I'll try to keep this relevant to the purposes of the Bullpen.
I'm with cabert's, rancid's and aelf's take on this. I'm sure many have read the threads spawned by futurehermit on the general AI tech pace, and the ALC Peter 2 game is an instance that confirms that prognosis. Gandhi seemed to mostly defend with LB stacks against Rifles/Cannon/Cav, though I did see some Grens/Cannon in one screenshot of his capital. But Sisutil would have to confirm the general case. In my experience so far this has not always been the case, not by a long shot.
The core issue is the AI tech pace, with the secondary issue of unit upgrade ability since that AI bene has also been nerfed. The issue is not that the AI doesn't build enough units (save the early game, but I don't like to build too many early either), but that it doesn't fully make use of the stacks that it does build. This, plus inefficient use of espionage plus the nerfed AI tech benes are suspected as the root causes of the overall slower AI pace.
So while Aggressive AI would fix the lack of use, it would do so at the price of 1) an even slower AI tech pace due to a) unit spam and b) destructive inter-AI wars, and 2) unit spam tedium - thus aggravating the basic problem, plus leaving the AI with even more units it can't upgrade.
So no to aggressive AI.
Same with No Tech Swapping or whatever it is called. This would nix a key way that the AI could address its tech backwardness independently of the human, further exacerbating the problem. So no here also.
The unofficial patch I haven't used since I think completely uncoupling corps from inflation is too overpowered, promoting an "it's all good" corp spam, for ex. I _like_ how the AP finally makes getting (the AP) religion a _bad_ thing, finally! The tie with inflation should be adjusted, not eliminated, and I'll wait until that is done.
As it sits now, BtS seems to suit a more passive-aggressive "nibbling turtle" style of play. For this I've found the GW+ToZ+AP(with shared religion) to be an excellent defensive combo. Especially with Protective, to which it gives new meaning. Bait an AI into attacking you and let them suffer the happy penalties while you rack up the 2xGG points. Together with an early Theology and early instructors and you can nurture a core of well-promoted units for later upgrade in the...
...Modern Era. I'd like to see some challenging Modern Era warfare. Especially if Boudicca were in the mix, Oooh, Sisutil in pouty Liz drag in a girl fight with Boudi! Er, another inappropriate image, I know
Feels like middle school spirit all over again - that's what these games do to you I guess
Too bad though if it means dumbing down one's play. I liked a tech beeline challenge as much as anyone else, but I like this more leisurely style as well. I've just sort of adapted to it and tried out other angles. I'm much more willing to share a continent with the AIs rather than feel that I must grab the whole thing for myself if I wanted to have a hope of winning, truly generally the case in Vanilla/Warlords. Not so in BtS, a big (and good) difference. Sisutils' Peter 2 game was unusual in my experience in that he had a truly great opportunity to knock out the only other AI (J Caesar) on his continent early on, one that I wouldn't have resisted, either. But that is exceptional.
The rule is: rubbing close borders with same-continent AIs. Just wait and they will attack, with nice Blake-style combined stacks. Trouble is, they often won't go all out total war with everything, so they are not too hard to contain in "aggressive-defensive" style.
We'll see how it all pans out in the end.