Aggressive AI

[LzPrst]

yeah. coastal invasions =

[Supr49er]

Haven't you had the AI launch a massive amphibious assault with marines? I was shocked when Stalin took my best port city with a huge force of marines, then unloaded into the city artillery, tanks, and infantry. Lucky for me they stayed in that city and I was able to retake it 5 or 6 turns later. I learned my lesson about keeping a strong navy with a submarine screen.

[jkp1187]

Originally posted by Jaybe

As an amateur answer:
Because the element of surprise can at least sometimes trump being overwhelmed on the beachhead. Otherwise stated as "people were complaining that the AI was NOT making amphibious attacks" when they could have worked.

Consider that the aggressor civ has very imperfect info on your troop dispositions, and the AI is not even programmed to consider which of your units are within striking distance (railroads in your case).

Before BtS, I have seen the AI make strong landings (next to my capital, for instance), but it made no difference -- they were still destroyed (with a little anxiety & straining of effort on my part). They chose to try to heal in their assault positions instead of attack & raze my city, so they were destroyed by my next-turn reinforcements.

I think the AI needs a little more focus on marines & amphibious promotion. Keep several (NOT All) of these units in reserve coastal areas so they can be dispatched to transports.

The AI also needs to focus on prioritizing unit attack order when doing amphibious assaults. As it is now, in my games, it'll often get hit with the strongest infantry units first, then the siege units, then the weaker units. There are many instances in my games where if the AI had started out sacrificing the siege units to do collateral damage, its strong infantry wouldn't get savaged, and it could have won the battle.

[vilemerchant]

Originally posted by jkp1187


The AI also needs to focus on prioritizing unit attack order when doing amphibious assaults. As it is now, in my games, it'll often hit with the strongest infantry units first, then the siege units, then the weaker units. There are many instances in my games where if the AI had started out sacrificing the siege units to do collateral damage, its strong infantry wouldn't get savaged, and it could have won the battle.

Siege units attacking last instead of first is almost a military tradition for the new AI

[Jaybe]

Hopefully siege will attack sooner (as in first) in 3.13. Whether it is documented or not.

[Experimentalist]

After reading this thread yesterday afternoon, I went home and started up my first game
of BtS with Aggressive AI enabled.

I wanted to take it easy on my first time through with it enabled, so I started a
new game. I played it on Noble, Hemispheres (Huge), Marathon, and 16 civs..

And whoever pointed out that you didnt necessarily have to spend all of your time slugging
it out with the rival civ's since turn 1 was dead on correct! I actually managed to have better
relations with the rival AI's thoughout the game so far (its now ~1750AD).

It was pure heaven to watch the AI's duke it out between themselves several times
in a row.. 14 civs going at it.. MUHAHAHAHA

Excellent!

In any case.. I look forward to trying a harder setting
soon (hey, its friday!), and Aggressive AI will definatly be
a default setting for me, from now on.

- Exper

[jkp1187]

Has anyone noticed if the AI amphibious assaults use siege units to attack first in 3.13? Unfortunately, Direct2Drive.com STILL hasn't released the patch yet....