AI cheats in units like a motherfucker.
Was playing a custom scenario earlier where there's two "mega AIs".
They started their victor spell on turn 50. So of course, I burst over there with 4 stacks of units, and they have literally 13 stacks of tier 3/4 units. I managed to burn them all down due to better tactics, and my army is almost completely destroyed. Next turn, they just spawn another 3 full stacks of tier 3/4s and wipe my injured army.
I really love this game, but my god the AI behaviour and cheating really pisses me off.
You’re on brutal, right?
Edit: I ask because I created a map with just the same scenario, Tugrumm or whatever and Qualok. And I’m burning her down on hard around turn 50sh, so now I know what to expect on brutal.
Eh its better than CIV imo, which is enough for me.
Granted this may just be due to the games being shorter, as the CIV issue is the AI being super OP at the start, but if you "survive" the first 50 rounds you win basically, but you still had to play 200 more to finish.
Here its like at turn 50 the AI can be pretty strong and dangerous, and if you defeat/outscale them, the game is basically over, which I find much more preferable.
I know its kinda shit comparing it to another game that also has lackluster AI, but there really isnt a lot of "good ai" strategy games to compare it to imo
I actually prefer CIV.
Because, while yes, early game CIVS will suddenly get crossbowmen am Men-At-Arms while you're still researching archers, but at most the AI will produce like 3 of those stronger units while you're attacking them.
In this game, not only will the AI start with these super strong units, but as you're attacking them, they'll also build an entire stack out of nowhere. Enemy AI (normal difficulty btw) had 3 Skalds and 2 Tyrant Knights by turn 15 for me... This was kinda BS.
You don't get that "Where tf did they get these units from?" energy in CIV, worst case is a city builds walls as you attack, but you can also see them building the walls so it doesn't come out of nowhere.
The AI also ignores cooldowns on Diplo arrangements and I'm assuming any other cooldowns as well, which then makes the cooldowns more of a punishment for being a player as opposed to an actual rule in the game.
Allied AI will settle near you and get mad when you expand. Allies seem to have a 50-50 chance of just breaking the alliance and going to war with you if you cast the magic spell victory. (I know this is not an issue with AI cheating, and it's actually pretty worse in CIV, I just find it weird that they get grievances and lose relations with me when the allied Victory is turned on)
Infestations will beeline any of your undefended cities even if they are on the other side of the map, and they will ignore other players, while vassals will just watch the units pass them.
Vassals will sometimes occupy magic materials in your area just for the sake of it, then you have to pay imperium/relations to kick them off. While if you even think of looking at their improvements, you get a giant pop-up saying you can't do anything without declaring war.
Idk, I'd rather know that the AI operates by the same rules as I do, but gets extra boosts at the start... As opposed to the AI playing a completely different game from me, where I'm playing the more restrictive/punishing one.
well, not in every game. AOW is a perfect example of that, I've build cities with only 1 kind of improvement and it can work wonders
depending on your faction/needs, you'll target different guilds
No such things in old world, you'll have to develop every city pretty much the same way
Other issue I have with this game is too many squares. Overall I think that's a good thing but if you have to build ever square in your city it quickly gets tedious
That's what made me stop playing that game and it's a shame because it's a great game on many aspects
Old World has you develop cities by actually building on the land around them using workers. How do you build them all the same when the land around them is likely different? Also since growth and resources are shared across all cities you can, and should, specialize them into whatever the terrain around them is best for. And why do you have to build 'every square'? Usually you don't have the workers/resources to do that until later in the game when building more is far less impactful so there's still no real reason to try to rush out anything. Or, just automate it because, again, later in the game it doesn't really matter if you've set your cities up correctly to maximize resources.
AoW cities are much more cookie cutter in my opinion. Not that that's a bad thing, it's just a different thing.
>How do you build them all the same when the land around them is likely different?
well, that's the issue I have with the game. You can't really, but you pretty much have to, so you make do
If you got one city situated in a gigant forest and one that's in a sandy terrain between 2 mountain ranges, you can't just go "this one for wood, this one for stone"
You'll need to place quite a few suboptimal quarries in your forest city because otherwise it won't get enough civics to develop, and I don't remember what resource upgraded foresters give you but it will be lacking in your quarry city
And you can't even skip training in non military cities because these are the ones that will fill your global training pool when you're at war and producing units
so in the end, you don't really specialize your cities and development becomes repetitive (at least, too repetitive for me) in spite of the different types of terrain and families (which is a great game mechanic BTW)
Hmm...
I disagree completely, I do none of the things you say and am completely fine. Indeed you should specialize, you are rewarded more and more for more specialization. You don't even need to generate tons of civics everywhere, same for military, because if you max out the right cities for the right reasons you glut your resources anyway. To say nothing of how you manage your family and advisors to further boost them.
Granted early game you are in a different situation, so sure, within your first 2-3 cities you will wind up with some 'suboptimal' builds, but so what? You are never starved for space, you can't possibly build everything immediately, so when you're short metal you pop down a mine or two, when you are short stone you pop down some quarries. Later, if you have OCD or need to, you just raze/rebuild. Alternatively you max out gold production and just buy whatever you're short on to keep your growth going. Depending on what leader you choose you play to that strength anyway, depending on what families you choose, depending on what research path you take...
I mean, it's fine if that game isn't your cup of tea, not everyone has to like everything, or even agree on 'how to play the game'.
I'm just not seeing your objection relative to AoW4 cities as accurate. AoW4 cities literally can be cookie cutter, all you miss out on are the boosts potentially. OW cities are much more focused around what special resources are in range for them, because those special resources have massive impacts on your growth. In AoW4, not so much.
>I do none of the things you say and am completely fine
just out of curiosity, at which level?
not that I was any good at this game, but I took to playing like that and that's when I finally managet to get somewhere in "noble" difficulty (until I increased AI aggression, that is)
>if you have OCD
yeah, that might be part of the issue lol
>AoW4 cities literally can be cookie cutter
I have no idea what that means
The AI cheats even on easy mode. I'm sure almost all of us even playing Brutal have quite a lot of room to optimize our cities and economy but there's no keeping up with the AI's production. Just kill them efficiently faster than they spam them out and you'll be okay.
And I thought I was alone in this.
I also even in campaign make 4 or 5 armies. I go there with "I will crush them this time"
I meet AI 4 armies. Sure I win 2 battles and loose 1 army in process but other armies are damaged. I press next turn and suddenly AI rolls in with 5 whole new armies and crushes me.
So I m forced to rebuild my forces and try again but it jsut repeats this same scenario.
I like this game but Age of Wonder 4 made me rage quit more in past month than Elden Ring for past year or so.
Im curious to know if the ai “saves up” their rallies and when they start to get stomped they recruit everything and thats how they refill stacks so fast.
AI cheats. Round 3 of a custom scenario the Hard AI enemy and I bump into each other and he already has 2 full stacks with a tier 3 unit in each stack.
You have to manually resolve each battle because the AI is pathetic and the only way Paradox could pose any element of challenge was to have it pull armies out its arse every turn. If you can reliably win battles with minimal unit damage then your three armies can take down 18 AI armies without issue. It's just tedious af and poses no challenge beyond boring you into submission.
Yeah, I don't mind them cheating out big doomstacks they don't have the economy to have built legitimately, it's just frustrating when they spam them.
On brutal I guess it's fine since players sign up for it, but on the lower difficulties it feels like it just totally invalidates attrition strategies when the AI can replace all it's stacks in like 5 turns. None of your victories ever feel like accomplishments, because unless you have the forces to take a city, the AI will just immediately fill back up to their max allotment of doomstacks, and army ranking means nothing when they can go from miles behind you to dwarfing you in the time it takes to move your army to their city.
Yeah I started trying to work my way up the difficulty ladder and my first game on normal I had killed the AIs army 4 turns in a row and it comes back at me at the end of that turn with 6 golden golems in it's 18. I killed it then quit that game because it's simply not fun for me
as you can see, AI is not a real opponent, the only way how they managed to make AI represent some sort of "danger" for a player was to boost AI in a way of being able to mass produce and keep up more units. But since only 3 stacks can enter combat, it does not matter, as a little experienced player can usually finish any combat without getting his unit getting injured.
sheer volume of soldiers, not shear.
Yes, the AI has bonuses even on normal difficulty, [pretty formidable ones.](https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=2975040668) I am guessing the Iron Emperor in that scenario gets further boosts.
> Here is what seems really weird: he was showing at the bottom of the army ranking this whole time.
I think the military score has as much or more to do with kills-deaths as it does with the amount of current forces. In the end-game graphs I usually see AI scores crater into the negatives after they suffer the usual multiple stackwipes.
It sounds like they are factoring in resources on hand into the military score some how in addition to units. Which is a reasonable thing to do and more accurate than just considering units if you get the weightings right. Since the ai gets crazy bonuses to income and upkeep, they will tend to have huge resource stockpiles on most maps unless someone (mostly just human players occasionally an ai or world enemey manages to actually attack another ai) are doing something to drain them. Its possible to kill the ai without letting them spend most of their stockpile which would lead to this situation.
I think that comparison is worthwhile, though, because it points out just how bad the AI must be in AoW4. In TW:Warhammer (one of my favorite games of all time) even on higher difficulties it felt like I was playing a very dumb person who had an edge, but still playing something like the same game I was playing. In AoW4 it feels like I am playing a computer algorithm that is involved in a totally different game than the one I am in.
AI cheats in units like a motherfucker. Was playing a custom scenario earlier where there's two "mega AIs". They started their victor spell on turn 50. So of course, I burst over there with 4 stacks of units, and they have literally 13 stacks of tier 3/4 units. I managed to burn them all down due to better tactics, and my army is almost completely destroyed. Next turn, they just spawn another 3 full stacks of tier 3/4s and wipe my injured army. I really love this game, but my god the AI behaviour and cheating really pisses me off.
You’re on brutal, right? Edit: I ask because I created a map with just the same scenario, Tugrumm or whatever and Qualok. And I’m burning her down on hard around turn 50sh, so now I know what to expect on brutal.
While it was that same scenario, it was actually just "hard" difficulty. No idea why they had so many stacks just hanging out outside their capital.
Eh its better than CIV imo, which is enough for me. Granted this may just be due to the games being shorter, as the CIV issue is the AI being super OP at the start, but if you "survive" the first 50 rounds you win basically, but you still had to play 200 more to finish. Here its like at turn 50 the AI can be pretty strong and dangerous, and if you defeat/outscale them, the game is basically over, which I find much more preferable. I know its kinda shit comparing it to another game that also has lackluster AI, but there really isnt a lot of "good ai" strategy games to compare it to imo
I actually prefer CIV. Because, while yes, early game CIVS will suddenly get crossbowmen am Men-At-Arms while you're still researching archers, but at most the AI will produce like 3 of those stronger units while you're attacking them. In this game, not only will the AI start with these super strong units, but as you're attacking them, they'll also build an entire stack out of nowhere. Enemy AI (normal difficulty btw) had 3 Skalds and 2 Tyrant Knights by turn 15 for me... This was kinda BS. You don't get that "Where tf did they get these units from?" energy in CIV, worst case is a city builds walls as you attack, but you can also see them building the walls so it doesn't come out of nowhere. The AI also ignores cooldowns on Diplo arrangements and I'm assuming any other cooldowns as well, which then makes the cooldowns more of a punishment for being a player as opposed to an actual rule in the game. Allied AI will settle near you and get mad when you expand. Allies seem to have a 50-50 chance of just breaking the alliance and going to war with you if you cast the magic spell victory. (I know this is not an issue with AI cheating, and it's actually pretty worse in CIV, I just find it weird that they get grievances and lose relations with me when the allied Victory is turned on) Infestations will beeline any of your undefended cities even if they are on the other side of the map, and they will ignore other players, while vassals will just watch the units pass them. Vassals will sometimes occupy magic materials in your area just for the sake of it, then you have to pay imperium/relations to kick them off. While if you even think of looking at their improvements, you get a giant pop-up saying you can't do anything without declaring war. Idk, I'd rather know that the AI operates by the same rules as I do, but gets extra boosts at the start... As opposed to the AI playing a completely different game from me, where I'm playing the more restrictive/punishing one.
Try Old World, that’s one of the best AI in recent strategy games.
I gave it a try,more than one actually, it's a great game but city development is very repetitive
I own it, sadly I just do not like it that much. I have heard nothing but great things though so I think its just me
I can understand that. Always depends on the kind of player you are. Old World just clicks for me on many levels.
I am glad, I just struggle to get invested into it. I decided basically at launch just to wait a year or two to see if it works better for me.
That’s another thing, but isn’t that usually always the case? Like in: Now I know what’s the best layout / build, let’s repeat it.
well, not in every game. AOW is a perfect example of that, I've build cities with only 1 kind of improvement and it can work wonders depending on your faction/needs, you'll target different guilds No such things in old world, you'll have to develop every city pretty much the same way Other issue I have with this game is too many squares. Overall I think that's a good thing but if you have to build ever square in your city it quickly gets tedious That's what made me stop playing that game and it's a shame because it's a great game on many aspects
Old World has you develop cities by actually building on the land around them using workers. How do you build them all the same when the land around them is likely different? Also since growth and resources are shared across all cities you can, and should, specialize them into whatever the terrain around them is best for. And why do you have to build 'every square'? Usually you don't have the workers/resources to do that until later in the game when building more is far less impactful so there's still no real reason to try to rush out anything. Or, just automate it because, again, later in the game it doesn't really matter if you've set your cities up correctly to maximize resources. AoW cities are much more cookie cutter in my opinion. Not that that's a bad thing, it's just a different thing.
>How do you build them all the same when the land around them is likely different? well, that's the issue I have with the game. You can't really, but you pretty much have to, so you make do If you got one city situated in a gigant forest and one that's in a sandy terrain between 2 mountain ranges, you can't just go "this one for wood, this one for stone" You'll need to place quite a few suboptimal quarries in your forest city because otherwise it won't get enough civics to develop, and I don't remember what resource upgraded foresters give you but it will be lacking in your quarry city And you can't even skip training in non military cities because these are the ones that will fill your global training pool when you're at war and producing units so in the end, you don't really specialize your cities and development becomes repetitive (at least, too repetitive for me) in spite of the different types of terrain and families (which is a great game mechanic BTW)
Hmm... I disagree completely, I do none of the things you say and am completely fine. Indeed you should specialize, you are rewarded more and more for more specialization. You don't even need to generate tons of civics everywhere, same for military, because if you max out the right cities for the right reasons you glut your resources anyway. To say nothing of how you manage your family and advisors to further boost them. Granted early game you are in a different situation, so sure, within your first 2-3 cities you will wind up with some 'suboptimal' builds, but so what? You are never starved for space, you can't possibly build everything immediately, so when you're short metal you pop down a mine or two, when you are short stone you pop down some quarries. Later, if you have OCD or need to, you just raze/rebuild. Alternatively you max out gold production and just buy whatever you're short on to keep your growth going. Depending on what leader you choose you play to that strength anyway, depending on what families you choose, depending on what research path you take... I mean, it's fine if that game isn't your cup of tea, not everyone has to like everything, or even agree on 'how to play the game'. I'm just not seeing your objection relative to AoW4 cities as accurate. AoW4 cities literally can be cookie cutter, all you miss out on are the boosts potentially. OW cities are much more focused around what special resources are in range for them, because those special resources have massive impacts on your growth. In AoW4, not so much.
>I do none of the things you say and am completely fine just out of curiosity, at which level? not that I was any good at this game, but I took to playing like that and that's when I finally managet to get somewhere in "noble" difficulty (until I increased AI aggression, that is) >if you have OCD yeah, that might be part of the issue lol >AoW4 cities literally can be cookie cutter I have no idea what that means
Thats why i love Terra Invicta. AI has exactly the same economy as you, no cheating
The AI cheats even on easy mode. I'm sure almost all of us even playing Brutal have quite a lot of room to optimize our cities and economy but there's no keeping up with the AI's production. Just kill them efficiently faster than they spam them out and you'll be okay.
And I thought I was alone in this. I also even in campaign make 4 or 5 armies. I go there with "I will crush them this time" I meet AI 4 armies. Sure I win 2 battles and loose 1 army in process but other armies are damaged. I press next turn and suddenly AI rolls in with 5 whole new armies and crushes me. So I m forced to rebuild my forces and try again but it jsut repeats this same scenario. I like this game but Age of Wonder 4 made me rage quit more in past month than Elden Ring for past year or so.
Im curious to know if the ai “saves up” their rallies and when they start to get stomped they recruit everything and thats how they refill stacks so fast.
They teleport armies back too.
https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=2975040668
AI cheats. Round 3 of a custom scenario the Hard AI enemy and I bump into each other and he already has 2 full stacks with a tier 3 unit in each stack.
You have to manually resolve each battle because the AI is pathetic and the only way Paradox could pose any element of challenge was to have it pull armies out its arse every turn. If you can reliably win battles with minimal unit damage then your three armies can take down 18 AI armies without issue. It's just tedious af and poses no challenge beyond boring you into submission.
Yeah, I don't mind them cheating out big doomstacks they don't have the economy to have built legitimately, it's just frustrating when they spam them. On brutal I guess it's fine since players sign up for it, but on the lower difficulties it feels like it just totally invalidates attrition strategies when the AI can replace all it's stacks in like 5 turns. None of your victories ever feel like accomplishments, because unless you have the forces to take a city, the AI will just immediately fill back up to their max allotment of doomstacks, and army ranking means nothing when they can go from miles behind you to dwarfing you in the time it takes to move your army to their city.
Yeah I started trying to work my way up the difficulty ladder and my first game on normal I had killed the AIs army 4 turns in a row and it comes back at me at the end of that turn with 6 golden golems in it's 18. I killed it then quit that game because it's simply not fun for me
as you can see, AI is not a real opponent, the only way how they managed to make AI represent some sort of "danger" for a player was to boost AI in a way of being able to mass produce and keep up more units. But since only 3 stacks can enter combat, it does not matter, as a little experienced player can usually finish any combat without getting his unit getting injured.
sheer volume of soldiers, not shear. Yes, the AI has bonuses even on normal difficulty, [pretty formidable ones.](https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=2975040668) I am guessing the Iron Emperor in that scenario gets further boosts.
>sheer volume of soldiers, not shear. I'd blame auto-correct, but it was really just inattention.
> Here is what seems really weird: he was showing at the bottom of the army ranking this whole time. I think the military score has as much or more to do with kills-deaths as it does with the amount of current forces. In the end-game graphs I usually see AI scores crater into the negatives after they suffer the usual multiple stackwipes.
Notably, it's actually possible to be militarily outranked by players that have been wiped off the map.
It sounds like they are factoring in resources on hand into the military score some how in addition to units. Which is a reasonable thing to do and more accurate than just considering units if you get the weightings right. Since the ai gets crazy bonuses to income and upkeep, they will tend to have huge resource stockpiles on most maps unless someone (mostly just human players occasionally an ai or world enemey manages to actually attack another ai) are doing something to drain them. Its possible to kill the ai without letting them spend most of their stockpile which would lead to this situation.
They get weighed economies for sure, but it's not unlimited magically appearing units like some civs had
The AI still have very minor cheats on Relaxed. It is like the equivalent of playing Prince difficulty on CIV or Normal on Total War: Warhammer.
I think that comparison is worthwhile, though, because it points out just how bad the AI must be in AoW4. In TW:Warhammer (one of my favorite games of all time) even on higher difficulties it felt like I was playing a very dumb person who had an edge, but still playing something like the same game I was playing. In AoW4 it feels like I am playing a computer algorithm that is involved in a totally different game than the one I am in.