PDA

View Full Version : Pillage Mode



AndrewW
03-05-2013, 09:48 AM
I greatly dislike the Pillage Mode that is engaged when one of the players is reduced to only one unit - it cripples any last chances the player has of winning.

Example: I was just in a game where I ended up with my Shieldmaster nearly full, about 12/11, all by himself. My opponent had two weakened Bowmasters, 0-8 and 4-8 respectively.

The problem was my Shieldmaster was always 1 square away, with Willpower movement, from being able to hit either of them. They, in turn, were able to keep away and pick off ELEVEN strength with their combined long-ranged skill, keeping me one space away the whole time.

Had the game continued in a fair, one unit at a time basis, I would have won without a doubt. No matter which one he played first, the second would have stayed and the second move of my Shieldmaster would have either killed the weaker one or left the stronger with 1 strength. Then I'd have killed that one or moved on to the next, and she would not have had enough willpower to knock out all my strength by herself.

Thinking on it, it would have been close. Not the complete rape of my stronger unit due simply to the flawed game mechanic of keeping the already-weakened player from winning.

Thoughts?

Jorgensager
03-05-2013, 10:08 AM
Pillage prevents a super-turn advantage should a player end up with one strong unit and the other (say) 5. It's a mechanic to reward trying to finish the game instead of lurking around with strong units to wait for this advantage. Since you know it's there, it's wise to plan ahead to keep (at least) two units alive, and when you can, trigger Pillage to finish the game in your favour.

Turn advantage is really strong, and if you could move your unit every turn it would simply be overpowered (in many cases, anyways). [Pillage was introduced in the Beta to counter this.]

LeCheeba
03-05-2013, 10:29 AM
I never experienced the game pre pillage but I'm glad it was implemented. if you look on YouTube you can find battles before it was introduced. It gave a major turn advantage to the player with one unit left and allowed comebacks of epic proportions, one archer taking down 3 to 4 units wasn't a unique occurrence. In my opinion pillage is awesome and should be kept as is.

BJSV
03-05-2013, 10:34 AM
I would dislike more if one single strong unit clean up my team because i couldnt get my units to play on time while his was just jumping from one to another.

Maybe if they allow you to choose which units will play next when enemy is left on only one?

Jawbone78
03-05-2013, 10:39 AM
All I'm taking away from this is that I shouldn't try to mop up archers with my Shieldmaster. :)

Also, don't let myself be the one getting pillaged unless I'll have a clear advantage in strength, armor, and willpower. And in some cases, movement.

Wordplay
03-05-2013, 02:23 PM
This probably felt particularly rough because you were pitching a Shieldbanger type against Bowmasters. I know from bitter experience, you cannot leave Bowmasters to the late game, especially against Shieldbangers.

Bowmaseters are lethal against Shieldbangers - practically any other unit match-up would have had a better chance. It is possible to come back from pillage - particularly if you have a tough warrior or raider, and your opponent has few archer options left.

However, before pillage, in Beta testing, there was a time when someone would save an archer, and then win the game by slaughtering 3-4 units using puncture, and her massive turn advantage. This led to very un-fun play styles.

netharch
03-05-2013, 04:49 PM
I agree that it can be frustrating, but I think planning for pillage ought to be just as important as whether or not to attack a unit's strength or armor. To me, it just adds to the tactical depth of the game.