A Little Help on difficulty for 1.0 please

[Chris1959]

I apologise in advance if this has been asked before, but I would appreciate a little advise on what the campaign difficulty changes.

I've been playing this beautiful mod for a year and particularly like the Romanii.
In earlier versions I played on VH/M as recommended but despite much enjoyment always got a little fed up when by about 210BC I pushed North of the Alps and ran into the Sweboz behemoth and constant slug-fests to hold the Alpine passes.

Now I want to play a more roleplay style and whilst I do not want to slavishly follow history, I'd like Roman expansion to sort of reflect what really happened.

Under 0.82 I used Redmeths AI mod and my last campaign was really on the money.

I lost that when 1.0 came out and currently I'm at 240BC as the Romans and thing are ticking along nicely but I'm playing on M/M.

I have seen some posts that imply on VH/M there are some very nasty Eleutheroi armies in the Po valley and beyond awaiting a cocky Roman commander. I think, maybe, M/M is alittle to easy for me, but when I start on VH/M I notice after a few years the Sweboz still expand fast.

Could forum members kindly advise what can be expected on different difficulty levels for the campaign. Please remember I would like a slowish role play style game that is a bit of a challenge. I'm really determined to finally play the Romanii to the bitter end.

Many thanks in advance.

[bovi]

You're likely to encounter stiff resistance in the east of Europe regardless of your campaign difficulty. The difficulty level mostly dictates what the AI will do, on M it's unlikely to expand as quickly and field as many troops. On VH you can expect it to attack you for no reason at all.

[Treverer]

Could forum members kindly advise what can be expected on different difficulty levels for the campaign. Please remember I would like a slowish role play style game that is a bit of a challenge. I'm really determined to finally play the Romanii to the bitter end.

Many thanks in advance.

Well, I'm far from an expert, but I've made the experience that the "eb-feeling" starts at H/x. So that's what I recommend you: choose "hard" as campaign level and - depending on your skills as a general - either E, M or H on the battlemap, though M is IMHO the best choice.

Personally, I usually choose either H/M or H/E for some time.

Yours,
Treverer

[Jurdagat]

I always prefered H campaign difficulty.
Eleutherois will still be somewhat aggressive at times (which is the most important thing in my opinion), unlike on N difficulty where Eleutherois are pushovers.

In addition the AI will be more open to diplomacy.
Where in VH it's almost impossible without "Force Diplomacy".
Which I never really tried, but after what I've read others places, this seems to be the case. :)

And you will not always feel like everyone hates your guts.

[ross1025]

i used to play romanii under M/M and now i choose VH/M, i've played both of them for about 50 years. and IMO VH/M is not so terrible as we thought before,just try it if you found M/M too easy for you.

the most difference between M and VH maybe is the aggressive of AI due to they received more economy bonus under VH, just keep enough garrison on your every side of your borders (6-8 principes + 2-4slingers and better with a general) ,and try to make your watchtowers fully used.i think that's enough.

as to the deplomacy,i admit that i seldom consider that even under M/M,because some hardcoded reason,this part of TW is always awful compared with CIV(maybe that's why it's named TOTAL WAR?).

[Marcus Publius]

The best settings is H/M and play with ALEX if you have and want challenge and quite smart AI

[NeoSpartan]

hum.... you want to go "slow & mimic roman expansion" but u want a "challenge"...

well i am NOT the authority when it comes to AI diplomacy but why don't u get the Forced Diplomacy mod? I hear it helps.

but remember, this is RTW, and the AI wants to expand (unless it is ur protectorate) so sooner or later is going to after you there is no avoiding that.