Is it just me or were there more variety of strategy in STW's earlier times? People used different strategies because people used different armies. I used a variety of army units that included missile, infantry, and cavalry units. Their different strong points supported each other. Then there were some other people who used the ashigaru rush, monk rush, naginata cavalry rush, camping, low koku games, etc. Once I figured out how to beat these unusual strategies with my usual form of army, it was fun and refreshing. Plus, beating these difficult armies was exhilarating. The Mongol army added much more spice to the game.
Then they added a patch that made it more expensive to use ashigarus, monks, and Mongol cavalry. The Mongol cavalry became depressing because people no longer used that army. There was no point in having the Warlord Edition except for the naginata cavalry. I rarely used the kensai or the battlefield ninja.
Instead of banning certain armies so that we could stick to our usual army movements, we should improvise in our strategy. I met the same sort of armies so many times, and that made me do the same thing over and over again.
The same could be said for the no elephant and no artillery rule. Artillery is the best weapon (mostly the rocket launcher) against elephants. I find it fun to watch enemy elephants go on a rampage against armies on their own side. Did you know that after routing an elephant unit, the rocket launcher will automatically aim at another while it fires in succession? It's refreshing after watching similar armies face each other over and over again.
And the preference for 10K games worked well for STW. But I don't think it's enough for MTW and M2TW. We keep using the same cheap army units including hundreds of different cheap spear units. I'd like to use army units that were specific to certain factions.
What do you think about that?
Bookmarks