Fighting Styles:

[StratOcastle]

Yeah, that was me. I'm usually trying to stay in the center nw area, but that's no excuse. I think I'm a fairly average player that's active. Being noticed feels good, but I do little things like aid when a guy is in need.
As I look back some of the best players I've seen were t/m, but Plaidovia had/has some great core players.
In HRS I thought piggy was a brilliant core attacker, but she normally played t/m.
In Arktic Fury it was Arktic Black who raised the bar on t/m. We had wonderful players in Zeus and Bandit, but Black brought organization and a pragmatic understanding of t/m roles. They all were in touch with depriving the enemy and aiding the kingdom at the heart of their style.

[noobium]

So t/m stylists you say?

Well my preference for a thief/mage machine is faery by far over their alternatives. Elf Mystics are pretty good in their niche, but Faeries have all the really useful bonuses and spells a t/m wants, and arguably the better army for pure t/m. My preferred personalities for this are Sage or Rogue, depending on what other provinces are in the kingdom - pair Sages if I have other sages, Rogues if I have other Rogues, or Sage if I'm have only a few slots and not enough Rogues to really make the personality work. WH is a nice choice too, but it implies playing an attack role to be at its best, as to the other playable faery personalities (basically anything but Merchant).

Kidnap is a really underrated op, really useful for the momentum it provides (exponential peasant growth, and depriving enemy of the same). Many times well-placed kidnap is better than nightstrike in the long term, unless fighting someone who can kidnap back or fireball efficiently.

A t/m that can sit on peasants is really annoying to deal with, since it forces population control on a province that will block a significant number of ops or conceding a lot of economic disadvantage. The only problem is getting to that point without being dead.

[Tash]

I do love our avians - I'd say our two current Avians are probably two of our smartest players in the KD

While the Virtual strat is dictated it is heavily influenced by player input. One reference being the 3 avians:not seen as practical mathematically I have seen do well as in Noobies Don't Bite. Every ability and shortcoming will be found in the Virtual Kingdom.

[StratOcastle]

I do love our avians - I'd say our two current Avians are probably two of our smartest players in the KD

That's what the Virtual Kingdom template is about if others didn't understand. Witnessing Noobies Dont Bite avians first hand and their sterling execution is the alternative to traditional cores. Essentially nobody said 'you have to play avian'; these guys wanted to play avian and know how to use them.

[tras19]

I run faeries.

not all the time silly guy. i played for you for a few ages and never was fae :-P

and if youre claiming you run faeries you dont cause youre retired, as far as i know :-P

[Bukharistan]

My style is run UD with 25 dpa 250 opa. Kill everything in my path.

[madi]

You're pointing out something I noticed Simians did from a kingdom standpoint: paying attention to the bottom vs Monument a few ages ago. This is good math and sometimes I've wondered about a system of collapsing the enemy bottom while supporting your own.

In my case things don't always work out, so style is second to substance. I try to temper idealism with practical execution.
I've faced kingdoms that counter my every move or are pros at SN. My mind can't absorb all the information available from SN or I'd ape the practice. I do try to convey the beauty of our enemies strategies so that players gifted with clarity of interpreting can try. The queen of Incarnation was gifted in this way along with Pak.

Pak was a brilliant bottom player that advanced my understanding of chained evolution. He became even more dangerous when chained. This mirrors some of what you are explaining in bottom gains navigation. He played avian sage as I've mentioned him in these forums before.

The reason I don't try to lead is that I've never been able to cross the road between being a 'feel' player and speaking the language of the mathematically biased players. I'm very right brain/left-handed so I think in shapes, and artsy-fartsy ways that don't translate well. Even my build strats are pretty numbers not exact percentages. I usually site AMA as an example because when they execute a move I can see it clearly on kingdom pages. My intuition tells me somebody in AMA has crossed the road I haven't.

pak is a noob... ;p... hes my slave.... yahhh..lol... hes good at handling chains, where u learn that pak??? ;p...

and i disagree on your reason for not leading... srry but no player can dominate every aspect of the game... leading do sent mean u have to control everything... most good kd's have multiple peeps that can b monarch or lead but each of them have there specialties... some are better at numbers, some better at strat and setup... some better directing orders for attacks... some better at directing ops... for one player to do all of those solo is a burden and how people get burnt out... Our kd has a council and during war one council member always on.. and can help direct but each has there own niche... and at end of war all leaders/ and individuals exhausted.... just cant do a one man show, unless have no job, no family, no life....

[Tovarishch]

pak is a noob... ;p... hes my slave.... yahhh..lol... hes good at handling chains, where u learn that pak??? ;p...

and i disagree on your reason for not leading... srry but no player can dominate every aspect of the game... leading do sent mean u have to control everything... most good kd's have multiple peeps that can b monarch or lead but each of them have there specialties... some are better at numbers, some better at strat and setup... some better directing orders for attacks... some better at directing ops... for one player to do all of those solo is a burden and how people get burnt out... Our kd has a council and during war one council member always on.. and can help direct but each has there own niche... and at end of war all leaders/ and individuals exhausted.... just cant do a one man show, unless have no job, no family, no life....

There should always be that one person upon whom the responsibility of having the final decision rests. So in a way that person will have a hand in all things concerning, but I would agree with you that one person alone cannot dominate every aspect without aid.
In my mind, it serves to reduce liability to one person, so naturally they are clearly visible should an inquisition take place.
In saying that, being led by a council also has its merits, the glaringly obvious being that power is not limited to any given person and the monarch becomes more a glorified title than a position of power. The flip-side would be that if the council members were not of the same mind and purpose, disagreements will fester and breed ambition; ambition to oust your rivals so as to bring about one's seemingly superior vision and direction for the kingdom.

I'm sure there are some among us who revel in the challenge, as it were, of running a kingdom single handedly, but no doubt you would have to be highly organised and dedicated with no small amount of intelligence or absolutely green to the position.
The success of a kingdom ultimately comes down to the "class of government" in use and how it's members respond to that system.

[Tovarishch]

In response to the threads topic, Intelligence gathering would be my answer. I suppose it's not exactly a style but nevertheless is a part of strategy I particularly enjoy.

Intel is something that is thoroughly underrated and underutilized by the bottom half of the game. Moreover, without such, every war you fight will be a mirror image of the last and a forecast of the future. Being acutely aware of the capabilities of your kingdom and how they compare to the enemy's, and being able to determine your opening gambit and subsequent manoeuvres as a result of intel gathering prior to hostilities, is a big factor in the eventual outcome of battle.

[StratOcastle]

Actually yeah, intel gathering isn't just a style it's an art. Maybe up the charts it's commonplace, but in the lower tier there's a real charm to guys that can interpret intel.

[Rissoto]

Omg. I love this thread. Screw this **** but i think I have a hard on for strato. Especially when he talks about nw control and core set up based on certain factors such as timeline. Haha. Anyways, not sure about style but i love thinking about spellbooks potential or racial potential when being chained.

For an exampe, an undead being chained serves a niche role in spreading plague when they are quad tapped, especially those pesky TM that wants to sneak in a few easy hits . That is something basic. But dwarves on the other hand serves a underated role of casting Fool's Gold when being chained. With WPA and science fluctuation, these things escalate exponentially. Pairing an orc with a dwarf with similar raw WPA of 1 (assumption, don't bother arguing about whether is it good to have 1 WPA for those attackers, its just an assumption), the dwarf would have a better time at the bottom pool in terms of spell book potential, thus raising his pontential to inflict damage at those zones. We all know orcs have their benefits, but people tend to forget the dwarf's spell book. Some might ask aid in a bigger package, others in a smaller package. But it's usually calculated to make sure ur armies are paid before tick returning. Fool's Gold ruins that calculation and planning. Fool's Gold in a proper concentrated planned method right before tick the army returns and you'll have a field day with the orcs returning elites for at least another hour. Planning who should be baiting the chain with these things in mind makes it more merrier.

It's not new and I'm sure others know about these but I love thinking of the potentials a race or personality acquire when they are chained. Sorry if this is not considered a style or is stupid. It's just something I'd like to think about. Along with all the others styles you guys mention. They're all great. :)

[Spahrep]

I'm liking grinder recently, specifically with merchants.
The role of a attacker that is allowed to grow very large and dilute nwpa/tpa/wpa and then eats a big chain. If done well you can really make them work at a chain and have it near impossible to make you have to release any offense. I recent went from around 4400 acres to 300 acres (pre incoming and LL, about 600 after those) and lost zero offense :) Mind you i ended up on land defense, all be it slowly by releasing exactly the required amount of thieves each tic. Once im down to that size, its all grind. Hosp/GS/Rax and just rotate land and keep a net land advantage over the opposing smallies. When you have crazy offense per acre and no defense you get to work on fun stuff like sniping other small targets when their armies are home and hitting way up in NW getting really good credits, and causing bounces with soldier. Its far less stressful than being a KDs UB or semi bank once that initial chain is done.

[StratOcastle]

@ Spahrep : Knowing the responsibility you had in HRS/AC first hand I'm glad to see you having some real fun. Just thinking of you mastering grinder is scary bussiness. - To those unfamiliar I witnessed Spah maintaining a top t/m in a t/m deprived setup with bottom feeders harassing constantly. I could never sustain an entire age like that.

@ Rissoto : that's very kind, and you have an apex avatar.

[Brindleleaf]

@ Rissoto : that's very kind, and you have an apex avatar.

That a 'Player of Games' apex reference?

[tras19]

I like to run attackers with very high offense and low def and draw as many hits as i can. Voluntary chaining if you will. I fight my best at the bottom with my back against the wall so to speak. Lemme eat those hits for breakfast