thanks LIP!
just to add on to my reply earlier, i would like to elaborate on the dynamics of sametime games. it is because i notice that the general perception or taste for this setting is dislike, some even expressed hate. i don't mean to dispel those fervent anti-sametime players, but rather to clear the air of ambiguity and distrust around this mode.
as i was saying in my former post, sametime games mimic reality in that if a player makes a mistake, anyone and everyone can exploit it. i believe the bulk of the players who dislike it is because they feel cheated (it goes without saying, the biggest reason is people don't understand it, so they blame it on glitches and luck). the thought that another player can break a region (bonus) in the last few seconds gets people very annoyed. they feel that their turn has been a "waste" because their efforts, over the course of their turn in that particular round, were futile. but the fact is, even in consecutive mode, other players could and would perform exactly the same thing during their respective turns. only the process is slower but the outcome similar.
and, another matter that gets on people's nerves is the idea that you can gain a region (bonus) by acting last, most of the time in the remaining few seconds. once again, people feel cheated and, obviously, annoyed. but, again, it is similar to the real world. you might have prepared for months to secure a contract/job but the sad fact is there are others who will barge in at the very last minute, put forth an irresistible pitch and win that contract/job. deal with it.
the crux of the matter is sametime games aren't as "evil" as some players make it out to be. yes, the game play is much more crude and intense and you are punish much more severely for mistakes (relative to consecutive mode), but the setting rewards you in equal measure when you play a perfect game, ie good strategy with appropriate adaptions where necessary. as with all games, yes, it takes practice and requires time to understand the game play. but, if you are a willing learner you will get the hang of it pretty quickly. for me, sametime games are a blend of Risk (the original game) and reality. it is only with a virtual interface are you able to accomplish that (imagine playing sametime in the physical world, hands and legs would be flying in the last few seconds!)
i have been in too many games where flawed strategies cost me my life, metaphorically. for illustration purposes, a [newbie] player 3 decides to demolish player 1's australia killing 35 troops and losing 32 for +2 bonus. then, player 4 notices player 1's troops significantly depleted and proceeds to wipe out the remainder, gets his cards and consequently wins. i, as player 5, become collateral damage. this, to me, is unfair.
i digress a little to address a side point that i notice a number of people voiced - i have seen people expressing not-so-positive words where certain regular sametime players have racked up points in a short period of time by exploiting people's mistakes. to keep it simple, just because a player has found a niche, specialised in it and utilised it to its fullest potential doesn't make the player any less deserving of his rank compare to others who took much longer to achieve it. we all play to win and obviously with winning comes lots of fun (tell me who enjoys losing?).
rastlin - read that. book 14 was the best, full of battle strategies and pretty awesome action.
thanks LIP!
just to add on to my reply earlier, i would like to elaborate on the dynamics of sametime games. it is because i notice that the general perception or taste for this setting is dislike, some even expressed hate. i don't mean to dispel those fervent anti-sametime players, but rather to clear the air of ambiguity and distrust around this mode.
as i was saying in my former post, sametime games mimic reality in that if a player makes a mistake, anyone and everyone can exploit it. i believe the bulk of the players who dislike it is because they feel cheated (it goes without saying, the biggest reason is people don't understand it, so they blame it on glitches and luck). the thought that another player can break a region (bonus) in the last few seconds gets people very annoyed. they feel that their turn has been a "waste" because their efforts, over the course of their turn in that particular round, were futile. but the fact is, even in consecutive mode, other players could and would perform exactly the same thing during their respective turns. only the process is slower but the outcome similar.
and, another matter that gets on people's nerves is the idea that you can gain a region (bonus) by acting last, most of the time in the remaining few seconds. once again, people feel cheated and, obviously, annoyed. but, again, it is similar to the real world. you might have prepared for months to secure a contract/job but the sad fact is there are others who will barge in at the very last minute, put forth an irresistible pitch and win that contract/job. deal with it.
the crux of the matter is sametime games aren't as "evil" as some players make it out to be. yes, the game play is much more crude and intense and you are punish much more severely for mistakes (relative to consecutive mode), but the setting rewards you in equal measure when you play a perfect game, ie good strategy with appropriate adaptions where necessary. as with all games, yes, it takes practice and requires time to understand the game play. but, if you are a willing learner you will get the hang of it pretty quickly. for me, sametime games are a blend of Risk (the original game) and reality. it is only with a virtual interface are you able to accomplish that (imagine playing sametime in the physical world, hands and legs would be flying in the last few seconds!)
i have been in too many games where flawed strategies cost me my life, metaphorically. for illustration purposes, a [newbie] player 3 decides to demolish player 1's australia killing 35 troops and losing 32 for +2 bonus. then, player 4 notices player 1's troops significantly depleted and proceeds to wipe out the remainder, gets his cards and consequently wins. i, as player 5, become collateral damage. this, to me, is unfair.
i digress a little to address a side point that i notice a number of people voiced - i have seen people expressing not-so-positive words where certain regular sametime players have racked up points in a short period of time by exploiting people's mistakes. to keep it simple, just because a player has found a niche, specialised in it and utilised it to its fullest potential doesn't make the player any less deserving of his rank compare to others who took much longer to achieve it. we all play to win and obviously with winning comes lots of fun (tell me who enjoys losing?).
rastlin - read that. book 14 was the best, full of battle strategies and pretty awesome action. :)
