Best Total War for custom battles against AI?

[Incendio]

I don't know if it's true but I've read somewhere else that in general, Total War games with fire weapons tend to be worse to play custom battles against AI since AI handle badly fire weapons, for example in Empire Total War. Well, what I actually read is that in general terms, Total War with melee battles are better to play against AI in custom battles since AI play better with melee weapons, this is more or less the idea I have read. Anyway, which is then the best Total War for custom battles against AI?

[King Athelstan]

The AI is a tad wonky in all of the Total War games, but I guess they're more polished in the newer ones. In my opinion, just go with the era you like the most and play that.

[Axalon]

In my experience....

Its probably... STW1, followed by MTW1... These two games (still) do battles better then any other TW-game I have played (obviously disregarding GFX, and this on general terms), this includes the overall battle AI-performance as well. The exception to this rule are siege-battles which are better handled or dealt with, in other/later TW-games like RTW1, MTW2 and Warhammer 1 for various and different reasons... Strictly AI-performance wise I think Warhammer1 probably do sieges better then the others, but I could be wrong (about that).

- A

[Gallus]

Third Age Total War for me. You can recreate iconic battles such as Helm's Deep, Minas Tirith and charge of the Rohirrim at the Pelennor Fields.

[King Athelstan]

In my experience....

Its probably... STW1, followed by MTW1... These two games (still) do battles better then any other TW-game I have played (obviously disregarding GFX, and this on general terms), this includes the overall battle AI-performance as well. The exception to this rule are siege-battles which are better handled or dealt with, in other/later TW-games like RTW1, MTW2 and Warhammer 1 for various and different reasons... Strictly AI-performance wise I think Warhammer1 probably do sieges better then the others, but I could be wrong (about that).

- A

Well, there's one important thing you've forgotten. The Warhammer sieges aren't proper sieges, they're just a wall assault. One short stretch of wall, instead of being able to envelop the entire city and attack from multiple cities. Warhammer sieges are the worst I've ever encountered, simply for that reason

[Axalon]

Well, there's one important thing you've forgotten. The Warhammer sieges aren't proper sieges, they're just a wall assault. One short stretch of wall, instead of being able to envelop the entire city and attack from multiple cities.

Agreed.

Warhammer sieges are the worst I've ever encountered, simply for that reason

This was unclear to me... Was it because you think the solution of "One short stretch of wall" as (overly) simplistic and (overtly) inadequate (not being proper sieges etc, as outlined?). Or was that the AI performed especially lousy under such circumstances? Or is a it because of a combo of both? Or was it something else....

Personally, from what I seen in Warhammer 1, the AI have at least tried to defend that wall and it properly fired upon my troops with warmachines and the like. Something that is hardly a given in general TW-AI performance, right?

- A

[King Athelstan]

The AI performs well because of the small bit of wall they can use. It's the small bit of wall I disagree with. For me, sieges have always been these massive epic battles, where you wouldn't need a top-tier AI anyways because they'll just be standing on the wall anyways. You should be able to attack from all directions, taking that out removes most of the strategy, and most of the fun. So tldr- It's not a proper siege with just one wall

[Axalon]

The AI performs well because of the small bit of wall they can use. It's the small bit of wall I disagree with.

True, and... I suspected as much, but now I know...

- A