About historical accuracy the game is more realistic, but it's still a simulation in which you write your own history, so it IS ahistorical. Also, when you want peace and you've won the battles, you get peace fairly easily, sometimes some nations are more stubborn, but you can break them without having to destroy them completely. The AI diplomats might offer silly trade sometimes (the ottomans wanted to trade Armenia for Milan), but sometimes, they will offer very balanced and useful trade, Spain sold me Gibraltar for a cheap technology in order to have a buffer zone between him and the russians in Morocco whom they were at war against. All game long, Spain had rocked the scoreboard with the biggest navy (closely followed by UK's fleet, but Spain never had to fight ME), and the biggest army was Russian, even at the end of the game when I was producing tons of soldiers every turn, I didn't even get half the russian army. I wasn't the biggest power in the game until I destroyed Britain in a third war in the 1790's, by the end of the game. For example, during my second war in India, I had to keep the port of my province safe so I could bring in reinforcements by boats that could reach the city, if you don't land in a port, you don't lose all movement after a landing, and I had to bring new regiments constantly. They also make sensible use of navies and armies. The AI manage to make balanced armies and navies and in order to beat them you need to secure key settlements. On the campaign map now, some factions will expand greatly and form challenging empires (Russia stood out in my game), some will trade and get filthy rich (Spain in my campaign), some other will usually die (Poland, United Provinces and Portugal did die fast). The musket battles are actually extremely enjoyable for me now.
0 kommentar(er)
