Is Warlords easier v. the AI than Vanilla Civ?

[eris]

I find that the AI is just a little bit smarter. Some decisions seem a little more appropriate, and therefore, correspondingly annoying. I had been trying to move up a difficulty level. In vanilla, I was starting to do okay. In Warlords, I am getting whacked and whacked early. I even got the Great Wall up and got the barbarians off my back, but before I could really celebrate, Elizabeth walks in with this stack headed for my Capitol. I was furious then. Now I am just impressed as well as depressed. Still working on it....

[Prussia]

Great Wall obliterates the worry of barbarians, which is usually a big worry early in the game.

A little easier.

[dregor]

On the flip side, if a neighbour gets the Great Wall it could mean a bunch of barbarians redirected towards your borders.

[Blaupanzer]

AI tends to attack in the early to midgame with stacks having siege weapons and cavalry-style units (elephants, horse archers, chariots) but no infantry (maybe one axeman). These die on my walls defended by spearmen and promoted archers/longbows. They did not attack this way in vanilla.

The game is not any easier, however. The key is some AI take off on techs, others on troops, yet others on wonders. Outracing them in all three is really tough. Conquering inevitably slows down my tech development, short-term. In vanilla, I was confident I could recover in the race with my broader empire. In Warlords, this is not always the case. I'm learning to be more aggressive, but only slowly.

[Lucilla]

I find it harder if you are a builder type of player. THe AI will definitely hit you if you neglect your military. This was easier in Vanilla CIV.
As was said before, if you play aggressive, your chances are better.

[kiky]

Originally posted by Blaupanzer
AI tends to attack in the early to midgame with stacks having siege weapons and cavalry-style units (elephants, horse archers, chariots) but no infantry (maybe one axeman). These die on my walls defended by spearmen and promoted archers/longbows. They did not attack this way in vanilla.

If the city defense is strong, most of them attack the city after they do a lot of pillaging. I usually hit them before they attack city.
In warlords, more strategy is needed. Predicting where the units move and where to hit them is very important.

I also usually attack more advance civ first to keep them in check. That way you can concentrate more on military and able to keep up in tech.

[Jon Miller]

I had to drop down two levels of difficulty. Now, I am not very good, an dI hadn't played for a while, but still, two levels of difficulty.

JM

[Thrak]

The early builder game is a bit easier, virtually all the AIs waste a lot of time trying to build the great wall AFAIK.

[Dis]

only played one game (just got it yesterday), but it's definately more difficult. I didn't do so well as the Vikings. Though a poor starting location (lots of tundra on a small island) didn't help. It was an archipelago map, but I got the smallest island.

[zeace]

With Raging Barbarians I'd say it's a little harder, since the barbs are far less dumb about attacking fortified archers on forested hills. The chariot helps a little with its new anti-axe abilities, but I still find it tough to avoid getting pillaged. Before, if the barb beat your hill guardian, you had a couple of turns to figure out how to deal with him before he started plundering. Now I usually have to wait until the barb is on my land before I attack, and an unsucessful attack will result in pillaging.

Sometime I'll use my workers to create forest-botlenecks away from my cities:

F F F F F F: Forest, G: grass or plains,
G F F F G H: Forest + Hill + Fortified Archer
G G F G G
G G H G G

The barbs like to stay in the forest as much as possible, so they end up getting funneled towards my archer. Even when starts going around, they usually end up attacking the archer instead of going all the way around.

Obviously setting up a trap like this could take a ton of time, but by using existing features of the land, I can often find a situation like this somewhere where a chop or two will return me to the good old "Smashing against my fortifications" days.

[MasterDave]

I think that it is a little bit harder overall. Mainly due to the barbarians being smarter and walking past pickets. Also, the AI can take advantage of the Vassal rules to get other AI's to declare war on you by capitulating to an AI while losing a war with the human.

On the other hand, eventually winning by domination is less of a grind than it was before, so that makes winning less tedious at least.

[uberfish]

Early axe rushes have been significantly slowed down by the need to guard stacks and captured cities with spearmen to stop chariots. However GGs and trebs work in favour of the player later on, so I'd say it's a wash.

[MikeH]

Yeah, that aspect is much better. You really do need combined arms in the early stages.

[couerdelion]

On the point about more effective barb/AI attacks, I wonder whether this is not just that it has adopted a new pattern. Once you get used to this new pattern, the human player can adopt a strategy where the AI behaviour once again plays into the humans hands.

Of course, the chariot makes the anti-barb battle a little easier but it makes it a bit more tougher when dealing with early AI stacks. Thus making catapults even more important

[MikeH]

I think it makes for more interesting early decisions (and civ is all about making you have interesting decisions)

Now, instead of just archer or axeman (or buildings/settler/worker) you also have to consider building spearmen and chariots. Early access to horses is more important, you have to balance bronze working with animal handling.

Incredible change considering it's only a buff of one unit.