What's your style of play?

[Martok]

This poll is just for fun, really. I know the question has been asked many times before.

So how do you guys generally prefer to play your campaigns? Are you a reckless warmonger, conquering the map as fast as humanly possible? Are you more focused on having a compact kingdom, building up slowly and only pouncing on opportunities for conquest if they're blindingly obvious? Are you more of an "in-betweener", balancing between conquest and internal development? Or something else entirely?

Set aside the fact that some factions in MTW are more suited to "rushing", and that other factions are more suited to "turtling" -- everyone here is well aware of that. All things being equal, what's your general style of play?

[Noir]

The faction i play usually determines the style (location-neighbours-roster etc); furthermore i play my campaigns in the home mini-mod of MedMod IV, in which certain factions need certain strategies to better succeed, for example: turtling with Novgorod or Kiev is a no-no - however turtling with say, the HRE is a very viable strategy.

In vanilla and in most mods when i tried to turtle the game either became quite boring as nobody was able to effectivelly challenge me or a superfaction would come and wipe me out of the face of the (MTW) earth (nothing to do with battle skills but with campaign logistics, believe me): that was part of the reason why a went on to make the mini-mod (to stop superfactions forming while keeping all factions competitive at almost all times).

I think i am a turtler by nature (nice little cycles of expand, defend, consolidate and so, expand... etc), but some times i play very offensively (super aggressive optimised blitz), the most latest of those was when i was trying to test if the mini-mod could prevent too fast conquest rates by rushings, with various factions.

Unfortunately, in most cases it could

Other times i play more in a role-playing/historical way: say as the French try to do the Crusades before take on the English or the HRE or the Italian factions etc or some times i set little role playing goals (kind of undeclared GA) following characters (sometimes even females or priests).

(OT: One idea i had was to set up only a handful of important provinces as valid for the domination winning conditions and see how that would affect faction behaviour, say only 1 per faction homeland: Constantinople, Egypt, Rum etc so you can have like 10-15 say provinces that make the 100% of the map winning conditions. Never did it though, hmmm...)

Many Thanks

Noir

[doctrellor]

My style is vared..

I can sit and wait, building up for 50 years thru peace while I tech up and then lash out in a Barbarossa style mass slaughter, or typically, I'll play agressively, backstabbing all who stand in my way of my "mini-objectives" I set for myself

so alliances generally mean nothing except a trade partner and potential victim later on..lol

playing on more difficult settings and playing with huge units have forced me to play more strategically and take riskier risks, and depend on "some" allies not to stab me in the back..lol

[danfda]

I turtle...oh, I turtle. Sometimes you simply must take some provinces right away at the beginning, but after that I will do my level best to sit back and let the rest of the world get developed. Its so much more fun when you have your homelands and a couple other provinces, some nicely upgraded, chevroned armies, and a horde of enemies all around. I try to go for as long in between conquests as I can. Since I always play GA mode, I often find myself battling one or two other AI superpowers that are ahead of me in points at the very end. It makes the endgame more enjoyable when you have something quite difficult to achieve. Also, its rather amusing to see eight gigantic stacks of Swedes hopping across their personal pond, the Med, from Algiers to take Palestine in one move. Very fun.

[MJF]

i am definately a turtle sort of guy. must be a deficiency in my personality or something but i like to have a nice compact empire with smooth edges (seriously), and give them almost all upgrades.

i always feel like there is too much to look after when empire gets too big. and underdeveloped provinces irritate me because you cant do anything with them except produce rubbish troops.

anyway, just my two bob's worth.

[General Dazza]

I'm a little bit of both, but I tend more to the warmonger.

I like to identify my key provinces then build them up. I love the sound of the building complete notification.

But I also to build strong armies and manoeuvre them against the enemy. It's the chess-like strategy that I like there. So I tend to not have a long time between wars.

For the first time I'm playing GA, and I turtled for about 50 years, and I was disappointed to see the carnage, because rather than having to take on the world, I've been able to sit back and pick of rebels as factions collapse. I think I preferred playing HRE when you're at war from go to whoa!

[MJF]

by the way, is there any reason why i cant vote?

[Martok]

by the way, is there any reason why i cant vote?

It's because you're still a junior member. If you PM TosaInu, he can probably fix that for you.

[Omanes Alexandrapolites]

I'm a turtle sort of person in the Early game - possibly because I'm too hopeless at military strategy to get too far too early on! I always exploit the easy opportunities when I see them, for example the bribing of a settlement which has just turned rebel in a civil war or an attack on a province which belongs to a nearly destroyed faction. Most of the time though, I just build up a reasonable military force and wait for these opportunities to come.

Later on in the game though, once these opportunities have been exploited, I begin my larger more organised attacks, although the conditions have to be perfect. I only ever go on a Blitzkrieg when I feel that I'm large enough, wealthy enough and strong enough to do it - often that means never - I investigate the conditions very carefully to avoid being incorrect.

[Kaidonni]

I turtle too, but I voted that my strategy is 'totally nutty/different' because I end up launching plenty of naval invasions as Sicily, and have even developed colonies through bribery. That and, in MTW:VI unmodded, back in 2006, I dispatched a very troublesome Egyptian re-emergence with a heck of a lot of assassins. Back then, I also launched a massive multiple-province invasion against England, taking all of Britain in one turn! Guess I could have waited until 1266...

[Ironside]

Usually an early blitz, followed by turtling with slow expansion (slow conquering of my attackers). So balanced I guess.

Starting in early and getting those gothic knights, lancers etc, etc takes a while, but when I get them in a GA campaign I'm usually rich and strong enough to be the very dominant power.

[caravel]

My style of play consists of GAH!-zi Infantry, hence the vote.

Ok coat on, etc...

[King Kurt]

I'm a blitz, turtle, blitz etc etc type of guy until my empire reaches critical mass when it becomes all out blitz. I always play GA and often play to house rules such as only attacking the same religion as me if I am attacked first. Also I do not believe in amassing huge wealth - I rarely have more than 20,000 florins in the bank and often have a crisis time in my campaign where the money runs out. It is an approach that seems to work and certainly gives me an enjoyable game with a good level of excitment!!

[Innocentius]

In my case it's pretty much the same as with King Kurt, I blitz an enemy, turtle for a few decades and strengthen my position and then I move on. I'm hopeless at achieving any larger conquests during Early since I'm no good with the Early units.
Different from Kurt however I do preffer to stay as rich as ever possible. Maybe it's pure greed, maybe it could be called "saving for the future"*, but I do it anyway (not that I ever get very wich, but...)
I very much preffer the "quantity over quality" thinking and mostly spam halberds and arbalesters (or billmen and longbowmen) topped with a couple of units of either CK or CFK, giving me cheap and easy to replace armies. Such armies work excellently for both offensive warfare as well as on the defencive and are the reason for most of my successes.


*Which would be stupid since the game always gets easier the further you get. The bigger you are the more soldiers you can train and afford to keep.

[Martok]

My style of play consists of GAH!-zi Infantry, hence the vote.

Ok coat on, etc...

*groans* You've been hanging out with Gregoshi again, haven't you?


As for myself.... I should mention that while I'm a turtler at heart, in practice I seem to end up being more aggressive than I'm really comfortable with. I think this is because I oftentimes feel compelled to blitz my immediate neighbors if I'm feeling overly "crowded". This is particularly true for when I'm playing as my two favorite factions, the Egyptians and Spanish. As the former, I team up with the Byz to destroy the Turks more often than not; as the latter, I usually take out Aragon early on as the former, and then shove the Almos off the Iberian peninsula soon after that.

Now it's true that once I finish my early blitzkrieging, I *then* settle down and (generally) behave myself. Until I've reach the point where I've secured control over the local vicinity, however, I admit I do have a tendency to do a little warmongering early on. It's not really my natural inclination to do so, but playing MTW for as long as I have seems to suppressed some of my instincts.

[Noir]

I would comment that local blitz goes well with your instincts: it allows for for ever effective turtling (can't turtle effectively with local enemies around) - i also do that as a rule, particularly when the game version favors it (for example XL).

Many Thanks

Noir

[caravel]

*groans* You've been hanging out with Gregoshi again, haven't you?

Well he's the absolute master and I was assuming the role of a mere cheap imitation.

But to quote Omanes for taking the thread off topic. Back to the style of play: Cautious approach, stop, mod the game, start again, stop, change something, stop, start again, change something else, stop....

It's been like that for a while unfortunately. I have to play Shogun these days as I can't mod that, and even if I could I don't think Mrs Caravel would put up with another mod - I'd probably get thrown out. The reading books and maps in bed bit is proving unpopular. Apparently I was talking in my sleep about provinces a few nights ago as well...

[Noir]

Originally posted by Caravel
even if I could I don't think Mrs Caravel would put up with another mod - I'd probably get thrown out. The reading books and maps in bed bit is proving unpopular. Apparently I was talking in my sleep about provinces a few nights ago as well...

Tell Mrs Caravel, that many other Mrs... feel her pain - i guess they should put it in the marriage oath questions for hardcore TWes:

"...till campaigning, modding, chatting, frequenting the forums, staying up in the MP lobbies for "one more game" tear you appart?"

Ah, the beauty of these games!

Many Thanks

Noir

[Martok]

Oh dear. Perhaps you need to lay off for a bit, then?

[doctrellor]

Tell Mrs Caravel, that many other Mrs... feel her pain - i guess they should put it in the marriage oath questions for hardcore TWes:

"...till campaigning, modding, chatting, frequenting the forums, staying up in the MP lobbies for "one more game" tear you appart?"

Ah, the beauty of these games!

Many Thanks

Noir

Ah yeah, my wife kicks me in the middle of the night as she bitches about me talking about TW or HOI2 (a fav WW II strat game I play)

[Noir]

Laugh young master Martok,

while (as i presume) you are single and free... enjoy playing (without having to dodge flying objects and make excuses by the dozen) as much as you can!

Many Thanks

Noir

[jadast]

I have to believe I'm a complete warmonger. The only time I am not attacking is when I am out of troops. I see more provinces as more recruiting stations which leads to quicker replenishment of troops which leads to quicker attacks.

[Ironside]

Now it's true that once I finish my early blitzkrieging, I *then* settle down and (generally) behave myself. Until I've reach the point where I've secured control over the local vicinity, however, I admit I do have a tendency to do a little warmongering early on. It's not really my natural inclination to do so, but playing MTW for as long as I have seems to suppressed some of my instincts.

You learn't blitzing from MTW?
I take it that you bought STW later then, considering that my opening moves from STW often involved invading up to 3 provinces on turn 1. An MTW blitz is awfully slow in comparation.

[Ciaran]

One of the nice things of MTW is the risk-style campaign map. There are certain provinces that minimize your frontline length, and that is always my goal. So usually it´s a short flurry of invasions with long streches of build-up in between. After the first few games I´ve been cured from the "build everything everywhere"- disease I´ve suffered from earlier strategy games (though I must admit that RTW, my first TW game, doesn´t punish that nearly as severly as MTW does).

[macsen rufus]

Well, I voted for the wishy-washy liberal thing, as I think my approach is pretty balanced (well as balanced as wasting 4 hours a day playing games can be )

Obviously, if there are any nearby rebel provinces begging for the benificence of my government, then they will be obliged straight away, but generally I prefer to get my economy in a sound state, and build up enough of an army to defend my core provinces before looking for conquests. It always depends on faction of course. In some cases rapid early expansion is necessary just to keep the coffers full...

I generally tend to increase my tech level in a suitable core province, and recycle troops through training for weapon / armour / morale / valour upgades rather than churn out low-quality stacks from every available province. It's not that I never do that though, where it's necessary to get every warm body out to meet the threat of the day.

My expansion tends to be opportunist, and I always* honour alliances. I try to go after one faction at a time. Once war has begun, I tend to prosecute it to the point of extinction. Strategic issues like reduced borders, valuable provinces etc tend to sway the direction of expansion when I am in an expansionistic phase. Each time I establish a new compact boundary, I tend to recoup and retrain whilst loyalty is built up. Generally before I'm ready to launch the next offensive, though, the AI will attack from the opposite direction

I do quite enjoy "grooming" my generals, as well, and my heir-apparent usually heads up the main offensive army, or defends the most vulnerable province, as he can often gain virtues I want for my next king

I also have no qualms about "pruning" the family tree to keep the bloodline strong, so very often princes will find themselves in a far-flung foreign land facing an overwhelming force. They also tend to get dismounted (where possible) so they have less chance of running away to safety as well

On the subterfuge side, I rarely bother with assassins, unless I want to station one on permanent duty near the Pope, as part of my patented "Pope on a rope" strategy (TM). Spies, on the other hand, I do tend to use quite a lot. I've recently taken to never building border forts, and letting my spies do all the "counterspying" thereby building up good valour. I usually identify one or two provinces that AI factions like to send spies or assissins into, and that quickly trains up my new spies to v5 or v6. Once they're at this level, you no longer need artillery for sieges, and you can easily tip a neighbour's province into rebellion, and they are a great help in stabilising loyalty in newly taken provinces.

I'm not really satisified with my economy until I'm at the point where every province is building and training constantly and the coffers are still increasing. Once there, the game is generally won




* remember the value of 'always' may go down as well as up

[Orb]

BLITZKRIEG!!!!111!

MTW, Spanish Doom Rush.
RTW, Gaul 3/4-direction simultaneous Doom Rush.
EB, Pontic Doom Rush
BL, Yomi Doom Rush (I admit, it does sort of cease to be amusing when your solution to an enormous and powerful enemy empire is simply 4 units of Wang Liang).

Anything that involves rushing, I can do. And the AI probably can't deal with it anyway.

[Ironside]

I also have no qualms about "pruning" the family tree to keep the bloodline strong, so very often princes will find themselves in a far-flung foreign land facing an overwhelming force. They also tend to get dismounted (where possible) so they have less chance of running away to safety as well

Lol I completly missed that you can do that with your "glorious fools" heirs (dismount them that is).

After the first few games I´ve been cured from the "build everything everywhere"- disease I´ve suffered from earlier strategy games (though I must admit that RTW, my first TW game, doesn´t punish that nearly as severly as MTW does).

MTW was the first game that tought me that, as when you earn up to 40k a turn midgame it's impossible to spend it all. That "save your money to the important stuff" habit comes from STW when you got money once every 4 turns (once a year, a year = 4 seasons). The first turns you calculated your spending one the koku .

[Noir]

Originally posted by Ironside
That "save your money to the important stuff" habit comes from STW when you got money once every 4 turns (once a year, a year = 4 seasons).

A very much missed feature, together with atmospherics (fog etc) and seasonal weather as a parameter in the battles. In STW you could actually build everything everywhere past the midgame, but till then specialisation was still useful.

MTW has a larger map and sea trade that can make you very rich slightly quicker unfortunately (STW was just as bad due to the small nuimber of factions and the linear unfluctuating trade profits). The profit margins are way too high and upkeep way to low in MTW to make decisions in the campaign trully strategic for a large part of the game particularly in the vanilla version, unfortunately.

Many Thanks

Noir

[caravel]

A very much missed feature, together with atmospherics (fog etc) and seasonal weather as a parameter in the battles. In STW you could actually build everything everywhere past the midgame, but till then specialisation was still useful.

Sorry Off Topic:

What on earth happened to the fog in STW. Since MTW is basically a rehash of STW anyway, why was the in battle fog taken out? That is one bit of "eye candy" that I really did miss. I value that over 3D units and other bells and whistles any day.

[Martok]

You learn't blitzing from MTW?
I take it that you bought STW later then, considering that my opening moves from STW often involved invading up to 3 provinces on turn 1. An MTW blitz is awfully slow in comparation.

Strangely enough, I didn't blitz that often in Shogun (and yes, I bought it well before I ever picked up MTW). Maybe it was just because of the clans I played, but I simply didn't rush my neighbors that much -- at least not early on. It wasn't until MTW that I really started doing that. Yeah I know that's probably a bit unusual, but that's me for ya....