Do you find battle difficulties above medium realistic?

[boxleitnerb]

Never ever have I played above VH/M because I just find it silly that simple peasants receive enough bonuses to beat disciplined, highly trained and armed to the teeth soldiers.

Am I alone?

[shikaka]

Never ever have I played above VH/M because I just find it silly that simple peasants receive enough bonuses to beat disciplined, highly trained and armed to the teeth soldiers.

Am I alone?

I usually don't play below Hard (but most often VH), because 'hard' only equals out your general.

(= you take a strong general and the AI usually only has a captain or a cr.p general)

[Xerrop]

Well I also play medium battles only. No need to go higher. I am a passive player and expand only in an historical realistic manner (no speedrun campaigns for early world domination) and prefer also the campaign game. So the AI has good troops in my later battles. No need to give them overpowered stats.

[Titus Maximius Thongus]

VH/VH all the way when i used to play vanilla and even some of the more difficult mods. Human ingenuity beats superior +7attack/+7defense bonuses any day

[Delta21]

VH/VH all the way when i used to play vanilla and even some of the more difficult mods. Human ingenuity beats superior +7attack/+7defense bonuses any day

Still...Spear militia become ridiculously OP for their price/pink pajamas It's funny to see them hack up cooler looking soldiers/ones who don't wear pajamas.

[Parzival2211]

I like realism, which is why I wouldn't want to have any att bonuses for anyone in my battles (if I am the better general than the AI, well so be it ;-)). But I have only played 4 campaign so far. Maybe, I'll change my mind one day.

[Lord Minotaur]

in m2tw i had played on vh battles but on rtw i only play m battles, i tried to play vh on custom battles - result my troops got pwned and routed in 15 secs

[Chris Death]

Medium is just way too easy - you'll win without a challenge even when odds are 1:3 or 1:4 against you.

Hard is just fine for me as i too dislike the bonus ai gets on VHard.

~S~ CD

[Vice]

Very Hard battles for the most point are not too hard if you know what your doing have decent troops etc...

However VH campaign can get kinda crazy with the amount of troops the AI can put on you...And whats even more annoying when they travel by sea and land everywhere and anywhere all the time!

[Titus Maximius Thongus]

well in theory your main grand army, or even a medium sized decent army, should never lose to an AI so u just need to keep crushing the enemy as they come to you. maybe sneak a stack or 2 around their lines, capture their cities, destroy all the buildings and move on in a pillage and plunder fashion

[MrManFreak]

I usually only play with VH campaign and M battle i would play with VH battle IF the AI would get smarter not if the AI gets bonuses i dont wanna see my men getting destroyed against lower quality troops in a frontal fight,i really dont mind if the AI throws Full stacks at me as long as i can beat them be it by quality or strategy.

[Mr. Magi]

I've never considered the battles realistic. They're either too easy, or too hard depending on the buffs given to the AI.

[StealthEvo]

Isn't VH battles bugged so that it's actually akin to M level difficulty. Or was the Campaign difficulty. I know that one of them H is infact the hardest difficulty.

Not to intentionally burst anyones bubble of course

[ScottishAdam]

Never ever have I played above VH/M because I just find it silly that simple peasants receive enough bonuses to beat disciplined, highly trained and armed to the teeth soldiers.

Am I alone?

I have never even selected anything other than the hardest setting for both battles and campaign and yet everyone calls me a noob

[ScottishAdam]

well thats because you use n00b tactics and n00b settings.

The same noob tactics that everyone on this forum is terrified of. I have challenged many people and have been turned down each time. Excuses made are that I use huge units. The fact that they can also use huge units does not seem to matter.

[Blatta Optima Maxima]

I don't find RTW realistic in any way.

[daxypoo]

Never ever have I played above VH/M because I just find it silly that simple peasants receive enough bonuses to beat disciplined, highly trained and armed to the teeth soldiers.

Am I alone?

FFFFFFFSSSSSSSS


what the hell? vh/vh is barely competent to even challenge somebody


my advice is to play multiplayer for a couple weeks and then ask yourself this question again

[Vice]

FFFFFFFSSSSSSSS


what the hell? vh/vh is barely competent to even challenge somebody


my advice is to play multiplayer for a couple weeks and then ask yourself this question again

Now I am most likely going to be flamed / trolled / banned (lol maybe not the last one) but...seriously...why do people bother playing MP on a game that is 6 years old and counting? Not to mention you miss all the things that make the game great besides the battles in SP. Just seems silly to me and a waste of time...but to each their own I suppose.

Games like WC3-SC2-WAR40k-COH are great for MP...because just about everything you can do in single player you can do in MP...You cant even come close to doing that in MP. Now dont get me wrong when they make Shogun 2 and it has MP...You can bet your ass Im going to play it on MP until it dies out where there is only a handful of people playing it on MP like the current situation for Rome. But if your only playing a handful of people who have played this game from the begin or are at least very good...whats the point?

Anyways let the flames of hatred begin...

[dacder]

Now I am most likely going to be flamed / trolled / banned (lol maybe not the last one) but...seriously...why do people bother playing MP on a game that is 6 years old and counting? Not to mention you miss all the things that make the game great besides the battles in SP. Just seems silly to me and a waste of time...but to each their own I suppose.

Games like WC3-SC2-WAR40k-COH are great for MP...because just about everything you can do in single player you can do in MP...You cant even come close to doing that in MP. Now dont get me wrong when they make Shogun 2 and it has MP...You can bet your ass Im going to play it on MP until it dies out where there is only a handful of people playing it on MP like the current situation for Rome. But if your only playing a handful of people who have played this game from the begin or are at least very good...whats the point?

Anyways let the flames of hatred begin...

well since you seem civilized I will explain this calmy
1.MP demands much much more skill....espicially micro
2.MP has clans and clans are very nice.
3.MP has communitys that are also quite nice
4.MP batlles are generally more enjoyable because you can actually lose them
5.you get it or do I have to yell?

[Vice]

well since you seem civilized I will explain this calmy
1.MP demands much much more skill....espicially micro
2.MP has clans and clans are very nice.
3.MP has communitys that are also quite nice
4.MP batlles are generally more enjoyable because you can actually lose them
5.you get it or do I have to yell?

1. Fair enough point I suppose...The AI can be quite stupid sometimes thats for sure

2. There are also plenty of other strategy games out there that have clan that are very nice

3. Same as 2

4. You can easily win a game against the AI just as easy as you can lose. If you have 20 stacks of peasents against 20 stacks of say basically anything your going to lose whether you play the AI or a human. It all comes down to what troops you have and how you use them against the other player...If all you have is peasents your pretty much doomed. (And yes I know nobody would choose 20 stacks of peasents to fight against 20 stacks of whatever but you get the point)

5. All I am saying is if all you do is MP you miss out on alot of the game that makes it great.

Its like people who still play Counter-Strike when there are tons of FPS out there for MP they have bigger and better MP communes.

Anyways in conclusion...If Rome MP is what you like its what you like. I just find it odd people still dig the MP scene when there is so much else out there to play and do MP wise. I know for sure Rome would not of won all of its awards or really any if it was just all about the MP aspect of it.