Yeah I noticed that. I am playing a Hayasdan game, and sent an army to check out Trabezond (sp) near the start - it had about 5 units, but a notice popped up telling me I would start a war with KH if i attacked, so I decided not to bother. I came back about 20 years later with an army of 6 units - 2 generals, a mad asabara, 2 steppe horse archers and an armenian horse archer, to find that the city had been busy building units like the apocalypse was coming (which it was). Tons of peltasts, slingers, milita hoplites, classical hoplites, pontic spearmen, thanvabera archers, pantopodai of course and even some helenic cavalry. To the extent that a second stack was sitting next to the city. Ok, my thoughts at this point were along the lines of 'Oh c***', but since I had sent my army right up without checking, I couldnt run away, so I attacked anyway. And won! Not only won, I got a heroic victory, killed about 1600 with only about 70 losses.
Anyway, my point is the AI seems a lot better at building a range of units now. But its still not very good with them. If you have vast numerical superiority, it makes no sense at all to spread them out and send them one by one when you are defending against an enemy with superior manouverability. If they had sat still and waited, supporting their ranged units with their spearmen, I would have been wiped out. My horsearchers wouldnt have had the ammo to even make a dent in an army that size. As it was, they sent in their slingers first - alone, which my mad asabaras and generals took care of. Then a few pantopodai and pontic spearmen, while the helenic cavalry tried to flank me - my archers took out the spearmen, while my generals took out the cavalry. That left a load of peltasts and a couple of units of thanvabera archers, which I could also deal with piecemeal. Oh, and the hoplites were just running in circles in phalanx mode, trying in vain to catch my cavalry...Im not complaining, I got a nice victory, and it was a fun battle, but it seems a bit dumb of the AI...
Bookmarks