Do moral changes make battles too easy?

[CandidMedia]

I like the principle behind the new moral system in battles. It makes sense that units should rout quickly if attacked from the side or rear. But there is a floor to the system. The player can exploit it, the AI certainly can’t. I’m no total war expert but even on VH im winning battles easily. Im 150 turns in and lost only two and only when heavily out numbered. It is just too easy to get round the side or rear of the AI causing them to rout every time. If the AI could return the favour, It would balance things out, but they rarely flank. I think the morale system needs to be rebalanced so rear/side attack’s dont have such an impact. Or maybe someone can come up with a sub mod?

[Jurand of Cracow]

I think this is a very interesting topic. Other TW game are always struggling with the "right numbers" and "incompetent AI" as well, also on other issued - eg. the discussion in the Europa Barbarorum II webpage.
I think all the TW AIs cannot cope with the challenges of innovative thinking so we need to live with it. The question is about time. Are your forces able to stay in fight until the other forces get to the back/flank and make the enemy routing? If not, can you cope somehow with it (tactics like negated wing)?
I also think that the only game that have more competent AI is not a TW - it's the Ultimate General made by the TW veteran Darth Vader. The terrain, morale and for of war are much more important than in the TW what make it more historical imo.
Besides, I think the Attila engine is really superb in the aspect of informing the player what's actually going on in the battlefield - why the unit is wavering etc. I like this feature very much even if it gives me very un-historical amount of information about the battle.

Is there somewhere on this webpage an explanation of the battle system and thinking behind for the Ancient Empires?

JoC