Quote:
Epaminondas said:
Quote:
Gandalf Parker said:
The idea of redundant or worthless units keeps popping up but there isnt much agreement on what they are. What you think of as worthless might better be phrased as "worthless for the way I play". Check the differences and see if you cant come up with a strategy or tactic which might rely on that difference. Slightly cheaper, or better morale, or different weapon or armor.
|
Dear Gandalf Parker,
We have some serious philosophical differences. Taken to extremes, what you seem to be suggesting is that the game is perfectly balanced, and there are no units that are extremely powerful or extremely weak or redundant per cost. Do you really believe this? It would assume that the game designers have infinite resources and infinite powers of judgment. Even game makers with far greater resources tinkering games with far fewer variables and aspects like Blizzard take years to get the balance right.
|
I afraid of people who feel that balance should move closer to each nation getting equal pieces which wear different colored uniforms like in some games. And actually, I havent seen worthless units yet. Only worthless units to me. Most of the units people dont like are cheaper and less armored so they feel that they are worthless compared to the "better" units. To me thats a play style choice.
My personal preference (Pangaea) tends to get "improvement" suggestions which remove all of my favorite pieces, and replace them with more Ulmish pieces. Less stealth, more armor, and in my opinion.. less Pangaean.
Quote:
By the way, regarding your implication/accusation that I am singling out units that do not fit my playing style, well, I tend to be an extreme experimenter. I am not the type of person that finds the "right" tactic and play it to death. So while I can appreciate a specific analysis of where I have gone, to make a quasi-ad hominem argument along the lines of "You are too stupid to have figured out how to use the unit" isn't really helpful for anyone.
|
I dont think I commented on any particular persons choices. I talked generally based on many conversations Ive seen. If you feel I was talking about you in particular then I apologize for that.
And Im not trying to imply that any one is too stupid to figure out a style different than their own. If I did then I would have to include myself since obviously I could never master the use of certain nations and their units on the level of some of the players whose strategy stresses large armored armies built with formulas so efficient as to make an accountant dizzy. But I am leary of declaring such strategies as the ultimate winner of everything. Nor do I consider them the ultimate decider of what is good or not good to have in the game.