What changes with the campaign difficulty level ?

[Akka]

The answer about the differences of difficulty levels on the tactical battles have already be asked and answered.

But what about the strategic map ?
What does it changes to go from "medium" to "hard" and "very hard" ?

Does anyone knows ?

[Slaists]

i'm not 100% sure about this. but, it seems, rebels pop up more frequently on VH campaign difficulty. starting money seems to be the same. i've heard: on the VH campaign map difficulty, the game engine uses VH tactical map bonuses when autoresolving against a human player. the same, supposedly, applies also to naval battles. it seems right, since my ships would lose even when considerably outnumbering the AI's fleets. i have not noticed any other differences though.

[Lord Ovaat]

I'd like an answer to this, also. I started my first campaign on normal, just to get the feel of the game, and have been using very hard since then. I can't see any real difference. I had just as many rebels, and my cities were just as filthy on normal as very hard. I don't autoresolve, so not sure about that one. Would figure it would be more difficult. The "logic" of the AI doesn't seem much different, and that's where it would be important. Still pretty lame. Still attack with small stacks, seldom blockade ports, seldom attack my ships if in port, etc. There has to be some tangible difference. I haven't even noticed a significant difference in vices and virtues (whatever). By now, someone has to have figured this out.

[Bob the Insane]

Got to say I have started a H (Campaign) / M (Battle) campaign as the Julii...

Most fun I have had yet without all the unbalanced unit strengths and excessive money gifts to the AI stuff you get on the harder levels...

And it has not been particularly easier for all that either... I have had serious money issue and have to fight masses of Gaul and have even lost most of an army to an Ambush (I won that battle only because of my 8 star general... My troops fought to the last where as the Guals started wavering after we hacked down their general, but I had still lost most of my troops.)

I don't like VH for the campaign because of how much more advanced ever other faction is (most settlements you capture will be more advanced than your capital) from the start and the endless number of troops they can turn out and the fact that you have to have massive superiority in numbers to win naval battles... I guess this is very hard, but it leaves no room for subtle strategies, it is just a mass of fighting to get anywhere...

LOL... I didn't notice I was ranting until I finished....

[Orvis Tertia]

I have played on medium and hard and I have noticed that diplomacy seems much more weighted against you at hard. I have been beating the snot out of the Gauls, Spainiards, Greeks and Romans (as Carthage) and not one of them has ever agreed to a ceasefire proposal--not even when I had a diplomat with influence to the max.

[Slaists]

Hmm, I play only VH campaign difficulty (Medium tactical difficulty) nowadays and I have not noticed any problems with diplomacy. As Julii, I am able to obtain a ceasefire (with a nice profit too, mind you) from Greeks and Carthagenians every time after I've harassed them following Senate's guidelines. It seems, those factions are hard-coded not to be willing to fight on two-three fronts and they take ceasefire proposals willingly... Unless you wait too long and they come to really hate you... Basically, I offer ceasfire (for a little contribution to my treasury) right after I have successfully attacked them or blockaded their port: works like a charm. Meanwhile, there appear to be factions that are hard-coded to hate you. For Julii: it's the Gauls. They would not accept a ceasefire from me even when totally beaten and on medium campaign difficulty whereas they'd accept the ceasfire from Brutii or Scipii for that matter...

Similarly, I've had no problems running around and selling alliance/map/trade rights packages for a nice profit on the VH difficulty setting...