pkt-zer0 said:
Powerful in the way that you should not stand a chance against enemies that are vastly superior in number, not even at high levels and with the best equipment. Yet you do.
So, I just see this feature as unneccessary as the cheat option. There are plenty of things to be exploited in the game in its current state as well, there isn't really a need for any more, thank you. Basically, adding that option would mean that the recruited soldiers just get in the way. That is power-gaming, isn't it?
Just my 2 cents.
"
You should not stand a chance... yet you do."Would it be better to
pretend that we don't stand a chance fighting alone in M&B by not making it simple to enter a battle solo? How would having the option to fight solo be adding "
any more" ways to exploit the game? It can already be done by commanding your troops to hold in place. Would admitting"
the recruited troops just get in the way" be wrong? Sometimes they are in the way.
Should we pretend that the AI in M&B can't be exploited and that our hero can't do most of the fighting? Saying it's not realistic is not an answer because we already know it's not realistic. I want M&B to have an AI strong enough to defeat a solo hero who's
both outnumbered and outclassed but we won't get that by pretending and thinking well people just shouldn't try it in the first place because that would be"
powergaming."
Personally, I have said that I'm not impressed by all those players who boast about how they can defeat vastly superior numbers of knights singlehandedly. A few weeks back, I had even started a thread in the discussions forum about "Defeating 100 Knights" ( http://taleworlds.com/v-web/bulletin/bb/viewtopic.php?t=2171&highlight=100+knights ) and how, imo, that isn't a good endorsement of the game because it shows how weak the AI can be and that it can be exploited. I regard it as a cheat or amusement but not as an accomplishment.
However, objecting to the
mazzadude's suggestion by saying it's not realistic to fight solo and that it would be admitting the AI is exploitable
is not a good reason. That's nearly equivalent to saying,
"Let's not talk about it. Pretend the AI can't be exploited." That's an attitude I'd expect a developer/designer to have because it would reflect negatively on his product but for a gamer to say something amounting to the same thing is discouraging.
ilex said:
Why couldn't a great leader of an army have his fun with 15 measly river pirates, without having any bloodthirsty peasants charging with him.
I mostly agree - in this particular case. A high-level hero with good armor, weapons, and horse should be able to rout a small party of poorly armed, unarmored, ill-disciplined group of river pirates.
But if this same hero went out against a dozen Dark Knights? Then he should most likely end up dead, prisoner or on the run - regardless of how fine a horse he has, and what type of armor he's wearing.
Against either group, the player should have the simple option to fight solo. I understand he could always order the troops to stay put while the hero rides ahead, but the player should have the option to order the hero to fight solo in the first place.
A really good AI that would deal appropriately with a foolhardy hero would be something we'd all like to see in M&B eventually (though I admit the game's incredibly fun now, Go M&B!).
We won't get that by saying let's not talk about it, let's pretend we already have it.