Actually, in KBAP at least, no loss was more an issue of knowledge. I did a few different no losses runs with the different classes, and rarely found myself re-loading. In fact, I was very against the idea of abusing the RNG like that. And for those few fights that did require a half dozen tries, it was all the more rewarding in the end, just like any challenge.

"1v1 me bro, 1v1 me!"

This is such an incredibly immature thing to say I don't even know how to respond. You have ego, and think you are great... how does that give you the ability of telling people what challenges they should and should not aspire to?

Once again, I think you are completely misunderstanding the point. I've only done one run with Droids, and that was a minimum time no-loss (as in, 7 or 8 days, without losses). That one is more like a tool-assisted run heh. Most runs involve simply perfect strategy and use of position blockers, control effects, and a bit of resurrection, to achieve. Infinite res engines are indeed quite boring, and I would generally recommend against them if you are looking for a good time.

Well good news! You can play this game, and feel how badass you are, and since it isn't multiplayer, no one will care how you play it! You can stew about how much you hate noobs, and you can tell your favorite Valkyrie girlfriend all about it. It's the great joy of the SP experience.

So, why No Loss in the first place?

It's pretty simple really. In every single fight you go up to, not getting killed, while killing the opponent, is the general goal. Reduce casualties, increase lethality. This isn't specific to the hardcore no-loss players, but rather what everyone does. I'm sure we've all been quite pleased at a fight where we managed to not lose a single troop and think 'yeah, that went really well!'

After you do that for a while, you start to identify certain types of enemies as causing you more problems than others. Ugh, Alchemists are a pain, they do poison and/or fire damage for many turns in a row, and are hard to prevent. Then you learn about target, or spell shackles, and suddenly you win those fights without losses as well.

Heck, you might even get into some really good combo's. Stone skin on griffons, then magic shield, and inquisitors to ress any that die... combined with target? Your Mage LOVES this! Any suddenly a lot of fights you win without casualties.

Once you start getting really good at finding strong things, and how to win more and more slanted battles, it eventually becomes "What if i could do this... in every single fight in the game? Like... never once screw up?" And thus, no-loss is born.

For the same reason some people play Legend of Zelda without picking up a heart container, or do speed runs of half-life, or whatever. It's the added fun, the challenge of it.

That's why we try to no-loss.

Nice trolling kid. Are you blind? Or just dumb? IF you read what I worte you will see that I said it is perfectly OK for a player to TRY to do do No loss in combats. The problem with the game is that it allows this thing to actually happen, even in the harshest of combats, labeled as invincible.

Yea, I'm smart and pro at games. It's only normal that I send in my assessment. It's guys like me that makes games evolve. You suck if you think that what you are doing when you kill 1000 bears with 1 royal snake is strategy.

How about shut up if you don't have anything relevant to say?

Well, I tried to have a real conversation with you, but you are apparently one who thinks that 'someone who disagrees with you' is a troll.

@tiberiu
Ok this things are doable, but take to much time and get boring really fast. But let me ask you this : Did you play Age of Empires games ? Where you get some foot archer unit (longbowman best for testing) and attack some enemy cavalry = result should be obvious cavalry will run to archer and kill him because it MUST be faster then unit on foot. WRONG you attack then turn and run, then attack then turn +run . . . and you kill cavalry unit with archer on foot. Seems retarded but it was in game mechanic and some player did it. Does it make whole game retarded NO, but it is just 1 thing that needed more attention from dev`s and never got fixed :-(
Same is here , no loss are doable even on impossible diff. Does all players do it ? NO, everyone play at own pace.

Woah, I came to this thread expecting a decent discussion... What is wrong with you kid ? Are you really so mad because some people try no-loss playthroughs...? Just don't do it, you don't have to.

I'd love to have problems like these.

Reading the title of the topic, I wouldn't have tried...
Can we all play the way we want now ? youpiiiiiiii :cool:

I'm probably older then you so you are pathetic to call me "kid". I am not mad at how people play. Learn to read and maybe go raise your IQ a bit to understand what you read.

It is quite simply, obvious, that the gamer, the player, should do all that is available to him in order to lose no units.
http://www.rdox.info/01.jpghttp://www.rdox.info/02.jpghttp://www.rdox.info/8.jpghttp://www.rdox.info/04.jpg

The problem is, for no-loss, at least in AP (WotN will give us more options, like Soothsayers and Warrior Maidens, not to mention that Gift is back...) forced you to ALWAYS use some resurrecting unit... like Paladins, or Inquisitors, or Rune Mages. Problem is, Inquisitors are just a useless unit unless you are fighting undead, and using Paladins in EVERY gameplay gets tedious. Same goes for the droid build. Yes, I've done it once, but I have no desire to do it again.

I'd rather try playing the game with an all-Elf army, or an all-Undead one, etc. I did a no-loss on AP with an all-Lizardman army+Warrior - but only on normal, using Resurrection spell/Time Back only. I have no desire to do it on Impossible, where the game would make me use the same old, same old tactics (Phantom+Paladin for example) over and over in every battle, often for 40+ turns. It is... mind-numbing and boring. This way, each battle was different, and I got to experience the Lizardman units and learn their strenghts and weaknesses. (Apart from the Chosa, I love them all...)

So I can understand why the new guy says "it's stupid", I do not agree with the way HOW he said that or how he trolled others who disagreed.