Open challenge: Duel to the Death

Current challengers:

UPDATE!

Ignoramus, France, versus ATPG, Turks (Vanilla 1.3) Waiting on Challenger

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Status: France has crusaders nearing our capital, but we have far more jihadis nearing what remains of France. Turks have a large territorial lead and a much larger standing army. Edge: Turks

Monk, Jerusalem, versus ATPG, Ghorids (BC 1.5) Waiting on Challenger

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Status: Jerusalem has conquered two factions, while the Ghorids claim 6. Ghorids have decisive leads in all categories. Edge: Ghorids

Elite Ferret, Khwarezm, versus ATPG, ERE(BC 1.5) Waiting on Challenger

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Khwarezm appears ready to defend, having accomplished their objectives. Meanwhile, Rome has taken out the Turks, crippled Armenia, Jerusalem, and hurt the Ayyubids, while boxing in the Georgians. The Romans have also launched a deep penetrating offensive against the Caliphate, who is nearly destroyed, with Baghdad captured and huge amounts of mercenaries roam Abassid lands. Due to size of lands and forces, Edge: Rome

Byblos, Spain, versus ATPG, Scotland (Vanilla 1.3) Waiting on Challenger

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Scotland has destroyed England and a Spanish invasion force left by ship to go deal with internal matters. We have declared war on France and joined a crusade that was in-progress. Spain lags behind in all categories. Edge: Scotland

Grog, Turks, versus ATPG, England(LTC 3.1) Game In Progress

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

England is off to a promising start...

Finished Games:
ATPG (Ayyubids) versus Monk (Georgia) Win: Ayyubids
ATPG (Moors) versus Ichigo (England) Win: Moors
ATPG (Scotland) versus TheFlax (England) Win: Scotland
ATPG (Oman) versus TriforceV (Jerusalem) Win: Oman
ATPG (Russia) versus AndyNgFL (Scotland) Win: Russia
ATPG (Moors) versus AntiWarmanCake88 (HRE) Win: Moors
ATPG (Egypt) versus Ibn-Khaldun (Sicily) Win: Egypt
________________________________________


A Junior Member with only one post asked The Ultimate Question; If two players could campaign against each other, who would win, The Turtle or the Hare?

https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?t=89140
The famous original thread is in the link.

As the self-parodying and self-proclaimed "Blitzmaster", I've waged the war of words and argued endlessly that the Blitzer would win all one on one confrontations, barring some really bizarre circumstances like the Turtle starting with half the map already under his control.

Now that I've experienced multiplayer mode in games with up to 16 players, and gotten a feel for how humans behave and what the new strategies required are, I have decided to set aside some time to publicly challenge anyone who wants to play any kind of "slow expansionist/true turtle" game against one of the more infamous blitz players to a one-on-one duel to the death.

Name your faction and version.

1. Medieval 2 Total War; Vanilla, version 1.0, 1.2, or 1.3
2. Medieval 2 Total War; Lands to Conquer
3. Medieval 2 Total War; Broken Crescent 1.5 with quickfixes
4. Medieval 2 Total War; Stainless Steel (with 4.1 patch)

I'll agree to rules that ban exploits, and I will reveal all my movements and publish my save files. I'll agree to host and I'll disable the console. This could be a lot of fun.

I will even agree to take on multiple challengers. Just give me at least 48 hours or more to play my turn, and I'll do the same. It will be like a mini-hotseat. I will also consider duels with other blitzers...

Raise thy sword. You are hereby challenged.

:knight:

This could be interesting :2thumbsup:

But question - If someone wants to play the 'blitzer' side .. would you take the challenge to play the 'turtle' side??

If you can win as a 'turtle' then you really deserve the title "Master of M2TW" :yes:

So, a PBEM? Or is there some other way to do this that I'm not aware of...?

Sounds like fun. Question, though: How will you define "blitz" and "turtle"? Seems like the "rules" for the different playstyles would have to be made explicit.

Is the turtler allowed to take nearby rebel provinces? Can he initiate wars, or only respond once attacked? Is there any limit on the turtler's rate of expansion -- one new province acquired every 20 turns, for example?

How much is the blitzer allowed to tech up? Must he play the entire game only with units initially available?

Essentially, at what point in the game do you stop being a "blitzer" and start being a "turtler", and vice versa?

Ultimately, I see turtling as a way to allow the AI to tech up -- turtling is a way to purposely make the game *harder*, whereas blitzing is a way to make the game faster and easier. My money's on the blitzer, even though I find that style less enjoyable when playing against the poor AI.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ibn-Khaldun

This could be interesting :2thumbsup:

But question - If someone wants to play the 'blitzer' side .. would you take the challenge to play the 'turtle' side??

If you can win as a 'turtle' then you really deserve the title "Master of M2TW" :yes:

---

I would not choose to play as a turtle, no. But I would accept challenges from other blitzers.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CountMRVHS

So, a PBEM? Or is there some other way to do this that I'm not aware of...?

Sounds like fun. Question, though: How will you define "blitz" and "turtle"? Seems like the "rules" for the different playstyles would have to be made explicit.

Is the turtler allowed to take nearby rebel provinces? Can he initiate wars, or only respond once attacked? Is there any limit on the turtler's rate of expansion -- one new province acquired every 20 turns, for example?

How much is the blitzer allowed to tech up? Must he play the entire game only with units initially available?

Essentially, at what point in the game do you stop being a "blitzer" and start being a "turtler", and vice versa?

Ultimately, I see turtling as a way to allow the AI to tech up -- turtling is a way to purposely make the game *harder*, whereas blitzing is a way to make the game faster and easier. My money's on the blitzer, even though I find that style less enjoyable when playing against the poor AI.

---

There will be no real rules restricting play styles, just ones restricting exploits.

I would ask that those who accept the challenge declare that they are turtle, blitz, or moderate, as I have declared a blitz strategy. There are no other house rules.

Basically the idea for the Turtle is to focus on defense, while the Blitzer focuses on offense. The turtle can expand of course, but if they overextend themselves they will be sacrificing defense and the "turtle" strategy. They typically focus on teching up, expanding their trade, creating defensive choke points and preparing to deflect what an invader can throw at them.

If this is not your style, then just declare what you'd prefer. But a while back I debated a great number of people who insisted that turtles had some kind of advantage. Now is the chance to prove which is more powerful. I'm putting my money where my mouth is.

Blitzers tend to go for the high risk, aggressive, quantity of troops strategy. Check out my signature for links to two of my noted campaigns as such. Turtles tend to go for safe, defensive, quality of troops strategy where there are defensive garrisons and watchtowers and navies and merchants and assassins, etc.

Some people tend to balance.

This will be basically a two-person hotseat game, play by email. We can hide our movements or write up the events of our turn as they happen. It could be a spectator sport or a simple private duel, like a chess game.

En garde...

What happens when the irresistible force meets the immovable object?

I like this, be sure to keep us all up to date when/if this happens. I'd be very interested to see how a turtle fairs against a blitzer invasion. :2thumbsup:

It all depends on Geography, eg. a turtle Scotland couldn't survive vs a blitzing England but a turtle Scotland may well survive against a blitzing Byzantine, no helpful crusades for them either...

All we need is a volunteer. Where are all those emphatic turtle supporters?

:grin:



Also, I have reconsidered. I will also gladly take up the role of a moderate Turtle versus a Blitzer, assuming I can't find anyone brave enough to Turtle. I'm feeling my oats today... who wants a war?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Askthepizzaguy

All we need is a volunteer. Where are all those emphatic turtle supporters?

:grin:

---

If after a couple days you don't get any volunteers I'll square off with you AtPG. I'm not hardcore turtler, and i'm not the best around, but I can put up a decent fight. :laugh4:

We can go BC 1.5 with hotfixes, the AI spawn won't be too bad since there's just two of us to police. What will the rules for this deathmatch campaign be? No console is quite self explanatory, will we have battles fought by the attacking player as in the BC2 hotseat? I'd be fine with that, though it may favor the blitzer I think I can put a dent in your forces given the chance. (I don't trust my armies to the number crunch of an auto-resolve...)

To be fair, there will be no forced auto-resolve.

I stated at the beginning of the BC2, and a number of hotseats, that auto-resolve kills the tactical part of the game. A smaller defending force needs to be able to actually USE walls and troops to defend, not have them sitting ducks as numbers to calculate unfairly.

I accept your challenge Monk, as well as any others.

ATPG versus Monk

Broken Crescent Hotseat Duel, VH/VH (or your preference), AI spawn intact except for human players, fight battles enabled.

Name your faction.

Georgia.

The hotseat has really given me a chance to look at their strategic position. Grab three nearby provinces and you can really start to turtle up effectively, along with a good map position in the middle of mountains it's got a good chance of bottling up invaders. At least.. in theory.

I challenge you! My choice depends on yours.

My money is on the AtPG. If battles aren't auto resolved then the person who attacks will hold the advantage of brain over AI. The Hare will be the attacker in almost all cases. AtPG is too good to lose more than 1 or 2 battles while he is in control of the tactical element.

Not necessarily true, Woad and Fangs. You need to be careful about leaving your troops exposed, yes, but inside settlements or forts means that you can sally if surrounded. Properly prepared, a defender actually has the advantage over the attacker.

If it were auto-resolved the defender would really be hurting. Walls aren't taken into account, horse archers are worthless, etc.

-

Elite Ferret:

Do you prefer Vanilla, LTC, or BC?

-

Excellent choice, Monk. I will pick a suitable faction to take on Georgia... I'm thinking...

do you prefer a short or long game?

I'm looking at.... the Ayyubids. I'm actually tempted to pick Oman though. :laugh2: THAT would be a challenge. But I'm going Ayyubids here I think.

Since turtling is rendered completely useless if it's faced by a human brain, the blitzer will win. Creating choke points is impossible for a number of reasons (Concentrated, repeated attacks on a bridge, or why not just land your troops with navies and the turtles shell crumbles), and teching up takes too long. I think most people that argue for a turtle-like playing style do so not because it's more powerful or has advantages, but because they like to extend their campaigns and don't want to conquer the world with spear militia. It's like a zerg rush, effective but, in my opinion, boring. Just like civ, a game against a human requires a completely different approach.
You have learnt how to play the game the way you want to, and you've gotten very good at it. I'm very good at turtling, not because I conquer the world, but because I enjoy playing a long campaign with small but elite armies.

I don't mean to spoil your fun, and I hope I don't come across as such =) I guess I'm getting all defensive for some reason because I'm sure I've argued for turtling before :p My point is I haven't said it's more effective, perhaps someone else has.
Enjoy your challenge! I hope it does get interesting, and may the best quadraped win.

:skull:

I'd be interested, but I only have vanilla M2TW patched to 1.3, but I can download a mod if you'd like. I'm fine with anything really.

I've learned from playing Hotseat campaigns that if you don't blitz then you'll end up surrounded by much larger factions with no room to expand, except for maybe overseas.

I'd also accept your challenge Ichigo. Would you care to pick a faction for vanilla 1.3?

I can even begin playing tonight. I have 3 days off.

I'll take England if that's alright.

Somehow I thought so... It's the navy defense for the win.

Ok... I'm going to go with something that can face off against england.


Quick question though... Should we ignore crusades/jihads? Methinks I could gain an army too quickly that way.

It doesn't matter to me.

This looks like it will be a fun game to play in and to watch, but there are a couple of things which I think negate its value as a true test of turtle vs hare.

- the AI presents too random a variable; in a repeated test the AI factions would likely behave and react in different ways to each player. If the turtler gets blitzed by the AI due to silly AI diplomacy he will stand at a disadvantage to the blitzer who will simply crush all the nations around him.

- this 1v1 test ignores the effect of other human players in a collaborative multiplayer environment. In a proper hotseat with other human players, I contend the turtle has a massive advantage if he is skilled at human diplomacy. A good player who is blitzing presents a threat to the other human players and will find himself ganged up on, while a turtle will find it easier to secure alliances against the blitzer.

I don't think anybody seriously doubts that this 1v1 challenge will ultimately be won by the blitzer one way or the other due to his quick accumulation of resources vs the turtle, and the AI's incompetence in failing to see him as a threat and ganging up to neutralise him.

It should be fun though, and I wish Ichigo the best of luck in proving me wrong.

having intimate experience of Oman, I would truly be beyond impressed if you managed to blitz effectively with them. I mean I was reasonably happy with the expansion I managed in 14 turns, but I have reached the point where either I wait and tech up or my garrisons start costing more than I make.

In SP deguerra (or if there is no player controlling the Abbasids), run up to Baghdad and sack it. Then enjoy your 20k florins to build up your towns and run around sacking more towns... like Rayy.

Note that if you ally the Seljuks and Ghaznavids in SP, you tend to manage to get a large swath of Persia which makes a lot of money compared to Arabia.

Oman is not that hard on the blitz actually.

I've yet to try the Seljuks, but apart from them, the Kypchacks really look like the ultimate blitzing faction. When those 4 uber stacks appear, nothing can stand in their way... especially not Georgia :smash: :smash: :smash: :smash: :smash:

Oh I would've taken you up on that challenge ATPG, but I'm a bit too busy at the moment (starting companies really does put a strain on the amount to time you can spend aimlessly on the web). Anyways, you seem to have plenty of opponents. Maybe some other time though. I'd like to see how long I last.

I'll challenge you ATPG with vanilla 1.3. Would you like to try a France v England or a France v HRE?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by phonicsmonkey

This looks like it will be a fun game to play in and to watch, but there are a couple of things which I think negate its value as a true test of turtle vs hare.

- the AI presents too random a variable; in a repeated test the AI factions would likely behave and react in different ways to each player. If the turtler gets blitzed by the AI due to silly AI diplomacy he will stand at a disadvantage to the blitzer who will simply crush all the nations around him.

---

I actually tend to disagree. The AI has never once mounted a successful offensive against a human player with any reasonable skill level. When was the last time anyone here actually lost all their settlements to the computer? When was the last time anyone here lost more than one or two settlements in any war against the computer ever? I also consider the AI quite predictible. They never defeat one another very quickly, and they betray human players on VH/VH so you just treat them all like advanced rebels, not other factions which can be dealt with honourably.

Quote:

---

- this 1v1 test ignores the effect of other human players in a collaborative multiplayer environment. In a proper hotseat with other human players, I contend the turtle has a massive advantage if he is skilled at human diplomacy. A good player who is blitzing presents a threat to the other human players and will find himself ganged up on, while a turtle will find it easier to secure alliances against the blitzer.

---

I totally agree.

I think everyone has noticed by now that ATPG has no massive empire and tons of allies in serious multiplayer. I've always contended that Blitzers get thier butts handed to them in real-life diplomacy because everyone sees thier aggression as a threat.

The original debate however was between a one on one turtle versus hare duel, and this test does effectively duplicate those conditions.

Quote:

---

I don't think anybody seriously doubts that this 1v1 challenge will ultimately be won by the blitzer one way or the other due to his quick accumulation of resources vs the turtle, and the AI's incompetence in failing to see him as a threat and ganging up to neutralise him.

It should be fun though, and I wish Ichigo the best of luck in proving me wrong.

---

There are a number of people who would disagree with you. I believe Sapi and privateerkev and a whole horde of turtle lovers truly believe the turtle can fight on slightly even terms if played effectively.

And by the way everyone, one war between Ichigo and ATPG won't "prove" anything... It would take many, many wars to build a solid case that one side is more effective than the other. And even then, there's no guarantee that a more moderate turtle couldn't come up with tactical scenarios that favor them.

Ichigo was wise to pick England, for they can easily knock off Scotland and defend the whole of their island with minimal troops and a navy. However, I am plenty prepared for the England scenario... I was challenged before with the England hypothetical.

I'm also selecting VH/VH so that the AI is more aggressive and won't give me an easy time while I'm off trying to destroy Ichigo. In the friendliest terms possible, that is.

:bow: to Ichigo: thanks for the challenge sir! I look forward to being humbled by you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ignoramus

I'll challenge you ATPG with vanilla 1.3. Would you like to try a France v England or a France v HRE?

---

I suspect you mean to take France? Well with England or the HRE I would not be much of a blitzer, having a human player on my border. It would be either a short bloodbath or a long, prolonged attrition battle.

I'm not intimidated, I would just not be a blitzer in that one.

However, if you mean to pick France, I could take the Moors and we could have a quick game.


Challengers so far:

Monk- BC, Georgia versus Ayyubids, ATPG (begun)
Ichigo- Va, England versus Moors, ATPG (begun)
Ignoramus- Va, France versus Turks, ATPG (begun)
Elite Ferret- BC, Khwarezm versus Rome, ATPG (begun)

True, I didn't think of that.

Well, as I'd prefer a long game a challenge, how about you choose the best faction for blitzing, and then I'll pick a faction that's not neighbouring it.

The BEST faction for blitzing? Hmmmm that would be the HRE technically, but I'd want to have at least one edge of the map to assist me. I would pick the Turks.

Allahu ackbar, infidel. You can go with France if you'd like. I won't even rule out crusades/jihads. You don't have to turtle if you don't want to, but France v Turks with france as a turtle would be an effective demonstration of Blitz v Turtle.

Right, you're on!

Very well. France is it? I'll begin the France v Turks duel and send you the save file.

I prefer to use email attachments rather than the org uploader if thats alright with you. The org has to save all these files and its unnecessary for them to sit in someone else's computer. Besides it's quicker and easier for me to deal with yahoo email than have my pm box clogged up, which it already is.

pm me your email address, mine is askthepizzaguy@yahoo.com

edit: save ready for you.