.com.unity Forums - Are heavy bless strategies the best ones ?

.com.unity Forums (http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/index.php)

- Dominions 3: The Awakening (http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/forumdisplay.php?f=138)

- - Are heavy bless strategies the best ones ? (http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/showthread.php?t=33683)

Re: Are heavy bless strategies the best ones ?

I agree with Baalz 100%. This is what I am seeing in the games I play in, but then again I am not playing the aggressive facehugger in more than one.

I one of the games I even have something as rare as really trustworthy ally whom is helping me with everything I want to do. I only "gained" him because I invested time and a lot of resources in showing that I can be trusted when the enemy is knocking at his gates.
But of course you must be vary of signs that indicate that he is turning against you - as it will happen eventually anyway.
It is a fine line between trust and mistrust; and walking this line is actually something that I believe you must master to be able to do well in many MP games.

Re: Are heavy bless strategies the best ones ?

I havent really seen this at all in MultiPlay.
Ive seen it in Solo play of course.

In face the games I remember tended to be quite the opposite. Early expansion by someone until they owned half the map, then later they ended up quite small by the end of the game. Losing or going AI even. I believe the winner was often the 3rd or 4th expansionist. But I suspect that like many people, who you are playing with can make a big difference. Playing with the same people or same type of player might give an impression that all games end up the same. I generally try not to make that assumption.

Re: Are heavy bless strategies the best ones ?

Quote:

FrankTrollman said:

Quote:

KissBlade said:
In most veteran filled games, the games have been consistently won by the best expander. There is the occasionally fluke here and there usually caused by the two most aggressive expanders butting heads.

See, when I see veteran players in a game, I generally see them being able to mitigate this particular trend by ganging up on people who are expanding well.

Being the biggest faction is a good way to find out if you are bigger than the second and third biggest faction.

I'm sort of surprised that you could play with people who have a lot of experience who are willing to allow someone on an obvious upward power curve to go unchecked until they achieve mastery of the world. If anything, experienced players are considered wise to keep things in reserve and purposefully slow expansion in order to be able to grow in spurts that are hard to predict or counter. Gettig too far ahead is a good way to incite a worldwide alliance.

-Frank

Simply put, the fact that you are surprised suggests you don't play with enough vets. First off, ALL veterans jump start expand early. Thus the lines between "first, second and third" are very blurred. Second, you are not always in position to effect the strongest player. For example, in Dawnstrike, Jurri the winner of the game started out literally on the opposite side of my rather large empire. You can imagine the trouble it is to gang up on him. Similarly in Quick and Dead, where my nation and my two allies who all put together was 2-4th place in the game had no way of reaching Ermor who was 1st. You do not get /too/ far ahead until you are assured of your dominance. However, there are certain factors that sure makes you very sure, ex. the quad bless Mict, secure starting position, sc pretenders, etc. Simply put, experienced players who see a dominant nation with nothing but scales and a rainbow pretender, yes you'll be eaten. However, often, the rank 2-3 players are wary to give up their similarly dominant position by attacking one of the "greater powers". In these vet filled games, there is rarely ONE central power (with exceptions such as qm who is a hyper expansionist but his defensive abilities are pretty unreal), instead you have several vets who all jump start their expansions leaving the stragglers behind with their poorer starts.

Honestly, if you played "with the big names", you'll see what I mean. There is a lot of jockeying for alliances, etc, in these games. The good players DO know when to make the lunge from "just slightly ahead" to grabbing the next set of provinces.

Re: Are heavy bless strategies the best ones ?

Heehee. Not to get this into a flame fest but lets tighten this down abit. Is your "big names" list:
A) regulars in the Dom3 IRC channel
B) listed in the game credits
C) frequent posters to the Dom2 forum
D) frequent posters to the Dom 3 Multiplayer and AARs forum
E) frequent posters to the Dom 3 Scenarios, Maps and Mods forum

That will give us some idea of the big name veterans you mean

Re: Are heavy bless strategies the best ones ?

Not trying to get a flame fest, but all of the above.

I'm sure you recognize some of the names I'm about to mention off the top of my head, quantum_mechani, archaeopo...(sp?), Ironhawk, Jurri, Boron (<= plays a little eccentric though), Ygorl, Zen, etc.

Re: Are heavy bless strategies the best ones ?

Yeah Quantum and Boron were very active in Beta testing mostly blitzs. IronHawk also but larger games. Zen I know real well. He still has an login account on my system. I probably know Quantum and Borons responses to the "most veteran players" comments but Id be interested in IronHawks and Zens.

I just wandered if it was going to be only the IRC blitz crowd.