Originally posted by The Last Conformist
Idea: heavy inf has MF=1, light infantry =2 and Cav =3. This gives the opportunity to attempt "hit and run" attacks with light infantry without giving them an offensive bombard (which the AI would use to destroy roads ...). Light infantry should have decent AF (so they can actually achieve anything), poor DF (so they're in trouble if catched by heavies) and a defensive bombard (to encourage combined arms).
Good ideas Last Conformist
Although cavalry running about with a speed of 3 is a little high (especially on roads), they could always be limited by making them 'wheeled' so that they cannot enter woods & mountains.
It is not possible to ride a horse through a wood off a path. I tried it once....well, I didn't have much choice, the horse was in control....and it still hurts!
As for siege engines:-
The Greeks were absolutely useless at sieges. 10 years to beieige Troy, the Athenian disaster at Syracuse, and the fact that the Spartans for 27 years couldn't think of a way of storming Athens!

All this changed in 357 BC when Philip II of Macedon organised a proper siege train that could take a city in a matter of months instead of years. And there were a few occasions when siege engines were use on the field of battle, such as by the Phocians against Philip at the battle of Onomarchos in 353 BC, and the Persians using them against Alexander the Great when he stormed the Persian Gates pass in 330 BC...but these instances were very rare, and are outside the scope of Amenhotep7's scenario.
On the other hand, we DO want cities to be taken during the scenario, even if the cities of Sparta and Athens themselves were nuts that were too tough to crack. So perhaps we should leave them in, or reduce the defensive bonus of cities and increase the attack factor of heavy infantry to compensate if we leave them out.
Originally posted by LouLong
Yes, exactly ! Now, is there a way of changing these {retreating} odds ?
Yes LouLong, under the "Combat Experience" tab in the editor, like this :-