I thought I would "bump" this one ( which I came across a few days ago whilst running a search on Crusades ) as I have a few views of my own...
Quote:
1. Manual Pillaging
I don’t believe it to be a sin just as long as you don’t use it systematically or constantly. Then it’s just an option you have and I think it’s great that you have that option even if you decide not to use it. Having a choice is always better than the other way around. Regardless, plundering is no stranger to war, why should it be so in MTW? Some limited plundering, I se no harm in that even if I almost never plunder myself. However, I would if I needed too – no doubt about that.
My ruling: No sin – option. A bit shortsighted thou.
No sin - it's historical after all ( even though I rarely use it ) !
Quote:
3. Mercenaries
Again this is an option. Options are always good. My main dislike about mercenaries is that the AI doesn’t use them (it should from time to time do so I think). It also can also easily disrupt the game balance of the game - because it is an option that the AI never uses (unable to do so I’d guess).
My ruling: No sin – option.
No sin - I agree with the edited comments above...
Quote:
4. Disbanding
I really have a hard time to buy this as a sin. It is an option and a great one at that. If you no longer can find a use for a unit you should have the right to disband it. And you should. It how you disband a unit and especially why you disband a unit that might leave possibilities for exploits that can be highly debatable.
At any rate, disbanding troops is essentially a good option. Especially when X-number of unwanted rebel armies just joined your cause. It is how we use that option that can be highly debatable – and the fact that the AI should properly use it when it was called for.
My ruling: No sin – option.
Agreed. No sin.
Quote:
5. Dismounts
Well…. The option of dismounting your troops when is called for (as in forest terrain for instance) can hardly be regarded as a sin. It is a question of using sound tactical thinking nothing else. The fact that CA have done a poor job in this area is not something that we the players should be punished for. The AI should more often use this option granted, but this is a tactical matter with obvious trade offs and if you are willing to pay that price – no problem. – Just checking, the AI do dismount in a siege or do I remember things wrong here?
My ruling: No sin – good and tactical option (It makes cavalry units more diverse and versatile! A pity that the AI don’t use it now and then).
Agreed - No sin ( although I have yet to use it ! ).
Quote:
6. Jihad spamming
I am no expert on Jihads but it is true that you could have 20 jihads directed too one single province. We can all agree upon that it was hardly the plan with Jihads. The fact that someone would do so is just an obvious behavior of a power-gamer and no matter what we say or do – those guys just want to win and they don’t give a rat’s :daisy: about having fun. So it’s a lost cause anyway. No one in their right mind would do that short of the power-gamer. It is such a mentality that is the sin not the possibility to build 20 Jihads. Now, as for the circumstances designed for Jihads in the original game they are obviously flawed. If nothing else they are too cheap and too easy to get them.
My ruling: Yes, it is a sin to spam Jihads…. (It is also a sin when the AI uses crusades or jihads to more or less self-destruct a faction into civil-war).
Agreed - SIN !!!
Quote:
8. The PAUSE button!
Ah yes… The infamous pause button…. Well I can’t see the sin in it as a function and option; instead I think it is great that we have this possibility. It is entirely a question of how you use this option and nothing else. Constant and systematic usage of the pause button will undoubtedly change the experience of battle and make it a lot less intense, no doubts there and it sure won’t be the same as unpaused battles – apart from the fact that things will get a lot easier. Now, I will fully admit that I use the pause button now and then for two major reasons. 1. I need or want make a pause from the game. 2. I want to know what actually happens in the game so I pause and have a look. I see no sin in that. To many crappy games live high on the fact that we are not allowed to be aware what actually happens there. I personally think that it just sucks and that it is not the trademark of a good game at all.
Rest assured that the AI knows all the time what happens and acts along that, so I think that it is only fair that I will have the same circumstance myself once in a while. Why should I have crappier circumstances to operate than the AI? I can’t see how that adds up to a good game. Anyway, I don’t use the pause button that often, because I don’t need too, but sometimes it can be very relieving to just slow down for a few minutes and just consider the overall situation in battle. The AI does that more or less instantly, apart from us, so it has the advantage over us in that sense. The thing is that it is not as adaptive as we tend to be and that is its weakness. To me it is important to be allowed to play a game in the tempo you prefer not what the game-designers prefer. It can be abused no doubt, but so can almost everything.
My ruling: No sin – excellent option. Use at you convenience.
Agreed - No sin.
Hell, I doubt if I could win a battle without it !!! The AI can compute and action orders and movements way faster than I could even dream of. Therefore this just evens things out.
[ I view it as : a ) unit commanders taking "executive" decisions as and when required, and b) a means to review the entire field of action as ( unlike the AI ) I cannot be in more than one place at once !