Count Ilban is Easy or Normal AI isn't Good?

[TheMasterBlaster]

Very new player here.

I've been playing/leanring with Count Ilban Richese vs 3 Normal AI. (i haven't learned any other leaders yet) I've been getting turn 8 wins fairly easily with low hanging fruit victory points. Snag a few Faction Influence Points, go all in on 1 or 2 Skirmishes worth 1/2 VP, and the rest is stockpiling Persuasion for Spice Must Flow.

From what I've read and watched in videos, even the easy AI in this game is supposed to be competent.

So, as the post title asks, is this just a typical way for Count Ilban to win, or is the game AI not as good as some people claim? Should I up the AI difficulty for a more realistic challenge?

[noctilucus]

I'd say Count Ilban isn't necessarily one of the strongest leaders but his abilities are quite straightforward to play.
On easy difficulty, I feel the AI is still able to win from time to time but compared to hard, it definitely feels a lot less aggressive in getting to swordmaster, heighliner, etc. and also less aggressive in battle, less hoarding multiple intrigue cards for use during combat.

[Trolleur_Durden]

Ilban is a decent leader overall, not really tied to a specific starting position and not needing specific cards in the Imperium row to complement his skillset. Also, he doesn't really have a specific way to win. TSMF by drawing 2 on Mentat with a dagger is always nice to pull off, but you can also go for a more agressive playstyle by recruiting more troops thanks to your ring (Ring on Secure contract means 4 solaris, enough to recruit 4 troops and draw a card), or if you get good faction access cards, cycle your deck faster by drawing more often and playing those cards more often to chase alliances.

The AI in this game is fairly decent, but can't really compete with a good player. I wouldn't call myself good, and yet I win around 80% of the time against 3 hard AI. So what you have heard around are mostly first impressions of people getting their feet wet.