How is Sforza a three sword campaign?

It just seems really easy. I bet all of the levels, on hard, with only one attempt on each. Playing all of them mostly legit. (I basically only used monks on the second level, but other than that). The first level is super easy, the second is fairly easy, the third is possibly the hardest, or at least one of the longest, the fourth one can be difficult if you try and go near the shore without a castle to shred boats, and the fifth is also easy. Why is it rated 3 swords? It feels like a one sword, 2 max campaign. Does anyone else find this to be true?


I agree, compared to Le Loi or Bayinnaung, Sforza is a piece of cake. On a scale of 1 to 3, I would rate it with 1.5 and thus with 2 swords.

The difficulty of campaigns is often poorly evaluated. I recently finished Prithviraj and I feel like it was harder than most three swords despite being two swords.


Exactly. I think that Gengis Khan could be a two swords for example, purely because of the third mission, “Into China”, which is a extremely hard mission for most people. They could have given Tariq a three swords if they want to evaluate based on the patience of the player and how hard it can be on peoples mental sanity. :wink:


Tariq Ibn Ziyad is 3 swords despite having 1, enemies have infinite resources and keep spamming you nonstop especially in the 2nd and last mission on hard…Both of them took me more than 2 hours just to deal with the endless unit spamfest.

1 Like

Yeah, I have to say I think just removing the Jurchen wonder would be enough to make this a one sword.

compared to Le Loi or Bayinnaung

I’d give them 4 or 5 swords on hard if I could :grinning_face_with_smiling_eyes:

Yes. And when you add in the achievement on steam, it goes up to at least three swords.

1 Like

I’m not sure we should take the achievements into account when rating the general difficulty, though, otherwise Saladin’s sword account would go through the roof because of his last mission.

This one isn’t that hard. The one that would become insane would likely be Montezuma, because saving Tabasco on hard is both exceedingly difficult and mostly RNG dependant.

Ah yeah the discussion about the swords. There was an old thread about this, esp. about Tariq being mismatched, but this thread is somehow gone / deleted now (don’t know if there is a time limit).

Esp. Tariq and Sforza are not adequate. 2 swords for Sforza seem fitting to me due to the lengthy fourth mission - the others being easy - while Tariq is at least 2 swords (due to missions 2 and 5).
But this ofc depends on individual gaming skills and I am not a pro player (and the rating should not depend on those!)

In all fairness even 3 swords campaigns on hard are made to be beaten by pretty much anyone that is willing to try hard enough, so don’t feel like you’re not good enough to give your opinion on campaigns.

The one that really confuses me is the Hautevilles. It’s rated three swords, but I found it the third easiest campaign, after El Cid and Montezuma. (Admittedly I haven’t played all the campaigns, but I have played all the one and two sword ones.)
I think Bohemond in the East in particular is the easiest defence scenario in the game.

The campaign difficulty is all over the place sometimes, though. I think it’s rare for a campaign to have the same difficulty throughout, or even a consistent difficulty curve.