| Author | This is the battle I'm currently most proud of -- critique away! |
|---|
| https://www.lordswm.com/warlog.php?warid=896892757 |
| Topic moved from "Queries and help" to "General game forum". |
https://www.lordswm.com/war.php?lt=-1&warid=848119683
This is what i found when i searched for barbarian-tribal invaders{0} |
| why are you proud?? Troll much. |
| It didn't seem like I was going to win it. Isn't it a tall order, 50 ogres ? |
| 60 ogres, but it did seem like you were confident. Why else would you waste all shots of skel bowmen to shoot out of range against an all melee army. Well, the way you played it was pretty obvious that you were gonna abuse raising to beat the ogre eventually. |
for LordMircea:
that was tough!
congratz! |
Wait, there's such a thing as abuse raising ?!
@Bheem Thanks! I tell you I was thrilled to death, had ~no hope of winning going in. |
| by abuse i meant not being prudent with it because you had an idea how things would end. From the battle it seemed to me like you did not try to maximize your chances to win and at first thought that was because you knew you could win relying on vamps' raise - resurrection abilities. If you need more critiquing, let me know lol. |
good work :)
if you want to improve for next time, you might want to get more shots with skeles when enemy is in range (like vv said), if nothing else at least move to range before firing your last shot. Zombies were staying put for no reason until almost the end, would have been better to infect the ogres sooner |
| Is it a "troll" thread? :( |
Ok so conventional wisdom is that if you have the ranged advantage or have higher ini and speed troops, then you allow them to advance to you, then choose your moment to counter attack. This way you maximise the damage dealt by shooters before shots run out, as well as ensuring your melee troops do as much damage relative to the amount of retal damage.
Since you were necro and could raise loss of troops is less concerning to you. Though also have the benefit of reducing the effectiveness of the ogres through infecting strikes
In this since it is relatively obvious to an experienced person that this is the tactics, for you to not do that by rushing out, and then going into the corner to keep them away from your bows is a poor tactic, that would only be done if you were confident and having a laugh. Similarly, raising vampires early just to get smashed down again while bows out of range is just wasting mana. Waiting for the ogres to move, then raising would have been more efficient as the same outcome would have likely got you a shot off in range.
Therefore since you asked for 'critique' unfortunately in my estimation there were a number of choices you made that reduced the liklihood of winning rather than increased it. This meant that you battle seemed close and so you were proud when in fact played differently you could have won it pretty easily. |
Therefore since you asked for 'critique'
Hum... Perhaps he's so proud of his victory that he wants the "critique away" from his thread and you're being the killjoy? :p
I do agree with your analysis though and would emphasize the part where it is relatively obvious to an experienced person, obvious to oldies playing for years and to a comparatively relatively new player are two different things. However if you go and sacrify the zombies for infecting then you're left with nothing to lock the archers, or if you use ghosts/vamp then you lack one stack, and possibly end up forced to waste one stack on defend while unable to reach the ogres. Could have come up with two extra zombies and use at least one for infecting duty (preferably toy with wait to time attacks after ghosts took retaliation).
So well, good job anyway, that looked bad at first. |
@IComeInPeace I see what you mean on both counts ; I'll keep it in mind!
@Lord MilesTeg Oh, I see. Well, it's my first week, I don't know these things.
Thanks though! |
| closed by Meshy (2018-04-27 20:26:28) |
|---|
