My Suggestion On Adding Difficulty

[Spartan90]

Okay, so I was just thinking then, the AI is horrible with their money, which is why they have money scripts. I was thinking to make the game more challening to you, add_40000 plenty of times and gift the money to all the factions so they can't go bankrupt?

I know this is unrealistic, but would it provide a challenge? Someone that has the patience to do this should get +rep, as it would take forever to gift every faction with like a million florins.

[jsktrogdor]

I think alot of mods already do this? Im pretty sure thats all they do when they boost difficulty is up the kings purse.

[Spartan90]

I think alot of mods already do this? Im pretty sure thats all they do when they boost difficulty is up the kings purse.

True, but even with mods the AI is usually always bankrupt. I mean bick bucks, like giving them a million dollars. That should last quite a while methinks.

Also, I think Samir hits the nail on the head. He makes some good points, plus trying to conquer the world with diplomacy is actually quite a rewarding challenge. +rep

[Sonykicks]

Pshh anyone willing to do that would be nuts

[Last of the Mohawks]

I did it to the weakest factions once, Scotland Portugal Moors, Denmark and even Egypt so crusades are actually hard.

[Samir]

the problem is that money does not solve the AIs problems, especially not versus human enemies.

they still attack the wrong armies and cities, they still wage senseless wars, rarley use diplomacy, etc.

if you really want to make your campaign more difficult it helps to take control of the AI faction, boost not only their income, but also their troops quality and quantity, improve their fortresses and cities, add some useful traits and ancillaries to their generals by cheating etc.

and even then you usually win.

what improved the quality of my campaigns a lot was to restrict myself in warfare and i am not talking about the chivalry/dread story, but that my danish empire is not really considering to take the whole world, but rather defend scandinavia and some byzantine borders, or my sicilan empire which developed the biggest economic power and which tried to bribe its survival instead of relying on troops. (this was one of my toughest campaigns ever. dont build effective armies, dont try to win battles, try to buy yourself out of war and stick to peace and money, rather than war and blood...)

[eggthief]

Obviously you've never played DLV at it's highest difficulty, in addition to your "original" idea, the AI also gets an extra garrison whenever you siege their settlements.

[Viking Prince]

The game is a simulation model -- no more and no less. If you take actions to "take advantage" of the limitations of the model, do not complain when it does not seem to result in a good simulation.

For example: several years ago (actual a few decades ago) I was involved in alpha testing a military war game with cardboard counters. Civilians hated the game because it was so easy to game the system -- all you had to do is rack up enlisted men deaths and you could meet the victory conditions in record time. The military veterans liked to game and found it quite tough since they were less willing to take actions towards the victory conditions that were expedient and resulting in many deaths to the team.

The computer AI does not seem to properly garrison the settlements and prefers to keep armies in the field. So fight the armies in the field before assaulting the settlements.

The army AI does not understand the advantages to the auto resolve system -- so fight the battles out on the battlemaps.

Etc.

[eggthief]

The computer AI does not seem to properly garrison the settlements and prefers to keep armies in the field. So fight the armies in the field before assaulting the settlements.

Even that is way to easy. I just let my infantry line engage their, then I let my cavalry (including general), take out their cavalry, general and ranged troops and after that I'll flank their infantry line. It's a basic system that allowes you to win battles with little casualties and lets you capture settlements without any kind of trouble.

[whitesoxfan]

If the AI has a lot of land, they can be strong. I believe someone posted a save from a game where the Timurids conquered Europe and became unbeatable. They had full stacks of units stretching along the roads.

[Conquistatore]

Give yourself as the player disadvantages to compensate for the weak AI. Set your King's purse value to 0, don't build the best quality troops, try to play a diplomatic or trade focused game. Most of all, DO NOT BLITZKRIEG, the AI can't cope with this and will falter easily.

[Conquistatore]

Yes that has been done before. But the AI still fundamentally lacks the ability to seriously challenge the player. The only advantage the AI has when they own all the land is in the numbers and resources, but their strategy and battles will ultimately let them down.

[Pink Beard]

Yes that has been done before. But the AI still fundamentally lacks the ability to seriously challenge the player. The only advantage the AI has when they own all the land is in the numbers and resources, but their strategy and battles will ultimately let them down.

Yep the AI is pretty much trying to snipe with a machine gun...
It can only win by throwing stacks (thus being a powerhouse) at you instead of using any tactics at all...

[Conquistatore]

Agreed, they basically play a game of beat you down.. over a long period of time. Like the Zerg or The Flood or even The Borg, Endless numbers.