Does the hard battle difficulty setting give the AI unfair advantages as in the other games, or is the AI juest better. And if so, either or, I want to play a campaign with a challenge but I dont want there units t be unrealistially better.
Does the hard battle difficulty setting give the AI unfair advantages as in the other games, or is the AI juest better. And if so, either or, I want to play a campaign with a challenge but I dont want there units t be unrealistially better.
Indeed, the "Hard" & "Very Hard" settings merely buff the enemy's unit stats with extra morale, accuracy, rate of fire etc. This can result in some pretty bizarre situations where a buffed-up militia is out-morale'ing a seasoned regiment of line... I don't particularly care for it. It does not make the AI "smarter" in any way.
Same goes for the Campaign difficulty settings, though these are slightly less annoying... Monetary bonuses, research bonuses and more armies make the campaign map more difficult without (to me) making things too unrealistic. Of course, the Netherlands might be able to field a 3-stack army (which it otherwise could not afford), but as long as your battle settings are at normal, you should still have a good time beating that huge army in the field without wild battlefield unit bonuses.
Still playing Napoleon:TW
Ya I agree , medium battle, and hard campaign.
I must say that VH battles result in similar losses to me as MP battles do, so I guess it's the most "realistic" mode...
Tools: PFM 4.1 - EditSF 1.2.0
(Download PFM - Download EditSF)
Warscape Modding Guide
Join the PFM User Group on Steam to receive PackFileManager update notifications.
Respecto Patronum
Very hard on campaign and battle is definetly unrealistic, but I think its a challenge that stops the game from getting boring over time.
Signature and Avatar created by ceylankral (give him rep)