Skandinav
06-30-2008, 22:17
I know this is a question often asked and yet one somewhat shrouded in mystery, what exactly does the campaign difficulty entail ? I remember a post ( believe it was from these fora although I cannot seem to find it now ) from the past containing a quote from a programmer from CA shedding some light on the subject, albeit vague his comments are the only information I´ve stumbled upon occasional speculation aside. Would any hold this information or know where to find it ?
The only things I know, based partly on what I read back then ( although I cannot remember much of it save that it was pretty much alike to what one might have guessed ) and some I am sure are pure theory from my own experiences and those of others, are that AI aggression are affected, meaning more wars between factions, a tendency to gang up on the player and a decrease in the likelyhood of sensible or peaceful diplomacy. Also it means that the enemy gets more money which could enable the AI to field more, better and larger armies, but does the AI really react on such advantages ?
I´ve recently tried two campaigns on the M campaign difficulty, like the first time I tried Shogun (...), in the hope of furthering my attempts of historical accurate campaigns which were in part being obstructed by the notoriously brutish AI. The change in AI aggression from VH and H was notably visible in both campaigns whereas I am not sure what to think about the changes in the AI´s capability to field armies; the one M campaign which was on the alex.exe made an impression of armies about the sizes of what I´ve usually encountered in my previous games on harder difficulties, but the other M campaign was running on BI.exe and here the difference was very evident in the sizes of the hosts the enemy would amass; they were both fewer and generally consisted of far fewer men. Which in my opinion is unfortunate, most wars, not all of course, should be settled after a few large-scale battles and not a continuous stream of skirmishes, which is why I tried the M difficulty in the first place.
Furthermore can it be true that the AI trains more elites on the harder settings, I´ve heard it rumoured once and I could be persuaded to believe that is what I`ve seen on M, lesser soldiers in general, even from advanced, ressourceful factions.
I would be pleased to know any of your observations on this, granted facts would be even better.
EDIT: Autoresolve are influenced by campaign difficulty aswell if I remember correctly, and also rebel armies, civil order in cities and loyalty of family members, although AI conduct is all I really care about.
The only things I know, based partly on what I read back then ( although I cannot remember much of it save that it was pretty much alike to what one might have guessed ) and some I am sure are pure theory from my own experiences and those of others, are that AI aggression are affected, meaning more wars between factions, a tendency to gang up on the player and a decrease in the likelyhood of sensible or peaceful diplomacy. Also it means that the enemy gets more money which could enable the AI to field more, better and larger armies, but does the AI really react on such advantages ?
I´ve recently tried two campaigns on the M campaign difficulty, like the first time I tried Shogun (...), in the hope of furthering my attempts of historical accurate campaigns which were in part being obstructed by the notoriously brutish AI. The change in AI aggression from VH and H was notably visible in both campaigns whereas I am not sure what to think about the changes in the AI´s capability to field armies; the one M campaign which was on the alex.exe made an impression of armies about the sizes of what I´ve usually encountered in my previous games on harder difficulties, but the other M campaign was running on BI.exe and here the difference was very evident in the sizes of the hosts the enemy would amass; they were both fewer and generally consisted of far fewer men. Which in my opinion is unfortunate, most wars, not all of course, should be settled after a few large-scale battles and not a continuous stream of skirmishes, which is why I tried the M difficulty in the first place.
Furthermore can it be true that the AI trains more elites on the harder settings, I´ve heard it rumoured once and I could be persuaded to believe that is what I`ve seen on M, lesser soldiers in general, even from advanced, ressourceful factions.
I would be pleased to know any of your observations on this, granted facts would be even better.
EDIT: Autoresolve are influenced by campaign difficulty aswell if I remember correctly, and also rebel armies, civil order in cities and loyalty of family members, although AI conduct is all I really care about.