularly important if the AI has disjointed islands of supply range - the AI should be able to travel between them, but it should calculate how much attrition it expects making the trip and only let ships go when they'll survive).

It's really too bad that the AI code isn't open for modding. I'm pretty sure I could write an AI which handles ship attrition in a reasonable manner. Will it be more conservative than the most crazily aggressive players? Sure. But it should be. (And if you're really aggressive with exceeding supply range, you will lose ships. I lost a transport fleet taking St. Helena in my current game, because while they could get there and unload troops, they couldn't get back before sinking. That wasn't good play. That was terrible play, but calculating attrition with open ocean and amphibious landing wait times is hard, since afaik the formulas are not published. And all for a pretty worthless island in the middle of the South Atlantic).

 

[linkicewolf]

I also wish that you can stop a circumnavigation too, I once accidently click to navigate the whole world and all my ships died before I can go and find 1/5 of the world along with my 2 star navigator, it was a sad day...

 

[AchedTeacher]

AI takes no naval attrition whatsoever ever.

But they should. AI could, if they were smart enough, start a circumnavigation on the day they are technologically able and complete it before the player would have a single chance of doing it.

 

[Arjik]

The AI should not:
*Park ships outside of supply range. No blockades outside of supply range. No sitting longer than necessary to disgorge troops.
*Patrol for trade outside of supply range.
*Sail halfway around the world from its closest port, under any circumstances. Even if it's not bound by supply range, it should be bound by *some sort of range*, so it can exceed supply range, but not more than by 2 or 3x. The player cannot effectively operate outside of that kind of range either. And when it does exceed supply range, it should complete the reason it is there (engage fleet or disgorge troops) and then return to supply range immediately.
*Calculate how much attrition they expect a task to take, and only do that task if it won't sink ships. This is something the AI can do a lot better than a human. (Particularly important if the AI has disjointed islands of supply range - the AI should be able to travel between them, but it should calculate how much attrition it expects making the trip and only let ships go when they'll survive).

I agree with this, except the last point. Before the AI could calculate attrition there has to be a programmer, who knows math well enough to make Ai predictions valid, which is kinda tough.

 

[Wizzington]

AI doesn't take naval attrition, instead it waits a number of tech levels before circumnavigating based on how suitable its circumstances are to give the player a chance to go first.

I realize it's a non-ideal solution, however.

 

[Arjik]

AI doesn't take naval attrition, instead it waits a number of tech levels before circumnavigating based on how suitable its circumstances are to give the player a chance to go first.

I realize it's a non-ideal solution, however.

Maybe some changes could be made about attrition, like the ones described above? It would make AI seem a bit more player-like, although it does make AI a bit more passive than it already is.

 

[Wizzington]

Maybe some changes could be made about attrition, like the ones described above? It would make AI seem a bit more player-like, although it does make AI a bit more passive than it already is.

AI could be made to understand naval attrition, it's on my long-term todo but it's a huge amount of work and there are other things that are higher priority.

 

[VampireBoot]

As a quick fix, how about just not allowing the AI to circumnavigate until it gets the tech to ignore "increase over time" attrition (dip tech 22 in vanilla)? That gives the player a lot of time get it done, but the mission itself is hard enough for players (pre-tech 22) that you don't really need much competition from AI to make it interesting.

 

[mocoman2001]

In my current game as Germany, Norway circled the earth first. Norway only has a few colonies in Florida, and just started colonizing.

 

[HansBaer]

The reward is mediocre at best anyway.
But don't get me wrong, the naval AI and naval combat in general definitely need some work, it's the most lacking aspect of the game since exploration was improved, imho.

 

[colinljx]

The Norwegians must have done it through the icy Arctic with snow dogs~ (shorter circle, obviously)

 

[IIWW]

As a quick fix, how about just not allowing the AI to circumnavigate until it gets the tech to ignore "increase over time" attrition (dip tech 22 in vanilla)? That gives the player a lot of time get it done, but the mission itself is hard enough for players (pre-tech 22) that you don't really need much competition from AI to make it interesting.

I like this idea!

Oh, and thanks for the answer Wiz!. Like VampireBoot wrote, the tech lvl 22 would be best point at which AI should try to circumnavigate the earth. It's almost impossible to do it before this lvl (when taking attrition).

 

[A-150]

I agree with this, except the last point. Before the AI could calculate attrition there has to be a programmer, who knows math well enough to make Ai predictions valid, which is kinda tough.

Would making the AI be able to manage naval attrition take a long time?

 

[ChildeR]

Would making the AI be able to manage naval attrition take a long time?

A couple of posts above yours:

AI could be made to understand naval attrition, it's on my long-term todo but it's a huge amount of work and there are other things that are higher priority.

 

[IIWW]

I have an idea: how about changing this AI cheat a bit. Give them +25% supply range, but make them never go over it, up to lvl 22 DIP tech, where they would get back to getting no attrition? (after 22 for human player it's also pretty much neglegible)

 

[yerm]

AI could be made to understand naval attrition, it's on my long-term todo but it's a huge amount of work and there are other things that are higher priority.

For circumnavigation the answer is VERY simple and minimal work: have the AI calculate what attrition it WOULD be taking, and if it takes enough to sink the expedition, it fails... but all the ships go home safe and sound. The AI does not attempt to circumnavigate again until it increases its tech.

Now, in general, I'd love if a similar situation was applied (ghost attrition, AI must go directly home if it hits 100%) that would stop the more ridiculous stupidity, but I do understand where you're coming from. Circumnavigation, at least, should be easy to fix because it only has to check for that mission and all it has to do is not give the reward if it fails.

 

[TheBoozehammer]

AI could be made to understand naval attrition, it's on my long-term todo but it's a huge amount of work and there are other things that are higher priority.

I understand that for most instances of attrition, but I would think they could still use it for circumvention, considering the mission is AI controlled for players too, right?

 

[RogerWilco]

One of Shennyyr's last videos shows part of the problem: https://youtu.be/8iMOcutVSK4?t=10m14s

He's got a really well developed early colonial empire, spanning the globe. But his circumnavigation mission fails because the AI explorer doesn't use his colonies, supply range, etc.

The problem isn't just that the AI takes no attrition, but that a player owned explorer when on a circumnavigation attempt, shows exactly that the AI currently doesn't take attrition into account and because of that dies when there is an AI controlled but player owned fleet.

Either have the player control the circumnavigation fleet, or have it take no attrition while on the circumnavigation mission, because it's essentially controlled by the AI.

I also have a big problem with the AI landing troops at points that would be impossible for a player, because they are very far out of range for the AI. It should have some limit.

 

[yerm]

One of Shennyyr's last videos shows part of the problem: https://youtu.be/8iMOcutVSK4?t=10m14s

He's got a really well developed early colonial empire, spanning the globe. But his circumnavigation mission fails because the AI explorer doesn't use his colonies, supply range, etc.

The problem isn't just that the AI takes no attrition, but that a player owned explorer when on a circumnavigation attempt, shows exactly that the AI currently doesn't take attrition into account and because of that dies when there is an AI controlled but player owned fleet.

Either have the player control the circumnavigation fleet, or have it take no attrition while on the circumnavigation mission, because it's essentially controlled by the AI.

I also have a big problem with the AI landing troops at points that would be impossible for a player, because they are very far out of range for the AI. It should have some limit.

This is why it is such a large undertaking. The AI doesn't just ignore attrition, it was literally programmed to take advantage of it and not even try to think about it. Even my desired solution - phantom attrition that forces them home at 100% - might not work, simply because they would IMMEDIATELY go right back to what they were doing stupidly in the first place.

In total war games on hard difficulties, you will find that the most powerful AI seem to fall abnormally more than in lower difficulties. I believe this is directly due to them not leveraging their militaries at home like they normally would, and instead, using maphack vision to try launch attacks halfway across the campaign world and losing out on all the potential for immediate gain from those troops against defended but beatable and more rewarding local targets. I consider EU4's attrition-hacking naval AI to be the same situation - sometimes it means the AI can do better, and often it sucks for the player, but from purely the perspective of the country in question it is VERY rare that they themselves actually benefit from the actions taken beyond supply/attrition range. England landing troops in the Balkans really sucks for the dude in the Balkans, but it actually sucks for England too. Same with them losing their heavies to galleys because they took a fight in the Aegean, or worse, someone down there sent their galleys to England and lost to those heavies.

Circumnavigation has an easy fix - if attrition hits 100% the ships continue and arrive safe, but the mission fails, and they need to wait to try again. Naval attrition has a far more complicated fix - punch whoever decided to program the AI to abuse it in the face (even if it means Wiz has to pull a fight club on himself), add scaling levels to it such as phantom attrition or a hard cap but increased supply range, and get to work fixing that shitty AI.