Lastly, I think the biggest exploit in this game is NOT how you choose to draw (or not draw) out the AI, it's reloading save restore points for any reason other than for the sole purpose of resuming where you left off from taking a break (that's what the developers said to do in the user manual -- to take breaks every 45 minutes to protect your eyes from starring at a screen).
So to me, if I was to compare Knights and Merchants to the game of chess, your "list of rules" is not allowing people to use their "queen" (which was given to you to use, take advantage of), but you're allowing them to undo their last move?
The main goal of my ruleset is not to prove how a player while playing the game is skillful but to have him go deeper into the game. This shouldn't be seen as any challenge. If someone is a newbie and come to play, he has to learn many things, naturally he shall reloading. Later, if he want to prove himself as a good player or spend more time with this game, he will decide not to "cheat" by reloading.
My second goal is to prove that it is possible to beat 2 campaings in this way.
And don't you think - my walkthrough looks like more natural and real than walkthrough with "lure out tactic". Do my towns and battles look more epic?
In addition, you say "Play as game-developers intended" in your video description. Do you realize that in the VERY FIRST mission in the Shattered Kingdom (in the ORIGINAL) game, the yellow AI would come and fire at your towers to DRAW YOU OUT? Maybe I'm wrong, but I think that it was the developers who TRAINED US to DRAW out troops with bowmen.
So clearly this is your opinion on how things ought to be, but there is no evidence that how you play is how the original developers intended.
I am aware that "Play as game-developers intended" will raise some discussions. Nobody knows for sure what developers intended. Many old games are full of flaws. And that "a draw out lesson" may tell us this tactic is blessed by devs. But there are points and reasons why "draw out tactics" seem to be undesirable. I mean here lots of later missions where the worldmap is huge, so resources and space are in gigantic amount, and you can see in my videos, I have to deplet them in order to win. ( In some situation, as I remember mining resources went out and I had to fight with leather armored army against iron.) And this is the suggestion what developers or level designers wanted us to do in these missions.
However, if someone stated that the game was developed to beat by various tactics, I would agree. The problem there is, all walkthrough presentation I have seen in the internet had been based on "draw out tactic". Surely, many of you guys, expierenced players, have played no using "draw out". I just want show another approach to play this game that is more fun and engaging.
This is very interesting idea!
However I must point out, that some of the maneuvers could be still considered "cheating" or "too clever", e.g. running through enemy lines with scouts and wrecking havoc behind main battle area.
I have been thinking about these maneuvers too. Indeed, some of them are crucial for the result of a batlle. But I would like to defend them against allegations of being "too clever" or "using future knowledge". As far as I remember, I could be able to prove that using only "present knowledge" a clever army commander may have ordered to make these maneuvers.
In some situations, as I recall, defending AI army was standing wrong and there was a empty space. I also saw a bit further than the first line of enemy units. So I had some information to make "clever" plans. Of course, "deciding what to do" is the one and "doing it" is the another one. Many maneuvers required a bit of luck and reloading (to practice)
. But it is the same in reality, isn't it?
And above this all, first of all, even if these maneuvers can't be done for the first time succesfully or can't be invented for the first time of trying to crack defenders line, it doesn't mean that it is impossible to win campains with my rulesets. You just need to hit your head to the wall again and again. Or reload
Still it's a very interesting study, since it indeed reveals that some of the tactics used are there because of AI limitations, not because they are "fun" (e.g. luring out with 1 bowman). If devs had more resources they could have made a better AI (without such obvious flaws) and build the gameplay around more accurate battles.
When many years ago, I have got to know about phenomen of exploits, the definitation of exploits sounded exactly like you have written. Overusing AI limitations or using AI limitations in crucial moments, is called simply "using exploits".
And to the end. If we love this game, so why don't try play it in different ways. Many play online and skirmishes map and get much more fun and proficiency, I respect that. But perhaps, we have neglected campaings.
