-
What I find amusing about all this theory crafting is that strat0 has never won or run a war. :)
I agree with him that tactical ability to think on your feet matters more than blind obedience to a dogmatic strategy.
What I feel he misses is that long term math strats beats tactical plays if people are experienced and can also pull the tactical plays.
Tl:Dr. Strat0; The decent kids can utilise tactics as well as.math. As long as you dismiss math as " witchy weird ****" and they dismiss tactics.as " witchy weird ****" there will always be a niche for the smart ghetto player
:)
-
-
@ makeo
This is why we're in roleplaying ;-)
~ If you know me by reading then you know me by nuance ~
Math is wonderful, but it isn't the end all. Monsoor and Realist are the fly in the ointment. So is tetley and company in Jerks to a degree.
The short version is this: when a creative, intuitive leader applies effort to win a crown they do. If you're not asking why(?) you're not an intuitive person.
The mechanical thinkers will enjoy their crowns vs other less mechanical thinkers so long as no creative intuitive leaders come along.
Tell me about the mechanical superiority of Jerks when they crowned or SWEA when they crowned?
I'm no leader, but I am intuitive which means I imagine the answer eludes. I know why Monsoor won the crown. The mechanical thinkers don't know what it was so they discount the value of the SWEA crown.
In Jerks case you need look no further than avian. This is not why the won, but it is what sealed the legitimacy of their crown in my eyes.
Mechanical thinkers are admired on my part; I know the game is more refined for their effort. We need to accept each other to achieve the highest goals in Utopia.
Realest may not know why he requires a B2B champion to come out of retirement, but I know why.
-
Virtual Roleplaying:
In a previous Virtual Kingdom I offered the perspective of roleplaying. The reason I think it could work in the Virtual Kingdom is because we do things by division. This would be akin to adventuring parties in D&D.
Consider one division:
Avian Tactician - defender/striker
Dwarf Merchant - defender
Elf Mystic - striker
Faery Sage - controller
Halfling Rogue - striker
Human War Hero - defender
Orc Warrior - striker
Undead Cleric - defender
This is only an example, but we could see the interaction of these different provinces in the guise of pirates, cyberpunks, a feudal Japanese war party, etc. The Virtual Kingdom thus could function efficiently with the other 2 divisions even if they chose no roleplaying. If we wanted to conceive a dimension-door/time-machine bringing differing cultures together we could do a whole kingdom with an ideal setting for a number of players that would enjoy this style. Are there 25 such players in the game?
The reason I define the roles in the example above ^ is to demonstrate clarity that we can be an effective kingdom while also enjoying the aspect of roleplaying. Roles would work as the D&D personalities. Defenders would guard the softer personalities, strikers would attack the enemies we engage and the controller would both hamper enemies and aid/bolster areas of need. We'd have decent spread of Tree of Gold, speed, and essential defense. One working in concert with all. The job of the council member as related to the kingdom would be to pool resources vs a common threat.
The Virtual Kingdom of course has a Monarch that oversees the entirety of kingdom function and also functions as a bolstering element to a division in need. In summary we potentially have 3 divisions to choose a roleplaying culture we are most comfortable with. While this system may not be as efficient as vanilla waves I think this holds a superior edge in player retention and defends crucial provinces. This means The Virtual Kingdom can tangle with quality opponents and continue on without the age being ruined by Thief and Mages being chained inoperable. One hand washes the other. Ideally this system can potentially stall chains which is an important aspect to kingdom health and morale.
Thank you for your time.
-
The Avian Tactician - Defender/Striker:
I wanted to define this because it may come to some misunderstanding why the Avian Tactician has a split role. In the strategy above the aspects of defender and striker refers to the normal engagements each province so defined is likely to face. The Avian Tactician role is variable on the tactics of the division. As an example, if the Human War Hero attacks with War Spoils and it opens a net worth bubble the Avian Tactician can assume the role of striker to widen the gap or defender to push net worth equivalence away from the vulnerable Human War Hero while the empty acres are fortified. The Avian Tactician is especially good at tearing down enemy attackers quickly and thus can strike in a narrower field than Elf, Halfling or Orc. The Orc Warrior is relatable to the D&D personality of Barbarian.
In D&D, as some strategies parallel in Utopia, is the idea of knocking out the controllers and strikers first. In my D&D party it was our Paladin, a defender, who actually engaged the biggest single threat. This was more an act of personal roleplaying than strategically optimal. Still this is common in Utopia as we are all use to seeing common personalities/race in their cores. Their defacto Paladin is the biggest guy or the one with the best position to engage.
So we aren't defined by this strategy, we simply list which is the most effective at doing a given job, all things equal.
Seeing The Field:
Utopia has in large part degenerated to a top based warring scheme. This isn't wrong, but we basically concern ourselves with the strength of our top and let our chained slog in the mud. My stand is we should attempt to avoid this in war. What can and can't be controlled is a matter of conjecture.
The teaching and learning in The Virtual Kingdom is broken into divisions. This segmented control zone may help some see the field of battle in microcosm. Observing the field, knowing the goals and executing within that frame can lend a feeling of belonging that might be lost in generic top control strategies.
Thus a student of field tactics can observe other divisions. They can see their unique approach and learn, offer advice or strategically lend a hand. There may be times to adopt different blended strategies. There are no absolutes just as there is no core here. But we do these things for exploration of the game. Failure is always a possibility and these are the times where a humble attitude can learn a lot.
You may learn to dislike the culture here as you're want to be part of a unified core. This isn't offensive in the least bit, but understand: The Virtual Kingdom is a culture. It's heritage is in it's many facets of persona/race. To change this aspect is to abandon it's culture. So if your a soldier of marching in phalanx you wouldn't find a home here. I would urge that you study the lattice of performance here and try to take something with you.
