Printable View
What campaign difficulty do you players recommend? I know that the EB-team officially recommends Very Hard - but that seems often unplayable for many people, given the known behaviour of the AI towards "war and peace" and "alliances", seemingly without any knowledge of their actual power and possibilities.
So perhaps it is a bit better on another level - what do you think, what is your preferred level for 1.1 or previous versions?
Frankly, I'm playing EB on the alx.exe, which makes the campaign AI a whole lot more reasonable. I like having a little campaign difficulty so I set it on very hard. My battles are on medium as I certainly don't like having my Principes battling equally with Rorarii.
If I were using the regular RomeTW.exe, though, I may vie to play on just hard difficulty.
Is it really this better to play with the Alex.exe and is 1.1 running with it?
Very hard for me as I hate when the A.I. goes "let's attack with only three units:yes: " only to find A FULL STACK waiting for them.....:shame:
I mean the A.I. even with the very hard on have some pretty dumb ideas about
attacking someone, just today they sent a full stack of good inf. units at my HA's as Saka Raka but 5 units of HA CAN beat a full stack of any unit that rely s on standing army's on EB, so the A.I. needs all the help it can get:smash:
Very Hard screws up the economy of every faction which means there's nothing to stop the smaller ones being swallowed up in short order. Plus being spammed by stack after stack after stack isn't my idea of fun. Nor is an AI that won't accept anything but total destruction to end hostilities.
I usually play "Hard" for easy factions and "Medium" for hard factions.
Hard difficulty. I'm a devout Romani player on BI.exe and it's just the right balance. On VH, the smaller factions get the business, but on Medium I can roll right over everybody. On the other hand, BI.exe makes the campaign even harder because of Carthage's naval invasions.
It's not as bad as you think if your REALLY good at using HA and are REALLY lucky with attacking and defending, I mean sure I lose about 2 settlements every now and again but for those two I gain about 4:skull: not to mentionQuote:
Originally Posted by QuintusSertorius
how many stacks they lose. On hard I often play only for a few factions but not HA ones because when I use them the A.I. tends to lose quite a bit and then it kinda gets boring as somehow it becomes no challenge anymore and even if your
economy sucks you can still balance it by enslaving everything you come into contact with.......:skull:
The harder the AI plays the better the game gets. AI usually makes stupid mistakes even when it has a full stack army. No matter how much I kill them, their cavalry just love to charge my phalanxs in a glorious frontal attack like in hollywood movies. :inquisitive:
So, at least when I'm playing VH AI still manage to make some kind of effective attacks, they don't usually work but hey, at least they give my troops some training and help my generals get out of that boring situation.
I think that people that play on other difficulties have not yet enjoyed TW games at a full level.
Come on! At easy difficulty any newbie player can beat the game with a 8 peasant stack or less! When he learns the basic comands, those villagers will start to get experience and when you see, they will be routing a URBAN COHORT or overpowering a SPARTAN HOPLITE even when fighting 1 by 1!
Sorry to say that, but you must agree with this...
usually VH, H for the most challenging factions
Certainly better. You won't see enemies attack you with those 3 unit stacks anymore. They actually combine troops now. They can also retrain troops as well. Diplomacy seems better. And they actually use their navy sometimes like that of BI.exe. The battle AI is certainly better as well.Quote:
Originally Posted by BigChef
It's bad because it's completely unrealistic and ahistorical. Especially when you consider that the AI have a script that stops recruitment depleting the populations of their cities. So not only do they get loads of money, plus a script that helps them not get too far into the red, they can recruit without regard to how many people they actually have.Quote:
Originally Posted by White_eyes:D
For this very reason I have taken the liberty to edit EBBS for me so it replenishes population only half of the original value (i.e. 100 instead of 200 for infantry on Huge settings). As I play exclusively on Huge, I have also deleted the entries for other unit sizes, which BTW made the script a bit shorther and thus the game negligibly faster:idea:
Hard with BI, deffinately. My campaign so far with the Makedones is very interesting, especially the Epeirotic activity in Greece...
Medium.
I like a slow, historically accurate game, and I don't want the AI attacking my faction for no good reason other than because its human-controlled.
Diplomacy actually works well on Medium. With Hard and Very Hard you need to use the Force Diplomacy mod, becuase the AI factions hate you more and won't make deals with you.
Also, Medium makes naval battles a lot easier, you don't have to outnumber your enemy three to one to win a naval battle.
Medium also helps a lot when playing the smaller factions like Hayasdan or Bactria, being able to make peace with their steppe enemies prevents you from being swamped on two fronts.
I would only pick Hard difficulty if I was playing a faction that was historically both very powerful, and universally hated by almost all its neighbours. Like the Ptolemies and Seleucids for instance. Maybe the Carthaginians and Romans as well.
What he said.Quote:
Originally Posted by MarcusAureliusAntoninus
whats Alex.exe and wat does it do
LOL! It's the Alexander expansion pack's exe.Quote:
Originally Posted by Belisarius12
Hard, that way the AI actually recruits some decent units that can really give you a kicking if you're not careful.
very hard, come get some :skull:
on a side note, is it better to play EB on BI.exe? I don't have Alex so i can't play on that, but if it's worth it on BI I'd be interested to learn how to sort it out. Cheers
It's worth it. The AI actually launches naval invasions, I just had Carthage land two full stacks from Sardinia and Africa on Sicily to resist. Almost immediately after I destroyed a full stack of theirs too. And this is on Hard, not Very Hard.
Thanks everybody. So there are two conclusions:
1) To mine surprise more people recommend Medium than Very Hard.
2) The increased monetary aid for the AI based on provinces makes VH a killer for little AI factions. I'd second that from my 1.0 Carthage observations.
So Very Hard is kinda out of the race. So Medium or Hard? I saw Chirurgeon voted for Medium and I know he is a seasoned AAR writer. Could you tell me why you voted for Medium difficulty please? Is the AI behaving more reasonable? Or does it get a teethless tiger, spamming three-unit-stacks?
Hmm answering his question, if i may. I belive he plays it for the excat reason you stated. The AI starts churning out stack upon stack of armies. It also drinks up the mercenary pool and spawns generals in random stacks in random places. Obviously this is so the AI can fight back if it is a small factions. but in the bigger factions it drives you crazy.
I always play as VH i was ordered to play it that way and i shall play it that way untill it kills me, for i am a drone and i march on championing the cause of EB
I say hard. It's balanced enough to still provide a challenge and the AI still gets the money bonus, but you actually fight battles because the AI actually churns out a half stack to a stack now and then. But if you want a truly balanced campaign experience, download the force diplomacy mod.
I'm about to start a 1.1 Lusotannan campaign and am wondering if folks recommend Hard or Medium. I would consider myself an experienced player. I will be playing with many (somewhat restrictive) house rules to broaden the experience. What say you?
If you're house-ruling things, stick with Medium. I'm regretting going with Hard in my historical campaign, largely because I'm having to do a lot of micromanaging of the AI factions. They're very aggressive towards each other (although largely not towards me).Quote:
Originally Posted by Disciple of Tacitus
I'm using a custom script that removes 5000 gold per turn from all AIs with a positive balance. It's quite easy to add it to the custom EB script.
This cancels out the 5000/turn bonus that the AIs get on Hard.
As a result I get rather aggressive AIs but without endless super stacks.
The AI has a lot of 3-unit stacks, but regularly attacks me with half-stacks.
I'm playing Ptolmies. Most factions are expanding slowly. The greeks are all in a stalemate. Carthage is doing very little. Rome is totally kicking arse and Selukia would be if it weren't throwing all it's units at me.
The game is maybe a bit too easy, so I might reduce the nerf to -3000 per turn. I'm seeing evidence that Selukia has upgraded it's MICs and economy though, so i't beginning to throw a few half-stacks of heavy cav/silver shields at me alongside the usual eastern mobs.
I'm also playing with huge units, which makes my vicories rather Phyrric when I have to recruit from small towns.
I thought it was only on Very Hard that the AI factions got bonus money?
I play on hard mainly because it offers much more of a challenge against ai factions (thanks quite a bit to bi.exe as well) who expand at a steady and fairly realistic pace, and they field pretty balanced armies.
Also I like playing as factions in the East (Seleukeia, Ptolemaioi, Pahlava etc.) so the constant warfare and momentary reprieves fits into my historical roleplaying quite well.
I used to think so too, but it turns out that it does get some bonus on H as well, probaby half the amount of what it get on VH, so it is not that noticeable.Quote:
Originally Posted by QuintusSertorius