Blitzing = Casual

[ArtistofWarfare]

Just to set the record straight.

Logical equation:

Blitzing makes the game easier since the AI cannot defend or keep up with a blitz. Blitzers, are playing easy mode.

Turtling allows AI factions to build themselves to a level that provides the player with the maximum challenge possible when it comes time for their expansion.

Just wanted to debunk some illogical theory a very green, new player put out there that blitzing is "hardcore" and turtling is "casual".

Roleplaying a persona on the forums, blitzing the map - these are the actions of a casual, very very green in the genre.

[Marauder]

Blitzing stresses an extreme of the game. It presents a very great logistical challenge. I am new to this game and the forums and I can easily see that there is value in both. As a new forum member, I'm already tired of people arguing that one is better than the other or a more pure way of playing.

[ArtistofWarfare]

Blitzing stresses an extreme of the game. It presents a very great logistical challenge. I am new to this game and the forums and I can easily see that there is value in both. As a new forum member, I'm already tired of people arguing that one is better than the other or a more pure way of playing.

Exactly. Just a few months ago, we didn't see one post debating the subject.

As I've said before: "Turtle" and "Blitz" are not Total War terms. The players using them, are new to the game.

It's a Warcraft Zergfest term. In the past, many members of this community were offended simply by the presence of one of these kids.

[FactionHeir]

Keep the discussion to the issues, not your opinion or perceived opinion of other forum members, please.

[Kadagar_AV]

First of all, there are 2 types of "blitzing", and the OP seems to mess them up.

1. Blitz to gain a game advantage, yes, that is easymode.
2. Blitz as a challenge to see how fast you can finish short campaign / long campaign / take the whole map. NOT easymode.

On the note of "this appeared on the forum just months ago".

First of all, it has been around since shogun, back in the last century.

Second of all, it is quite natural that players seek other means of competiveness than player vs AI when the game has been out for quite some time.

[Ratwar]

The Zerg are from Starcraft, ArtistofWarfare, and a 'blitz' is generally referred to as a 'Rush', but I suppose that's unimportant. Of course, since I know that, I apparently offend you. I'm sorry.

Really, anyone that bothers to register on an internet forum is a pretty hardcore player, no matter what their strategy. The Hardcore/Casual barrier is about time spent playing, not how you play.

[FactionHeir]

As this is degenerating into a flame fest, this is hereby locked.

If you wish to discuss history, use the Monastery.

Removed offending posts.

This is one last chance for this thread. Keep on topic and discuss the issues in a friendly manner, do not attempt to flame, bait or attack or even respond to perceived baits or attacks. These will be dealt with by the staff.

[Kadagar_AV]

I must say I am a turtle at heart... I make a LOT of "house rules", such as:

* I may not accept adoptions or man of the hour, to keep the bloodline straight.
* I am not allowed to capture more than 1 province / 3 turns.
* I try to roleplay, as an example, if a character turns 16, and there is a cardinal in how city called "the warmonger", and the pope calls for a crusade, I will then crusade with this character no matter if it's wise or not.

Do I think I am more hardcore than the people who finish the campaign in X (X = few) turns?

Nope:2thumbsup:

We all play this game to HAVE FUN, people have fun in different ways.

Although I do not blitz as of late, the THREADS about blitzing has helped me understand the game mechanics, and have more than one time helpd me out of a really tight spot.

This forum is open for everyone, in my oppinion, the best player is the one who *gasp* has the most FUN out of the GAME. That's why we all play, isnt it?

To then flame different playstyles is for me futile...


Sidenote: Please AoW, where does the term "blitzkrieg" show up prior to WWII?

Edit: spelling

[ArtistofWarfare]

As this is degenerating into a flame fest, this is hereby locked.

If you wish to discuss history, use the Monastery.

Removed offending posts.

This is one last chance for this thread. Keep on topic and discuss the issues in a friendly manner, do not attempt to flame, bait or attack or even respond to perceived baits or attacks. These will be dealt with by the staff.

This is getting a little silly now. Locked, unlocked, locked, unlocked.

Perhaps a little too much "government intervention". Let the chips fall where they may faction :2thumbsup:

[ArtistofWarfare]

Sidenote: Please AoW, where does the term "blitzkrieg" show up frior to WWII?

You sent me this in PM as well - and I responded.

As I've shown you, the entire concept was a product of WW1. Hitler didn't wake up one morning during the bombing of Poland and have a "new idea". It was a style of warfare that developed from the need to break static trench warfare in ww1.

It was fully realized and became a mainstream term when the military technology of ww2 was introduced, as this made the mobile, lightening nature of the style more viable.

[Lancome]

The Zerg are from Starcraft, ArtistofWarfare, and a 'blitz' is generally referred to as a 'Rush', but I suppose that's unimportant. Of course, since I know that, I apparently offend you. I'm sorry.

Really, anyone that bothers to register on an internet forum is a pretty hardcore player, no matter what their strategy. The Hardcore/Casual barrier is about time spent playing, not how you play.

Good Job on The Blizzard Games Terminology... I play once a week does that make me hard core?

[El Diablo]

Okay then. If blitzing = casual. Do it. Simple - do it fast.

VH/VH win the game as quick as possible.

Now I know you find it boring, you mentioned it once or twice.

But hey if it only takes say 9 turns, then that is not a great amount of time out of your life?

I am just interested to see how a hardcore player would do it.

[ArtistofWarfare]

Okay then. If blitzing = casual. Do it. Simple - do it fast.

VH/VH win the game as quick as possible.

Now I know you find it boring, you mentioned it once or twice.

But hey if it only takes say 9 turns, then that is not a great amount of time out of your life?

I am just interested to see how a hardcore player would do it.

Should I modify my files, auto resolve all my battles, and reload a saved game every time something goes wrong like the real pros on here do?

[TevashSzat]

Okay....emotions are wayyyy too high here it seems

Anyways, to each his (or her) own. Its a game and should be treated like one. IMO, given the state of M2TW multiplayer, I doubt anyone who plays M2TW can truly call themselves hardcore (compared to those WoW, Starcraft, Warcraft, ect... players that is)

For me, the AI is ridiculously easy to beat against in almost any circumstance so I think neither blitzing nor turtling is particularly hard at all. The only way to get a half decent level of difficulty, methinks, is to use a mod that gives the AI a horrendously overpowered starting position or something like that

[El Diablo]

Whatever floats your boat.
You are doing the blitz you make your own houserules.
Thats the point.

As stated at the start of all other blitzing threads are the "houserules" the blitzer will follow. These usally include the difficulty the mod (if any) and any altered files (if any). Also if you have to capture town x or elimintae a certain faction to win then put that in as well.

So if you want to autoresolve all battles - do it.
Re-load after every loss - do it.
Modify all files if you want (I would recomend making a backup though as modding is not all that easy).

Just state the rules you have adhered to and blitz away. Obviously the harder the rules you impose on yourself the more impressive to follow gamers. But as always you are playing the game for your enjoyment.

[Askthepizzaguy]

Okay then. If blitzing = casual. Do it. Simple - do it fast.

VH/VH win the game as quick as possible.

Now I know you find it boring, you mentioned it once or twice.

But hey if it only takes say 9 turns, then that is not a great amount of time out of your life?

I am just interested to see how a hardcore player would do it.

An interesting proposal, El Diablo.

I daresay, it would allow the OP to prove his mettle as an experienced, hardcore player. It's as fair a challenge as any. Not only would he have the oppurtunity to prove a debate point, but he would also have the great pleasure of proving how incredibly easy blitz challenges are! This challenge you propose will show just how casual blitzing really is, and how green players who blitz competitively are. Kudos for both your creative idea, and also your incredibly on-topic and within-forum-rules response, ED. Quite polite and conducive to a civil discussion, as well as pertinent.

:applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause:

And a round of ale for everyone here for contributing to this relevant, well-constructed, well-reasoned, polite, respectful, and non-farcical debate.

:medievalcheers:

Three cheers for the OP, ArtistofWarfare! Let's make him feel welcome in this forum!

HIP HIP!

[ArtistofWarfare]

So you guys interpret all of my posts as: "Guys, I'd like to set up a blitz campaign myself - could you tell me what the normal process of doing so around here is?"

I thought it was pretty clear that I was one of the forum members who did not blitz.

[Ratwar]

So you guys interpret all of my posts as: "Guys, I'd like to set up a blitz campaign myself - could you tell me what the normal process of doing so around here is?"

I thought it was pretty clear that I was one of the forum members who did not blitz.

Basically I think that most people here are saying that unless you've tried to blitz, you don't really understand how time consuming/hard it is. Which I'll agree makes a ton of sense.

[Askthepizzaguy]

So you guys interpret all of my posts as: "Guys, I'd like to set up a blitz campaign myself - could you tell me what the normal process of doing so around here is?"

I thought it was pretty clear that I was one of the forum members who did not blitz.

No, I hadn't noticed.

:laugh2:

Actually, yes, you had mentioned that you don't like to play the game very quickly (in sometimes less than polite words) and you've alluded to the fact that on the contrary, you're actually quite the opposite.

[ArtistofWarfare]

Basically I think that most people here are saying that unless you've tried to blitz, you don't really understand how time consuming/hard it is. Which I'll agree makes a ton of sense.

It would make sense that the person who offered a "blitz challenge" would respond. I appreciate the assistance, but I didn't see him ask for it.

Thanks.

[ArtistofWarfare]

No, I hadn't noticed.

:laugh2:

Actually, yes, you had mentioned that you don't like to play the game very quickly (in sometimes less than polite words) and you've alluded to the fact that on the contrary, you're actually quite the opposite.

So why do you and two others repeatedly keep trying to drag me into a "blitz" challenge.

I've already told you: I find it so boring, that if I have trouble sleeping, I read the blitz challenge thread. Others around here, sleep in the chair...hand on mouse.

[Ratwar]

It would make sense that the person who offered a "blitz challenge" would respond. I appreciate the assistance, but I didn't see him ask for it.

Thanks.

Perhaps next time you should state their name then, instead of "So you guys" or even better quote the post, so it'll be clear that you only want him to respond. Or, if you wish to have a private conversation, you might want to consider taking it to PM.

[Askthepizzaguy]

So why do you and two others repeatedly keep trying to drag me into a "blitz" challenge.

I've already told you: I find it so boring, that if I have trouble sleeping, a read the blitz challenge thread.

So boring that it consumes the content of most of your posts of late?

By your own reasoning, that makes it seem as though you actually find them fascinating. But surely a skilled player such as yourself could easily win such a challenge proposed by the greenest of the green players. You wanted to set the record straight, here's your chance.

Wow us with your hardcore skills, and I guarantee that you will win this polite debate with full honors.
:7king:

[Askthepizzaguy]

obvious troll is obvious

This post is off-topic.

And your response to the challenge is:

A) "I don't have the time necessary to complete such a challenge, because it's too difficult"
B) "I've already completed the challenge but I don't know how to upload the images"
C) "I accept your challenge because I have always been able to put my money where my mouth is"

A hardcore player could easily beat such a green, casual player challenge. But if it makes you fall asleep, that's ok. You can always give it the ol' college try when you wake up.

[ArtistofWarfare]

And you attempt to again pull me into a "blitz challenge" without first even answering why you did the first time.

1) It's not a measure of skill imo. At all. Therefore, my completion of one would provide me with no satisfaction.

2) "Set the record straight" - What record? I didn't challenge you. You're off topic. The "record" in this thread, is the topic. You're repeatedly discussing blitz challenges - Get back on topic. I don't want to have to tell you again or surely, FH will drop the hammer on you.

3) Yes - this concerns me so much that 11 of my nearly 500 posts discuss it. Yup. That much Pizzaboy.

4) There is nothing to win. I think you're casual because of your attitude and playstyle. Has nothing to do with how much time you put into the game - we've already established that you play TW more than any human being on earth - that's your claim to fame on here. That's why everyone knows Pizzaboy. For me to come on here and set up house rules, and set up blitz challenges so I can "earn praise" is just not me. I'm a real thrill seeker I guess...that just wouldn't get my adrenaline pumping. I dunno, it just wouldn't. I seek no praise on here. I post/read. I'm not here to pop an award in my signature or anything. I would only do that if my rocks were gotten off by doing so - mine aren't. To each his own right?

[El Diablo]

AoW don't do the blitz if you do not want to.
As stated it is your game to play the way you want to.

All I was just wanting to know how you know blitzing is so easy?


Logical equation:

Blitzing makes the game easier since the AI cannot defend or keep up with a blitz. Blitzers, are playing easy mode.


This is (in my humble opinion) partly true. To get what I mean is if you conquer the map at a fast rate. The AI will never keep up. This is particularly true in RTW. The human player recruits better, sends stacks to better locations, fights better on the battle map. Thus if you attack steadily you will usually win.

But if you go ALL OUT that is leave the centre of your empire exposed, consistently fight battles that you are out gunned and out numbered in, spread your reserves paper thin you are in reality giving the AI the best opertunity to beat you. However the AI is as stated here alot not good at co-ordinating attacks, and given being a goodish player you will probably win.

Also when do you go from turtle to conquerer to blitzer? Is it taking a breath after the inital rebel land-grab? One province per five turns? Only attacking after being attacked? Thoughts?

These are all valid tactics and fully accepted here by post lurkers like myself.

So please post an example of your campaign and how it progressed so we can see why you enjoyed it so much. It might be a style that we may like to try. We may even question why you did such and such? Like "Why did you leave Constainople alone when it was takeable?" - to which you might say something as inane as "I like the colour of the Byzantines". That would be a fair answer (and please I am not being condesending here) as it is your game you make the decisions.

The point of this who org business is the game - flaws and all. Some here love camels some don't.

Some love to blitz - others (like you) don't. I don't dislike ATPG for blitzing (he is only killing virtual soliders and civilians) and I don't dislike you for NOT liking blitzing. But attacking another style of play as you have been seems strange. No one is forcing you to do it, so why let it worry you? Play the way you like and leave others to play their way.

But back on topic, I do not think that blitzing = casual. It sure look hard to me.

[Askthepizzaguy]

And you attempt to again pull me into a "blitz challenge" without first even answering why you did the first time.

Well, you posted the theory that Blitzing is "easy mode", as shown here:


Just to set the record straight.

Logical equation:

Blitzing makes the game easier since the AI cannot defend or keep up with a blitz. Blitzers, are playing easy mode.

Turtling allows AI factions to build themselves to a level that provides the player with the maximum challenge possible when it comes time for their expansion.

Just wanted to debunk some illogical theory a very green, new player put out there that blitzing is "hardcore" and turtling is "casual".

Roleplaying a persona on the forums, blitzing the map - these are the actions of a casual, very very green in the genre.

And some of our other forum members have suggested you don't know what you're talking about, and that you should try it before you reveal to the whole world with your vast experience how easy it is.

It's a fun debate, and I think that's why it's generated so much interest.


1) It's not a measure of skill imo. At all. Therefore, my completion of one would provide me with no satisfaction.

So, logically, by that same token if I believe that Olympic Diving is not a measure of skill, and earning 10 points in front of neutral judges was not satisfying, therefore it is not a measure of skill, because I am all-knowing and my judgment is the only one that people care about. That's why everyone must always agree with me. Point conceded.

:bow:


2) "Set the record straight" - What record? I didn't challenge you. You're off topic. The "record" in this thread, is the topic. You're repeatedly discussing blitz challenges - Get back on topic. I don't want to have to tell you again or surely, FH will drop the hammer on you.

Actually, you did challenge me, or rather whoever you were discussing this with, to refute your allegations that blitzing is easy and only green, casual players do it (paradoxically, also charging that only someone who is a serious, hardcore player with 4,500 hours of game time would want to blitz).

And when someone other than myself suggested that you prove the assertions in your original post were true, I agreed and thought it was a good idea. It's a fine way of making your point and proving that anyone who blitzes must be a green player after all.

And it's all entirely on-topic, because the discussion is whether or not blitzing is done by green, inexperienced, casual players who don't have the hardcore skills that you do.


Just wanted to debunk some illogical theory a very green, new player put out there that blitzing is "hardcore" and turtling is "casual".

If you wish to debunk a theory, you may expect some debate. This is all on-topic. Amazingly, though, very few of your own posts were on-topic, and that is why they were deleted.


3) Yes - this concerns me so much that 11 of my nearly 500 posts discuss it. Yup. That much Pizzaboy.

That's true. In all fairness, many of your recent posts on this topic have been deleted. So they don't technically count.

So what else has occupied your mind for the last 3 days? A quick search of all your posts reveals: Very little.


4) There is nothing to win. I think you're casual because of your attitude and playstyle. Has nothing to do with how much time you put into the game - we've already established that you play TW more than any human being on earth - that's your claim to fame on here. That's why everyone knows Pizzaboy. For me to come on here and set up house rules, and set up blitz challenges so I can "earn praise" is just not me. I'm a real thrill seeker I guess...that just wouldn't get my adrenaline pumping. I dunno, it just wouldn't. I seek no praise on here.

First point: There's nothing to win. There's no prize for completing the game in a "normal" way, nor is there any definition for beating the game normally. So I consider this argument self-defeating.

Second point: Your opinion of my attitude, playstyle, and other such things have already been flagged as inappropriate topics of discussion for this forum. We have a backroom and private message for that.

Third point: Thank you for helping me establish the (untrue) assertion that I spend more time playing TW than anyone else, thus disproving your original thesis which is that I am a green, casual player.

Fourth point: Praise may be earned, but it was never asked for. But thank you for agreeing I've earned praise.

Fifth point: What you do with your time to seek thrills is your business, and unless it's involving M2TW it belongs in another forum. And whatever it is you do to seek thrills, is your business, so long as when you post about it on here it's the thread topic and within forum guidelines. To each his own after all, as you say. So why does it offend you so much that other people seek thrills in ways that you don't?

The bottom line is that you are derailing your own statements by offering other, contradictory statements, and that you don't appear to have a consistent position other than "I dislike blitzing", which we have heard you say in one form or another quite a bit these past several days. As a very famous, hardcore player known as ArtistofWarfare once quipped: "That seems boring to me".

[Ramses II CP]

I must suggest that bragging on a forum about how 'hardcore' a gamer an individual might be is an unhealthy sign. I've played my fair share of MTWII and plenty of other games, but I've somehow never found myself tempted to tie my ego up in that particular fact. We're talking about light entertainment here, an almost inherently unskilled pursuit. I mean, in my prime I was a pretty spectacular television watcher, and I could surf channels with the best of them, but I still managed to avoid demeaning the sad little weak-thumbed peasants who were outside running around in the grass throwing footballs like clowns.

All this stuff is supposed to be about fun. If you're not having fun, you're doing something wrong. If the way someone else has fun makes you angry, you've really missed the point of entertainment altogether. :clown:

:egypt:

[El Diablo]

All this stuff is supposed to be about fun. If you're not having fun, you're doing something wrong. If the way someone else has fun makes you angry, you've really missed the point of entertainment altogether.


~:thumb:

[pevergreen]

Just to set the record straight.

Logical equation:

Blitzing makes the game easier since the AI cannot defend or keep up with a blitz. Blitzers, are playing easy mode.

Turtling allows AI factions to build themselves to a level that provides the player with the maximum challenge possible when it comes time for their expansion.

On your original post AoW, I disagree. In both RTW and M2TW I have held my initial settlements for over 150 turns, not attacking at all in this time, and just watching to see what the AI did. Although they built as well, their armies did not improve significantly in value. They, in both instances, were still comprised of low tier units with 2-3 medium tier units. My last period of gaming with M2TW involved FactionHeir's Vanilla Mod (Hosted here on the .org if you fancy taking a look) This mod gives extra money each turn (and IIRC, extra when they have one provine) to the AI factions. Quite often during my games, I would see a faction down to one province, but having 3-4 full stacks around the city. ATPG has just recently downloaded this mod, and I wait to see how he goes in a blitzing style.

Blitzing is an art form. As said earlier, it is not just attacking really fast, it is attacking so fast that you constantly have no money, your settlements are worthless. Not only that, to properly plan how you go about it is very hard. If you don't like reloading, why dont you suggest that there may be "Hardcore" Blitzing, where no reloads are allowed. If you attack and lose, then you've lost. Think of blitzing as...a challange, like many other games have. It is an art form, a playstyle and a challange.

(Challange as in many other games such as Soul Calibur 2 "Defeat your enemy using only air attacks" etc)

Praise is given to members who are able to do such a feat by others who know how hard accomplishing said feat is. Like jumping 4m in long jump. It may not sound impressive if you haven't tried, but to those who have, they know the effort it takes.

:bow:

[Privateerkev]

Blitzing is one challenge. Turtling is another. They are two different ways to play the same game. Assigning value judgments to either is not helpful. Because there are plenty of people who have fun playing both ways.

I don't blitz because it is not fun for me. But I see why others have fun with it. And I am impressed by the logistical challenge and the fact that they refine their "game" to a fine art.

[Proserpine]

In chess, and many other games, there are different ways to play. "Blitz", as used in these forums is nothing to do with Blitzkrieg, a common mistake. It is actually from chess and refers to really short time limit games (like 5 minutes, compared to "long form" chess which has time limits of an hour or more per player). The time limits, in chess, impose a completely different style on the game, make mistakes much more likely, and incidentally make it way more exciting to watch. There are also many variants of chess (usually called "fairy" chess), where the pieces are different from the standard setup, e.g. no knights, or move differently.Then there is "problem" chess. The point being that virtually all games have different modes or ways to extend the gameplay for those who want to.

The other thing is that people have different skill levels, even at different forms of the game. And that is only partly about practice. I will never be a chess grandmaster, if I practiced for the next thousand years, however, I appreciate the skill and dedication involved for those who are grandmasters. Not all grandmasters. I, personally, do want to spend the time to reach even the "average club" level that I could probably obtain in chess. However, I do play chess occasionally (often vs the a computer) because, for me, it is "fun".

Similarly, in STW, RTW, MTW and MTW2 you can play the game in different ways. The problem with the game in this respect is that the "victory conditions" assigned are quite limited in how you go about completing them. I would love it if it was possible to set up something like the old Civ "One City Challenge" (win the game with only one city) in MTW2 - actually there are some good scenarios that approach this. Note to self: try them sometime. Mostly though you resort to "house rules" and essentially build your own variant. This is easy to do (not necessarily easy to win, note), partly because of the way the game is normally played (against the computer) and partly because there are so many rules and options. Some of these I find interesting, some not so, but I appreciate the skill and dedication of those who set up and play such modes, even though not necessarily my thing. In exactlythe same way as I appreciate the skill and dedication of the people who mod the game in various ways, which also takes a huge amount of dedication and effort.

Finally, some people, if enough play it, will find any game "easy". There are great footballers, like pele, and there are park players. I like to think, in MTW2, I am somewhere beyond a park player, but I will never be pele. However, I enjoy reading reports from other players, both those more and less skilled than myself. And I have learned a lot from these forums about how to play the game to the best of my limited ability.

Does Blitz = Casual? Does Blitz = Easy Mode? No to both questions. Blitz in MTW2 is simply a way to play the game, different to, but not inherently better (or worse) than any other way of playing. End of

[TheDruid]

Sure there are many ways to play this game :) But since i see this " a historical " game. i tend to realisticly build up countries. Now correct me if i'm wrong : I only know 1 person who ever blitzt in history ; that would be Alexander The great. all the rest kept armies home to keep peace so...
Even though i already quit many games because i get bored, blitzing would ultimately bore me.
why? there is "no realism" in it. like most games if you know what to do and what the enemy will do its no more game.
Since i'm "hardcore" gamer in an MMO i know a game always has problems dont know how to explain in English though.
its just that there are always ways to make a game easier. I find blitzing one of those. I see cheating just beyond.
this is not an attack on the ones who do ( i usually try cheats, i just get tired of them so quick :) ) Its just taking advantage of something you know that the game is incapable of anticipate on.
I like the historical or role playing campaigns much more.

[Proserpine]

Sure there are many ways to play this game :) But since i see this " a historical " game. i tend to realisticly build up countries. Now correct me if i'm wrong : I only know 1 person who ever blitzt in history ; that would be Alexander The great. all the rest kept armies home to keep peace so...
Even though i already quit many games because i get bored, blitzing would ultimately bore me.
why? there is "no realism" in it. like most games if you know what to do and what the enemy will do its no more game.
Since i'm "hardcore" gamer in an MMO i know a game always has problems dont know how to explain in English though.
its just that there are always ways to make a game easier. I find blitzing one of those. I see cheating just beyond.
this is not an attack on the ones who do ( i usually try cheats, i just get tired of them so quick :) ) Its just taking advantage of something you know that the game is incapable of anticipate on.
I like the historical or role playing campaigns much more.

Other famous historical "blitzers" would in my opinion include: Genghis/Chingis Khan; Timur/Timurlane, and Hannibal, just for starters. Oh, and maybe Clive of India

[Ibn-Khaldun]

In chess, and many other games, there are different ways to play. "Blitz", as used in these forums is nothing to do with Blitzkrieg, a common mistake. It is actually from chess and refers to really short time limit games (like 5 minutes, compared to "long form" chess which has time limits of an hour or more per player). The time limits, in chess, impose a completely different style on the game, make mistakes much more likely, and incidentally make it way more exciting to watch. There are also many variants of chess (usually called "fairy" chess), where the pieces are different from the standard setup, e.g. no knights, or move differently.Then there is "problem" chess. The point being that virtually all games have different modes or ways to extend the gameplay for those who want to.

The other thing is that people have different skill levels, even at different forms of the game. And that is only partly about practice. I will never be a chess grandmaster, if I practiced for the next thousand years, however, I appreciate the skill and dedication involved for those who are grandmasters. Not all grandmasters. I, personally, do want to spend the time to reach even the "average club" level that I could probably obtain in chess. However, I do play chess occasionally (often vs the a computer) because, for me, it is "fun".

Similarly, in STW, RTW, MTW and MTW2 you can play the game in different ways. The problem with the game in this respect is that the "victory conditions" assigned are quite limited in how you go about completing them. I would love it if it was possible to set up something like the old Civ "One City Challenge" (win the game with only one city) in MTW2 - actually there are some good scenarios that approach this. Note to self: try them sometime. Mostly though you resort to "house rules" and essentially build your own variant. This is easy to do (not necessarily easy to win, note), partly because of the way the game is normally played (against the computer) and partly because there are so many rules and options. Some of these I find interesting, some not so, but I appreciate the skill and dedication of those who set up and play such modes, even though not necessarily my thing. In exactlythe same way as I appreciate the skill and dedication of the people who mod the game in various ways, which also takes a huge amount of dedication and effort.

Finally, some people, if enough play it, will find any game "easy". There are great footballers, like pele, and there are park players. I like to think, in MTW2, I am somewhere beyond a park player, but I will never be pele. However, I enjoy reading reports from other players, both those more and less skilled than myself. And I have learned a lot from these forums about how to play the game to the best of my limited ability.

Does Blitz = Casual? Does Blitz = Easy Mode? No to both questions. Blitz in MTW2 is simply a way to play the game, different to, but not inherently better (or worse) than any other way of playing. End of

Now that was a good post :beam:

And I share this opinion of Ramses..


All this stuff is supposed to be about fun. If you're not having fun, you're doing something wrong. If the way someone else has fun makes you angry, you've really missed the point of entertainment altogether.

Everyone plays the game in their own way. Some like to do it fast, some will take it slow. And no one should say that because they don't like the way others play it then they play it in a wrong way or your way is right one. Also people should never forget that this is just a game!!!

[gardibolt]

Really, I'm not sure why this is so contentious. I'm a hardcore turtler, and ATPG is a hardcore blitzer, and we have had some back and forth about how the various strategies work, and I think we've 100%managed to be quite respectful about each other's play styles. I dunno why people are starting to take this personally. If you don't like blitzing, don't blitz. :wall: I do think it's a little presumptuous to proclaim blitzing is 'easy mode' if you've never tried doing it, though. :whip: It'd be one thing to say "I did a couple of blitzes and it was so easy I went back to turtling since it seemed like more of a challenge to me." But that isn't how I'm reading the OP. Of course, I've misread the OP's posts before so maybe I'm missing something.:clown:

[TheLastPrivate]

I am sorry but I can't help erase the nuance that what OP is tryign to convey is:

"Turtling requires more skill than blitzing, therefore turtler > blitzer. Blitzers do not deserve the attention they get."

or something along that line. Correct me if I'm wrong, but that's what I'm receiving from OP's posts.

If anyone read my post; https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showpost.php?p=2008528&postcount=72
you'll see that I insist that turtling be practice as the normative gameplay due to my personal wishes for CA and future
TW titles, but I honestly find this old topic unnecessary of debate, if we can even call this a "debate." I'm pretty disappointed actually, and I'm willing to compare turtle vs. blitz debate with euthanasia, abortion, and gun control debates at this point.

[Warmaster Horus]

From what I see, the Blitzing vs Turtling debate is like those issues. Mainly, it's a matter of opinion.

We all are different. I like to lounge in bed for 5 minutes before getting up, while my best mate litterally springs up from the bed. Same thing with gaming. We've all got different styles. Let's live with it. Leave the debate standing, and have the result be a draw. Blitzers will blitz, Turtlers will turtle. Blitzers will post their achievements, and Turtlers can as well (somehow... Getting to the end date will be one thing).

While the debate is understandable (even though I think it's ridiculous to try to convince the other side here), starting - continuing, rather - the debate the way the OP did is inexcusable. If there's one thing that does not work in debating, it's insulting your opponent. And that's what the OP did, as I understand.

My two cents... That's all.

[Doug-Thompson]

Well, as it says in my signature ...

[TheDruid]

Other famous historical "blitzers" would in my opinion include: Genghis/Chingis Khan; Timur/Timurlane, and Hannibal, just for starters. Oh, and maybe Clive of India

2 of those 4 i dont even know :(
Hannibal and Genghis Khan did great things yes. but they did not conquer the by that time known world. as that is what i meant.
Hitler's generals did a good blitz as well, but they didnt even conquer a quarter of the world.
you understand what i'm trying to say?
off course blitzing as you name could be quite interesting if you are not that experienced in it.
But my experience in every game i have played is that you may come at a point when gaming isn't gaming anymore, but beating the game by using its limits.
Lets say in game milanese seem to conquer a lot and become very strong : with that knowing before it will happen you can anticipate it. just like going to the limits of the AI. I really cannot explain well in English.
btw I do seem wanting to know how you can conquer 106 provinces in less than 30 turns. how do you mobilize?
Perhaps that would be the greatest challenge (for me)

[SirRethcir]

Hm, I think there a two meanings for blitzing used in discussion.
1. overrun the AI
2. do 1. in the least amount of turns

I admit 1. is easy an can be very boring and I don't recommend it.
But 2. is hard and a challenge.
So, if I'm talking of 'blitzing', I mean 2.

Correction:
I'm not a green, nor am I a casual player.
I play TW since the Shogun-Demo.

And, yes, it is hard to play M2TW in a historical manner, cause it has very very few in common with the 'real' history and historical conditions. :beam:

[TheDruid]

Hm, I think there a two meanings for blitzing used in discussion.
1. overrun the AI
2. do 1. in the least amount of turns

I admit 1. is easy an can be very boring and I don't recommend it.
But 2. is hard and a challenge.
So, if I'm talking of 'blitzing', I mean 2.

Correction:
I'm not a green, nor am I a casual player.
I play TW since the Shogun-Demo.

And, yes, it is hard to play M2TW in a historical manner, cause it has very very few in common with the 'real' history and historical conditions. :beam:

That is nicely said what i was trying to say.
now for your point 2 i mean that if you go so quick, the AI always does the same moves (in my opinion in the beginning ) so you can counteract and perfect the game.
As said i am interested in how you do that, i probably will try it to seek it out.
But once you are perfecting your gameplay thats when it gets so boring.
Or is there someone who finds if you do 2 the exactly same campaign, the AI will not react 2 the same?

[Proserpine]

2 of those 4 i dont even know :(
Hannibal and Genghis Khan did great things yes. but they did not conquer the by that time known world. as that is what i meant.
Hitler's generals did a good blitz as well, but they didnt even conquer a quarter of the world.
you understand what i'm trying to say?
off course blitzing as you name could be quite interesting if you are not that experienced in it.
But my experience in every game i have played is that you may come at a point when gaming isn't gaming anymore, but beating the game by using its limits.
Lets say in game milanese seem to conquer a lot and become very strong : with that knowing before it will happen you can anticipate it. just like going to the limits of the AI. I really cannot explain well in English.
btw I do seem wanting to know how you can conquer 106 provinces in less than 30 turns. how do you mobilize?
Perhaps that would be the greatest challenge (for me)

Well Alex conquered most of what he knew, but he also knew that the "known world" was not the same as "the world that can be known". Timur is in MTW2 (founder of the Timurids), in reality he spent most of his life fighting, he won the battles but could not establish a stable empire. Genghis would have conquered more for sure if he had lived longer - his empire was considerably larger than Alexander's I think. Clive of India was a British soldier who won the battle of Plassey (1757, I think) that resulted - ultimately - in the conquest by Britain of India.

[TheDruid]

so : Alexander made the " known" world bigger.
Timur : failed & unstable lands
Genghis : died as you said, so he didnt conquer all.
Clive of India : This is the first time i heard of him.... (says enough i think)

And as for timur and Genghis Khan : Steppe armies fight alot other in woods.
As TW player you should know ;) lol
Genghis was great yes. But what would the horse archers do in the forests lets say against Brute Danish men (my favourites :) ), or against the European spearmen....

Back on topic ; AOW is right when he says there are blitzers here who say turtling is "green"
cannot remember name of post however but i read that one as well.
I do remember it was not the Pizzaguy who wrote it though.

And if find this topic is quite the same as the : how to get the best kingdom in 22 turns turtle challenge
===> both over the same topic , both as stupid.

You ever played : who becomes multimillionaire on console?
if you have an answer wrong, next time you get the same questions , so you know the right answer and go on.
That is the way i find blitzing.. still cant find the right words :wall:

[Ferret]

Somone's a little jealous methinks...

Listen to the wise words of the Pharaoh:


I must suggest that bragging on a forum about how 'hardcore' a gamer an individual might be is an unhealthy sign. I've played my fair share of MTWII and plenty of other games, but I've somehow never found myself tempted to tie my ego up in that particular fact. We're talking about light entertainment here, an almost inherently unskilled pursuit. I mean, in my prime I was a pretty spectacular television watcher, and I could surf channels with the best of them, but I still managed to avoid demeaning the sad little weak-thumbed peasants who were outside running around in the grass throwing footballs like clowns.

All this stuff is supposed to be about fun. If you're not having fun, you're doing something wrong. If the way someone else has fun makes you angry, you've really missed the point of entertainment altogether. :clown:

:egypt:

And from personal experience all of the casual gamers I have seen play are extreme turtles, lacking enough experience in the game to pull off a blitz. One person I knew was playing RTW as the Julii and managed to conquer the few Gallic places in Northern Italy by turn 100...

[FactionHeir]

Please stay on topic. 2 posts removed. (yes, that means you, ATPG :wink:)

[ArtistofWarfare]

requesting move to monastery...

More history mentioned here than on the Military Channel.

[KarlXII]

I do not see historical discussion :dizzy2:

Anyway,

Blitzing and Turtling are used frequently in RTS games. It is not a "new" or "green" thing, it is a gaming term.

[ArtistofWarfare]

I just double checked...

I sure do see historical discussion :dizzy2: :smash:

[Ethelred Unread]

Hmm, the title is Blitzing = Casual so any historical content is either to back up an arguement or off topic.

:focus:

I'd have to disagree because surely pulling off a succesful blitz would require strategic planning, not seen in casual gamers?

In successful blitz I would assume not to be using save/load, the console or even autoresolve.

IMHO these would be casual gamers. Exploiting the AI, whilst distateful to me as a player, isn't really the actions of a casual gamer as they would have had to put some time in learning how the AI works in order to be able to exploit it, again not the marks of a casual gamer.

[Askthepizzaguy]

:bow: to Ethelred Unread. Good post!

For blitzers, in terms of competitive, every-tile-every-turn, full on hardcore blitzing, autoresolve is allowed, and if those results aren't favorable, reloading is allowed. (Saves time, fight your own battles if the computer cannot pull it off).

In actual campaigning, I see autoresolve as a bit of a cheap play, because it usually ignores walls. And besides, when I actually campaign, it's purely for the battles, because I already know how to annihilate the AI on the campaign map too easily.

[Carlos Matthews]

When blitzing you have to rely on poor starting troops to beat the computers poor starting troops, easy enough right? Then you need to keep these poor troops alive and defeating hundreds and thousands of Ai poor troops. Then if they die you have to then rely on poor quality mercenaries, you have to be able to fund them also which means keep moving.

When turtling you use good human brainwork to queue up beneficial buildings and troops which can easily slaughter the rabble the AI has. Now do you see the true test of blitzing AoW?

[Askthepizzaguy]

From my understanding, he's no longer with us.

Good post, though Carlos. And you're absolutely right that your starting troops get creamed as the blitz continues unabated, however; crusaders/jihadis and mercenaries, as well as reinforcements from the territories you claim, all ADD to your total troop count. This is necessary because as you expand you will be fighting 10 or more empires simultaneously, and you need a decent general and some fair troops on every front.

[TheLastPrivate]

From my understanding, he's no longer with us.



Did I miss something?

One fun factor of blitzing is that I get to have high quality generals when I need it where I need it.

When I turtle generals usually don't get past 3 stars most of the time, since a general will MAYBE conquer one province during his entire lifetime...

[Askthepizzaguy]

I cannot say for certain.


But yes, the ONLY way to build a general is to engage in multiple pitched battles, exterminating or releasing consistently, and joining crusades or not ever joining them.

[coldpolar]

i find i have to 'hot-house' generals if i want a superstar by sending them on prolonged wars either hurtling around the provinces picking up new armies, taking the city and then moving on himself. or alternatively command a field army in an active front. got a nice candidate after finally winning over north italy now. best concentrated on kings and princes tho.

[TheLastPrivate]

Turtling will enable the micromangement of building good governnors (not generals) and ancillaries/traits via city swapping and construction.

But in this game, high chivlary/dread will make better governor than anyone with less chiv/dread and more governor-related stats.

[pevergreen]

Anyone wishing to discuss AoW should not do so in this thread, there topics in the watchtower, or you can PM me.