Factional jack or specialist?

Share and discuss strategies for playing the game, and get help and tips from other players.

Moderators: Forum Moderators, Developers

Post Reply
Yoyobuae
Posts: 408
Joined: July 24th, 2009, 8:38 pm

Re: Factional jack or specialist?

Post by Yoyobuae » January 4th, 2010, 11:32 pm

To tell the truth I watched this thread for quite a while. I didn't post in it initially to see just how many more people would state the "random advantage" statement.

If I jumped at the first post mentioning that, I would get a biased opinion from everyone after that (you said yourself you would change what you said).

I crossed the line saying that players that pick random do so just to get the advantage to win. That may not be 100% true, but it is probably not 100% false either.

There are many views on the posts above (beside my posts). And not all views agree that Random is balanced vs the other choices.

I beleive that Random has an advantage over the choices. And some of the above posts indeed support this view. I got what I wanted.

I never intended to convince anyone. I never intended for a change to be made. I just wanted to know this.

UK1
Posts: 118
Joined: January 4th, 2010, 7:34 pm

Re: Factional jack or specialist?

Post by UK1 » January 4th, 2010, 11:47 pm

1: I usually go random.

2: If I pick, I pick undead the most.

3: When people see that I chose undead they recruit their HI's and mages and woses, but I use unorthodox recruiting methods for undead and people get something they do not expect anyway.

When it comes down to it playing a faction you're good at is better than the advantage of surprise. Because surprise has little advantage. Most players don't even alter their recruit. I can play most factions decently though.
"Hey you, bats should be nerfed."
"Why?"
"Because I lost a game to bat swarm and I'm bitterUhm... clarity... and... consistency? Yeah yeah that sounds good. Clarity and consistency."
Do not. Nerf. The bat.

Caphriel
Posts: 994
Joined: April 21st, 2008, 4:10 pm

Re: Factional jack or specialist?

Post by Caphriel » January 5th, 2010, 1:27 am

It's worth mentioning that the pruning of the leader list for random removed some leaders which were unplayably bad before the addition of the quick trait to 4-MP leaders. As it is, if you may recall the summer fad of hurt-heal threads, particularly the leader thread, you'll remember that most players think that one or two leaders from each faction are far better than the rest amongst the remaining ones.

User avatar
Mortles
Posts: 40
Joined: December 12th, 2005, 2:08 pm
Location: The small land of The Czech Republic

Re: Factional jack or specialist?

Post by Mortles » January 5th, 2010, 8:58 pm

1) I choose my faction in most of times, I tried random only handfull of times, when I played some survival or so.

2) I play almost only Rebels and when I'm bored with them I play undead instead. I tried also others, but I suck with most of them.

3) I like elves because of their good defence on most of terains and flexibility in combat. Almost every unit has both atacks and thus, even the fighters can attack e.g. grunt or troll without fear of retribution, but when they atack you, they get some damage. And last but not least, I like that crushing sound of an attacking wose.

To add my two cents to the specialist x generalist discusion, I don't think, that neither of them gives an instant advantage, it mainly relies on the players ability to use his choice. I don't think, that playing specialist is boring, as I'm one of them. Well I might sometime try some other faction, but only to return to my beloved Rebels.
Nobody's perfect. Only present perfect is perfect."

--A gramatical discusion in a Wesnoth game

geg_Ma3gau
Posts: 8
Joined: May 2nd, 2009, 2:30 pm

Re: Factional jack or specialist?

Post by geg_Ma3gau » January 20th, 2010, 6:36 pm

When you choose only 1 option all the time the game gets boring. Also: you dont learn as much as when you choose random. Random improves skill while staying at one faction all of the time leads you into a psychological trap like "lol i lost that game but what can i do else since i was playing the faction i play ALL the time, i must really suck at wesnoth then".
Not wesnoth only, you have to study the game through and through to master it.

User avatar
Aelaris
Posts: 77
Joined: January 21st, 2010, 3:22 am

Re: Factional jack or specialist?

Post by Aelaris » January 21st, 2010, 7:13 pm

I played random on my very first multiplayer game, and got a matchup of playing Undead vs. Rebels. That went badly, and I looked up a bunch of guides and figured out how not to die to mages, and why not to attack elves in forests.

I then became rather decent at Undead, but I started winning, and winning is no fun at all.

So I then went random, and figured out how to play all the various other races (and boy do they play differently). Since then, I have never really looked back. Random is... so much more fun than sticking with a single race. With one faction there are what - six match-ups, including the mirror? With random, there are 36 matchups? (Including playing Northerners vs. Undead, which I still have to figure out - no poison is rough on my play-style.)

So yeah. Random, because it is fun. I do feel more secure with Undead, Drakes, and Loyalists than the other factions.

When I play Age of Heroes, I pick a faction so I can pick a leader. Some of those level 3s are just so interesting. Like that Silver Mage.


As a side note, I think that staying with one faction encourages thinking that Wesnoth is all about terrain (for my two friends who play Rebels), or all about resistances and attack types (for my newbie undead friends). This factional-specific thinking means it's harder to read what your opponent is doing. Drake strategy is incredibly different from that of Knaglans or Rebels, and it's important to know what a drake player is doing. Sure, you can read the capabilities of his units, but until you know how to successfully play as a race, you don't know how those pieces work.
"Let's all agree that Konrad simply represents 'Konrad and his female ninja bodyguards'." - Gambit, explaining how a character could also be a battalion.

User avatar
Wurmish
Posts: 17
Joined: December 28th, 2007, 7:14 pm
Location: A tesseract

Re: Factional jack or specialist?

Post by Wurmish » January 22nd, 2010, 8:38 pm

Personally, I have always been a Drake player, I rarely go random. Why? Preference for dragons obviously, and they suit my playstyle. In my experience, Drakes are either all in, or all out, full on attack, or getting their tails out of there. I dislike using factions where the easiest/most apparent tactic is outlasting. Essentially I play Drakes because no matter my opponent, I'm always on the move. If I had to pick a second faction though, I'd take Loyalists since I've played with them the second most.
When (never if) I'm confronted with a Random opponent, I just recruit based on the map. Will I need a scout? Is it mostly land or mostly sea? Will Clashers be worth it in the long run (considering their relative slowness)? How many good high-defense spots are there for Saurians? Et cetera.
Currently quietly developing a small faction as part of my master plan to develop an entire era independently. Art is the only concerning point for me.

Huumy
Posts: 292
Joined: October 15th, 2009, 9:52 pm

Re: Factional jack or specialist?

Post by Huumy » January 23rd, 2010, 6:56 pm

I like to go random because that way I learn to play all the factions and improve my overall playing faster than going single faction.
"And the girl that you want is directly out in front, And she’s waving her caboose at you, You sneeze achoo, She calls you out and boom!"
The offspring, trolling you since forever.

Josh327
Posts: 12
Joined: January 27th, 2010, 11:48 pm

Re: Factional jack or specialist?

Post by Josh327 » January 28th, 2010, 1:21 am

honestly you just need to learn how to parallel factions in your head and specialize in one or two and you can adapt to the rest yes i like using elves but im as good or at least solid in all factions but its easier to slip up in those were im not actively aware of potential weak points

User avatar
Pentarctagon
Forum Administrator
Posts: 3998
Joined: March 22nd, 2009, 10:50 pm
Location: Earth (occasionally)

Re: Factional jack or specialist?

Post by Pentarctagon » January 28th, 2010, 1:25 am

i tried playing random today. i got drakes, my brother got dwarves. he then proceeded to slaughter me with hodor+thunderer spam. in under 20 minutes. it was kinda depressing lol... :?
99 little bugs in the code, 99 little bugs
take one down, patch it around
-2,147,483,648 little bugs in the code

Juli
Posts: 2
Joined: January 24th, 2010, 12:17 am

Re: Factional jack or specialist?

Post by Juli » January 28th, 2010, 5:50 pm

I mostly play Loyalists. I suppose I like that they are quite flexible and their rank-and-file units (Bowmen and Spearmen) are solid in most situations

TheHouseJackBuilt
Posts: 23
Joined: January 31st, 2010, 11:42 am

Re: Factional jack or specialist?

Post by TheHouseJackBuilt » February 6th, 2010, 6:28 am

1. 9/10 times i go random
2. If i choose it will be probably be undead or loyalists because they are my favourite factions
3. Three reasons.
- To get some variety between games
- I prefer my opponent not to know what my faction is
- Although sometimes taking random faction backfires since i play better with some factions than others (like orcs) the best way to get better with orcs is to play some more games with them. And since i would never willingly choose orcs since i dont like playing with them at all random is the way to go. Also playing with all factions helps me understand them all and play better against them rather than staying with one or two factions.

siowy
Posts: 29
Joined: April 18th, 2008, 10:12 am

Re: Factional jack or specialist?

Post by siowy » February 8th, 2010, 1:01 pm

i actually agree with Yoyobuae's view that choosing random shouldn't be the way it is, despite this thread not being the place to really debate such a point.

i think that instead of having a 'random' option to choose, there should just be a button when choosing race and leader, that when chosen, selects and displays the random race/leader for you, and you can click the button as many times as you want to change the combination, or just decide to choose race/leader anyway. both players can see their opponent's race/leader this way.

however, both players being able to see their opponent's race/leader leads to an awkward situation, where each player keeps changing their race/leader based on the opponent's race/leader in order to get a matchup they are familiar with. this makes real competition clumsy and awkward. that's why i think that whether a player chooses 'random' or any race/leader, it should be hidden until the opponent spots your units in-game.

my reasons for preferring to equalize race/leader and randomising(instead of giving each different advantages and disadvantages):

1. amongst the casual crowd, wesnoth is a game. it's supposed to be fun. some players, like myself, enjoy role-playing in fun games. wesnoth is an awesome fantasy-themed, tactical game(which is so rare). i enjoy leading a bunch of stupid, hard-hitting and ugly warriors into battle(no points for guessing what race i play). being able to happily choose to play my pet race while knowing that i start the game on truly equal ground is satisfying.

2. amongst the competitive crowd, wesnoth is a fight. in a 1v1, two players getting different advantages and disadvantages because one chose a faction and one randomed just isn't the type of advantage that i'm looking for. the pre-game choices are supposed to lead up to the game itself, not immediately create a set of imbalances(advantages and disadvantages).

3. if randomising and choosing was equalised, it would be a better survival-of-the-fittest model for the different races, and game admins would be able to better identify imbalances in the game by looking at high-level competitive players and their race choices. they would better understand what races need to be nerfed or improved and in what ways.



feel free to move my post to a new thread or place if that's appropriate.
i play as foreverfighter on official server and ladder

psychic
Posts: 86
Joined: July 30th, 2009, 10:18 pm

Re: Factional jack or specialist?

Post by psychic » February 8th, 2010, 2:05 pm

1) Random
2) All factions.
3) Cannot make up my mind and the random option rolls the dice like the rest of the game XD

Now for some argument...
Like it was mentioned in one of the previous arguements the initial recruits for any faction can be picked in such a way that no unit is totally useless. Right off my head the worst case initial recruit i can think of is assasin against undead, even that can be tactically used to poison bats, finishing of ghosts and even used as a tactical shield against adepts in the day.

Arguements which say random is imbalanced generally quote from previous replies or just announce that not knowing a faction gives advantage without giving specific examples.

People supporting imbalance have used the arguement "why should learning all 6 factions give you an advantage?", which is not the case with over 90% of the players. That 90% is just out of my head and am pretty sure they all cannot play all the factions equally well. Going by this theory people only start playing random after gaining acceptable playing level with each faction, which is ridiculous and not the case and players learning to play random have a bigger disadvantage comepared to faction pickers.

On a final note if you can prove a certain intial recruit which you pick with reasons is totally useless against a particular match up, then it is even worth arguing, else i consider this arguement finished.

User avatar
Megaprimetron
Posts: 20
Joined: January 12th, 2010, 12:17 pm

Re: Factional jack or specialist?

Post by Megaprimetron » February 8th, 2010, 3:00 pm

1) I chose, most of the time i pick drake.
2) I'll play any fraction other then rebels if i'm asked to change.
3) I don't like rebels, the fractions concept of terrain based doge factor as the primary method of victory just doesn't inspire me.
On a final note if you can prove a certain intial recruit which you pick with reasons is totally useless against a particular match up, then it is even worth arguing, else i consider this arguement finished.
How about recruiting mage and fighting drakes? 4 out of 6 units with 50% fire resistance, and the two that don't are chaotic enough to break past the weakness and win at night. Winding up with a 20 gold investment that can counter 2/6 of your opponents recruits half of the time, and loses on every other occasion.

Augur have 2 less base hp then mages. at night they deal the exact same damage to each other [6-3],
Augur costs 16 gold, has 6 moves, heal +4, and has a 4-2 melee [5-2 at night].
Mage costs 20, has 5 moves and a 5-1 melee. So don't go on about how a mage can compete with augur at night.

The mage can attack skirmishers at night, but that 6-3 better kill it because 2 skirmisher melee battles at night more often then not finish a mage (dependent on traits and footing)

I'm not arguing for or against nerf to the random choice, I'm not suggesting that loyalists are bad at fighting drakes, and i don't believe wizards are bad units. I do however, think that insisting that you can have a mage on your initial recruit line when battling a drake and not be at any kind of disadvantage is wrong.
______________________________
/ --------This is a temple-- --------\
\for the random number generator/
/=====Place sacrifices below=====\
-------------------------------------------

Post Reply