I can never understand why some players will try to hide and start building up troops in a very lopsided game when it's apparent that one player is en-route to an easy victory unless all remaining players make a desperate attempt to bring said player's bonuses to a manageable level. Now, I've both benefited and been hurt by this tpye of playing, but I will never understand it.

I agree with you Thingol.  I suspect though that this behavior is constitent with the tendency for people to always hope that someone else will take action and risk while they protect themselves.  I am not being critical of this behavior, it is an effective survival strategy that has served us well over the millenia....hard to break a habit ingrained by evolution. 

I don't quite understand it either.  I'm always pushing hard if I being beaten.  Turtling doesn't help anything.

I disagree that it has served us well...on the contrary, it has enabled evildoers throughout the ages to conquer and rule and subjugate the masses.  It's only when enough brave folks took action that this behavior was brought under some control.  

But going back to the game, if it's apparent that the only way the 'game itself' will survive, I don't understand the mindset to hide in a corner, essentially waiting one's turn of destruction.  Is there something to being the last one conquered (which is the best these players could hope for)?!!  I don't get it...  

SquintGnome wrote:

I agree with you Thingol.  I suspect though that this behavior is constitent with the tendency for people to always hope that someone else will take action and risk while they protect themselves.  I am not being critical of this behavior, it is an effective survival strategy that has served us well over the millenia....hard to break a habit ingrained by evolution. 

+1

Thingol wrote:

I disagree that it has served us well...on the contrary, it has enabled evildoers throughout the ages to conquer and rule and subjugate the masses.  It's only when enough brave folks took action that this behavior was brought under some control.  

But going back to the game, if it's apparent that the only way the 'game itself' will survive, I don't understand the mindset to hide in a corner, essentially waiting one's turn of destruction.  Is there something to being the last one conquered (which is the best these players could hope for)?!!  I don't get it...  

+1 I would agree with Squint in regards to individuals, but with Thingol in regards to societies.  And, yeah there are some players who do think order of elimination counts for something. I've had the "loosing last" conversation a few times.

I do this. And honestly, to me it's the difference between picking a fight I can't win and taking time to build and be stronger.  I used to try to control all the other players on the board, and the foolish aggressiveness cost me all the games I played. 

Most games are won with patience.  If you watch the top ten play games, they know when to move and when to not poke the bear with a stick. 

It was exactly this thinking that took me from being a 1200th ranked player (like the first year I played here) to a 200th ranked player (around nowish).  

-----

On a side note, I am going to reconsider this behavior now for having read the thread. =:0)

p.s: And sometimes it's hard to tell if another player is on their way to victory.  And sometimes I want to be number two player so I don't have all the rats chewing on me. And sometimes you just can't get an edge and making yourself take-out-able is not a good idea. etc.

But Ratsy, I'm not necessarily against turtling per-se. There are times when it can be a good strategy.

What I'm talking about is turtling end-game, on large maps, when the winning player is contolling 3/4 or more of the map and has 3 or 4 times the rest of the player's units combined, and with card sets that are worth a fraction of said troop count.

Ahh. That's the -I can't win so I'm gonna try to survive- reflex.   And sometimes as the little guy in that case, its best to wait for someone else to try to be the hero, and then swallow them up.

Although, I'm sure in the situation you describe it's probably not worth it to take em out. 

Probably a lot of these players just aren't skilled enough to recognize that, in the situation you laid out where someone is dominating, turtling isn't going to accomplish anything except a faster elimination.  Either that, or they simply give up and just dump their units onto the map and move onto the next game.  I know it doesn't make sense - and I know it's frustrating, but I've been guilty of it from time to time and have seen other highly ranked players do it in a game every now and again.

What's really frustrating is when you are in such a situation and beat the leader down, and then the other players swoop in to knock YOUR meager bonuses that you just accumulated in knocking the leader down... leaving the leader alone and essentially letting him/her get back into the game and to win it.  That's about the only thing on this site anymore that will make me swear out loud :)

the other players swoop in to knock YOUR meager bonuses that you just accumulated in knocking the leader down... leaving the leader alone and essentially letting him/her get back into the game and to win it...

 

Sorry Cona.  I've definitely done this too...  

Thingol wrote: I can never understand why some players will try to hide and start building up troops in a very lopsided game when it's apparent that one player is en-route to an easy victory unless all remaining players make a desperate attempt to bring said player's bonuses to a manageable level. Now, I've both benefited and been hurt by this tpye of playing, but I will never understand it.

I don't like it and will punish this behavior.  But I've seen games where the turtled troops allow an elimination sequence to start, suddenly vaulting the turtle to the top where normal play never could.

Does this strategy make sense?  Suppose there are 4 players left.  If you participate in the crab game, then you've got at best 25% odds, and that is assuming that the leader is pulled down.  Which often does not happen.  So you've got 15-20% odds of winning if you help pull down the leader.

If the turtle strategy works out for you more often than this, then it is a worthwhile (if annoying) play.

Btilly, per your first paragraph - yes, if that elimination run is possible, than turtling is an option. In the sequence I describe, there isn't such a possibility to go on a run like that. In fact, it is desperation enough if all remaining players threw all their troops and sets at dominant player...even then, it may not be enough to stem the tide...the dominance is that great and the map that large.

It is the Lord of Destruction map and one player has 80% of the map and both orbs en-power.

Well, sometimes people hope for miracles when all seems lost.

If it isn't in your blood to cooperate, then you won't.

It's a two way street. I owe a good number of my wins to games where it should have been clear to my opponents that the only way to stop me would be to ally and attack me exclusively.  But there's definitely grey area here; the only way it makes sense for players to do this is if all involved have a some kind of shot at victory.

ratsy wrote:

the other players swoop in to knock YOUR meager bonuses that you just accumulated in knocking the leader down... leaving the leader alone and essentially letting him/her get back into the game and to win it...

 

Sorry Cona.  I've definitely done this too...  

LOL!  I was thinking about the "Brick in the Wall" game we were in, but Red was the one who really was driving me nuts in that one after I knocked Orange's bonuses down.

We were sunk in that game from quite early on.  I tried, but it went no place!

Please post a link to that.

Thingol wrote: Please post a link to that.

http://www.wargear.net/games/view/244961