Crazychester1247

The armypool system hasn't made a difference in my game. I'm still having the same problem where me and the CSA AI get into meat-grinders and they end up becoming to large for me to fight. They'll always suicidally charge my position until they lose almost their entire army. Then they magically regenerate to full strength. You have no idea how many times I've received messages saying the AI has received 50K+ reinforcements after I barely managed to scrap together around 5,000. You NEED to give the AI army a sense of self-preservation. At this moment in time they'll sacrifice an entire army just to kill 25% of the players men. Make their first concern be the continued survival of their own forces, like any sensible general. At the very least make it so that if the player inflicts a certain amount of casualties on them (say 40% with the player having taken 10% less casualties) the battle ends. In my opinion you should gut the army pool system, and replace it with a true carryover system. Make it so the AI has to manage their army exactlly like the player. They'll have a set pool of points and political power to spend on their army based on how they performed in the last battle. If they keep losing battles they'll be replaced by a better general with more starting political power. If at any point in the campaign the AI army becomes to weak the player will get to have a whack at the AI capital. Which would be guarded by heavy fortifications, the AI army, and a sizable garrision of elite troops. If the player wins the battle the campaign ends. If not the campaign continues with the AI army recieving a glut of men/money due to the surge in morale. This is important because it would make the player feel like he's actually affecting the war on a strategic scale. Rather than it just playing out the same no matter what happens.