KingMaker - let the Ascension War commence!

[cleveland]

Jim:
You tend to absolutely disagree with what, exactly?

Sure, different nations have different strengths. Irrelevant.

I'm asking about the human psychology of joining a war-game and staying out of war. Do people really find that fun?

[Twan]

The question is : is this kind of MP a wargame ?

It's as much a diplomacy game actually, with some players spending ten times more time sending messages than giving orders, and in some areas situations making the game looking like Europa Universalis 3, with guarantees in addition to alliances and NAPs (things like A threatening B of breaking his NAP with him if he attacks C, because A need the help of C in case D attack him).

[Xietor]

The game does require diplomacy. In the last Big Game diplomacy failed, and the 2 super races gobbled up great chunks of the map until they were near unstoppable(la Ryleh and LA Ermor). Having these races in the game REQUIRES diplomacy for the lesser races to have a chance to win.

If you are playing in a Big Game and you draw a race like MA Man for instance, and your neighbor is EA Lanka and he attacks you, well the best part of MA Man's game is the early game.

That said, MA Man, all other things being equal, has no shot of beating off Lanka. Lighting only gets you so far.
And longbows just make the lanka sacreds mad.

So really, diplomacy is your best option in that situation.
Find another of lanka's neighbors and say, "When I am gone, which will not be too far into the future if i do not get help, who do you think will be next on the menu?"

But peace is boring.

[JimMorrison]

cleveland said:
Jim:
You tend to absolutely disagree with what, exactly?

Sure, different nations have different strengths. Irrelevant.

I'm asking about the human psychology of joining a war-game and staying out of war. Do people really find that fun?

What I tend to disagree with, is your assertion that people are just avoiding war either out of aversion to the MP conflict (maybe a few total newbies who are intimidated by the scope of the megagame, I doubt it's many), or because they are just plain scared to fight their neighbors.

It is absolutely relevant that some nations are better in the late game. Just as for example, Lanka and Niefelheim burst out of the gate and went straight to war - they are both doing well because they are exploiting the strength of their nations. If someone has a late game strong nation, particularly one who is not even very good in early game, then they are intelligently playing this strategy game by investing their time and effort into reaching that late game first, rather than slowing down the evolution of their nation by pissing resources into a war that won't go entirely fast - possible enticing another neighbor to attack them in their weakened and overextended state.

My point is that there is very little "psychology of joining a *strategy game* and -staying out of war-" involved in all of this. Maybe 3-4 people who feel lost in this sea of carnage and intrigue, and just don't want to invite someone to kill them off yet.

To prove my point, you've been hard at war for some time now Cleveland, how many capitals do you own? It's one thing to come out with both guns blazing because that is the way your nation succeeds. It's another thing to run amok like a bull in a china shop until all of your neighbors band together to put you down like Old Yeller.


So then I pose to you this question - How does the human psychology work, to join a large scale strategy game like this, with no overarching strategic intent to win, but rather to just enjoy yourself until you lose?

You're fine to play how you like Cleveland, I think everyone enjoys what you bring to the table. But implying there is some psychological deficiency in people who are - with rational and clear reason - playing close to the chest, well that's a bit rough. <3

[DonCorazon]

Wow JM you extract a lot of meaning from a few words.

I think cleveland just suggested staying out of war for 3 months is kind of boring - that's all.

[JimMorrison]

Well he was implying that if you're in this game for this long, that it's because you don't enjoy warfare, or you enjoy the lack of it more at least.

Then he says it's irrelevant that most nations are almost guaranteed to lose if they just jump straight into early war on a map this size (while he says he's happy to lose this specific game because he wants to go down in a blaze of glory).

I think that's fine, I just don't understand the implication that there is some sort of pathos involved on the part of people who are being more cautious in their gameplay.


And yes, I do have a psychological problem. Every time I start pushing the keys on this board, and they start forming into words, I have the most awful time trying to make them stop..... O.O

[Foodstamp]

He's not implying anything. You criticize other people constantly to feel better about yourself. Then you try to spin it like your taking up for the community.

Learn a sport or endeavor to get good at a hobby and maybe you wouldn't have to play this pseudo psychology game periodically to build up your own self esteem.

Cleveland's comment could have very well just meant that he felt conflict makes this game fun.

I am getting down to your level on this and I apologize. Calling you out on this will just put you on the defensive here, but I think it may encourage you to act differently in the future on different forums where no one will know about your e-persona or past posting habits.

[AdmiralZhao]

Maybe it is just JM's adorable user icon, but his posts always seem to be somewhat tongue in cheek to me. I didn't read it as him insulting Cleveland or vice-versa, just some good natured bantering.

[JimMorrison]

Zhao gets me, that makes me feel good. 8 )


I understand that you don't get me, Foodstamp. I know it has to do with that horrid debate over maliciously abusing egregious bugs in the game code and how ugly that whole thread got. I would personally (and I doubt I am alone in this) appreciate if you would not drag that baggage around. We don't have to like eachother, but I don't understand how you justify bringing those burnt biscuits into this thread, and then blaming me for it?


And I do hope Cleveland understands that I do not have the slightest shred of animosity towards him. I fairly like the guy actually, because of what he is bringing to the table. Maybe I got a bit effuse in my monologue over his musings, but I think, Foodstamp, if you see any sort of implied insult in it, it has nothing to do with Cleveland, or me.


The funny part about forums..... (do you remember Bulletin Boards? how 80s.....) ..... you can disagree with people, you can debate, and discuss, and generally just carry on - and it doesn't have to MEAN more than what you put into or take away from it. I apologize to anyone and everyone who feels that I generally just come on too strong, and have this "e-persona" that is somehow aggressive and overbearing in some way. It's not my intent, generally.


Anyway, I love this game, and most of the people I've met here. I'm sorry you cannot appreciate or empathize with that, Foodstamp. Maybe try to abuse bugs less, and get less defensive when people tell you it's wrong. You know, to help you in the future on different forums where people don't know about your e-persona, and bug exploiting habits. <3



Are we having fun yet?!


I'M FLYING!
~Bob

[Foodstamp]

Just curious since you have mentioned it on two separate occasions now; what bug have I abused?

P.S. Maybe mine is a bit tongue in cheek as well, but the king isn't as cuddly.