Anti-player bias of AI is getting out of control

[DaBigUn]

The AI truly needs some adjustments. im tired of running around the campaign map to trap an AI army with enough power to take all of my settlements while my armies are at the other part of the map. Im so bored when I see a faction that im in good relations with suddenly declaring war when im fighting an enemy in the opposite side. In this state of the game, you have no option to ACT, all you can do is react to the stupid AI decision makings. playing is limited to see what AI decides to do and not what you want to do. you are forced to play the game AI wants. not the game you want to play. The game is not fun. its super boring and im done with it.
Im tired of building up an empire and see it ruined by a random war deceleration from a neighbouring semi friendly AI. 50 turns of building up just to get raided by a random rouge army, eventually razing 10 settlements and returning you back at turn 1! who said that randomness is fun? who thinks that illogical matters can be fun?

all the planing that player does gets countered by something ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ like a movement range buff for AI to get away from you, or to reach to the settlement you want to defend. tis game needs some serious AI readjustments, because at this state the game is not fun. Its too random. and too biased. unless you are playing dwarfs, who are trash anyways...

[Farsha]

Yea, this game would use AI adjustment, but in opposite way you’d like.
AI is pretty dumb, easily exploited and baited into traps.
Diplomacy is pretty transparent and war declarations don’t fall from blue sky.

Once you will get used to it, you will realise how easy it is to dominate in this game.

It does not need nerfs, it needs to get smarter.

And Dawi rule, you are going into the book for that one.

[StANP]

On Legendary or Normal? I don't think the AI have movement speed buff, just the ability to field armies faster than you (with reduced upkeep cost) and overusing quick march stance. Oh and they could know your armies location and the whole map and what settlement is weakest so yeah, Chorfs are the most outrageous when using all these advantages on my VC campaign plus the autoresolve heavily leans towards their units.

[Garatgh Deloi]

I would take the opposite view.

I would argue that the anti player bias needs to be stepped up again. The game is less fun ever since they nerfed it.

[Aleera]

Originally posted by Garatgh Deloi:

I would take the opposite view.

I would argue that the anti player bias needs to be stepped up again. The game is way to boring ever since they nerfed it.

How about they make it a toggle? Like they let us change AI stats separately.

Give people that find the AI to be to aggressive the option to turn it of, while those that want a hyper aggressive AI able to turn on what we had at launch.

[Zeek]

Originally posted by DaBigUn:

im tired of running around the campaign map to trap an AI army with enough power to take all of my settlements while my armies are at the other part of the map.

Ambush stance solves this problem.

Originally posted by DaBigUn:

Im so bored when I see a faction that im in good relations with suddenly declaring war when im fighting an enemy in the opposite side.

Yeah no, this doesn't happen by itself. You're either doing something to piss them off (trespassing, raiding, killing their friends, etc.), events are happening to sour your relations, nemesis crown, sword of khaine, etc, or a combination of these.

Originally posted by DaBigUn:

snip

Honestly, and I mean no disrespect here, but you don't seem to fully understand what's going on, because none of this happens "just randomly" as if to screw over the player. Drop down the difficulty to Normal and play more to familiarize yourself with how diplomacy works. Hover your mouse over the little faces of factions to see why exactly it looks happy or angry at you. It gives you a nice breakdown showing you exactly how they feel.

[DaBigUn]

most replies tell me that you havent played the game I have been playing. Ambush stance never works for me. AI will reach the settlements that it should not be able to reach and the game is ♥♥♥♥. maybe we are playing different games. who even plays this game on lower than very hard?

[dyne2alex]

Originally posted by Rianne:

Originally posted by Garatgh Deloi:

I would take the opposite view.

I would argue that the anti player bias needs to be stepped up again. The game is way to boring ever since they nerfed it.

How about they make it a toggle? Like they let us change AI stats separately.

Give people that find the AI to be to aggressive the option to turn it of, while those that want a hyper aggressive AI able to turn on what we had at launch.

the more difficulty toggles and sliders, the better. A friend of mine I just convinced to play warhammer 3 with me quit again because of the anti-player aggression, but I don't mind it when I'm playing solo.

[Zeek]

Originally posted by DaBigUn:

most replies tell me that you havent played the game I have been playing. Ambush stance never works for me.

Sometimes it doesn't work (because it's chance based) but statistically it will at some point. Put points into ambush success when you can. Ambush in forests and other areas that can bump up the success chance by 25% or more. There's also nothing wrong with save scumming.

Originally posted by DaBigUn:

AI will reach the settlements that it should not be able to reach and the game is ♥♥♥♥.

It literally doesn't do this. What you're seeing is the AI being very calculating with it's movement points. The AI plays by the same rules as the player here.

Originally posted by DaBigUn:

maybe we are playing different games.
who even plays this game on lower than very hard?

I don't know, I just know the AI isn't cheating like you say it is.

[Garatgh Deloi]

Originally posted by Rianne:

How about they make it a toggle? Like they let us change AI stats separately.

Give people that find the AI to be to aggressive the option to turn it of, while those that want a hyper aggressive AI able to turn on what we had at launch.

I personally wouldn't mind it being a toggle/setting.

That said, i have heard that devs don't like adding too many of those. Something about human nature and players not necessarily choosing the options they would find the most fun.

[Tech-52]

Originally posted by DaBigUn:

most replies tell me that you havent played the game I have been playing. Ambush stance never works for me. AI will reach the settlements that it should not be able to reach and the game is ♥♥♥♥. maybe we are playing different games. who even plays this game on lower than very hard?

Ambush do work but not always since the ai have strong campaign line of sight.

Lot's of people play on lower diff and it's nothing to be ashamed of.

You built a large empire? Good you need to field more armies to protect the 4 corners. If you don't have enough money that means you are expending too fast.
So i suggest you to lower difficulty to hard or medium and master the game first then step by step bring it back up

[jtordoff]

The Anti-player Bias coupled with the AI cheating has turned the game into an arcade style game. The AI just keeps sending conga lines of loot and experience right to the human players doorstep, even more on higher difficulty levels. JUST wait in ambush stance, near defensive structures, another shipment of loot is coming in. By the time you have recovered from the first wave, the second wave is incoming and the third wave is being built. There is no way the AI could afford that, not even close, but it happens over and over again, like "Space Invaders". The only way to break the cycle is to break the AI with "Diplomacy". Give them a single province with a basic military building and they are begging to be your incompetent Vassal BUT it wants a zillion gold for a mutual beneficial trade agreement, boggles my mind.

To be crystal clear, AGGRESSIVE doesn't mean good or competent, it just means it attacks even when it should not. We already have Kamikaze factions, where the AI sends all their troops at the player while another AI faction rolls up and takes their empire from them and then promptly declares war on the player. It really does ruin the illusion of multiple Factions which is the whole reason to have all these factions.

The AI is shouldn't be walking into a wood chipper over and over again. Each faction should make survival a priority,

[I Throw Spears.]

Some players just completely ignore Aversion and Diplomacy.



Some races are just straight up going to declare war on you at some point.

Some races can be buttered up slowly via gifts, non-aggression treaties, and trade agreements.


Use the tools given to you.

The AI is hilariously weak.

[Max Doge]

Actually for once in my current Franz campaign on L/H the AI has been fighting among themselves and ignoring me, like Vlad and Drycha knocking each other out so I just wiped them for free afterwards.

[Falaris]

How to get ambush to work:
Ambush is setting your army somewhere you think the AI will move, and if/when it does, you get a hugely favorable battle.

How to make it do that? Recruit a fresh lord with no army. Name it 'bait mc lureface'. Put it next to your ambushing army. The AI will attack targets of opportunity like that.

So... the AI is predictable. It does not learn from its mistakes, so this will never not be a thing.

That this works consistently tells me two things:
1: The AI doesn't cheat, and it's not receiving free ambush information it shouldn't have.
2: The AI isn't that clever.

[miscellaneous unc]

Originally posted by Garatgh Deloi:

I would take the opposite view.

I would argue that the anti player bias needs to be stepped up again. The game is less fun ever since they nerfed it.

Yeah I agree. AI in Warhammer 3 are extremely passive compared to past TW games. It should scale more with campaign difficulty.