I got to the point in playing the French and Indian War Grand Campaign where I felt that I had inadvertently taken advantage of the A.I. and was pretty much assured a boring game from then on.
My strategy, as France, was to attack the Albany/Oswego/Ft. Necessity then raze those forts and depots and withdraw to the Lake Champlain, Niagran and Ft. D Objectives, leaving scorched earth and wilderness between his supply centres and objectives.
This worked because a) the scenario is set up to give France an initial qualitative advantage in the early years and b) the A.I. does not tend to re-establish forts or depots.
I turned the Fog of War off and watched the A.I. for a year, '58, building its forces, properly I might add, and launching respectable attacks against most of my objectives. I can’t fault it here.
However, each time these stacks were rebuffed by conservatively used but not overwhelming forces and then destroyed by pursuit or weather when they should have been able to fall back on their prudently re-established forts and depots and resumed the campaign in the spring.
These comments are appended to my AAR posted in the other forum.