When should I give in?

Kirjutas AlBoZzZ, 26.07.2014 at 20:07

Kirjutas Professor Adog, 26.07.2014 at 19:38

Kirjutas AlBoZzZ, 26.07.2014 at 19:37

._. Dude no one cares about your stupid scenarios or banlist and shit. Stop trynna make this scenario shit look so serious and important

More haters, great. This is why I just ignore posts from 3v3 players. Guess what, IDGAF about your input, because it is irrelevant to the thread.

How can i hate you or your scenarios when im not even interested in them? 3V3 players are better than any scenario player man . Keep thinking that some scenarios are in center of attention it will make you feel better. You talking about this thread like u think the rest of aw cant sleep at night because some stupid thinf u guys got going on there lol

Kirjutas Tundy, 26.07.2014 at 20:10

Kirjutas AlBoZzZ, 26.07.2014 at 20:07

Kirjutas Professor Adog, 26.07.2014 at 19:38

Kirjutas AlBoZzZ, 26.07.2014 at 19:37

._. Dude no one cares about your stupid scenarios or banlist and shit. Stop trynna make this scenario shit look so serious and important

More haters, great. This is why I just ignore posts from 3v3 players. Guess what, IDGAF about your input, because it is irrelevant to the thread.

How can i hate you or your scenarios when im not even interested in them? 3V3 players are better than any scenario player man . Keep thinking that some scenarios are in center of attention it will make you feel better. You talking about this thread like u think the rest of aw cant sleep at night because some stupid thinf u guys got going on there lol

Don't turn this into a scenario vs 3v3 war, because last time i check: u got rape in that 3v3 when me and Marcus played and we are scenario players

Kirjutas Goblin, 27.07.2014 at 04:21

I played a scenario once , picked the toughest country to play, had no idea about units, no idea i should make ludacris walls, no idea what to do ...yet somehow at the end of the game i had most sp most units killed even caped a skilled scenario high rank with ridicilous marine squad and got his high number of units out of the game ...so much about us 3v3 players that cant adapt to scenarios :p

Kirjutas Fockmeeard, 26.07.2014 at 20:24

Here's some of my points:

1.) Adog cares about plays for his scenarios. He only bothered to try to help replace RP because RP was taking away from the plays for his maps.
2.) You say you hate the ignorance of high rank players, yet you referenced earlier on that there are lots of high ranks who emerge from RP as noobs. So how can high ranks who achieved their high ranks with RP be ignorant to a topic about RP? I think you want to say 'ignorant competitive players' instead of ignorant high ranks, but you probably are afraid of the rebuttal if you said that. So you used ignorant high ranks instead.
3.) There will always be noobs who wish to RA spam. Doesn't matter what maps are out there. At first 50k world was the problem. Then it was UN. Now it's RP. You take away RP they go back to UN. You take away UN they go back to 50k world. Only difference is they don't gain as much SP.
4.) You forget that the individuals of every player in atwar are what contributes to the overall status of the community. You cannot be a puppet master controlling the strings. Trying to force certain players to play what you think is best for atwar. If the community thought CWs were bad for the community and removed it, i'd play 3v3. If the community said 3v3 was bad for the community and removed it, I wouldn't play atwar anymore. The same will happen for those everybody thinks RP and UN are bad for the community. Atwar would become less active and devs won't have any reason to continue updating the game if we tried to force people to play games they didn't like.

Kirjutas Neptune_, 26.07.2014 at 23:25

Honestly I would rather play with the default units than yours. The either 1 attack or 1 defense thing with your units is so annoying. It reminds me of playing Great Combinator, the least used strategy. Don't make your units faggy like tempted's just make them more like default units. Seriously no one like GC, no one.

Kirjutas Professor Adog, 01.01.2000 at 00:00

If I wanted power I would have done it already. If I wanted popularity I would have done it already. If I wanted to abuse ban-list I would have done it already. The Question then is why not?

Kirjutas Milton Friedman, 27.07.2014 at 05:12

Kirjutas Professor Adog, 01.01.2000 at 00:00

If I wanted power I would have done it already. If I wanted popularity I would have done it already. If I wanted to abuse ban-list I would have done it already. The Question then is why not?

You have done it.

Kirjutas Milton Friedman, 27.07.2014 at 05:38

Tells me to cry more

Is the one being butthurt and throwing insults.

Kirjutas Meester, 27.07.2014 at 05:57

Stop insulting and derailing the topic or I'm locking this.

Kirjutas Quantum027, 26.07.2014 at 22:57

how are they better? better at 3v3 or eu+ yes, but at scenarios no. its saying that an apple is better than a pear at being an apple, no shit. There are many overlap players, like myself. you cant compare these players unless your 3v3 players can compete in scenarios with the best scenarios.

Kirjutas Permamuted, 27.07.2014 at 08:02

Kirjutas Quantum027, 26.07.2014 at 22:57

how are they better? better at 3v3 or eu+ yes, but at scenarios no. its saying that an apple is better than a pear at being an apple, no shit. There are many overlap players, like myself. you cant compare these players unless your 3v3 players can compete in scenarios with the best scenarios.

even WW2, my first time playing it i went italy, i was told what italys purpose was then proceeded to crush the unknown high ranks opposite me in the middle east.

Kirjutas Tundy, 27.07.2014 at 08:12

Kirjutas Permamuted, 27.07.2014 at 08:02

Kirjutas Quantum027, 26.07.2014 at 22:57

how are they better? better at 3v3 or eu+ yes, but at scenarios no. its saying that an apple is better than a pear at being an apple, no shit. There are many overlap players, like myself. you cant compare these players unless your 3v3 players can compete in scenarios with the best scenarios.

even WW2, my first time playing it i went italy, i was told what italys purpose was then proceeded to crush the unknown high ranks opposite me in the middle east.

thats because italy is medium pick for ranks 7-8
i would love to see u play as germany,mainstein, or russia.

Kirjutas Professor Adog, 26.07.2014 at 19:31

Original Post

Kirjutas notserral, 27.07.2014 at 10:42

Do it, Adog. Make it harder.

Kirjutas notserral, 27.07.2014 at 10:42

I'm sorry Adog, but I didn't read the entire thread. I did read your OP though.

Reading the options you proposed, I'd like to add another, more interesting one: make your map harder. Decrease incomes, do not allow any above 400. Decrease reinforcements, use 5 reinf instead of 8. Make sure income improvements (oil rigs, mines, etc) are hard to take and hard to defend (i.e. no other reinforcement in a wide area like Hawaii or Mongolia). Remove OP units. Decrease city density, make them count and be important. If it's just one more city, the player won't really care if it's taken or not and will go on in the offensive.

The lack of obscene amounts of units forces the decision of where to use them. This is why 3v3 games and CWs are interesting - you often don't have access to 150 units to attack your opponent at any given time.

The skill in AtWar derives from being able to successfully predict your enemies' moves, to deny them reinforcements, deny them income, and with a buttload of units or income this becomes an empty effort.

Do it, Adog. Make it harder. Make those 3v3 guys say they won't play it because it's too hard.

Kirjutas Permamuted, 27.07.2014 at 08:02

Kirjutas Quantum027, 26.07.2014 at 22:57

how are they better? better at 3v3 or eu+ yes, but at scenarios no. its saying that an apple is better than a pear at being an apple, no shit. There are many overlap players, like myself. you cant compare these players unless your 3v3 players can compete in scenarios with the best scenarios.

this isnt true, 3v3s and the like are where the best players in this community play, its where the competition exists to practice against. if you dont play them youll never reach a high level of skill in aw. once youve reached the stage in aw where youre not learning off expansions, where youve mastered all the strats, their strengths weaknesses and how/where to play them. you can hop into any game on any map and dominate.

i play quite a few scenarios, usually when i want to play something chill out for fun, zombie apocalypse, LOTR. GOT being my main ones. ive never been dominated off these maps by anyone. even WW2, my first time playing it i went italy, i was told what italys purpose was then proceeded to crush the unknown high ranks opposite me in the middle east.

Kirjutas Tundy, 27.07.2014 at 08:12

Kirjutas Permamuted, 27.07.2014 at 08:02

Kirjutas Quantum027, 26.07.2014 at 22:57

how are they better? better at 3v3 or eu+ yes, but at scenarios no. its saying that an apple is better than a pear at being an apple, no shit. There are many overlap players, like myself. you cant compare these players unless your 3v3 players can compete in scenarios with the best scenarios.

even WW2, my first time playing it i went italy, i was told what italys purpose was then proceeded to crush the unknown high ranks opposite me in the middle east.

thats because italy is medium pick for ranks 7-8
i would love to see u play as germany,mainstein, or russia.

Kirjutas notserral, 27.07.2014 at 10:42

I'm sorry Adog, but I didn't read the entire thread. I did read your OP though.

Reading the options you proposed, I'd like to add another, more interesting one: make your map harder. Decrease incomes, do not allow any above 400. Decrease reinforcements, use 5 reinf instead of 8. Make sure income improvements (oil rigs, mines, etc) are hard to take and hard to defend (i.e. no other reinforcement in a wide area like Hawaii or Mongolia). Remove OP units. Decrease city density, make them count and be important. If it's just one more city, the player won't really care if it's taken or not and will go on in the offensive.

The lack of obscene amounts of units forces the decision of where to use them. This is why 3v3 games and CWs are interesting - you often don't have access to 150 units to attack your opponent at any given time.

The skill in AtWar derives from being able to successfully predict your enemies' moves, to deny them reinforcements, deny them income, and with a buttload of units or income this becomes an empty effort.

Do it, Adog. Make it harder. Make those 3v3 guys say they won't play it because it's too hard.

Kirjutas Quantum027, 27.07.2014 at 15:40

im sorry but this is just complete bullshit, i love 3v3 but saying you learn skill in 3v3 only is bullshit, 3v3 is balanced, talk to me when you win an unbalanced map, like winning ww2 asia as siam against india and china with japan's lands.

Kirjutas Quantum027, 27.07.2014 at 15:42

yes play manstein with a rank 5 romania against russia, play against tunder, critical, tiktok, myself etc. we would wipe the floor with you