making game harder...ideas...

[NicSO]

1. raising all units morale
2. lowering speed movement values
3. raising defence skill values and lowering missile values
4. removing weapon upgrades (AI is always poor on this)
5. modding retraining so u cant retrain more than unit every turn just like u cant train more than one
6. modding ai so that AI generals dont run into certain death every battle
7. making ai more agressive

[mxlm]

5. modding retraining so u cant retrain more than unit every turn just like u cant train more than one

If you think retraining's too powerful...don't use it. Why do you need to mod it? Just limit yourself to one retrained unit per turn (or whatever).

[Uesugi Kenshin]

My main issue with it is the fact that the AI is not smart or agressive enough. If the AI was better at fighting the battles the game would be a lot better. When CA makes a sequel they should keep everything pretty much on the sma elevel it is now with a few upgrades and focus on making the game more historical and mostly the AI, but fixing the AI would be quite hard to do.

[Byzantine Prince]

Limit your view to just the General. That makes the game a lot harder.

[NicSO]

If you think retraining's too powerful...don't use it. Why do you need to mod it? Just limit yourself to one retrained unit per turn (or whatever).

I cant because Its avaliable and the fact alone that is avaliable is pissing me-....

[hung41584]

nononono, just make the game put more emphasis on the MORE IMPORTANT cities. Like I noticed how when the ai loses a major city somehow, they just do a downhill spiral from there. for us human players, we are balanced with our current amount of cities and when we capture just one more, it totally improves the situation by being able to support more units. The ai on the other hand, just loses a city, then falls back onto the other ones, and never regains their foothold because they just lost a large chunk of their military. So you will begin their eventual defeat just by taking out one city. If there is ever a ceasefire, they still will never get their strength back.

How come its not like where factions lose some bordering cities and then still make a comeback because their capital managed to recruit more units. I find it rediculous when cities out in the middle of nowhere become major cities rivaling those of italy's in economic strength. Take caralis or palma for example, they are just gold mines waiting to be dug up, and the worse part is the ai puts almost no emphasis on those cities. It gets badder when you can take a place like kydonia and turn it into a metropolis. There should be limits on certain cities because we all know those places never became MAJOR centres in the past.

[professorspatula]

Only use peasants.

Lambs to the slaughter.

Make their training time 0, up their morale a bit, and make sure you build plenty of armour upgrade buildings and temples that give experience. Then let the carnage begin.



Ok, so there's some Night Raiders there too. I needed some hard men to keep the peasants in order.

[Old Celt]

When the battle begins, close your eyes and try to win by clicking and listening to the results through the speakers. If it's still too easy for you, turn the sound off.

[MorgTzu]

Love those peasants, brings back memories of STW...I would pay in the thousands to have a RTW version of Shogun (even with bugs). Now, back to reality...

I have a list of my personal changes that i have modded and that I do in game as self limiters at the thread: My Final Mod - Bringing it altogether.

One thing that I do that I did not mention there was temples. I use no combat enhancement temples. It gives me too much of an edge in the early and mid game to be able to pump out units that already have 2 and 3 chevrons, plus i find i take better care of my units if i have to earn every single experience point. This is just my personal preference.

I have my game about 99% of where i want it to be. It is fun, challenging, and I feel like i have a good understanding of how to tweak it even further if and when I see something else, BUT, I cant get the AI generals to stop running into my lines (suicide). I have read many threads on this, and although it is less of a problem post-patch, it is still there. The good thing about ideas and threads similiar to this is that they are positive. i.e. what can I do to make my game better, more customized. All that negative posting has its place, but its the ideas threads where people start to get things done.

May your lines be straight and your battles decisive.

-MorgTzu

[BeeSting]

Don't use generals when fighting battles.

[Herakleitos]

When the battle begins, close your eyes and try to win by clicking and listening to the results through the speakers. If it's still too easy for you, turn the sound off.

ROFLMAO

[mystic brew]

well, the way i use the reinforcement rule is that where an army is assembled in one of my home cities, that becomes it's base...
and the only place that they can retrain is there.

and a rule of conquering new cities is i tear down all the troop buildings. this means a campaigning army gets more worn down the further it gets from their base.

especially with Rome.
also with Rome I limit my cavalry production to lower level troops.
also as Rome, if soomeone is elected to a position i have to put them in charge of my armies, no matter how rubbish they are

[Count Belisarius]

Maybe somebody can educate me, but I really don't understand all the complaints about the stupid AI. Not that the game isn't "stupid", because it is. But RTW is a GAME, a computer program! It wasn't until very recently that a computer program was written that could beat a really good human player at chess. CHESS!! And chess has only a tiny fraction of the variables of an epic-scale strategic and tactical game like RTW. Computer programs work on logic alone, no intuition or creativity, and warfare - even simulated warfare - is as much art/creativity as it is science/logic. Hence, the human player has a distinct advantage.

One way that game designers in general compensate for AI "stupidity" is to allow the AI to cheat. If they do that, you have gamers crying "foul" to the heavens, so it's a lose-lose situation. Until computer programming becomes sufficiently complex as to approach sentience (an idea that frightens me, because I've seen ALL those movies), we have to face it: a human player who knows what he/she is doing will beat a non-cheating computer program almost every time, assuming parity of position.

Now I'm not talking about bugs here. Armies running into rivers, boats being stuck on the shore, unit icons that don't match up, etc., etc., etc., ad nauseum. These are all legitimate complaints that probably can be addressed. But I, for one, expect to win when when I play a game against a machine on equal terms. My suggestion: give the computer a leg up by playing one of the harder factions. Armenia, Spain, Thrace, and (somewhat) Parthia, for example. If you can turn Armenia into a powerhouse on VH/H, you've mastered the game.

[Orb]

Maybe weakening the general units will lower the chance of them doing this (I'm pretty sure that this was mentioned somewhere by Jerome Grasdyke.).

[Arrowhead]

Only use peasants.

Lambs to the slaughter.

Make their training time 0, up their morale a bit, and make sure you build plenty of armour upgrade buildings and temples that give experience. Then let the carnage begin.

Ok, so there's some Night Raiders there too. I needed some hard men to keep the peasants in order.

These are BARB peasants here. The Spartan beating (in my case) ones.