|
|
Post by Jean Lannes on Mar 13, 2016 22:53:04 GMT
While I enjoy a good campaign, I find that conquests' size makes them fun. And the need to annihilate everything prevents my campaign strategy of: "send a good horse to take the city and that's all you need" Same... it's always a nice warm fuzzy feeling inside when you see the WHOLE world falls under your rule. Plus the conquests doesn't really require specific tactics to win, it feels more flexible than "MuST GET THAT CITY IN 4 TURNS OR YOU LOSE NOW!!!" But I prefer that there's different nations in campaign, different maps, different cities, different generals, scenarios, etc |
|
|
|
Post by Desophaeus on Mar 13, 2016 23:03:31 GMT
True... I don't mind the diversity that the campaign page offers except for the fact that you're penalized for not getting the perfect 3 stars on a mission. 33 medals for 2 stars, and then even if you did better on the next attempt and got 3 stars, you get only 16, which means you got 49 instead of 50 and that one missing medal is lost forever unless you reinstall. BLEH!
|
|
|
|
Post by Jean-Luc Picard on Mar 14, 2016 0:49:25 GMT
True... I don't mind the diversity that the campaign page offers except for the fact that you're penalized for not getting the perfect 3 stars on a mission. 33 medals for 2 stars, and then even if you did better on the next attempt and got 3 stars, you get only 16, which means you got 49 instead of 50 and that one missing medal is lost forever unless you reinstall. BLEH! WC3 problems |
|
|
|
Post by Jean Lannes on Mar 14, 2016 1:19:00 GMT
True... I don't mind the diversity that the campaign page offers except for the fact that you're penalized for not getting the perfect 3 stars on a mission. 33 medals for 2 stars, and then even if you did better on the next attempt and got 3 stars, you get only 16, which means you got 49 instead of 50 and that one missing medal is lost forever unless you reinstall. BLEH! Could've been avoided with 60 or 45 stars. But I'm guessing easytech dislikes 45 and 60 was too much in their opinion |
|
|
|
Post by Jean-Luc Picard on Mar 14, 2016 1:20:56 GMT
True... I don't mind the diversity that the campaign page offers except for the fact that you're penalized for not getting the perfect 3 stars on a mission. 33 medals for 2 stars, and then even if you did better on the next attempt and got 3 stars, you get only 16, which means you got 49 instead of 50 and that one missing medal is lost forever unless you reinstall. BLEH! Could've been avoided with 60 or 45 stars. But I'm guessing easytech dislikes 45 and 60 was too much in their opinion Easytech has something against anything that makes sense |
|
|
|
Post by Jean Lannes on Mar 14, 2016 1:22:44 GMT
Could've been avoided with 60 or 45 stars. But I'm guessing easytech dislikes 45 and 60 was too much in their opinion Easytech has something against anything that makes sense They are pretty much the company version of Conrad von Hötzendorf |
|
|
|
Post by Jean-Luc Picard on Mar 14, 2016 1:28:22 GMT
Easytech has something against anything that makes sense They are pretty much the company version of Conrad von Hötzendorf Sounds just about right |
|
|
|
Post by Napoleon Bonaparte on Mar 14, 2016 4:23:27 GMT
Easytech has something against anything that makes sense They are pretty much the company version of Conrad von Hötzendorf ayyyy ROFL XD |
|
|
|
Post by Jean-Luc Picard on Mar 14, 2016 4:25:54 GMT
They are pretty much the company version of Conrad von Hötzendorf ayyyy ROFL XD Indeed. I hope Conrad von Hotzendorf isn't pissed about all these jokes |
|
|
|
Post by Napoleon Bonaparte on Mar 14, 2016 4:31:47 GMT
ayy poor guy who tried to start a war 30 times... |
|
|
|
Post by Conrad von Hotzendorf on Mar 14, 2016 7:41:14 GMT
ayy poor guy who tried to start a war 30 times... you make that sound like a bad thing |
|
|
|
Post by Desophaeus on Mar 14, 2016 9:24:20 GMT
I think what Khurram mean that trying to start a war by itself isn't necessarily a bad thing. It's the part where a backward empire with an outdated military really should rethink for a moment before the leadership decides to jump into a war.
|
|
|
|
Post by Napoleon Bonaparte on Mar 14, 2016 9:29:16 GMT
I think what Khurram mean that trying to start a war by itself isn't necessarily a bad thing. It's the part where a backward empire with an outdated military really should rethink for a moment before the leadership decides to jump into a war. exactly! |
|
|
|
Post by Jean-Luc Picard on Mar 14, 2016 14:28:45 GMT
I think what Khurram mean that trying to start a war by itself isn't necessarily a bad thing. It's the part where a backward empire with an outdated military really should rethink for a moment before the leadership decides to jump into a war. exactly! That's why the original Von Hotzendorf is considered a bad strategist etc |
|
|
|
Post by Jean Lannes on Mar 15, 2016 2:56:52 GMT
I think what Khurram mean that trying to start a war by itself isn't necessarily a bad thing. It's the part where a backward empire with an outdated military really should rethink for a moment before the leadership decides to jump into a war. It wasn't THAT outdated. The Mannlicher 1895 was pretty cool imo. The leadership with Hötzendorf and Potiorek (who possibly was even worse than Hötzendorf) and many others was just horrible which is visible with the three failed invasions of Serbia for example |
|
.jpg)
