In an old west gun fight,.....(Not OT)
 

... and out numbered, gunslingers would always target the best on the other side first. Then next best and so on down the line.

I know this because of that Clint Eastwood movie a long time ago where he goes in and guns down a room full of guys. :)
(Please someone remind me the name of that movie! Im in the mood for more westerns after watching Appaloosa the other night)

I guess dominions isnt like a gun fight. Most of the time you see larger nations gobbling up the smaller ones first than finally turning on each other.

In any case, how do you pick your targets in MP? Do you always go for the weakest opponent first (I see that alot) Do you let a squabble over a province get to full blooded war? How about desiring the gems their capitol is offering?
Discuss.

Re: In an old west gun fight,.....(Not OT)
 

In "A fistful a dollars" there is a scene like that.

Re: In an old west gun fight,.....(Not OT)
 

Because the best shot in the world still goes down after one bullet. The same cannot be said for a game nation in ANY strategy game.

Re: In an old west gun fight,.....(Not OT)
 

The Unforgiven is old? Sheesh, it was made in 1992, practically yesterday...

The saloon fight scene is on youtube too
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qeNrre_7bYw

Re: In an old west gun fight,.....(Not OT)
 

You measure potential gain against the cost of taking it. Then you consider how easy it would be to keep it (how many new borders do you open up, how easy is it to get more units there to protect your new territory, etc...), what the political fallout is going to be (additional friends or enemies gained), and how long you think you'll have to commit forces to the war.

The best war is one that is fast, not very costly, lets you rapidly acquire territory/sites/key sites, and only gains you friends. This is why you often see a bunch of nations gank a nation, because you form ties with the others and the cost per nation is low on average.

Re: In an old west gun fight,.....(Not OT)
 

agreed with Squirrelloid, but I have another thing to do. how dangerous is your potential enemy nation to you? even if it isn't the weakest nation around nor the easiest gain, but you know that if kept unattended that nation will run you over later on than you will want to try and stop it while you still can. for example, in EA C'tis and Helheim are pretty weak nations right off the bat, however if you let them build up and turtle they will get the quickest tart factories around, and will hit you with tarts way before you can respond in such manner or bring the appropriate counters in enough numbers. so even if you have weaker nations to attack, or nations on richer lands or with high gem income, you might want to take on C'tis or Helheim before that nation due to its sheer late game potential.

Re: In an old west gun fight,.....(Not OT)
 

18 years is old enough to enlist in the military. And old enough not to go to jail for statutory rape :). Yes, Unforgiven. Good movie, gonna have to look it up tonight.

Good answers so far. There are so many guides out there, yet one of the most important ones; "The art of Diplomacy" still has yet to be posted.

Re: In an old west gun fight,.....(Not OT)
 

Early in the game a consideration can also be scales. Does their hurt you? Is there a high push on it so that you are having a hard time keeping your scales up?

Also maybe theirs has something like heavy death. That makes their lands worthless later on, and harder to invade with big armies. So taking them out early might be a consideration if everything else seems equal.

Re: In an old west gun fight,.....(Not OT)
 

Personally I usually attack strong nations or nations that I can benefit from politically by attacking. I have a strong tendency towards attacking players I think are becoming too powerful to keep them from growing too strong and running away with the game.

Re: In an old west gun fight,.....(Not OT)
 

Gunfights also tend to be pretty straightforward fights. One side vs another. You don't have to worry about shifting alliances or any diplomatic fall out during the fight.

Nor do you get stronger by killing a weak gunfighter and taking his stuff.

Re: In an old west gun fight,.....(Not OT)
 

MP may be more like a Mexican stand-off than a gunfight, thinking about it.

Re: In an old west gun fight,.....(Not OT)
 

So, the first one to shoot always dies?

Re: In an old west gun fight,.....(Not OT)
 

Generally I expand in the direction of greatest profit.
However, first I securit my borders (to the extent possible) then choose the easiest target, then repeat.

However, if someone has managed to grow faster than me, I attempt to find someone else to assist in the attack, all the while trying (desparately) not to look like the easiest target =).

Re: In an old west gun fight,.....(Not OT)
 

As with much of this game, its not so much absolute answers as personal preferences on tactics. Staying flexible might be one of the most important "rule" of all.

I have a tendency to play nations that can gain scouting information very quickly. Of course I rush scouts to my borders. Then I follow those with another batch of scouts to relief those while they go deeper. To the other side of my neighbors borders. I want to know who HIS enemies are, and is he at war with them. If he is pushing all his armies in a direction away from me then.... well... its nice to know when deciding who to attack. :)

Re: In an old west gun fight,.....(Not OT)
 

Well, assuming you're playing to win you always want to avoid a fair fight. If you attack the leader early on...even if you win you'll be weakened enough that the guy who gobbled up a couple smaller guys while your war dragged on will gobble you up. Later on in the game though things do tend to shift once its more likely that people gang up on the leader...thus still avoiding a fair fight. The main problem is that people are so abysmal at accurately assessing other player's power level so the guy with the most provinces gets dogpiled by the guy with the most research and the guy with the surging blood economy while the guy who put up Forge of the Ancients sits alone in the corner.

Re: In an old west gun fight,.....(Not OT)
 

Spies and scrying devices are the most important units in an MP game. No single aggressive or defensive strategy will generally be so dominant as to be able to take down multiple adversaries. Knowing who is doing what and what they have is the best way to determine your opponent.

Selection based on opportunity and political value is generally a good way to go. Attacking the aggressive people is always good since if they've attacked multiple nations, they'll have no aid and may end up with multiple attacks. Aggressive posturing is usually the best bet. For a good part of the game you can only attack your neighbors, so that restricts your choice of targets to an obvious group.

Problems can occur with the quiet ones who stay in the background cooking up schemes. Generally speaking, quiet players have selected strategies which are powerful but take a while to concoct. It is important to try to figure out if anyone is doing something like this and then block it before they can bring it to fruition because once it goes down, they and their allies will generally have a big advantage.