Campaign difficulty recommendations

I noticed that the EB team recommends playing at a VH campaign difficulty in the FAQ. I've also read several posts on this board describing how hard it is to win on this setting. My understanding is that the AI is hyperaggresive and gets enormous financial advantages that allows it to spam you with full stack armies. While I certianly enjoy a challenge I'm not interested in playing a game where I'm doomed to be steamrolled by the opposition every time. Why exactly does the EB team recommend VH and is the game winnable on that setting? I intend to play as the Sarmatians and they seem at a particular disadvantage economically. I guess I'm looking for a setting where the AI has a slight advantage and is a very viable opponent but can't just overwhelm you with a huge resource bonus. Would a medium difficulty be better for that?

While, as you correctly stated, the EB team recommends you play on VH/M, I and some others out here prefer H/M. And that because the AI is more reasonable in its behaviour, both on campaign map as well as the diplomacy itself.

Maion

I would go on H/M, Doesn't give them toooo many bonuses, and still gives a slightly reasonable Diplocmacy. Though AI in RTW is just "MEH" alot so you just have to make do.

I'm slowly trying to move into H/M from M/M my self.

If you're playing as the Sarmatians then you won't want to play on VH. VH is more for the Romans, Greeks and very advanced players. You will need all the help you can get with Steppe factions.

Thanks for the info guys. Does the medium difficulty put you on an even footing with the other factions as far as money?

No


-Skullheadhq

Certain factions are near impossible, but there are some who have done it. Fluvius Camillius is currently trying to take over the world with Pontos, on VH/VH, and has been doing alright so far, so it is always possible. That being said, if you don't want to blitz factions, H/M, of M/M are better choices.

I prefer H/M myself. On VH the AI tends to spam elite stacks at you and it gets boring. On M the AI never hires mercenaries and the rebels never attack your cities, which also gets boring.

.
H/M :yes:
.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ravenfeeder

On M the AI never hires mercenaries and the rebels never attack your cities, which also gets boring.

---

That is the reason I would never try M campaign. I rarely hire mercs so the AI can have them and the game is still relatively easy, I would hate to try a game where it didn't hire them. I play H/M.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by johnhughthom

That is the reason I would never try M campaign. I rarely hire mercs so the AI can have them and the game is still relatively easy, I would hate to try a game where it didn't hire them. I play H/M.

---

Errm are you sure about this? I swear I saw a few mercs in a M campaign.

Not completely sure, no. But the couple of times I played M/M I didn't see any and that was fighting AS who normally seem to have loads.

for peaceful game play : M/M
for reasonable and best for role play : H/M
only choice blitzing and get tired of elites : VH/M
if you like challenge : H/H
if you like suicidal games and have problem on masochism VH/VH :laugh4:

M/M here http://i.fokzine.net/s/bloos.gif

VH/M is almost always my choice, but it gets annoying because the AI simply will not leave you alone. If you enter a war with another faction and take even a single settlement from them, it is literally impossible to ever make peace with them. They will throw every single unit they have at you, and you have no choice other than destroying them or suffering constant attacks on your border with them. It can get pretty damn irritating.

EDIT: Yes, the AI does really annoying/stupid things with mercenaries on VH. They'll send out a lone FM at you and have him buy up every merc in the area. Having to fight instant fullstacks is not my idea of fun.

So am i the only one who plays VH/VH only? I think that's the most realistic, since the AI won't represent much of a challenge without endless fullstacks in their reserve.

And building a vast empire with, for example, Bakltria or Hayasdan very quickly and easily is neither fun nor historically correct. You must play VH/VH with these factions to have "historically correct fun", if you know what i mean :crowngrin:.

VH Battle Difficulty is completely illogical. It gives the AI massive bonuses. I like to see my elites being able to east up levies, not vice-versa.

Maion

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by option

VH/M is almost always my choice, but it gets annoying because the AI simply will not leave you alone. If you enter a war with another faction and take even a single settlement from them, it is literally impossible to ever make peace with them. They will throw every single unit they have at you, and you have no choice other than destroying them or suffering constant attacks on your border with them. It can get pretty damn irritating.

EDIT: Yes, the AI does really annoying/stupid things with mercenaries on VH. They'll send out a lone FM at you and have him buy up every merc in the area. Having to fight instant fullstacks is not my idea of fun.

---

So why do you choose VH/M if it get's annoying quickly??

For large factions that "normally" everyone dislike them, or with Isolated areas that you can build yourself better (such as Romaioi, Karthadast, AS, Sauro, Casse, and Ptolemaioi)... I reccomend VH/M

Anyone else is H/M, but now I run my lastest KH and Sweboz campaign on VH/M

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cute Wolf

For large factions that "normally" everyone dislike them, or with Isolated areas that you can build yourself better (such as Romaioi, Karthadast, AS, Sauro, Casse, and Ptolemaioi)... I reccomend VH/M

---

Seconded with enthusiasm! See >> :smash:

H/M for me... I like a bit of breathing space

H/M. I play for the roleplaying and the realism.

VH/VH is really fun (except perhaps when your economy is too puny). Yes, the AI get's bonusses during battles, and opposing certain units is rather scary, but I still don't feel my elites are being chewed up by levies. You just need to do a little bit more (than let's say indiscriminate butchering them for 50%) to rout the AI. I'm hinting towards something like flanking, concentrated pilae-storms, or strategic cavalry-charges.

In my current Romani campaign, I'm regularly losing cities, even well defended ones with large stone walls. I've just lost 3 out of my four full stacks I sent into Iberia, while the remnants of my invasion force are besieging a town I won't be capable to defend for any prolongued period of time. I've lost several armies against the Aedui, while the Getai butchered my poor soldiers. And then I didn't even mention my 'victories' against the Sweboz, that regularly implied losses of 70% and higher. But hey: this makes the clear victories (and revenge) all the sweeter, while you don't need to 'give' the AI a chance. They rather take it.


kind regards,

Andy

Edit: I haven't tested VH for barbarian factions though, which may be rather rough.

I wouldn't recommend VH on a Casse campaign, the AI will rape you before you get a chance to build up you're economy. Believe me I know, but on H the AI will leave you alone. They are the only faction at peace with the Eleutheroi, there's a half stack right by your capital that will attack you within 5 turns.

Im pretty good at EB, I normally go VH/M with the factions I play, except the Casse of course, and I haven't tried the steppe people yet. If youre not very experienced then I would say go M/M.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mouzafphaerre

.
H/M :yes:
.

---

seconded

VH/M has worked well for me with the Getai and Romani. For the Getai especially, Hard battle difficulty might be in order.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dutchhoplite

So why do you choose VH/M if it get's annoying quickly??

---

It's not usually a problem since I would normally be destroying a faction anyways, but when you annex 95% of the Arche Seleukia and they're still attacking you from their three remaining steppe settlements, it's both frustrating and illogical.

m/m and proud of it :oops:

i do have one big noobish question thats been triffling with my mind for over an year

how do we get large unit size ? i only seem to get the regular 60-120 one´s wich is a tad frustating for role playing purposes and most importantly population control :help:

In video options, from the starting screen.

H/M for me, best setting for roleplaying.

VH/VH only if you just want to play EB as if it is a video game.

Is there anyone played HAYASDAN in VH/VH, huge unit size? I remember my first campaign back in 0.81a, playing as Hayasdan. I hardly captured and controlled 3 settlements, surving several years as a small kingdom. Then the AS came. They sent full stack after full stack, it's just like there is no end! Then I did the most glorious thing, QUIT. And the worst thing is medium cavalry beats my Hayasdan body guards. :dizzy2: