|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 27, 2021 13:54:18 GMT
I was trying the Columbia challenge quest for 1861,and safe to say I failed multiple times. Tried going for France, didn't go well. Went for Mexico, didn't go well. Went for US, and that gave me the most success, but having to deal with the United States and Mexico throwing their armies at me wasn't sustainable for the economy, as some is also spent to hold out against the French in south America. The problem was the general spam was much worse compared to when I was Cuba. Real problem was the confederates losing in all of those runs, that and Canada and Britain weren't of any real help. Probably just need a revise of strategy, and more upgrades to my generals. Maybe just abandoning South America and sending every single general to punch through the U. S is the strat, as going through Mexico is just too slow and has too much resistance.
|
|
|
|
Post by stoic on Oct 27, 2021 16:27:21 GMT
I was trying the Columbia challenge quest for 1861,and safe to say I failed multiple times. Tried going for France, didn't go well. Went for Mexico, didn't go well. Went for US, and that gave me the most success, but having to deal with the United States and Mexico throwing their armies at me wasn't sustainable for the economy, as some is also spent to hold out against the French in south America. The problem was the general spam was much worse compared to when I was Cuba. Real problem was the confederates losing in all of those runs, that and Canada and Britain weren't of any real help. Probably just need a revise of strategy, and more upgrades to my generals. Maybe just abandoning South America and sending every single general to punch through the U. S is the strat, as going through Mexico is just too slow and has too much resistance.ย I recall I was trying to keep at least a couple of allies alive. If we could protect them they will be of some use. For example, playing as Serbia, I created a defensive line from Balkans to the Baltic see to protect Russia, and, after defeating USSR they helped me a lot to hold Europe while I was attacking South America. |
|
|
|
Post by Erich von Manstein on Oct 27, 2021 17:57:15 GMT
I was trying the Columbia challenge quest for 1861,and safe to say I failed multiple times. Tried going for France, didn't go well. Went for Mexico, didn't go well. Went for US, and that gave me the most success, but having to deal with the United States and Mexico throwing their armies at me wasn't sustainable for the economy, as some is also spent to hold out against the French in south America. The problem was the general spam was much worse compared to when I was Cuba. Real problem was the confederates losing in all of those runs, that and Canada and Britain weren't of any real help. Probably just need a revise of strategy, and more upgrades to my generals. Maybe just abandoning South America and sending every single general to punch through the U. S is the strat, as going through Mexico is just too slow and has too much resistance. I recall I was trying to keep at least a couple of allies alive. If we could protect them they will be of some use. For example, playing as Serbia, I created a defensive line from Balkans to the Baltic see to protect Russia, and, after defeating USSR they helped me a lot to hold Europe while I was attacking South America. That's pretty much why I recommend keeping the tech low. The allies are more vulnerable at high tech than at low tech. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 28, 2021 1:19:22 GMT
I recall I was trying to keep at least a couple of allies alive. If we could protect them they will be of some use. For example, playing as Serbia, I created a defensive line from Balkans to the Baltic see to protect Russia, and, after defeating USSR they helped me a lot to hold Europe while I was attacking South America. That's pretty much why I recommend keeping the tech low. The allies are more vulnerable at high tech than at low tech. Too bad that tech can't be reset. That said, still gotta try something. Now that i have hipper to cover the navy, it would be much easier as i can use him to control the waters and just be a nuisance to the opponent without using resources on spamming naval units. |
|
|
|
Post by Nobunaga Oda on Oct 28, 2021 14:57:58 GMT
If they were as "threatening" as playing conquests without gens on Normal mode, I'd still be able to win.
Against superior tech, numbers and my inexperience in regularly deploying gens in Conquest in ET games beyond EW4 and EW5, these conquests are excruciatingly tough.
Preservation of allies is all the more important, regardless of their tech lvls. Perhaps a mix of knocking out and crippling the biggest threats ASAP is a viable doctrine? Maybe we can draw enemies to key cities and try to hold on defensively while we attack their exposed flanks and rear?
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 28, 2021 17:40:32 GMT
If they were as "threatening" as playing conquests without gens on Normal mode, I'd still be able to win. Against superior tech, numbers and my inexperience in regularly deploying gens in Conquest in ET games beyond EW4 and EW5, these conquests are excruciatingly tough.
Preservation of allies is all the more important, regardless of their tech lvls. Perhaps a mix of knocking out and crippling the biggest threats ASAP is a viable doctrine? Maybe we can draw enemies to key cities and try to hold on defensively while we attack their exposed flanks and rear? Yeah, they're really tough. I find it particularly hard since the strategy of just ignoring enemy generals and going for enemy cities isn't that viable, as with superior tech+numbers, they can easily overwhelm militia defenders, so it becomes a war of attrition usually. Hard part is if you can't afford a war of attrition, so you have to give up some cities and just pick which attrition to fight, and when to just go straight for cities. That's why Artillery seems to be more appealing to me when it comes to challenge quests. |
|
|
|
Post by Erich on Oct 29, 2021 4:53:32 GMT
Yeah, they're really tough. I find it particularly hard since the strategy of just ignoring enemy generals and going for enemy cities isn't that viable, as with superior tech+numbers, they can easily overwhelm militia defenders, so it becomes a war of attrition usually. Hard part is if you can't afford a war of attrition, so you have to give up some cities and just pick which attrition to fight, and when to just go straight for cities. That's why Artillery seems to be more appealing to me when it comes to challenge quests.ย The general strategy is to find a gap to rush with Cav gens and at least one Artillery gen with max mobility (MF+JF/JF), the rest defend other fronts and wait for chance to attack/support. Itโs ofc a war of attrition. Til now itโs really hard with 1* countries coz even my best defensive infantry gen (MacMahon) with Alert+Ambush+Cover and full health Marshall rank (~500HP) destroyed in one turn against the horde of Austro Hungarian Empire. Itโs addictive when you need to keep thinking and restarting. And in this versionโs challenge conquests, every single thing is important, every unit has the counter, so one wrong decision will be the end of the conquest. |
|
|
|
Post by Manfred von Richthofen on Oct 29, 2021 4:56:22 GMT
what is "challenge conquests"?
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 29, 2021 7:46:55 GMT
Yeah, they're really tough. I find it particularly hard since the strategy of just ignoring enemy generals and going for enemy cities isn't that viable, as with superior tech+numbers, they can easily overwhelm militia defenders, so it becomes a war of attrition usually. Hard part is if you can't afford a war of attrition, so you have to give up some cities and just pick which attrition to fight, and when to just go straight for cities. That's why Artillery seems to be more appealing to me when it comes to challenge quests. The general strategy is to find a gap to rush with Cav gens and at least one Artillery gen with max mobility (MF+JF/JF), the rest defend other fronts and wait for chance to attack/support. Itโs ofc a war of attrition. Til now itโs really hard with 1* countries coz even my best defensive infantry gen (MacMahon) with Alert+Ambush+Cover and full health Marshall rank (~500HP) destroyed in one turn against the horde of Austro Hungarian Empire. Itโs addictive when you need to keep thinking and restarting. And in this versionโs challenge conquests, every single thing is important, every unit has the counter, so one wrong decision will be the end of the conquest. Yeah, i'm now thinking of what generals to use mostly. Since i'm trying to go for every single challenge conquest, it would take a while. Sounds really frustrating, but rewarding when beaten. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 29, 2021 7:48:34 GMT
what is "challenge conquests"? Hardcore conquest, just press the the word conquest after you are in the conquest select screen, just above A.D 1861. It would change to Conquest Challenge, and it's basically nightmare difficulty conquest. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 30, 2021 2:58:28 GMT
stoic,was testing 1914 challenge conquests, and it seems like my allies are able to atleast hold off for a bit compared to the earlier conquests. It was also easier with max tech, as my units were onpar with the enemy units, even tho they were better slightly. Too bad they nerfed the Austro-Hungarian 1 turn cheese in the challenge conquest, was looking for some easy win with it. So max tech might not be as detrimental in later conquest compared to earlier ones. They're still hard, and I'm not prepared yet, generals need more upgrades . I'm fine with 1 to 2 hour conquests, but challenge conquest may as well be 4+hours,and that's not considering bad rng where you are forced to restart.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 2, 2021 4:36:28 GMT
I have to say, the initial difficulty with Challenge conquest, atleast for 1861-1914 were just mostly my expectations of them. The way i usually play out conquest the first time is by being a bit more passive to see how things go, getting used to how it is, then start playing more aggressively. After trying them out and playing with my usual playstyle of hyperaggression, they're much more manageable, some are quite easy even. The difficulty lies within managing resources for nations that are far from the action, as if you play too slowly, you'll get bogged down later on, and you can actually lose hard. And this is why 1917 challenge conquests are a pain for 1 star nations, although this can be circumvented by quickly capturing your neighbors and sending as much aid to your allies in North America if you're in Europe or vice versa. Ironically, 1 star nations in the middle of the fighting are much easier, maybe except Belgium, leeway for error is much lower but the rewards if you manage to hold out is a fast conquest. War of attrition is necessary in challenge conquest , although you should be doing something else and not just using the majority of your generals in defending a city, as that's gonna end in a disaster. Remembering turn order for when nations act is also more important, as it would help out when bribing allies or enemies, and which ally you should donate for maximum chance of it succeeding(nations who go first should be a priority, but don't expect things to go out smoothly).
I'm not saying Challenge quests are really easy, as you still need strong generals and much more micromanagement to win, and your opponents can actually straight up beat you if you aren't careful due to their inflated stats, but it isn't impossible as what other people mentioned.
|
|
