Rant - Experiment to see how hard game is...

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ramses II CP

Auto-calc'ing city battles removes a small factor of difficulty as auto-calc ignores walls.

Effectively, though, this just shows what we already know, blitzing in any way breaks the game model, and the strategic AI is grossly incompetent. That last is true of all the TW games, IMHO, I'd be surprised if there was any realistic situation a player couldn't win their way out of on the strategic map.

Agreed entirely.

I admit, I didn't even become a decent general until my War for Independence campaign forced me to use... archers.

When one can easily field massive all infantry and cavalry armies and blitz straight through all resistance using superior strategy map positioning and recruitment... why would anyone need to learn to battle effectively? You can always simply massively outnumber or outmaneuver them.

I HAD to blitz by a certain TURN number in order to give the AI a chance. The faster I move, the weaker I am on the field, the fewer troops and funds I have, and the less advantageous my strategic positioning. Actually having to win seige battles with only a unit of cavalry is difficult.

Winning seiges with basic militia infantry and archers, while undermanned, is very difficult.

Blitzing gave me that. But only when I had the much more difficult house rules of War for Independence did I even begin to meet real resistance from the AI.