![]() ![]() It might be time to revisit the ‘no archers challenge’! I reckon I might have exhausted the ‘three aux / four archers / one cavalry’ format if I’m going to continue to play (without another break of several years) then I’m going to have to create new targets. But actually, this isn’t a very attractive prospect either right now. I could start playing the ‘100pt penalty for every repeated battle’, and have arguments with myself as to whether ‘restarting after three seconds because you set all your archers to charge by mistake’ incurs a penalty or not. I’m not going to make another save scum attempt (was just curious to see what sort of total I could rack up, but 20+ attempts at a battle and *never* beating your average score for that battle is uniquely frustrating and un-fun). ![]() Nooooo, I can IRON MAN with my regular build, so you can too! But I think we’re agreed it’s not as much fun as a ‘high score’ game: it’s essentially 50 battles which simply cannot be lost (unless you get your legate killed in a ‘general must survive’ scenario), a dozen battles which can be lost if you play spectacularly badly, and perhaps six or so battles which require proper concentration to meet the victory conditions. Could this work? I may try this on the next Fri/Sat nights. I may very well be proven wrong, but I cannot imagine that anything less than a complete juggernaut of an army could have enough punch for the 68 scenarios, although it would certainly bleed the fame.Įnough early power, four Auxilia to fight in the woods, many fast archers, two extremely powerful anti-cav dudes, two more horsemen for improved mobility in time-limited battles. The self-imposed restrictions are all that makes the difference from a "normal" run, I don't think that Slitherine will make a datadisk for 18 y/o game, so we're stuck with what we got, and I don't really enjoy that, namely when it seems like the best Iron Man army could be some kind of a 20-units behemoth that rolls over the enemy without consideration for our own losses. ![]() In its current form, Iron Man challenge doesn't thrill me. So what's the fun then? Namely when the fame goes out of the window, AND you still can lose to a disengage bug, or enemy leader's ZOC extending all across the map, or random dude dying two seconds before the time limit, or random enemy guy NOT dying in the same way, or archers splashing to death with dumbos, etc. ![]() Now, excuse my excurse, but this is the core issue (pun intended) of the IM challenge: you simply cannot deviate from your tried and true core army, battle plans, purchase order. Surprisingly, I lost very early, at Aequi Riders to be precise. The idea was that as long as I don't care about the fame, I may simply develop a fast early core (Nobles + 2x Aux) with enough gold for pincushions so that I can build the Archers Horde asap, followed by some Triarii and Aux Cav to pack a punch. In fact I may have made a core development issue during the 2nd try, as I tried an unusual start with the Nobles. I started two IM games this week, not finishing either one of them. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |