Please add the option to tell AI allies to attach to our army like ck2.

[Pat]

The AI are pretty dumb sometimes when it comes to maneuvering their armies and it's super annoying. I've lost some saves purely because the AI can't figure out how to evade an enemy army and just sit and die.

[volbound1700]

AI in war is pretty dumb on this game. At least they rush to join your battles and you can take advantage of that. However, they will abandon sieges that are at 95% sometimes for no reason.

[The Former]

Eh, I'm torn on this. I suppose the option couldn't hurt, but I doubt I'd use it. I don't like the AI basically existing as a tool of the player. They're supposed to be simulating feudal lords with their own goals and their own power, I don't expect them to do everything I say. We're peers, after all.

[Pat]

Originally posted by Lockfågel, the Paradox Knight:

Eh, I'm torn on this. I suppose the option couldn't hurt, but I doubt I'd use it. I don't like the AI basically existing as a tool of the player. They're supposed to be simulating feudal lords with their own goals and their own power, I don't expect them to do everything I say. We're peers, after all.

In a perfect world I wouldn't want to micro the AI for rp reasons, but after 700 + hours, it's pretty evident to me that the AI needs a LOT of work and for that reason there has to be an option to force attach them. I'm honestly starting to feel like the worse than CK2 AI but to be fair I never let CK2 AI do their own thing anyways.

[Сааребас]

Originally posted by quasaR:

Originally posted by Lockfågel, the Paradox Knight:

Eh, I'm torn on this. I suppose the option couldn't hurt, but I doubt I'd use it. I don't like the AI basically existing as a tool of the player. They're supposed to be simulating feudal lords with their own goals and their own power, I don't expect them to do everything I say. We're peers, after all.

In a perfect world I wouldn't want to micro the AI for rp reasons, but after 700 + hours, it's pretty evident to me that the AI needs a LOT of work and for that reason there has to be an option to force attach them. I'm honestly starting to feel like the worse than CK2 AI but to be fair I never let CK2 AI do their own thing anyways.

Even without the attach command in CK2, the battle a.i. in CK2 is simply better.
Some of the problems in CK3, *cough* crusade pathfinding *cough*, was vastly improved.
CK2 used to have the same problem.
The same counts for the siege, not siege, siege, not siege, thingy that has happened.

[ShepherdOfCats]

Originally posted by Западный шпион:

Originally posted by quasaR:

In a perfect world I wouldn't want to micro the AI for rp reasons, but after 700 + hours, it's pretty evident to me that the AI needs a LOT of work and for that reason there has to be an option to force attach them. I'm honestly starting to feel like the worse than CK2 AI but to be fair I never let CK2 AI do their own thing anyways.

Even without the attach command in CK2, the battle a.i. in CK2 is simply better.
Some of the problems in CK3, *cough* crusade pathfinding *cough*, was vastly improved.
CK2 used to have the same problem.
The same counts for the siege, not siege, siege, not siege, thingy that has happened.

Agreed. I rarely ever had to use the attach command in CK2, but then again supply limits were much higher than they are in CK3.

CK3's AI just doesn't know when to pile up if an enemy army approaches, which is inexcusable since the AI can detect enemies coming at them from 2 or 3 counties away.

I've seen countless times where the AI piles into a battle just as the first stack of friendly units is wiped out. That, or they won't stack up when they would have had an advantage. Either way each stack gets picked off separately.

The siege button was also useful in CK2. If I have a siege handled on my own, the AI does not need to abandon it's own siege that is almost completed to come sit beside me.

[Michael]

Originally posted by Lockfågel, the Paradox Knight:

Eh, I'm torn on this. I suppose the option couldn't hurt, but I doubt I'd use it. I don't like the AI basically existing as a tool of the player. They're supposed to be simulating feudal lords with their own goals and their own power, I don't expect them to do everything I say. We're peers, after all.

Being peers shouldn't prevent you from communicating and coordinating your actions in pursuit of a common goal, especially in wartime. While I can agree that it is unrealistic for the ai to do everything the player wants, I think it is even more unrealistic and jarring that you can't coordinate at all with your allies beyond asking if they will join your war.

I think a good compromise would be to have the level of ai cooperation linked to their personality traits and relationship with you.

[Klutch]

this would be great for bringing them into a war and then letting them get destroyed by another ruler. sounds like cheat mode to me

[Сааребас]

Originally posted by Klutch:

this would be great for bringing them into a war and then letting them get destroyed by another ruler. sounds like cheat mode to me

You haven't played Dragon Age Origins, have you?

because yes, I would def. see this as a possebility which may be could be punished with a reputation hit.
I also don't see this out of the perspective of historical accuracy, tho I fail to think of any examples just out of my head.

[ShepherdOfCats]

Originally posted by Klutch:

this would be great for bringing them into a war and then letting them get destroyed by another ruler. sounds like cheat mode to me

You wouldn't have to use it. Make it an option in the main menu. Some people play on very easy mode, and it affects you playing on normal in absolutely no way whatsoever.