I never ever saw monster attacking an AI outpost.
Never.
I never saw a monster attack one of my own outposts either, actually. I don't recall having ever built a warden at all.
I've seen that happen. I have also moved in with my pioneers after random event enemies wiped out the cities of sovereigns that could not be bothered to defend against them. I have also played using strategies where defending cities is usually not worth the bother (like when they are just hubs for spawning pioneers).
Brad said that monsters do not specifically target and attack outposts(or resources). They do however destroy them randomly if those happen to be in the way.
Eh... really?
I thought I remembered them working for me. Then again, I have been seeing a variety of bugs which I need to reproduce so I can report them. I will have to go in and see if this "roads do not boost move when war has been declared" thing is something that I see consistently, inconsistently or not at all.
I left a settlement spot alone because there was a dragon near it.
Later, Gilden moves a pioneer in and settles.
The Dragon gets pissed and immediately beelines for my cities.
I'd sent every unit I had available to the two cities it was threatening... And the dragon wouldn't attack me in the cities... It kept wandering about.
My sovereign was off in foreign lands adventuring, and I didn't think I had a chance against the dragon with my army, so I hit it with strategic flame spells (storm dragon, wasn't immune to fire) and tremors to hold it in place until it was almost dead, then sent my army in. 5 of 7 units in my army died, but I killed the dragon.
However, I think the dragon should have wandered about Gilden's city, as it disturbed it, and around it's lair, not traveling further to cross the border into my territory. Tactically, Gilden's city was a better choice, as it was not well defended like mine and threatened the dragon's lair. A nice easy target ignored in favor of attacking me...
Dragons, and other monsters, shouldn't be moving randomly. They should have goals (protect their base, raid for food) and move to accomplish those goals. They should leave the base once in a while, walk in a circle (hunting behavior), chase easy prey (pioneers), flee from stronger fights. Resources are prime targets then. Generally poorly defended, yet still have some people (food) operating the mine or ranch or whatever. Destroy one thing, then return to their lair, fat and happy for while.
Should be able to negotiate with the smarter monsters like dragons, offer it gold or population to leave for a term. Dumber monsters you should be able to bait with a fast low value unit to lead them away from your stuff (Although if they have a lair, they'll return there later), or pay to drop a pile of meat for it to appease it. . Need some options of dealing with early deadly monsters.
I agree. but my take on this is that Frogboy made a strategic decision that AI priority was given to the AI factions. On top of getting more development time, the faction AI also gets pretty much all of the processor time during the game because monster AI makes its decisions based on dice rolls.
That's a great idea!
Except I guarantee you that the AI would be better at bribing monsters than you are. Which means that the monsters would not attack the AI and people would grief the forums even harder.
But still, I'd love to see a bribing mechanism applied to the larger monsters. Such bribes should also increase the monster's level. So that it always demands moar and becomes ever more dangerous as the game wears on.
It would also be nice if the loot ended up as part of the monster's hoard. So if someone finally killed the beast, they would be showered in gold.
Hmm... I don't think processor time is much of an issue to implement monster behavior in a turn based game, not compared to the AI factions that have to coordinate resources and troops and diplomacy... I've done a bit of programming, and I'm thinking it can be done fairly simply... Although it would be tempting to complicate things once you really tried nailing down the behavior you wanted (monsters that leave the area when it's too civilized/too threatening and find another lair, for instance).
If the AI factions were bribing monsters, at least people on the forums would have an explanation for the AI's not getting attacked, and they'd know that the AI paid for it in some way.
Yeah, I like the idea of the monster gaining levels through extortion... lol
This AI problem has been around forever, and is a great big black festering hole in what otherwise is a fantastic game. Why on earth don't they fix it, is it working as intended?
I have been playing a dense monster game, and the AI has been getting trashed by the monsters.
Here are some tips, though, for dealing with monsters:
First, do not disturb lairs if you are not prepared to deal with the occupants. If you build a city near a dangerous lair, change the name of your city to something that tells you not to extend its boundaries.
Second, a garrison can help fend off monsters.
Third, monsters will move only one tile per season on the strategic map. And, they love to chase pioneers, if they are close enough. So you can often save a city by sending out some pioneers to stand just out of reach of the monsters. Often this will mean that the monster will spend its move chasing the pioneers.
Fourth, monsters will not venture too far from their lairs (so they will chase the pioneers for only a few seasons, you need to pay attention to the geometry of the situation, though, if you want to keep them alive). (Also, if you have not noticed yet: when you mouse over a tile on the strategic map, the movement cost for entering the tile will appear in the lower right of the screen.)
You can also sometimes drag monsters the AI's armies, but I have not found a reliable way to make this useful.
If this thread is getting this much attention there is probably a problem. It is very annoying when a monster pack roams into your territory from another computers territory and destroys your city (cities). So annoying in fact that some people might stop playing, why not just fix it so the monsters attack all the same... How can someone argue against fair play?
Sigh. There is nothing to fix. The monsters do not give preferential treatment to the AI.
A number of years ago I was a GM for a successful online game. People playing that game regularly used (ate) violets in it because they all believed--and we're talking a userbase at the time in excess of 12000--that it functioned as a subtle aid to healing. It was common knowledge, and there was no manual for things as detailed at that. In fact, there was nothing, literally nothing in the code about violet and healing. Violets had other uses in potions (non-healing ones), but they did zip for healing. But whenever someone asked about this in the forums, enough people would always point out that they had friends who had friends that had seen it work, and that was that. Violets helped speed healing.
The reason the problem you see won't be fixed is because the perception doesn't equal the reality, no matter how many people believe it so.
I agree that the AI doesn't get preferential treatment, but wouldn't it be cool if monsters destroyed cities one improvement at a time? The city would only be razed when the last improvement was destroyed.
Maybe specify what we want in detail? I worked this up in a couple hours, might be some possibilities of infinite recursion I've missed, but I think it's what I'd want to see, which is intelligent behavior, monsters going after whoever disturbed them, varying behavior for different classes of monsters...
General Lair-based AI for Monsters and Bandits, to be processed during End Turns
Designed for most monsters. Prioritizes survival, then opportunistic preying on weaker units/cities. After attacking a target and presumably surviving, the monster will return to it's lair to rest. Monsters try to stick to forests and hills and swamps when possible.
Modifications for bandits/Syndicate: Remove warden detection. Find new lair if current lair is inside borders. Initial bandits will always guard their lair (only Lair behavior: no random hunting, will only attack targets adjacent to the lair). Spawned bandits will immediately go hunting, targeting closest city, and use lair based AI. After cooldown expires, they will immediately go hunting again.
Modifications for spawned nomadic monsters: They should set off in a specific direction after spawning (hunting behavior), possibly set up a lair.
Modifications for undead: Undead kill because they hate life. Once woken, they continue hunting and killing, not returning to their lairs (nomadic), and they do not care about threats, being mindless. They won't prioritize cover (forests/swamps/hills) and won't randomly awaken to hunt. Good behavior for golems, too. Probably should also attack other monsters...
Modifications for demons: Kill because they hate life, not for sustenance. Similar to undead, except they do care about threats.
General Prey/Threat definitions
- Threats are units/cities with greater or equal strength. If of equal strength, threats have equal or more unit members.
- Prey are units/cites with equal or less strength. If of equal strength, prey have less unit members.
- Pioneers and resources and outposts are always prey unless guarded. The system below allows a unit to guard
Variables
AI: specifies AI algorithm to use for monster (Lair based, nomadic, undead, demonic, bandit-leader, bandit-raider). This can change for a specific monster, for example, if a lair is destroyed, and no room exists to create a new lair, AI becomes nomadic.
Behavior: Current behavior of the monster.
Target: A location where the monster thinks it's current objective is near.
Cooldown: Used as a timer
Start
Behavior = Lair? ; Used when the monster is current in it's lair.
Lair destroyed? ; Shouldn't happen with the monster in the lair... but just in case.
Behavior = FindNewLair
Redo from start
Check for warden
within warden range, and city attached to the outpost has strength greater or equal to monster?
Look for threats ; Threats in this case are units/cities with strength two higher than the monster (Strong unit threatens a weak monster). Scan radius one tile.
Threat? ; Home ain't worth dying over...
Cooldown > 0 ; Recently eaten?
Cooldown = Cooldown - 1
Exit
Health less than max? ; Don't look for trouble if still wounded...
Look for prey ; Prey are units/cities with strength less than monster. If equal strength, prey have less unit members. Scan radius is two tiles
Prey?
Behavior = Attack
Inside nation borders?
Behavior = Hunt
Cooldown = 9 ; hunt for eight seasons
Target = Closest city matching nation borders.
5% chance of... ; Maybe modified by difficulty?
Behavior = Hunt ; Monsters will occasionally leave their lairs.
Target = random tile within three tiles of lair.
Behavior = Hunt? ; Hunt behavior is used when a specific target isn't available... Basically searching for targets.
Disallow movement to any tile that is protected by a warden with city strength greater or equal to monster.
No movement available?
Behavior = Evade
Currently within warden range, and city attached to the outpost has strength greater or equal to monster?
Look for threats ; Threats are units/cities with strength greater or equal to monster. If equal strength, threats have equal or more unit members. Scan radius two tiles
Disallow any possible movement that moves monster within attack range of a threat.
Is a threat within attack range? ; one tile attack range.
Target = weakest available prey
Redo from start.
Look for resources ; Resources currently being gathered are a secondary priority, so you can bait monsters away with a weak unit. scan radius is 2 tiles.
Resources?
Target = Resource
Cooldown = 1? ; Cooldown tracks turns until monster gives up and returns to lair empty handed.
Cooldown = 0
Behavior = MoveToLair
Cooldown > 1?
Move to one of the remaining possible tiles, prioritizing target direction (any tiles that move closer to target, this should normally be 3 tiles unless tiles are disallowed by threats), then prioritizing tiles with forest, swamp, and hills. If no priorities, use random determination to select a tile
Behavior = MoveToLair? ; Used after attacking something
Lair destroyed?
If no movement available, reset possible movements
Look for threats ; Threats are units/cities with strength greater or equal to monster. If equal, threats have equal or more unit members. Scan radius two tiles
Move to a safe tile, prioritizing forest, swamp, and hill tiles (tiles with cover and no civilization), then prioritizing lair direction
Behavior = Attack? ; Used when a target is found. target is last known location of prey
Look for prey ; we've possibly moved last turn, along with prey, so try to find again.
Is any prey at Range = 1?
Attack target
Cooldown = 3 ; wait three seasons after getting back to lair
Else
Target = weakest available prey that can be moved to (range will be 2, so we're trying to move adjacent to prey) on remaining possible movement tiles. If no prey meet that criteria, target weakest available prey (means a threat is close, so we have to travel around the threat to get to the prey).
Move to one of the remaining possible tiles, prioritizing target direction (any tiles that move closer to target, this should normally be 3 tiles unless tiles are disallowed by threats), then prioritizing tiles with forest, swamp, and hills. If no clear priority tile, use random determination to select a tile
Behavior = Hunt ; Lost the target, hunt around the immediate area.
Cooldown = 4 ; Hunt for three turns
Behavior = Evade? ; Use when a monster is threatened.
Check for threats (one tile radius)
Disallow movement to tiles containing threats
No possible movement left?
25% of attacking weakest unit ; completely surrounded by tougher units. Suggest Frenzying monster.
Check threat attack ranges (for threats in a two tile radius)
Disallow movement to threatened tiles
Is current tile threatened?
Move to tile prioritizing tile without a threat, closer to lair, and containing trees, swamp, or hills. If more than one tile, pick a random tile.
Check tiles within radius of one for prey
Exit ; Currently safe.
Check for warden (one tile radius)
Disallow movement to warded tiles
Move to tile prioritizing tile without a threat, not threatened, closer to lair, and containing trees, swamps, or hills. If more than one tile, pick a random tile.
All tiles available to move to?
Behavior = Hunting ; Looks like we're safe
Cooldown = 9
Move to one of the possible movement tiles. Prioritize tile closer to lair, containing trees swamps, or hills. If more than one tile, pick a random tile.
Behavior = FindNewLair? ; Use when a monster is driven away from it's lair by wardens or major threats
Target is set each turn in a direction away from threats/civilization. New lair is set up as soon as monsters find an area with no threats in 2 tile radius. If not possible to find in 10 seasons, change behavior to nomadic (no more lair). Certain monsters may not set up a lair inside borders.
I dunno. You put a lot of thought into this, and perhaps it's the way to go. However, I can't help but feeling it's a case of "be careful what you ask for,..."
Perhaps "smart monsters" could be an option.
EDIT: fixed minor typo.
VVell, seems like some of the positions here are contradictory.
Monsters either shovv AI factions preferential treatment (player POV), or they don't (some players and developer POV), and everyone has examples to support both sides. Sounds like difficulty levels may modify monster hostility to AI factions (vvhich contradicts the developer position).
The other issue is that developers have allegedly said there isn't enough room for AI factions to have a "safe zone" around their starting position, so they have stronger monsters near them at the start, and having them immediately hostile vvould mean a lot of factions getting vviped out early (contradicting the non-AI faction preferential treatment position the developers also hold, but this could be due to different versions...).
Given the map size (I generally play large maps, so I'm biased here), I disagree that AI factions can't have a safe zone like players. If there isn't enough room, I think that's more a symptom of too many AI factions and quest areas.
I figure monsters are already smart, but I find their behavior is annoying. I've seen monsters allovv AI faction troops and pioneers pass chokepoints, then attack my troops vvhen I try the same behavior. I've seen AI factions disturb dragon lairs, then the dragon leaves the AI faction territory to hassle my cities. The behavior modifications I propose make monsters act more goal-oriented, less random, more like I think monsters vvould act, vvithout overcomplicating things (I hope). Plus, it adds bandit raids, monsters that resettle vvhen driven avvay, undead that care about nothing but killing... some mild changes that add to the game in vvhat I think is a positive and engaging manner.
But I think this is only part of the solution. I think AI's should have safe zones for their capital and equal treatment from monsters (level the playing field), and maps should be large enough to support that. Having their behavior spelled out should ansvver most issues raised here.
Two things, as far as I'm concerned: 1) Monster behaviour needs to be less random. I've said it before, they should have things like 'kill the problem' scripts where if their home is disturbed by border, they go find the problem. If they're powerful enough (and intelligent enough to make that decision), they kill the problem and go back home. There needs to be a greater degree of consistency in making it a seriously bad idea to explosively expand on top of all sorts of nasties you haven't at all bothered to clear out or know you can't hope to challenge. Monsters should not be freaking chaos theory. Even my damn hamster was in a fair few ways pretty predictable, and he literally had a brain the size of a garden pea. 2) Notices of places being burnt down. That 'customer is always right' rant was utterly bloody daft. The problem here is irrespective of the reality, people feel cheated, and people don't keep playing a game they feel is being unfair. In fact, the best designers and developers put a shitload of effort into hiding whatever cheating the game is doing to keep up with the player, because although everyone knows AI usually has to cheat in some way to challenge us, we also hate seeing them visibly not playing by the same rules. We can deal with the problem of people feeling like the AI is getting too free a ride by everyone in the game getting a notice that a settlement has been killed by the wildlife. We don't need a name, or a location, just shit like, "Rumours reach your realm of a town devastated by denizens of the wild."
Two things, as far as I'm concerned:
1) Monster behaviour needs to be less random. I've said it before, they should have things like 'kill the problem' scripts where if their home is disturbed by border, they go find the problem. If they're powerful enough (and intelligent enough to make that decision), they kill the problem and go back home. There needs to be a greater degree of consistency in making it a seriously bad idea to explosively expand on top of all sorts of nasties you haven't at all bothered to clear out or know you can't hope to challenge. Monsters should not be freaking chaos theory. Even my damn hamster was in a fair few ways pretty predictable, and he literally had a brain the size of a garden pea.
2) Notices of places being burnt down. That 'customer is always right' rant was utterly bloody daft. The problem here is irrespective of the reality, people feel cheated, and people don't keep playing a game they feel is being unfair. In fact, the best designers and developers put a shitload of effort into hiding whatever cheating the game is doing to keep up with the player, because although everyone knows AI usually has to cheat in some way to challenge us, we also hate seeing them visibly not playing by the same rules.
We can deal with the problem of people feeling like the AI is getting too free a ride by everyone in the game getting a notice that a settlement has been killed by the wildlife. We don't need a name, or a location, just shit like, "Rumours reach your realm of a town devastated by denizens of the wild."
+100
It doesn't matter whether it's skewed or not. The way it works now makes people feel screwed. I had the same feeling, which is what brought me here. However many players will just dump it instead of doing research, so this IS a problem in some way. Those will be disappointed and lost for the game and most likely as long time customer and result in bad word of mouth.
To me it seems to be a mixture of the AI settling "dangerous" spots too frequently (more frequently than players would), the monster behaviour being (seemingly?) too random and no good explanation of "how it works" in the game. There seem to be some rule to it (like the "main" stacks waking up not due to vicinity, but only when the zone of influence reaches the lair??), but those should be made clearer to the player.
Also in my current game I see "spawn" mobs (mostly air shrills) wandering around my lands in certain places all of the time for dozens of turns (when I was unable to clear the source), but not attacking anything. They went circles around my cities and improvements even though I didn't have any garisson and the cities weren't strong either.
If this is randomness, this should IMO be changed - they should be VERY likely to at least take down undefended improvements, instead of just circling around them.
If it is tied to the difficulty settings - again - add this to the description of the difficulty level. There is already far too much players need to figure out on their own.
You just shouldn't see the AI settling close to mobs that you know won't be defeated in the next 40-50 turns (by you - make that 200 turns for the AI) just about all of the time. And you shouldn't see so many mobs wandering the AI territory if you visit them (or your own territory without causing any damage for that matter).
I like the idea of the notification, too. I now it is completely unnecessary from a pure game perspective, but it will alleviate the problem of (new) players feeling screwed at least a bit.
https://forums.elementalgame.com/435841/page/2/#3269110
Not sure I can say much more on this subject.. but its not a new one. .
I actually performed an experiment on this back in one of the betas:
https://forums.elementalgame.com/433115
I used cheats to move my armies near monsters to replicate all the stupid things the AI was doing and, from my limited sample size, the mosters behaved pretty much exactly the same way towards me as they did towards the AI.
At the same time, I agree that random isn't a good way to go. Monsters need to be binary - attack or not attack. It can be by type (aka slags attack, bears don't), but it needs to be all or nothing.
One thing that has made this game interesting is there are big bad--unpredictable--monsters out there you need to avoid. If you accidentally end up close to one, they might attack but they might not. Some are advocating the monster make a bee-line toward any unit, stack, or city it knows it can defeat. The "cure" would be much worse than the way it is now.
There have been many times I see a monster wander close to one of my cities, or a unit or stack of mine inadvertently ends their turn too close to a monster. I hold my breath to see if it's hostile/hungry this time. This adds to the game. Making such attacks mandatory under "smart monster" rules would destroy the game for me.
Some people see an AI pioneer sneak past a monster and suggest this proves the game favors the AI. Well, the game has spared a pioneer or two of mine well. And I like it that way.
As stated here, I have found that by having AT LEAST 1 unit (not militia) in your city, it highly deters monsters from attacking your city. If it's a dragon roaming around you would need, at least, a medium level garrison army to deter it from attacking. I believe this is how the AI prevents the monsters from romping them. Just by having a unit in the city deters them from taking it over.
Random is unpredictable. But Unpredictable isn't random.
Random monsters are random. Sure you can call them unpredictable.. but doesn't make them less random.
Really to me.. the random actions of the world is one of the worst killers of immersion.
What I imagine :
Pioneer marches right up next to a dragon.. dragon eats him.
What happens:
Pioneer marches right up next to a dragon. Dragon walks four squares over and attacks a totally unrelated unit, or marches 2 squares away and stands there for 10 turns then proceeds to go half way across the map to attack my city that he couldn't even known existed. May as well stick in some tapdance or something to liven up his slapstick routine.
Monsters in FE are not completely random (e.g. Frogboy has said that "smarter" monsters take into consideration their opponent's strength before they attack). However, their behavior is not completely predictable. They wander around and attack based on weighted dice rolling, not on any deterministic strategy.
You can accomplish much the same thing with complex logic akin to how the faction AI works. But after thousands of hours of coding, debugging, testing, and tweaking you'd most likely see only an incremental improvement in monster behavior. Meanwhile, the game would run slower and people would still complain about the monsters giving preferential treatment to the AI.
Look, I get it. You are used to scripted behavior. You are comfortable with scripted behavior. Most games (especially strategy games) only have scripted behavior. Everything deterministic, everything predictable.
The monsters should really wait until you're ready for them and then they should have the good grace to die; preferably without giving any of your champs an injury.
The worst thing that could happen, after hours of playing, is that the game should present an unanticipated challenge that you are not prepared for. Everything should happen just so, like in a movie. And, just like in a movie, once you do everything in its proper order, you get to win.
Thanks for the link Fistalis.
I'm kind of struggling with the forum search.
Frogboys comments over there explain some of the things we see. E.g. how monsters are never "targetting" outposts and improvements, but just "incidentally" destroy them. One way to reduce the issue with players feeling cheated would be to put this information into the game in an "into your face" way. It would still be random and not very intuitive, but at least people would know how it works. I actually think that is important, since that also allows you to take better decisions on which risk you take in settling a specific place.
So explain in detail in the ingame help: Monster lairs, how the "main" stacks there are woken up, how they spawn "additional" stacks, how each stack type behaves (i.e. what he targets or not, how far he wanders, etc.).
And also put at least the basic info on this into the tutorial. All I got from there was "dangerous monsters spawning and roaming the land attacking anything in their path and something about territories that I should figure out myself (but so far haven't been able to see any real pattern).
I think this would already reduce the number of people complaining, since it explains at least some of why the AI can sit in the middle of roaming monster stacks with little problems.
However I also have to say that this together with my experience on how the monsters act in the game takes away some of what made the game special for me. When I started out there was that sense of danger about the wildlife. I hardly ever established an outpost or city without clearing all monsters around in a good radius and if there was still some lair nearby that might send spawns, I would refrain from building improvements. But knowing now that they don't attack outposts and improvements, seeing the "spawned" stacks roam my lands for dozens of turns without anything happening, seeing how the AI settles in the middle of them and has them running wild in their territory without a lot happening (I perfectly believe that they suffer frequently, but I hardly ever see any AI city that doesn't have multiple monster stacks and at least one lair within their territory) and how there seems to be a good chance of even pioneers sneaking past them, reduced the felt risk from very high to hardly noticable. The worst thing seems to be if a strong stacks lair is reached by your cities expanding zone of control which has some risk of them taking down your city, but even that seems to happen only in some cases - I have lost 2 cities by this, but also had 2 cases where the stack just wandered of into fog of war and never (within more than 100 turns) came back.
I'd actually like the monster behaviour to become more aggressive - the way I thought it was. Less chance (better even none) for weak stacks to not be attacked, monsters attacking outposts and improvements, main stacks when waking up due to zone of control attacking the source of the zone of control instead of some enemy city further away, wandering of into the fog of war or just roaming around randomly.
EDIT: I have to admit this is after only 2 games (one on normal aborted after few dozen turns when AI dogpiled me and the other one on easy going for a few hundred turns now) and what I have read here from other users and from Frogboys comments in the other thread. I'll give it some more time and keep a closer eye on the monster behaviour while doing so.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:
Sign in or Create Account
