Results 1 to 9 of 9

Thread: Who Chooses Warrior?

  1. #1
    Needs to get out more
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Oh
    Posts
    8,748

    Who Chooses Warrior?

    Hello.

    I'm curious, who enjoys running a warrior? If you had freedom of choice and chose warrior, I'd like to hear from you as well.

    The reason I'm asking is that I like to match players to races and personalities they wish to play.

    Thank you for your time.
    Quote Originally Posted by Bishop View Post
    Correct me then, instead of being a dick about it.
    love that thick mahogany back with no belly carve or anything...pure thick wood ! The thing ROCK is made of !
    ________
    Weed bowls

    http://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=...+say&FORM=VDRE

  2. #2
    Post Fiend
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    210
    A player in a kingdom with all attackers. Not to say all the attackers would be warriors just that a warrior needs back fire power. The sole reason for a warrior is to make sure the kingdom can get through any one. That being said a warrior attacker needs to have attackers that can capitalize on the warrior's attacks. Most often though we see warriors in kingdoms heavy on the t/m provinces. The warrior does a great attack but that is short lived when their is no one to back him or her up with attacks that will counter the attacks made on the warrior.

    If I had played warrior with this province I would be able to attack someone 100% in net than me--TM. Or quad-tap someone my own size. But I would need back up--back up is the most important part of the warrior strategy. If I built a kingdom I would do all attackers maybe one rogue and one mage.


    Just think of it, four warriors doing 4-tap on four different attackers and the other attackers hitting the most well guarded t/ms--all TMs. Then offering a MP, as if to say, just passing through. There is no such thing as an unbreakable--I keep telling people that. Utopia is about team work--always been that way.
    Last edited by Blue Mass; 22-06-2018 at 21:50.

  3. #3
    Sir Postalot Pillz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Sinners NA
    Posts
    3,190
    I played DE Warrior last age. Just because it seemed a workable but unorthodox attacker.

    Personality to player. You are abominable

  4. #4
    Needs to get out more
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Oh
    Posts
    8,748
    Quote Originally Posted by Pillz View Post
    I played DE Warrior last age. Just because it seemed a workable but unorthodox attacker.

    Personality to player. You are abominable
    "Priest Vito Cornelius: You're a monster, Zorg.*
    Zorg: I know.*
    " The Fifth Element - 1997

    Thank you.

    @ Blue Mass: agreed
    Quote Originally Posted by Bishop View Post
    Correct me then, instead of being a dick about it.
    love that thick mahogany back with no belly carve or anything...pure thick wood ! The thing ROCK is made of !
    ________
    Weed bowls

    http://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=...+say&FORM=VDRE

  5. #5
    Regular
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Posts
    53
    Quote Originally Posted by Blue Mass View Post
    A player in a kingdom with all attackers. Not to say all the attackers would be warriors just that a warrior needs back fire power. The sole reason for a warrior is to make sure the kingdom can get through any one. That being said a warrior attacker needs to have attackers that can capitalize on the warrior's attacks. Most often though we see warriors in kingdoms heavy on the t/m provinces. The warrior does a great attack but that is short lived when their is no one to back him or her up with attacks that will counter the attacks made on the warrior.

    If I had played warrior with this province I would be able to attack someone 100% in net than me--TM. Or quad-tap someone my own size. But I would need back up--back up is the most important part of the warrior strategy. If I built a kingdom I would do all attackers maybe one rogue and one mage.


    Just think of it, four warriors doing 4-tap on four different attackers and the other attackers hitting the most well guarded t/ms--all TMs. Then offering a MP, as if to say, just passing through. There is no such thing as an unbreakable--I keep telling people that. Utopia is about team work--always been that way.
    I agree that you usually choose warrior in order to reach really high offense numbers, but I would disagree with the rest. Imho the high OPA breakers dont need a kingdom back up, they are the back up. They are the pawns that create winning opportunities for their kingdommates, but are not made to last.
    For example: if your kingdom has a halfling rogue gang and the opposite side an elf rogue gang, you can use your breakers to massacre a few elves so that your halflings prop them down. This way your enemies lose potential UB provinces and a small rogue gang is not very effective in itself. Like the pawns in a chess match, your job is not to do the killing stroke but to create a strong position for the more important UB provinces.

  6. #6
    Postaholic
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    811
    Utopia: A game of figuring out various threats and dealing with them.

  7. #7
    Needs to get out more
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Oh
    Posts
    8,748
    Quote Originally Posted by jmiedema View Post
    Utopia: A game of figuring out various threats and dealing with them.
    Exactly.

    Now I understand in many kingdoms the player gets a role and thus you can be a warrior. That being said, I'm curious to get a head count on players that choose warrior of their own volition.

    There were a few avian players I recall who enjoyed running warrior, and an encounter with FREE many ages ago convinced me that some of their players enjoyed warrior.
    Quote Originally Posted by Bishop View Post
    Correct me then, instead of being a dick about it.
    love that thick mahogany back with no belly carve or anything...pure thick wood ! The thing ROCK is made of !
    ________
    Weed bowls

    http://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=...+say&FORM=VDRE

  8. #8
    Post Fiend
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    281
    I have chosen Elven Warrior out of my own volition before... it was fun to play.

    Though this upcoming age, I think Sage is better than warrior.....
    A outerworld vagabond Elf traveling this world.
    From the world of Thardferr, herald of the Eldar Elven Kingdoms
    Elven Roles sense Age 63: Sage, Mystic, Rogue, Tactician, Cleric, Merchant, Heretic, War Hero, Warrior, Paladin, Undead,

  9. #9
    Needs to get out more
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Oh
    Posts
    8,748
    Quote Originally Posted by RedPanda View Post
    I have chosen Elven Warrior out of my own volition before... it was fun to play.

    Though this upcoming age, I think Sage is better than warrior.....
    Thank you. This is what it's all about.

    In The Virtual Kingdom I try to distribute race and persona in ways that were player friendly for me, but it helps to know from those who've run them.
    Quote Originally Posted by Bishop View Post
    Correct me then, instead of being a dick about it.
    love that thick mahogany back with no belly carve or anything...pure thick wood ! The thing ROCK is made of !
    ________
    Weed bowls

    http://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=...+say&FORM=VDRE

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •