Forums / Miscellaneous Discussions / Problem of 3 player types

Problem of 3 player types
15:20:27 May 8th 07 - Sir Lithlego:

I have a problem figuring this one, so I decided to let the great minds of VU to have a go at it.

There are 3 player types: warmongers, farmers and new players.

The warmongers want to fight and win battles, no matter the casualties or the sacrifice. They want (read: demand) the era to be won by strategic planning through war. (Boredom drives industry = war = very long eras). They detest farmers.

The farmers just want to farm. They believe that the era can be won through economics and look for ways and means to make the era shorter. (Laziness drives invention = peace = win with least cost and effort).

The new players just want to know more about the game. Unfortunately, they are in the way of the warmongers, as they take up precious land and resources needed by the latter. The farmers befriends most of them, and they will be eventually farmers, given enough time and chance to do so by the farmers. They could had been warmongers, but they got wiped out by the warmongers and never return to the game.

The problem: How to make them coexist, if not, how to cater the game to cater to these 3 types of players.


17:19:03 May 8th 07 - Mr. Supercalifragilistic:

They can coexist is the farmers stop farming and start warring or if they move to a lower map.


19:21:40 May 8th 07 - Mr. Gnadentod:

if every1 is waring and no1 is farming, waring won't pay out in efforts ;), you will never see a 50k army, only 5k armies running arround killing each other....
Ofc, only if those warmongers never farm ;)


19:35:33 May 8th 07 - Mr. Haywood Jablowme:

i have the solution!
Fantasia - for warmongers only
Mantrax - for farmers only

name era after both winners :P


22:10:38 May 8th 07 - Lord Osiris:

no. why should farmers get the era named after them Fantasia is the main map. If you cant take the heat on fantasia you dont deserve your name to be up thier. People farm because they cannot or are unwilling to war no other reason


22:39:02 May 8th 07 - Lady Tantulii:

Gnaden has a good point.  You don't get anywhere if everyone's spending %100 of their income on attacking others.  There is no mined gold to steal if there is no mined gold to begin with.

The only real way to win is to kind of go halfbreed.  Fantasia isn't for the warmongerors or the farmers.  It's for those skillfull (or daring) enough to be able to comfortably balance them.


22:55:41 May 8th 07 - Sir Lithlego:

But Dear Lady, I am talking about the mentality of game play, not the specifics of game play. Warmongers make sure that they have enough economy before they go to war.

Farmers don't, and are unwilling to sacrifice any troops. They don't want to go to war but still want to win the era. They just want to see their cities explode in size, maybe have a few hordes (but not using them in anyway, in case the scores get hit) and insane amount of income. They, in other words, build for the sake of building. The end result that they want to see is just the score and nothing else.

Compare it to the warmonger: they want a good fight, regardless of the score. They want to have troops that do something on the battlefield, not just to accumulate scores. Their version of the winner is the one who survives a war, not a farmer hiding in one corner of the map hording armies, resources and land, then wait for the era to end.


23:14:31 May 8th 07 - Lord Senturu:

i agree Lithlego. i too think the winner is one who survives the wars of Fantasia. not someone who Farms the whole era.


23:22:12 May 8th 07 - Lady Tantulii:

Not all farmers are looking for a high score, though.  Perhaps they'd rather enter the battlefield when they are good and ready with a strong economic backing.  A solid offense is a good defense, is it not?

Farmers aren't necessarily are they the ones looking to cast Arma.  That would be the score whores.


23:29:21 May 8th 07 - Mr. Supercalifragilistic:

Farmers are score whores thinking otherwise is plain stupid.


00:09:03 May 9th 07 - Mr. Elsin:

"The new players just want to know more about the game. Unfortunately, they are in the way of the warmongers, as they take up precious land and resources needed by the latter. The farmers befriends most of them, and they will be eventually farmers, given enough time and chance to do so by the farmers. They could had been warmongers, but they got wiped out by the warmongers and never return to the game.

The problem: How to make them coexist, if not, how to cater the game to cater to these 3 types of players."

Coexist? Get war mongers to wipe out the farmers instead of NAP'ing them and the new players will have no choice but to become warmongers.

The circle of death goes on >: )


00:20:24 May 9th 07 - Lord Senturu:

EVIL...but a good idea Elsin :P


00:30:27 May 9th 07 - Mr. Naked Pizza Delivery Guy:

You can't have warmongers with out farmers. Who are the warmmongers supost to feed off from with out the farmers. Who are the farmers going to point there finger at and say "play nicer."As for the players that quit after being wiped out once, why do we want them for in the game? To hear some one whine each time they loose? Leave the game the way it is.


04:24:26 May 9th 07 - Lady Tantulii:

"Farmers are score whores thinking otherwise is plain stupid."

Let me put it this way.  You have two pistols sitting on a barrel next to you.

Do you:

A:  Charge the enemy without taking the time to pick up a gun?

Or B:  Make sure you're well armed with both guns, loaded with ammunition, before you go running at your opponent?

 


04:31:21 May 9th 07 - Mr. Savage Messiah:

A----- becuase id drop kick him in the face


04:43:25 May 9th 07 - Mr. Dakarius:

hmmm...
You have four options:
A. Charge right in and try to kill with your bare fists
B. Wait 1 minute and get a knife then charge in
C. Wait 10 minutes and get a semi-automatic rifle then charge in.
D. Wait an hour then you get a red button that triggers the nukes on the world.
personaly I like B, but thats just me.


04:46:19 May 9th 07 - Mr. Savage Messiah:

A----im still gunna dropkick him in the face wheter hes got a knife or a nuke

so ha dak while your getting a knife im flying into your face with my feets


04:48:47 May 9th 07 - Mr. Sigheart:

Mr. Savage Messiah

Report


5/8/2007 10:46:19 PM

A----im still gunna dropkick him in the face wheter hes got a knife or a nuke

so ha dak while your getting a knife im flying into your face with my feets....

...... and Savage Messiah dies



06:13:01 May 9th 07 - Lady Tantulii:

Of course, you never know if your other neighbor is sitting back and watching you both, while assembling his full gang of thugs armed with Tommy guns... it's all part of the strategy.


10:44:33 May 9th 07 - Mr. Supercalifragilistic:

I find that analogy completely irrelevant, actually if I'm honest I find it down right stupid. Farmers farm for scores that's the whole point of farming, if they weren't they wouldn't be called farmers.


12:25:54 May 9th 07 - Sir RA Enlightens You:

let them farm, the warring dudes need their towns ...   farmers are wankers, cowards, losers, little kids, spineless, ...  they are just in the game to provide us with the income to wield our powerfull armies  :-p


14:47:11 May 9th 07 - Sir Lithlego:

@ Supercalifragilistic: :) Which part is stupid? The guns and roses part or the part about the 3 player types? The problem is about catering to these 3 types of players all at the same time, and perhaps in the same area. Do note that we have a few eras where we have farmers who won the era, and quite a number of the VU community is not happy about it.

@RA: ;-p Agreed. You forgot lairs, manipulators, scheming Shylocks, cloak and dagger.... you get the gist.


15:10:49 May 9th 07 - Mr. Supercalifragilistic:

That's the problem, we shouldn't cater to the farmers.


15:59:26 May 9th 07 - Sir RA Enlightens You:

no, they cater to us, so what is the problem?   they'll get tired of loosing their towns and eventually become more warhungry.


04:02:19 May 10th 07 - Lady Tantulii:

"I find that analogy completely irrelevant, actually if I'm honest I find it down right stupid. Farmers farm for scores that's the whole point of farming, if they weren't they wouldn't be called farmers."

Then, being honest, I find you rather dense.  If you don't want to call them farmers, fine.  But then you need more than 3 player types.  Since you seem incapable of comprehending this, I'll take it upon myself to do that.

----------------

Here are some basic strategies common in most rts games.

Rushers (warmongerers):  Attack the enemy ASAP before they are prepared and plunder their resources.  Pro=effective if done right, even a rush done wrong can hurt the enemy's economy so you can overcome them quickly.  Con=done wrong, it's game over.  Plus 3rd kingdoms may jump in and reap all your efforts.

Turtle:  Puts up defenses ASAP so that the rushers can't get them.  Pro=very strong and safe at beginning.  Con=economy suffers later on due to upkeep and soldiers taking up homes.

Boomer (usually referred to as farmers, but aspects differ):  Focuses mostly on economy until the time is right, when they pump out the armies real quick and take over their weaker-economy neighbors.  Pro=powerful mid-endgame armies, able to outproduce most opponents.  Con=very vulnerable to rushers and attackers until ready.

EVERY one of these options has its own risks.  So here is what most kingdoms do, to varying levels:

Balanced:  Works on all three strategies in moderation, balancing out offense, defense, and economy.

 


04:21:07 May 10th 07 - Sir Lithlego:

Dear Lady, I agree (I hope I am not in your Dense Head List). But in the RTS games, you will win ultimately by fighting a war when you are ready. However in this game, you can don't go to war and win it. That is part of the problem of accommodating such players in the game. The ultimate problem is how to let all 3 types of players play this game.

For example, a change in the rules of this game (how Arma is determined) or some other forms of improvements?


05:10:02 May 10th 07 - Mr. Paracelzus:

This is very interesting, I hope we get more intput on this subject. I have none, I am a new player, so dont expect me to reply at all.


06:55:13 May 10th 07 - Mr. Supercalifragilistic:

With preconceived notions like yours it's no wonder vets run right over you.


23:38:31 May 10th 07 - Lady Tantulii:

Buddy, that is the fundamental of virtually every RTS out there.  Change the names, add or subtract a few details, but that strategy emerges in every economy/military game out there.  Prove me wrong and then I'll believe you.

"However in this game, you can don't go to war and win it."

Can you rephrase this?


23:55:44 May 10th 07 - Sir Lithlego:

Lady Tantulii, I did say I agree with you, and I did say that anyone who wins the game ultimately have to go to war and win it.

However, this game has a peculiarity: through manipulation, a farmer, can "engage" in a war but don't win it. He will have troops to defend, no doubt, but it won't be used because someone else will be fighting for him, through clever manipulation. In plain words, he can give his allies the impression that he will join the war at a later stage, and let the allies fight his enemies.

In the midst of all this fighting, he sees that he has the highest score (or in this era, he is able to maintain the highest score obtained through farming, and he is in a very safe location), he casts arma and the rest will be set in stone.

There is already proof that some kingdoms in the previous eras keep a farmer, and that farmer don't have to go to war. Then, arma is cast, and the farmer wins. Later, politics evolved to a stage that most kingdoms will go to war, but a kingdom will farm and let her allies do all the dirty work. This, is the peculiarity of a person with good political skills will do to the game.


[Top]  Pages:   1 

Login
Username: Don't have an account - Sign up!
Password: Forgot your password - Retrive it!

My bookmarksOld forum design


- close -
  Copyright © 1999-2018 Visual Utopia. All rights reserved. Page loaded in 0.02 seconds. Server time: 5:53:59 PM