I’m currently up to turn 30 of a normal difficulty campaign playing as Pacifica. Yes, it makes sense in a way, but it irritates me as it makes it more about luck than strategy. In effect, you pick an enemy territory and commit some or all of your forces, and because you have no intelligence at all on enemy troop movements or commitments, you gamble that you have the troops to beat their defenses, as well as gamble that you have enough reserve troops to fight off any potential attacks on your territory. I understand that this adds a great deal of tension in the strategic layer, but it also seems to relegate strategic movements to pure gambling luck. Because armies are not shown on the strategic map, and are assigned on a “per battle” basis, you have no idea of the relative army strength of any given faction, based on how many units have already been committed to battles, versus how many are left for defense.
I’ll add that the strategic map is also somewhat lacking by design.
0 kommentar(er)
