VH/VH?

[RuleBritannia]

Just a question, but why is VH/VH the recommended difficulty and why is it said to be the "only difficulty you should use"? I play VH campaign difficulty, but M battle difficulty, as VH gives enemies vast bonuses to stats, making the game very unfair.

[Seleukos_I.]

Because it's balanced for VH.

[RuleBritannia]

How can it be balanced when VH gives enemy troops 2-4x the stats of yours?

[Sponbo]

How can it be balanced when VH gives enemy troops 2-4x the stats of yours?

DO you want to have a challenge or do you want to own anything and be the 00berRoxxor ?

So play VH/VH or play M/M

[The Mouth of Sauron]

its for Als lack of a brain,so if he is much thoughter than u then he is balanced with u (u r supposed to have brain )

[Jean=A=Luc]

How can it be balanced when VH gives enemy troops 2-4x the stats of yours?

No it doesn't. If you're having trouble feel free to lower the difficulty, it's not such a big deal.

[jinjo]

because AI plays much more foolish than people
AS USUAL AT LEAST

[Neige]

JVH gives enemies vast bonuses to stats, making the game very unfair.

Are you sure? I thought that was only in Rome...

[ackrite26]

VH - in battles raises enemy unit morale, possibly experience. Has been mentioned countless times around the board recently.

[RuleBritannia]

Ok, will start a VH/H campaign. The only thing I was worried about was playing VH battle difficulty with Gondor. Already Mordor is overpowered enough, sensing 1000s of troops at you ever turn, and it's already challenging enough on M battle difficulty. If Hard doesn't give that many bonuses, I'll play it.

[Seleukos_I.]

It's not overpowered, that's how Mordor is supposed to be. And believe me, it's not too hard.

[HarneY]

It always says in the previews making it more difficult for the more experienced players who have had M2TW since it came out thats fair enough as long as they put it on H or VH. Cos TBH I suck well not suck but I'm just not capable of uber pwning like some people so aslong as M and E keep it down to my level I don't mind then we can all play

[conorr]

Well its a balance really...

As high elves (with RR/RC mod) if I can destroy a full stack of the orcs of the misty mountains, with 0 units lost on VH/VH, I can destroy 5 full stacks. So I might as well play H/VH (too avoid/deter stack spam while still not only fighting like 1 stack per faction).

But then I get to fighting the good factions (because I'm bored/the jerks took a settlement I wanted.) and 3 generals with full dread and 4+ exp on each do a hammer anvil charge on some scrap unit and they don't take heavy losses AND/OR not route.... I can still win with minimal loses but it is much more boring when its just ok 6 archer units, 6 cavalry/generals, oh I just wiped out 7 full stacks. (Archers kill, cavalry intercepts units when they get to close to archers then retreats leaving the enemy slowed/stopped and very very vulnerable to archer fire.) So I might as well have just been playing VH/H (again at LEAST hard just so that the godly units are still godly while the scrap units are turned into only average.)

My first campaign = High elves 141 turns in, VH/VH, I lost 1 single battle (trying to take Minas tirith and except for that fight never had an army with more then 10 units, taking on upwards of 3 full stacks.)

My second campaign = High elves 60 or so turns in, VH/H, lost a handful of battles but I'm no longer using cheap tactics like archer spam and abusing the AMAZINGLY AWESOME cliff battles with archer spam. Overall it is much more fun knowing that I can bring infantry to a fight and actually use them.

Yeah I still can't help feeling like "I should be playing on VH" but if I'm playing on VH I still cant help feeling "boring". Lose lose if your someone like me lol.

[airborne guy]

Well its a balance really...

As high elves (with RR/RC mod) if I can destroy a full stack of the orcs of the misty mountains, with 0 units lost on VH/VH, I can destroy 5 full stacks. So I might as well play H/VH (too avoid/deter stack spam while still not only fighting like 1 stack per faction).

But then I get to fighting the good factions (because I'm bored/the jerks took a settlement I wanted.) and 3 generals with full dread and 4+ exp on each do a hammer anvil charge on some scrap unit and they don't take heavy losses AND/OR not route.... I can still win with minimal loses but it is much more boring when its just ok 6 archer units, 6 cavalry/generals, oh I just wiped out 7 full stacks. (Archers kill, cavalry intercepts units when they get to close to archers then retreats leaving the enemy slowed/stopped and very very vulnerable to archer fire.) So I might as well have just been playing VH/H (again at LEAST hard just so that the godly units are still godly while the scrap units are turned into only average.)

My first campaign = High elves 141 turns in, VH/VH, I lost 1 single battle (trying to take Minas tirith and except for that fight never had an army with more then 10 units, taking on upwards of 3 full stacks.)

My second campaign = High elves 60 or so turns in, VH/H, lost a handful of battles but I'm no longer using cheap tactics like archer spam and abusing the AMAZINGLY AWESOME cliff battles with archer spam. Overall it is much more fun knowing that I can bring infantry to a fight and actually use them.

Yeah I still can't help feeling like "I should be playing on VH" but if I'm playing on VH I still cant help feeling "boring". Lose lose if your someone like me lol.

You can destroy a full stack without any losses? How is that possible?

[MAMO72]

You can destroy a full stack without any losses? How is that possible?

It is possible, trust me. I always play VH/VH level, starting from my first Shogun campaign, it is the funniest level I believe (without any cheats obviously). I playied two SE campaigns, in both of them I was able to destroy one enemy's full stack without casualties, doesn't matter if OOMM, Mordor, Harad or Rhun. I also had two battles were with my SE full stack destroyied 2 or 3 full stacks with less than 100 casualties (no bridge). You must only choose carefully the ground where deploy your army, and his constitution.

[IHV]

I also noticed that between M and VH there is no differense on unit cost and upkeep, what i cant understand tho is how im always so broke on VH (thats the main reason why i can fight back the countless enemy armies, no money) and how come i have plenty money on Medium difficulty.

[FriendoftheDork]

I also noticed that between M and VH there is no differense on unit cost and upkeep, what i cant understand tho is how im always so broke on VH (thats the main reason why i can fight back the countless enemy armies, no money) and how come i have plenty money on Medium difficulty.

I believe it's about the size of the King's Purse. Check your financial report for M and VH campaign difficulty, respectively.

The only other option is that income from cities is somehow reduced, but I hardly believe that is the case.

For the OP: Play on what difficulty you want. I started on M/M and had fun with that. Now I plauy VH/VH, But I consider going back to H/H or something soon.

[Æsir]

You can destroy a full stack without any losses? How is that possible?

Make an army of 12 archers (even militias will be good enought) and take the high ground. And have a good general with cavalry BGs to flank the enemy. That's it!

[Muffer Nl]

As high elves (with RR/RC mod) if I can destroy a full stack of the orcs of the misty mountains, with 0 units lost on VH/VH, I can destroy 5 full stacks. So I might as well play H/VH (too avoid/deter stack spam while still not only fighting like 1 stack per faction).

H/VH actually spams more stacks then VH/VH does.

[Smaug]

H/VH actually spams more stacks then VH/VH does.

Why is that?