Quote Originally Posted by Melvish View Post
On the campaign map you could just go around a entrenched army and go for the region capital. The only choice left for the defender is ether intercept you: they lose trench and they come to you (you become the "defender") or lose their city.
When you intercept, you're defending, not the intercepted army. But the point remains: If you avoid interception by going straight for the capital, you get to defend, even though you're the "attacker," because the AI will inevitably have to sally out after only 2-3 turns and likely with no reinforcement help. This adds up to a significant advantage for the human player on top of an already weak AI because he/she gets to defend when taking a city, and the disparity in difficulty between defense and offense on the battlefield is even greater in this game than past TW games, in my opinion.

Do you think the defense-offense balance is more, uh, balanced than in past TW games? I don't, although admittedly I haven't played too too much yet and only RTI.

I don't think that's necessarily wrong, but CA can make some adjustments for the AI to mitigate that, like making the AI more likely to call in reinforcements when sallying out to attack a besieging army and increasing the number of turns besieged cities can hold out.