Battle Difficulty Question

[rancor]

I was wondering if someone could let me know what the current (1.5) status is concerning battle difficulty? A while back VH was actually not that hard because of user attack bonuses as well. Id appriciate if someone could tell me or direct me to the place that explains the most recent explination of difficulty settings.

[Avicenna]

I think if that's the case, easy has long battles and allows you to make mistakes. Very hard is ruthless: one mistake and you'll lose most of the unit that gets flanked/attacked from behind.

[x-dANGEr]

Very Hard = +8 attack +4 defence for the AI (Not sure if their is any morale penalty/advantage).

Hard = +4 attack +2 defence for the AI <--- Not sure..

Medium = No bonuses.

Easy = +4 attack +2 defence for the player.

[Severous]

+8 attack !!

Gosh. Peasants attack strength is increased many times over.

Does the AI react sensibly to these revised values ?

[econ21]

Not sure about the numbers given earlier in this thread. A CA staffer, quoted in frogbeastegg's guide said: "The combat bonuses are easy; they apply to attack only, while on Easy the human player gets a +4 bonus, on Hard the AI is given +4, and on Very Hard +7. The morale bonuses are much more complex, as they work on a series of sliding scales.”

Personally, I just leave the battle difficulty on medium, as I like historical match ups.

NB: The bugged difficulty referred only to standalone battles - not battles fought in the course of the campaign.