I've recently played another game of K-Mod and noticed some suboptimal AI behavior. The situation was as follows: I (Portugal) was at war with the Ottomans at my northern border. The core of my empire to the south had a number of coastal cities, and since my last K-Mod game was already a while ago I foolishly left them mostly undefended. That got me into some trouble when the Zulus (situated on another continent, so I equally foolishly ignored them diplomatically) decided to backstab me and and suddenly had a fleet of Galleons at my borders. So far, so awesome. I had nothing but one happiness defender in those threatened cities and really wasn't able to organize much relief besides whipping one additional unit each. Still, Shaka decided to do the following: 1. Start an amphibious attack with all non-siege units on one of my cities (the least defended one, at least). 2. After that has failed (I had technological superiority), he disembarked a stack of siege units next to the city. I suppose the second is because game rules prevent siege units from amphibious attacks, so it's understandable at least. Still, the decision to immediately start an amphibious attack doesn't seem very smart to me considering the chances to take the city that way were rather low. Landing the units first and attacking the next turn seems like the much better move for several reasons: - no amphibious penalty - the AI can make use of its siege weapons instead of wasting them - I have nearly no means to reinforce during the extra turn they're giving up - even if I manage to better defend my cities, I'm in no position to get rid of the stack, so it can potentially pillage my roads/block access for further reinforcements or threaten other cities Maybe it's worth a look adjusting the AI weights for outright amphibious attacks? I think it should really only risk them when no siege units are in the fleet or there are decent chances of actually taking the city that way.