A Discussion With Nashwan

[Alrowan]

Well after having one of the most enjoyable battles to recent date, Nashwan and i had a lengthy conversation in MSN.
We discussed quite a few things, but ill post it below for everyone to read.

(Im Flip in this Transcript)


Wolf_Nashwan says:
yo flip
Flip says:
hey
Wolf_Nashwan says:
heheh
Wolf_Nashwan says:
i wanna thank u
Flip says:
why?
Wolf_Nashwan says:
right now here i am again making my homeworks
Wolf_Nashwan says:
hehe
Flip says:
hehe
Flip says:
you needed an ass kicking ?
Wolf_Nashwan says:
i guess i underestimated u
Wolf_Nashwan says:
u played very well
Flip says:
its a simple strat
Wolf_Nashwan says:
i actually
Wolf_Nashwan says:
dident even check ur army so well
Wolf_Nashwan says:
i newer saw thoose chiv foot knights
Flip says:
ahh
Wolf_Nashwan says:
lol
Flip says:
my strat is simple
Flip says:
one word
Flip says:
RESEREVES
Wolf_Nashwan says:
hmm
Flip says:
my lack of mobility means i need to use reserves to counter flankers
Flip says:
and you fell into the trap of wasting your cav on me
Wolf_Nashwan says:
alrowan
Wolf_Nashwan says:
in our battle u showed very high skill quallaty
Wolf_Nashwan says:
very well done
Flip says:
thanks
Flip says:
but it was thanks to you that i won
Flip says:
here is a hint
Flip says:
dont always pull the same tricks and the same army
Flip says:
it makes you predictable
Wolf_Nashwan says:
i will try to not underestimate
Wolf_Nashwan says:
and be more patient
Flip says:
hehe
Flip says:
that too
Wolf_Nashwan says:
( means being more carefull )
Wolf_Nashwan says:
this i must do
Flip says:
your shifting strat is good, but predictable now
Flip says:
your oppononet almost expects it of you
Flip says:
lke i did
Wolf_Nashwan says:
hehe
Flip says:
works good the first 2 times
Wolf_Nashwan says:
i just couldent belive u held the power of my army
Flip says:
not too hard
Wolf_Nashwan says:
i came with thoose 8 infs from left
Flip says:
polearms are the toughest
Wolf_Nashwan says:
and 5 heavy cavs at left
Wolf_Nashwan says:
2 feudal at right flanking
Flip says:
hehe
Wolf_Nashwan says:
but u held so nice
Flip says:
thanks
Flip says:
it was probably my favourite battle in a long time
Wolf_Nashwan says:
k flip i will train and challenge you later
Flip says:
everything went well to the last kill
Flip says:
ok mate
Flip says:
like i say at the org
Flip says:
this is a game of skill, not armies
Wolf_Nashwan says:
yes thats true
Wolf_Nashwan says:
alrown
Wolf_Nashwan says:
listen
Flip says:
ok
Wolf_Nashwan says:
ur very right in its 100 % skill
Wolf_Nashwan says:
but
Wolf_Nashwan says:
ur 100 % skill
Wolf_Nashwan says:
can be lost vs someone with 75 % skill with a very good army
Wolf_Nashwan says:
do u agree ?
Flip says:
no
Flip says:
picking an army is skill
Wolf_Nashwan says:
the thing is
Wolf_Nashwan says:
if both have a balanced army
Wolf_Nashwan says:
then its 100 % skill
Wolf_Nashwan says:
but if the other one
Wolf_Nashwan says:
( example amp )
Wolf_Nashwan says:
he takes non balanced
Wolf_Nashwan says:
powerfull is the word for his playing
Wolf_Nashwan says:
not much of skill actually
Flip says:
but amp can be countered wit the right army
Flip says:
so it comes back to skill in choosing an army
Wolf_Nashwan says:
hmm
Wolf_Nashwan says:
all is about honour i belive
Wolf_Nashwan says:
fairiness
Flip says:
that too
Flip says:
ok
Wolf_Nashwan says:
i could buy a army with like 7 lancers
Wolf_Nashwan says:
with spears sowrd some pavs
Wolf_Nashwan says:
i would win
Wolf_Nashwan says:
many games
Wolf_Nashwan says:
but ppl must have the honour
Flip says:
yup
Wolf_Nashwan says:
( to playing fair )
Wolf_Nashwan says:
alrowan
Wolf_Nashwan says:
once i played amp
Wolf_Nashwan says:
he did a army like that
Wolf_Nashwan says:
i had a normal balanced army
Wolf_Nashwan says:
( i tell u )
Wolf_Nashwan says:
it was impossible
Flip says:
if you look at our game, i had a non-balanced army, and you had a balanced, it came down to skill though
Wolf_Nashwan says:
u had a balanced army
Wolf_Nashwan says:
in our game
Wolf_Nashwan says:
pavs spears
Wolf_Nashwan says:
horses
Wolf_Nashwan says:
swords
Flip says:
no
Flip says:
i had
Flip says:
billmen
Flip says:
militia sergeants
Flip says:
chivalric foot knights
Flip says:
1 unit of alans
Flip says:
3 pavs
Wolf_Nashwan says:
lol
Wolf_Nashwan says:
thats a real mix
Flip says:
no swords
Wolf_Nashwan says:
its balanced aint it ?
Flip says:
all polearms
Wolf_Nashwan says:
ohh
Wolf_Nashwan says:
lol
Flip says:
the abrs are to stop me from getting shot to bits
Flip says:
and the alans are for random tasks
Flip says:
but my main core army was polearms
Flip says:
75%
Wolf_Nashwan says:
unbalanced armies ( can be beaten yes ur right )
Wolf_Nashwan says:
but
Wolf_Nashwan says:
its harder
Wolf_Nashwan says:
aint it ?
Flip says:
no
Flip says:
my army is easy to beat
Wolf_Nashwan says:
i mean amps
Flip says:
lol
Flip says:
amp is beatable
Flip says:
but he has the most skill of most players in making an army
Wolf_Nashwan says:
yes but its harder cuz he play unbalanced aint it ?
Flip says:
so amp does have skill
Wolf_Nashwan says:
hmm
Flip says:
but not as much on the field as on the army selection
Wolf_Nashwan says:
yes now i see why ur right
Wolf_Nashwan says:
skill
Wolf_Nashwan says:
skill is allso
Wolf_Nashwan says:
when u choose ur armies
Wolf_Nashwan says:
ur tactics
Wolf_Nashwan says:
not only in the battle field
Wolf_Nashwan says:
so ur totaly right
Wolf_Nashwan says:
listen
Wolf_Nashwan says:
sometimes i use to think hours for good armies
Wolf_Nashwan says:
and stuff
Wolf_Nashwan says:
thats a way of ur skills
Wolf_Nashwan says:
experience

(EDIT) off topic chat

Wolf_Nashwan says:
ur where right
Flip says:
its hard to explain though
Flip says:
i believe skill in making an army is knowing your enemy
Flip says:
the problem with most players is this:
Flip says:
they take balanced armies out of unspoken rule
Flip says:
leaving people like amp to counter
Wolf_Nashwan says:
hmm
Wolf_Nashwan says:
the unspoken rule is
Wolf_Nashwan says:
the honour
Wolf_Nashwan says:
i told u about
Wolf_Nashwan says:
people wanna play fair
Wolf_Nashwan says:
but some dosent care
Flip says:
but also, people want to try new things
Wolf_Nashwan says:
against them
Wolf_Nashwan says:
u dont need to care
Flip says:
i play with honour and uniquly
Wolf_Nashwan says:
yes u do
Wolf_Nashwan says:
but some rushers dont *
Flip says:
true
Flip says:
my only prblem with rushing is that they deploy up close
Flip says:
making it unrealstic
Flip says:
if one rushes from the whole field i dont mind
Wolf_Nashwan says:
hmm
Flip says:
i dont call it rushing what people do
Flip says:
rather the start game ambush
Wolf_Nashwan says:
if example i take russian
Wolf_Nashwan says:
( they are weak )
Wolf_Nashwan says:
they wouldent have big chanses tought
Wolf_Nashwan says:
against a great rush
Flip says:
depends
Flip says:
if the enemy deploys at a normal distance
Flip says:
and rushes from there
Wolf_Nashwan says:
u sure ?
Flip says:
its fine
Flip says:
if they deploy on the edge of thier zone
Flip says:
then its a start game ambush
Wolf_Nashwan says:
yes i c
Wolf_Nashwan says:
but
Wolf_Nashwan says:
are u sure if they start enogh far away
Wolf_Nashwan says:
u can beat it ?
Flip says:
its not a matter of trying to beat it
Flip says:
its a matter of whats honourable
Flip says:
a rush army is honourable
Flip says:
provided they deploy fair
Wolf_Nashwan says:
ok alrowan
Wolf_Nashwan says:
yes
Flip says:
ok

[alioven]

Honour is above victory. If I fight a player in a fair battle and I lose, I don't feel ashamed. I just like losing that way (and winning, of course), and I will try to learn from that loss.

I simply hate seeing games where people takes spanish and byzantines, with armies composed of more than 50% heavy cab. Yep, as Alrowan says, these can be beaten, but if you use a typical balanced army, you are in a great disavantage. Most people that chooses that kind of armies are either noobs (no problem with these, really, as I also did it when I started playing MTW http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/frown.gif ) or semi-veterans that really only care about winning, based in army selection.

It's been a lot of time since my last early rush or heavy-cab army (now I only get spanish or byzantines when I expect an opponent to field a rush/all-lancers army, and even in that case I like more the HRE) or since using long-lines of cav. I used that when I was a real noob (now I'm a perpetuous semi-noob hehe), but I found that they were unfair, as they force your enemy to take a similar "win-at-all-costs" army and spoils the fun and tactical part of the game. As ladyAn said once: "Let them rush, take all-cav armies or do whatever they like, that's the way they learn how to play." But every decent general, once he/she learns how to play, discards these cheesy tactics/armies, as they ruin the intense potential gameplay of MTW, and get boring after some time.

Of course, choosing a right army is a show of skill, and I'm sure Amp would beat me (and most MTW players) with a balanced army too. Moreover, he knows what he does when choosing that armies, and he has always recognised these are based in specific caveats of the game. The problem is with other people that really think they are good just because "Hey, look, my long lines of lancers did 1400+ kills". I hope the VI makes some of these imbalances disappear (although new ones will pop up too), and the tactical part of the game takes more importance again.

I just love seeing great generals use their armies like a good general should do. I always find watching/joining that battles a pleasant experience, and I try to recognise great players, even if they lose, by their overall skills and fairness (recognising imbalances is fair). I always see how much I still need to improve when I see those genius in action, but I'm always grateful for the show.

And, yep, I also think a rush army can be honorable, if used fairly: i.e. not deploying just in front of the enemy and running over just at the start. Well, at least a good general can stop that kind of rush, but it's not always possible.

Along the time, everybody knows which people play with fairness, what kind of written and non-written rules of behavior are expected to follow in battle/foyer and what are the generals that really have great skills (despite some rudeness sometimes), high sense of honour, kind degree of politeness and good sense of humour, and I try to play with these people I appreciate as much as I can, as it's always a pleasure meeting these persons.

As my signature says in spanish (it's a translation from Tomi's signature): All glory is fleeting, but honor lasts forever.

Have fun all, good luck and hope to meet you in the field (Gah & Opa also) http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wave.gif

[Magyar Khan]

being succesfull in mtw is more depending on teh right army than it was ever before. without manouvring skills life is still hard ofcourse.

cavarchery replays (http://www.totalwar.org/cgi-bin/forum/ikonboard.cgi?act=ST;f=18;t=6376;r=1;&#top)

[FearofNC]

amp is the most creative battlefield general ive ever seen play... i was clanm8's with koc for over a year and have played magy many times... ive played all the top players... all of em... and none come close to amps skill of seeing the battlefield... amp can see what will happen almost a miunte into the battle it seems... you wont surprise him... he is 10 steps past you.. that is skill.. of course playing so many games also gives you a unique feel for the units... and amp is one of the better army pickers... but not the best.

[ErikJansen]

Thats a very nice discussion, highlighting some of the unwritten rules which do exist between veteran players and some semi-noobs like myself and the Honorable Alioven http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

Personally I go out of my way to try provide a balanced match, I don't want to tilt the scale at team selection, and certainly not through map selection etc.

If you want to rush me, fine fine, but please dont setup on defence in a 1v1 and do the edge deployment ambush trick. Makes me sad http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/frown.gif

http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wave.gif

[spacecadet]

I cant see the battlefield as well as Amp on my little 15in 800x600 screen http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/joker.gif

Space
http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/smokin.gif

[MF_Ivan]

Yeah I can attest to that

[Polish Crusader]

That conversation is a very interested read especially for new players such as myself who have no idea what the top players talk about. Thanks for sharing it.

[tootee]

In a 4v4, one guy takes all cav, one takes all polearm, one takes all sword, one takes all shooters.. is that a balanced combined army?

The thing I find about players always playing with honorable? 'balanced' army, is that after some times their games (and mine) get stagnant, boring, isnt fun to play with anymore.

It's so boring to play every game like the one before. Give me arty, give me lancers, give me lots of cavarchers, give me all shock rush, give me a shooter buffet.. these varieties keep me sane.

How can life be interesting when you always cross at traffic lights, drive within limits, see only one gal..

[ErikJansen]

I believe the point was more of a 'why we dont choose imbalanced armies all the time when playing', not 'Why we choose a vanilla army each and every time we play'. Because we don't http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif

As to your question..

I'd love to see you work that 4v4 setup out. Alrowan, Crandaeolon, Glorfindel and my humble self tried something similar on Flatinland03 a while back, and even tho the game lagged away from us things weren't progressing as planned http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif (Everyone wanted my spears to be everywhere http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/tongue.gif )

[Kocmoc]

everyone can have his own opinions,....but mostly its jsut ur own opinion...... so its very nice if u share it with us all


koc

[FearofNC]

tonight we almost had a 4 different army types working together... and it worked out very nice...

on front left was fucy with a balanced christian army
behind him was farmer with a russian cav arch (mostly) army
i was center with an almo ground army
and amp was spain with a cav army on right flank

at start fucy was point man ... farmer backed him up with cav arch .. i blocked the center and fomed a defense... amp moved his all cav army to the left.... fucy attacked.. farmer and amp went in on left side too... i defended center... we wraped all 4 oppents up from the left.. download replay here (http://www.fearfulways.com/downloads/4army.zip)

[Swoosh So]

What hand were u talking about with amp? the skill of his left hand or the skill of his right? I must admit i come close to beating his left hand http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

[FearofNC]

thats cause his right gets more excersise

http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/joker.gif

j/k

dont hate me amp http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

[LRossaLordJimi]

I'm completely agree with Alioven,honour is first thingSo if you play some honourable general,and the match will be close and you have fun speaking about evrything before start,this is the best i wish http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif
I miss our funny game Alio,with Ale and Sko http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/mecry.gif

I never play against AMP,i hope i will have also this honour,but my mates say me about many games when he play with all heavy cav and rush,or 6-7 cannons just shootin on you...where is creativity? http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/confused.gif http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/argue.gif
The times of Shogun are gone... http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif

Ave

[baz]

someone had to say it NC http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif

[FearofNC]

so your a doubter http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

amprules (http://www.fearfulways.com/downloads/amprules.zip)

next time you see him online why dont you ask for a balanced game.. when amp plays serious.. you dont wanna be on the other side

[Swoosh So]

Well i must say this debate goes on and on about skill and honor, Ive only played mtw for 2.5 days online mp, First player i played was nash, i won but was disgusted at how bad i was my 8 hcav winning the day, next i played 3-4 games v amp and was cav rushed in 1 http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif I was expecting it but still lost http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif then me and amp played a few more games 1v1 which i lost but saw amp use different more 'honorable' armies? Ill never forget the war belt training game i played where poali and i played magyar and kocmoc , i was byzantine and was mouselagging like crazy after flirting with magys cav and got drawn into the fight, couldent do much except double click my army behind magyars and won?? http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/mad.gif Geez if this was shogun i would have been herded back into my sheep pen Then on my last day i played as kurogane an undercover name, Id decided on a powerful army german and played and won about 13-14 games in a row Now was it down to skill? the answer is no it was down to army selection. plain and simple i was rusty in playing totalwar esp mplayer (i tried to press the pause button in one of my first games) http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif So my conclusion is can a rusty or unskilled player compete with the best at mtw? yes definately and id say its about 50% skill and 50% army maybe even more on the army side, Havent you started a game and thought my opponent wont win with that army? My loss against nc also where i learned a quick cav attack is the name of the game. Cav are powerful, too powerful as stated at the beginning and recently. ramble ramble

I was working on an anti cav boring army have a look its slow boring but does the job http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

4 chiv foot knights
4 gothic seargent
4 arbalister
2 feudal foot knight
1 mounted crossbow
1 cav gen

I think most of the troops were valor 1 with weapon upgrades, the gothic seargents and chiv foot kinghts take care of cav, the arbs *sigh the footknights destroy foot troops, the mounted crossbow is a pain in the bum for the opponent and a chaser of routed men, and the cav gen is for chasing also.

[Alrowan]

didt you read the discussion http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif

i did say that chosing an army is skill... no matter how much it infulences the rest of the game. I think i need to upload the battle with me and nash. Even as nash said in game "Ive faced a lot of armies like that and beaten them" But to this i replied "But i was not the general then"

nash still confident he would completely kck my but, cam in and attacked in a very skillful way, forcing me to shift my army, and use my key tactic. My deployment and game plan was one which basically relied on reserves, I had my billmen making up the main line, with cfk's on the flanks and at the rear, with my Militia sergeants a fast reserve line, ready to fill in any holes and destroy flankers... which is just what they did.

Nash managed to get his cav into my rear, yet he didnt account for my reserves, and soon he was routing, much to hi amazment. Now my army has flaws, but forcing my opponent to make the moves that i wanted him to make was my ultimate goal. the lack of cav in my army led nash to think he could flank my men fast enough, and they did, but once his cav was arround behind my lines, he faced fresh troops, guarding other units rears. With a quick counter i soon had his armies routing, even though army wise nash should have wipd the floor with me.

[tootee]

.. and the moral of the thread is

is Nash a better player or is Alrowan a better player? http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/confused.gif

[Paolai]

Probably I am stupid....maybe not....but I still think that you dont need skill choosing an army...you can simply copy it....I think the skill is another thing...you can copy an army, a "tactic" a deploy but you cant copy the skill, this is the difference http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

[Swoosh So]

The moral of the story is not about the 2 players but about the imbalances and overstrengths of the units and fair play.

[ErikJansen]

Hey NC I've downloaded those replays but the damn things won't show up on my replay list. I've done this lotsa times before, so theres no doing it wrong involved.. gah http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/confused.gif http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/mecry.gif http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/confused.gif

These weren't pre patch, no?

[Crandaeolon]

Al, those Militia Sergeants aren't really polearm units. (They don't get the +3/+1 bonus that polearm units get against cavalry.) They're melee infantry that have an AP bonus, Axemen would probably be the best classification.

"Dedicated" polearm units like Billmen, Swiss Halberdiers and Janissary Heavy Infantry lose in combat to CMAA and Mil. Sgts, if florins are equal.

[Magyar Khan]

nash is a pittbull wolf and will come back for his part of justice.

[alioven]

LRossaLordJimi: I miss our funny game Alio,with Ale and Sko

Me too, I remember a lot of fun with that battle but I don't remember if the armies where balanced or not as (ssshhhhh, this is a secret) some of us were somewhat drunk in that game. You know, there are balanced/imbalanced armies as well as balanced/imbalanced generals (by the effects of some nice degrees of alcohol). Beware when we start with all those "Muuuuuuuuuuuuuuu" & "Beeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee", that's not the signal of a balanced general http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

Tootee, sometimes the fun is not with the armies you face, but with the generals you face: a rush armie can be boring and vice-versa. Of course, variety helps avoidind the boring games, but sometimes all those "army/rush"-tricks get very boring when they are due to a continuous abuse.

Vandal: The game puts a file called "~TMP.MRP" in the savegames folder where I believe it stores info about savegames and buffers the last replay you watched. Sometimes, deleting that file makes the game re-create its internal replay games list. It is not harmful, however, so you can try it without fear. Also, check if you have a big (over 100 aprox.) number of replays in the folder, as the game has a limit on the maximum games it can show in the replays menu, and if you have more replays than it can manage, it won't show the last ones (those that start by 'z', for example).

[Alrowan]

well i tihnk nash is the better player, but thats beside the point. The idea of the thread was to get people looking at battlefeild ethics, and its very interesting to see how some generals see the game

my philosphy when i play is this:

Know your army, know your enemy. Keep them guessing and make sure they dont know you. Creativity is the key to success, utilise every oportunity, and exploit it. As long as your opponent doesnt know what you will do, you will always have success.

[FearofNC]

the 4v4 replay i uploaded was from last night... the amprules was fought on january 29, i think this was 1.1 but im not entirly sure. i always zip my files ... its a longshot... but did you unzip the folder b4 you moved the file?

[DthB4Dishonor]

I agree with Alrowan,

For the most part this game is about fun. I play very few 1v1 games but when I do its versus well known generals. I have fun tough battles that I enjoy alot win or lose. I have no problem with unorthodox armies as they are fun too its boring to have a balanced army all the time. I dont however take all cav armies as that is counter fun.

Cavus aka Wolf_Cub_Kanuni is a prime example. He uses a fun unorthodox turkish army that is actually fun to play against. He uses the turks in a rush like manner but its fun because he is not a rusher just using his factions strenght of very close quarter range war and rush any stray units.

Nash is also a great example since he uses a wierd mongolian magyar type style. I have played Nash so many times using Egyptians and muslims vs his Italians and I lost probably 90% of them but it was fun and exciting.

Upon retrospect I like playing top players and unorthodox players since they make you actually think. Versus newbies or semi-vets games actually get a bit boring and its almost muscle memory as to what to click when.

Then we have our I beat veteran guys...hahahaha I beat you guys and I thought you were tough. Yeah but I had poland and you had spain I think to myself. I then smile and think how I made this guys day because he beat me. I then think how much fun I had in almost beating those Lancers with my retainer, halb combo and contemplate how I could've done better. I can only imagine what Magyar and Amp go through when they lose. The guys must never let them hear the end of it. And they must get that engraved on there tombstones.

So honorable play for me is to keep the game exciting and challenging by either playing top players and using new techiques and attack strategies or by using weaker factions and army combinations vs other players who use the stronger factions and most powerfull army combinations.

RTKPaul

[Tera]

Final word?

The release of Mongol Invasion changed completely the way we played Shogun. The so called nu skill emerged, consisting of aggressive armies composed of strong missiles and lots of attacking units. The battles were hectic.

Will Viking Invasion change our MTW experience as MI did to STW? The answer is coming soon http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

As for the discussion, I would like to outline my beliefs on the issue:

In MTW, there is indeed less need for raw skill to win a battle. Hence the deciding factor between players of more or less the same skill is often the (1) army used and (2) a little more "luck" in unit engagement and timing. Personally I didn't play MTW intensively for like months, and two weeks ago I started playing a lot again. It took me a few battles to find a good army...and from then on I just won and won, sometimes facing generals who played MTW for months non-stop. The army is really, really...important.

[Crandaeolon]

Quote[/b] ]Upon retrospect I like playing top players and unorthodox players since they make you actually think. Versus newbies or semi-vets games actually get a bit boring and its almost muscle memory as to what to click when.

I fully agree with Paul. I still remember when me and Paul played against Magy and Koc some months ago... we lost, but those games were great experiences. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

[Tera]

My greatest experiences where the games I've played against the best of the best, practically speaking about Koc, AMP and Magy. The thing I remember most vividly from an AMP game was back in STW...he used ...literally... 2/10 of his army to hold (and they miracously did against half of my army http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/eek.gif ) and the other 8/10 in a gigantic flanking manouver. I wished we had replays back then lol

Obviously I lost miserably as I was just a little noob back then ...but these are the games that teach you how to play ultimately. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif My 'big step' came when I played a top player like Satake (soon to come back) for like big tens of times in few weeks...that's the trick.

I think I still need to play you Cranda, looking forward

Tera

[Skomatth]

Quote
LRossaLordJimi: I miss our funny game Alio,with Ale and Sko

Me too, I remember a lot of fun with that battle but I don't remember if the armies where balanced or not as (ssshhhhh, this is a secret) some of us were somewhat drunk in that game. You know, there are balanced/imbalanced armies as well as balanced/imbalanced generals (by the effects of some nice degrees of alcohol). Beware when we start with all those "Muuuuuuuuuuuuuuu" & "Beeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee", that's not the signal of a balanced general



Speaking of that game, I wish we had the replay lol. me and kuma were 2 sober guys out of six but that was a very tactical game. No point recounting here tho all I can say is chooo chooo.

[alioven]

Sko:
Quote[/b] ]Speaking of that game, I wish we had the replay lol. me and kuma were 2 sober guys out of six but that was a very tactical game. No point recounting here tho all I can say is chooo chooo.

So we were only 6 players in that battle? Hmmm, I always thought we were at least 12 http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/joker.gif

About that chooo-choooo (or chucu-chú), in its intended original name, please don't tell too much about it. That ultra-secret tactic is only reserved for games really drun... errr, funny http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif like that (or all those Gah games Krast usually play).

One day I'll send you a replay where a western battle is depicted, with even a formation like those made with wagons against Cherokee raids in western movies http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wave.gif

[LRossaLordJimi]

Hey,my army was balancedI just put 1/2 of Tuborg beer,1/4 of Adelscott Beer valor upgraded,1/8 of Limoncello 3armour and the rest of something i don't remember http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/joker.gif
Ave

[LordTed]

Some one called me a poodle wolf

[tgi01]

Quote[/b] ]The thing I find about players always playing with honorable? 'balanced' army, is that after some times their games (and mine) get stagnant, boring, isnt fun to play with anymore.


Just wanted to say that i couldnt agree more with Tootee...


TGI

[Wolf_Nashwan]

The thing I find about players always playing with honorable? 'balanced' army, is that after some times their games (and mine) get stagnant, boring, isnt fun to play with anymore.

This you say i can allso not agree with, cuz what i anyway mean normal balanced is ( not to take example more than 7-8 fighting cavs, and about 1 pav rest strong infs.
A normal balanced army can be different, depending to wich faction u take.

Example: russian they aint meant to held with power against example the europeans, they must play the mongolian style, where u play on speed and flanks + some cav archers irretating his flanks.

Russian and all the Muslim factions is hard to play when u havent the control and speed in touch, but this u learn by battle fields chaos experience.

All the Europeans styles depending much on power, well diceplined armys, with great swords and powerfull heavy cavelerys.

The Euorpean is recomended to play with if ur new.
(i dont say that veterans shouldent use the Euoropeans cuz then i would say against myself ) this is just a help for the newBs .

And allso veterans playing with the Euoropeans against Veterans playing With Euopeans = fair differents is Zero. And the Euoropeans can having big problems against veterans playing mongol style, this i have proffs of.

but it require more of the speed with thoose players who wanna play with the mongolian styles, but it can be very effektive once u learn.

I would say the opposit of that u said balanced armys after a while gets borring.

I want u to think after abit more what balanced armys is and what nonebalanced armys is.

There is many more styles in balanced armys that unbalanced, for a army to be balanced mustent it have like 4 p arbs, 3 swords 3 spears, 6 cavs, this i would allso call borrrinnngg http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif))) but as i told in the mail there is many different swords spears cavs even missails, and u dont need to always play with 4 arbs, i sometimes play with 2-3 arbs, allso sometimes when i know my opponent like cavs, i take away 1 sword and add 1 extra spears, and cavs if u wanna flank him or take his arbs ( choose fast cavs ) but if ur rest army is weak, take srong heavy cavs.



Well this are what i belive http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif
Wolf_Nashwan http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wave.gif

[ErikJansen]

Quote[/b] (Wolf_Nashwan @ May 03 2003,05:58)]The Euorpean is recomended to play with if ur new.
(i dont say that veterans shouldent use the Euoropeans cuz then i would say against myself ) this is just a help for the newBs .
While I agree fully with the rest of your post Nash, I kinda differ a bit in opinion regarding this. European armies might offer the newbie better chances at victory than a Turk army, but the Turk army will teach you a lot more about the use of specialist units and micromanagement. Not only that, but you must also learn to manuever a lot more than the usual european juggernaught. It teaches the value of speed and manueverability vs raw power, and you'll gain more tactical understanding quicker.

You'll prolly loose more in the beginning, but it'll pay off http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

Regards,

[Wolf_Nashwan]

Yes you are right.

I was thinking for new player if they wanna win in beggining.

But ur right, taking example turkish faction will pay off.

Wolf_Nashwan http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/cool.gif

[Alrowan]

i think even taking on turks only as a new player will make them a grand general, and they wont fall into the european style generals that so many have become

[Tempiic]

Very true alro... Hmmmm sadly im unable yet to play catholics the same way i play muslims and russians...So im stuck with this so-called european style which i suck at more than that so-called muslim style http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif

[Tera]

Quote[/b] (Alrowan @ May 03 2003,23:15)]i think even taking on turks only as a new player will make them a grand general, and they wont fall into the european style generals that so many have become
Mo used Turks for most of his time in MTW, only since few months he's been taking Catholic armies...and somehow he's kinda good http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/eek.gif

[Puzz3D]

Tera,

There is a lot more room for error in choosing an MTW army than there was in STW because there are more units and many factions. However, once players learn what to take, the army factor diminishes, and skill reemerges as the main factor in winning. The "luck" factor hasn't changed since STW, and I see no basis for believing that it has.

The feeling that all cav is somehow dishonorable stems from the inability of some players to defeat it. It's definitly beatable with a balanced army and Crand, Cheetah and I all demonstrated it in 1v1 against good players.

[Skomatth]

I'm not really sure what you guys mean by the mongolian/european styles. Care to expand?

[Tera]

The 'European' style is more or less the 'normal' style so to say.A row of missiles, a row of spears, a row of swords and cavs on the flanks with the general behind. Missile battle and afer it who loses attacks. It's quite easy to master decently if you have a good army and very effective, so everyone uses it.

The 'Mongolian' style goes heavy on cavalry, normally having a mix of horse archers, light cavalry and heavy cavalry with some spears/swords (and some missiles) to support. It needs good timing and creativity to work out...imho the basics of true skill. Horse Archers do more physcological damage than anything else. Encircling and massive flanking manouvers are used...it's difficult to master but satisfying and effective if done well. In STW/MI this style was more effective...Magyar kinda used to specialise in this style and frankly he is one of the few vets if not the only one who uses it consistently.

[Tempiic]

I guess Muslim style is something in between both the European and Mongolian style... Where Almohads is better suited for a style more closer to the European one and the Egyptians more suited towards the Mongolian style

[Alrowan]

i see the muslim style as being a more manouverable one, using thier great archery skills for a lot of skirmishing tactics. Muslims are the kings of the organised retreat, and the ability for most muslim armies (especially turks) to just melt away in front of an enemy makes thier style of play unique. Muslim armies are great for flanking with, a european style attack can be easily defeated with a feigned retreat then a quick turn and strike into thier flanks. Even the units like ghazi and absynian guards were made for fast quick hits, as opposed to prolonged combat. Even last night i managed to stave off two opponents with my heavy hitting nizares army.

[Tera]

Well, arguebly, the Muslim factions (Mamluk Horse Archers especially) (along with Russians...Boyars) are the best ones to use with the Mongolian style...still though, horse archers need to be improved.

I wish to play you Alrowan...never did, I think.

Tera.

[Alrowan]

well tera, when you fight me, dont expect anything and you should do fine, but expecting me to take any particular army with me is where i tend to mess with peoples heads. Im jack of all trades http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif

[Tera]

I don't expect anything, just an a decently enjoyable, close game... http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/smokin.gif

[DthB4Dishonor]

Hail,

The Mongolian style....hehe how many times have I faced it http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/confused.gif . It is fun to play against and I have taken my hand to play using mongolian style just to have fun and to get a better fuller understanding of it so I can defeat it when I play it in future battles.

Mongolian style usually has 2-4 p arbs or similar shoot out units. These are used to hold off enemy p arbs. With enemy p arbs occupied on the flanks cav archers go with mix of light and HC just behind them. The light and HC are deceptively close usually and attempts to get those CA off your elite units is often meet with your cav being trapped. There are about 100+ more very subtle things mongolian style does. Russia and Muslims do have best suited units for this with there better CA's.

Mongolian style is both fun to play with and against. However the real weakness of it is that it needs wide spaces and usually very treeless maps. Mongolian style IMHO losses effectiveness once you go past 2v2. At this point the room needed to effectively skirmish with your cav is nullified. So Christians are better in 3v3's and 4v4's since its generally more of a head up style.

Aside from these another very distinct style of play is used by Turks. Those who play as Turks alot realize they have a big disadvantage in range battles with there lack of p arbs. Good Turk generals like WolF_CubTurkish who use a "grab you by the belt style" have compensated for this and taken advantage of Turkish good hybrid range units. No time to explain this style right now but it is fun to play against.

Paul

[Tera]

You played STW/MI Alrowan?

If not, I understand your points. In STW the real skill was shown when Magy kicked your a$$ hard with 10 HorseArchers...or when AMP slaughered you with units that nobody in the world used to get because of their apparent useless function. And when I say 'you' I mean the creme de la creme of the skill hierarchy of the community at the time. This is very very difficult to see in MTW, because armies are much more important. That's why we are lamenting, the game still needs skill, but compared to the good ol' days.....

Tera.

[Magyar Khan]

i think i have an old replay somewhere where u were defending totomi tera http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif

promise me the next clan u will be in will be wolves.

the mongolian style is not with any arbs or whatever. mongolian is synonimeous (?) for horsearchery based cav army which requires a full control of the battlefield and yourself and fully understanding of teh enemies thoughts if u want to prevail.

the style u refer too is different, but i admit its fun to play againt. for me its a bit to risky/fast.

[Tera]

Annihilate Kenchi then we'll see http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif

Discussion continued on the skill thread..

[Magyar Khan]

imo i should leave people do what they do best themselves http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif