Why Turtle

[Askthepizzaguy]

Ok what if there is a random button and you end up being england and I Egypt... would you be able to Blitz me if you didnt know which specific faction I were to be.

As long as we were not neighboring factions, and you did not use a blitz strategy, I feel confident that you will join the ranks of those I have vanquished.

[Askthepizzaguy]

And PS, I have proven the greater the distance, the more royally screwed you are.

[ArtistofWarfare]

And PS, I have proven the greater the distance, the more royally screwed you are.

If there are 4 factions under player control and I'm France, while you're the Byzantines - there wouldn't be a situation where you would be bee-lining it to my faction right off of the get go. And if you did, you just threw your chances of winning out the window.

Let's be real...

If we're far apart, by the time we do meet - I'm not 6 provinces and undeveloped. You might be bigger , but you're putting the ENTIRETY of what determines who wins a war into who controls more land.

[Lancome]

If there are 4 factions under player control and I'm France, while you're the Byzantines - there wouldn't be a situation where you would be bee-lining it to my faction right off of the get go. And if you did, you just threw your chances of winning out the window.

Let's be real...

If we're far apart, by the time we do meet - I'm not 6 provinces and undeveloped. You might be bigger , but you're putting the ENTIRETY of what determines who wins a war into who controls more land.

Not to Mention Pizza's Large amount of troops and underdeveloped economy to support them in far campaigns.

[Askthepizzaguy]

To be clear:

I'm only referring to two-player, turtle versus blitzer games.

And in all cases, 100% of the time, turtle loses. Ask those who have played turtle against me. Visit my duel thread.

In all other cases, blitzer will lose because all the other nations rise as one to attack me. Two different arguments.

If you would like to test your theory, in one on one campaign battle, I invite you to duel me to the death and see the results.

[Askthepizzaguy]

LOLZ

Underdeveloped economy?



The single fastest way to grow an economy is sacking other territories while building your own. Before this discussion continues further, please read my duel thread and hear testimonials and witness the results of actual death combat, turtle versus blitzer.

And if thats not enough, I cordially invite you to battle me.

See my signature.

I must go now, but I will be back to hear your responses.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Final note... this is for fun, and I'm not trying to be unfriendly. I just love a good debate. No hard feelings no matter how it turns out. Just making sure you know that.

[ArtistofWarfare]

Well to be clear myself: I'm not talking about a duel to the death between 2 player factions and the rest AI farm factions.

I'm talking about a real multiplayer campaign ...with anything from 3 players, to every faction controlled by players.

In that situation, my previous thoughts apply.

p.s.- Again, in that situation the blitzer is excomm'd almost immediately and DOES have an underdeveloped economy. Your army sacks/pillages and profits yes...but your Kingdom does not have a developed economy. Your economy stalls as soon as you get into a war with a faction who starts beating you on the battlefield. At that point you're at the old "decrease troops or start losing money" choice. A faction in that shape, taking losses, is hardly some blitzing war machine that is going to paint Europe it's own color.

[gardibolt]

Well to be clear myself: I'm not talking about a duel to the death between 2 player factions and the rest AI farm factions.

I'm talking about a real multiplayer campaign ...with anything from 3 players, to every faction controlled by players.

In that situation, my previous thoughts apply.

p.s.- Again, in that situation the blitzer is excomm'd almost immediately and DOES have an underdeveloped economy. Your army sacks/pillages and profits yes...but your Kingdom does not have a developed economy. Your economy stalls as soon as you get into a war with a faction who starts beating you on the battlefield. At that point you're at the old "decrease troops or start losing money" choice. A faction in that shape, taking losses, is hardly some blitzing war machine that is going to paint Europe it's own color.

The problem is, there's no such game as this. In the game we have, there is no "faction who starts beating you [the blitzer] on the battlefield." It just doesn't happen. Maybe if the game were modded to make all the AI factions fully-upgraded Timurid armies at the beginning it would but otherwise, uh, no.

That said, I enjoying turtling myself when I play the game. It's just how I like to do it. But clearly it ain't the most efficient way to go about things.

[ArtistofWarfare]

As long as we were not neighboring factions, and you did not use a blitz strategy, I feel confident that you will join the ranks of those I have vanquished.

Most powerful, aggressive nations do feel confident...

The problem is when you move 6,000 medium quality (but your best) troops into my provinces for your invasion and you lose the first battle along with 3,200+ troops.

Now you're "at war" with me and there's no reason to believe you will win either than by sheer numbers. That's one factor out of hundreds.

We're not even discussing specifics so this is degenerating. The point is that in a REAL mp campaign where everything is as is but it's players behind the factions, you wouldn't have one player to worry about...as there would be several on the map and the AI factions would basically be what rebels are in a single player campaign today.

You really wouldn't be able to just blitz AI factions - and if you did, you know very well you'd be invaded by a player.