Why not adjust HI instead of AI?

[screwtype]

I quite like this idea. Though it would take iron discipline not to cheat when things were going badly.

I thought your post was going to be about something else though. I thought you were going to argue again for a multiplayer campaign, which I'm sure a lot of people would like to see. But CA just don't seem interested in implementing it.

I'll tell you one thing I *would* like to see CA implement though, which would require very little change to the code. I'd like to know why there is a limit of only one human player on the same computer? In other words, why can't you turn human control off and on for each and every faction in a game at will?

That way you could play yourself, or play against one of your buddies or flatmates or whatever. For example, if you were playing by yourself and starting to win as one faction, you could switch to another faction that was losing and see if you could retrieve the situation - and then maybe switch back to the previous faction again. You could do this from time to time in a campaign to give the AI a guiding hand. Or you could have a couple of factions that you personally controlled and simply play against yourself.

All you'd really need to implement this would be an option to have each and every faction either human or AI controlled (preferably changeable at any point in the game), and then a random selection concerning which human faction gets control in a battle against another human faction.

It's a feature that would add a great deal of longevity and extra interest to the game IMO. Indeed this used to be a quite popular way of designing games (Lords of the Realm had it for example) until the internet came along, when suddenly it disappeared completely in favour of online multiplay. But I for one really miss this option in games and I'd love to see it implemented in the TW series.