Revised the Method of Implimenting Difficutly Levels as it Pertains to Combat

[acd]

I have sneaking suspicion that at higher levels of play, the game makes it more difficult for the player simply by making your units ineffective in combat, and while making the AI's units highly effective. If so, I don't see this as a legitimate means for simulating difficulty. With regard to combat, Difficulty Levels should solely involve the AI's ability to implement advanced strategy. There is nothing (AT ALL) redeeming to a game that, for the sake of illustration, always rolls a 6 and while you always roll a 1. A game environment such as this is just STUPID,and not to mention very ANNOYING.

 

[Naokaukodem]

The AI IS stupid, everybody knows it. But I don't know if it cheats on the rolls... what is certain is that it cheats on the shields needed to build a unit, and the starting number of units. To seem realistic, an AI should stop to send randomly units to suicide and send them in stacks. It would be a first step. But it's true, building a stack would implicate the AI being able to stop units, join them together, and send them again, what is tough. Where to stop them? How many of them? How many units should the AI keep to another front or possible counter-attack? Difficult to say when you are just an AI. Fortunately the rule in civ is "strike strong in one point at the time". But only to be able to do stacks, the AI should be able to think about a bigger strategy. So to be more difficult, it just builds more units. The AI should need to play with stacks. It would make the game more balanced. I never lost a city by weapons when i had to win a game, what should happen more often.

 

[Vael]

I have sneaking suspicion that at higher levels of play, the game makes it more difficult for the player simply by making your units ineffective in combat, and while making the AI's units highly effective.

This is not how it works.