Your favorite way to play?

[Sheogorath]

So, we've all (by now) heard and seen enough of the 'RUSH VS TURTLE, OMG!' arguement, so...how do YOU, and I use the term to include all of my dear readers, play? What, as it were, gets you your jollies?

I personally enjoy taking a (totally a-historical) sort of roleplay approach. On its own, the TW experience would've gotten boring long ago. But, given the AI, its always fun to take on a sort of psychotic crusader/jihadi personality and sail off to the Holy Land/Europe to show those damn dirty Mohammedians/Franks the what-for. By Jingo.
My personal favorite thus far involves the experiences of a clan of Scottsmen who, exiled from their home by the English, took to the seas and wound up in the Crimea, who promptly seized Kiev, destroyed the Rus and showed the mongols what a highland charge can do to their fancy-pants cavalry.

[The New Che Guevara]

A sort of slow turtle but crushing any enemy I'm at war with, and severe over use of crusades/jihads. Nice mix between blitzing and turtling I reckon. and Very quick decisions, my campaigns normally end with me being way too strong before finding a good enemy to fight. My wars last for about 20 turns max, and if I play my armies right, 1.

[Kadagar_AV]

I found I tend to roleplay quite a bit...

I dont do offensive warfare unless there is a reason, like, someone attacking me first... The goal is to make the game feel more real.

[Ferret]

I guess I am a little of a turtle in SP, but not really slow. I tend to gobble up most of the map before turn ~100

[Askthepizzaguy]

I think by now everyone is sick of hearing how I like to play. :laugh2:

New Signature Line.

[Galain_Ironhide]

I'm a roleplayer. I like having my Generals either be 'Mr Nice Guy' (preserving life - a man of the people) or 'Evil Re-incarnate' (Death to anybody in the way - that means you Mr Pope). I've also found that I like taking the universal role of being the 'Big Brother' to my allies, if they have been attacked or have gone to war against another faction, then I'll send them all the support I can, being both financially and militarily.

For longetivety, I'll sit back as long as I can (be bothered) before beginning my Imperial Expansion, but just like EF, around turn 100 my Kingdom is usually looking very healthy and unbeatable.

[Ibn-Khaldun]

It really depends on what mood I'm in. Sometime I blitz from the start and sometimes I turtle and take some time before I take any settlements. And then there are cases where I cheat a lot to get the best troops I can get from the start. What can I say. I am the Cheatmaster after all :clown:
Also I have found that it's really interesting to play the game when all the factions have been controlled by the AI for the first 20-30 turns.:yes:

[Monk]

For SP I like a mix. I'll normally turtle for 20-30 turns and then hit the AI with all i've got, I used to just play really slow campaigns since i knew the AI couldn't handle a rush - but since I started to explore AI mods i really noticed a difference. Now if I don't rush with the house I may very well end up dead later on. So i guess you could call me a situational TW gamer, i'll turtle when i need to, and i'll empty my lands of forces and throw them at an opponent with reckless abandon when it's needed as well.

In hotseats (i haven't had the time for one in a while, i may pick a fight with pizzaguy soon though if my schedule stays clear like this!) I tend to air on the side of caution. In multi-player hotseats (non-1v1s) I like to play the part of the small power, the little guy who is happy to live in his own corner of the map. The guy who is fiercely proud of his king, his faction and his army however small it is and is willing to fight and die for it. I love to play the diplomacy game in hotseats more than anything :2thumbsup:

In 1v1 duels i normally play the part of the conservative blitzer. ATPG was my adversary twice and the first time we fought he utterly destroyed me; taught me a lot of valuable lessons. I'm a lot more aggressive now, a lot more guarded with my cities but not afraid to gamble my armies if it'll pay off in the end.

[rossahh]

I do it the opposite way. I hit the rebels hard and fast to get as big as I can at the start. Then I back off and turtle (and I mean really turtle). I don't attack anyone unless they attack me first, and then I only take their settlements that orginally bordered me, then sue for peace.

[PBI]

I tend to try to keep a slow but steady expansion going at all times; I'm almost always expanding somewhere, but usually only on one front at a time and against one faction unless I have other wars forced upon me (i.e. a faction attacks me or the Pope orders me to go on Crusade). I tend to be quite leisurely about it, taking about one city every two turns or so after the initial firestorm against the local rebels. It's usually enough expansion that I tend to win the Long Campaign conditions around the 1250 mark.

I also tend to be quite picky about where I will expand; I like to snap up little islands such as Crete, Cyprus and Ireland, and to carve a colonies out of factions quite some way away from my main empire. As such my empires tend to end up quite far-flung and disjointed, with all sorts of funny shaped peninsulas only loosely connected to the central provinces.

[_Tristan_]

In SP, I would describe my type of play as "pragmatic". I do anything that needs to be done when it needs to be done. I exploit any weakness I may see in adverse factions and strike.

I will also make use of every single game mechanism to further my own ends : bribing with diplomats (though it is rarely successful), spying, assassination and sabotage... Anything...

Mostly, I'll do anything to avoid a true siege situation whether on attack or defense : on attack by opening the gates with spies or attacking a nearby stack drawing the garrison into the fray; on defense by using a relief force to attack the besiegers and forcing a field battle on them.

I wouldn't call myself either blitzer or turtle but progress is generally made by bounds securing whole areas at a time, rebuilding strength then making another leap.

Hey, maybe that will end the blitz/turtle debate with the introduction of the "frog" tactic... :beam:

Don't mind me... That must be my French background speaking...

[Arcana]

I guess I'm a bit of a newb in this regard. I barely even bother to diplomatise and just bum-rush all my neighbouring settlements and factions. If someone picks a fight, I crush them sooner, but eventually they'll all crumble beneath my might. As a player who generally plays England, the Scots, French and HRE (the natural enemies of any Englishman :P ) are the first to die. I usually ignore Spain unless they provoke my wrath. I suppose I have a thing for stabbing eastward...

[Ibn-Khaldun]

I wouldn't call myself either blitzer or turtle but progress is generally made by bounds securing whole areas at a time, rebuilding strength then making another leap.

Hey, maybe that will end the blitz/turtle debate with the introduction of the "frog" tactic... :beam:

Don't mind me... That must be my French background speaking...

So we have now turtles and blitzers and no you as a "frogger"? :beam:

But then again I tend to play like that as well.

[Askthepizzaguy]

I guess that would make me a frogger as well.

I leap up to conquer the entire Eurasian and African continents quickly, then wait for the Mongols and Timurids to arrive, building up my forces, and then leap to their destruction.

Then I wait for the World is Round event, and I leap to the Americas.

I'm not a blitzer anymore!

[_Tristan_]

Welcome to the Frogger Club !!!

(Psst : You have to speak French to gain full admittance...:beam:)

[Anonymous II]

I do it the opposite way. I hit the rebels hard and fast to get as big as I can at the start. Then I back off and turtle (and I mean really turtle).



Then I guess you and I have the exact same approach. :yes:

[The_678]

I have to say the same as the guy above. That's why I love to play as the english. I like to conquer the islands, then turtle till i got retinues and armoured swordsmen, then walk across the map shooting down whoever gets in my way

[PittBull260]

I personally like to play a steady kind of slow realistic play. I settle down at my home territory build up resources, wisely make allies, and build up nice armies. Then i just expand my empire slowly. What i go for is just to have an empire with happy citizens and civilized way of building an empire. I dont go start wars and all that unless i have to or unless i've been attacked. And if i am catholic I always do everything the pope likes :)
matter of fact i'm about to start a spanish campaign and do just that

[Monsieur Alphonse]

I usually start a little bit of blitzing until I have some nice small kingdom that is easy to defend. If I play England I blitz until the UK is once again under my control and I have Rennes, Angers and Bruges. After that the attacks of the AI direct my next move. If the HRE attacks me I head north to wards Hamburg, if the French start messing around I attack eastward. When I play the Turks I stop blitzing when I control the entire middle east, Anatolia, Constantinople and Sarkel. After that it is playing reactive. My stile ensures that usually the AI will attack me with full stacks instead of small armies. I like to fight two stacks at a time when possible. I don't role play, I don't care about my blood line and I have usually no diplomats since they have nothing to do because my reputation is usually very untrustworthy or worse. Most of my generals have high dread, I don't use them as governors since then they will all become sexually insane alcoholics.

[Bronco]

Agree with some of the others on this board.

I also like make a rush to secure as much border as possible then turtle and tech up. I keep a large(but relatively inexpensive) army at each rough border(like if I'm German than a northern, eastern and southern army) and only attack in self defense. Then when I have my invincible armies I start methodical campaigns against any enemies.

[GMaximus]

Usually I take whatever rebel provinces that would feel convenient, then sit back, spam myself up with diplomats and spies, build a bunch of watchtowers and forts around my place and start improving my reputation around the world (after playing MTW where the Pope is always your mortal enemy, somehow I feel inclined to aid his puny and not nearly as agressive M2TW counterpart), make some good allies, maybe even get a vassal if I'm lucky. Usually I tend to avoid open war, and only make a single strike, then start haggling with the AI when it comes suing for peace.

[Paradox]

I tend to attack bordering regions and lay the foundation of my future empire for the first twenty or so turns. After I gain a vast amount of land and the tech level, economy, military etc. I need, I have a bad habit of turtling. Don't know why, but once I have that large of an empire I often become paranoid and play it safe, diplomatically, cold war style. Truth be told, I have only went through a single full campaign, I usually play short (mission) campaigns. Though if I was able to play the actual battles of M2TW, I'd probably be an insane blood-craving tyrant, like the Blitzkrieg master!

[Ramses II CP]

I think the way I play can best be described as 'never pick a fight, but finish every one you get in.' I expand through rebels to start, but then I like to trick the AI into attacking me, or sometimes just wait patiently for them to decide to do it on their own. There was a time when I tried to get ceasefires to make the game more interesting, but at this point in my MTWII spectrum I can see it's a waste of time. I really enjoy seeing the AI make a well prepared assault on my empire, even when I break it and go on to conquer their homelands.

For example in my latest BC campaign (With the new AI fixes installed) I expanded the KoJ through Abassid territory easily, but Georgia and the Kwaz had massive, allied empires north of me. I could've launched an attack while they were still expanding, but instead I settled back (Well, finished off Oman and forced Makuria to attack me, but both were weak) and waited for them to decide I was a target. When Georgia had knocked back the Kypchaks halfway to Kiev they suddenly attacked me at Hamadan and a few other places, making for some fun battles. Next turn six stacks of Kwaz troops hit me at various places, more fun battles!

Admittedly there becomes a bit of a grind where, no matter how impressive the armies they assemble the AI very rarely wins in the field, but it's fun to me to think of parts of my empire being massively important battlefields. Hamadan is the Sommes of the 12th century ME, and Tblisi is the Tarawa, etc. Georgia is in deep trouble now, but I'm going to play defense against the Kwaz until the Mongols show up. I want them to have someone to expand against before I get to them and start the spanking (I also want to see how far the Rajputs go, since they're about to wipe out the Ghorids and Sindh).

The most fun for me is when the AI surprises me, and things are harder than I expected. I fought a siege of Constantinople in the Turkish campaign I'm trying to write an AAR for that was shockingly close to being a loss. In fact, if the AI wasn't broken, I would've lost the city without making any mistakes in my defensive strategy. I love that fleeting feeling that there's an actual opponent in the AI.

:egypt: