Old World Monthly Challenge

As for Undo, I'm leaning towards allowing limited undos for genuine mistakes (as it is part of the game) but not for tactical reasons.
While I like this approach in theory, I think it is pretty hard to decide on a technical side which kind of undo one does. Relying on the honour of players sounds good in theory as well, but especially with OW I see that as extra challenging. I don't play to take part in the challenge, so I will not come into the following situation where it counts, but it might not be something only I stumble over. The fact that OW both has a clever AI and several combat "0 or 1" combat mechanics (no serious retaliaton attacks unless opponent unit is lead by a tactican general, damaged units doing full damage, certain abilities stunning units or allowing extra strikes after kills) sometimes leads to the situation that after playing through the individual battles on a front a small mistake in from of a wrong movement or attack with a single unit leads to narrowly missed kill. That "winner-takes-it-all" combat mechanics plus the fact that the AI feels like a chess-computer always executing the ideal move (I know, no post of mine with a last prasing OWs AI twice ;) ) puts a hard strain on my honesty here frankly. I'm not replaying to cheese with critcial hits, but I confess that I sometimes do when I realize that I attacked with the wrong unit and wasting too much potential damage for the final kill or missing out the extra attack for routing. I know that even that isn't completely "fair", but I consider myself still learning the game (so I hope the cheesy-correct replay helps me to do better I future on the initial attempt) and especially when calculating potential wasted overkill it feels like I having to rely on guesswork (as the battle prediction doesn't show it - or do I miss something here?), while the AI probably can calculate it exactly and picks the ideal attacker based on it. Also it helps to keep frustration in check and motivation up, if you sneak in an extra kill sometimes to directly take revenge, when the AI ambushed you one more time...though it's often a phyric victory anyway, as the AI rearly lets you of the hook...and there is always that next turn, where they come back to finish you.
 
i think you're touching on something here that the GOTM will help with.

I think while we're playing and, more importantly, reading and writing reports, we'll see strategies, tricks, and little MM techniques that we didn't even think of -- and reduce the number of times you need to UNDO b/c of you attacked wrong, didn't consider something, etc.

also, isn't September 1st just about here? i'm champing at the bit over here.

is it one UNDO per turn? ;) :)
 
So about that!

I had the save all ready to go and then ran into a technical issue. Hopefully only delays it all by a day or so!
He had to undo ;) :)
 
Too large a maps can be more of a challenge for the machines.
I am in favor, however, of more aggressive AIs/tribes & a closer proximity to our neighboring nations.
Plus...no barbarians, they are, simply too easy to take over. imho
 
Last edited:
As someone said in another thread, no Double Victory (especially if the Ishtar Gate is available), at least for the easier difficulties.
Personnaly, I found Strong to still be easy, and Noble to start challenging me. I have yet to try Glorious and harder.
 
My preferences would be somewhere around Glorious difficulty, standard map (big maps have nations you never interact with), some ai advantage or headstart, ruthless ai, strong tribes/barbs, no double victory... and then play around with other flavour settings, like random families, competitive mode, high/low density resources, less common map types etc.
 
After looking at the files that reference tribes & barbarians...no barbarians does not mean less city sites; just less city sites that are easy to capture.
Now, those raids can be a slight problem on higher settings, however. :)
 
Top Bottom