Conquer Club

seriously. its for tools. you sit there there for 4 minutes and 50 seconds before someone make a move. its not fun. its just people looking for an easy win off someone impatient

to each his own, why bitch?

Why do people like sequential - where a huge portion of the game goes to whoever goes first. Also in 8 player games, a lot less strategy is involved since if you get stuck in the situation where you have to cash first, or skip a cash, either you cash first for 4 armies, or risk someone else sweeping the process - either way you lose because of the turns.

yeah - I miss playing sequential - all those games where luck is involved. At least freestyle allows for strategy and anticipation of another's moves.

If you are not a fan of freestyle games then stick to the other...

miamipc wrote:seriously. its for tools. you sit there there for 4 minutes and 50 seconds before someone make a move. its not fun. its just people looking for an easy win off someone impatient

Yeah it's no fun during that time but there are several things you can do-- like chat with the other players, work out your strategy, study the board and if you still have 4 minutes and 30 seconds after all that..... you're a genius

You have to admit-- those 10 seconds of play are pretty damn exciting !

Scott-Land wrote:

miamipc wrote:seriously. its for tools. you sit there there for 4 minutes and 50 seconds before someone make a move. its not fun. its just people looking for an easy win off someone impatient

Yeah it's no fun during that time but there are several things you can do-- like chat with the other players, work out your strategy, study the board and if you still have 4 minutes and 30 seconds after all that..... you're a genius

You have to admit-- those 10 seconds of play are pretty damn exciting !

Forgot the 10 seconds, what about the up coming round(s). Sure the first 5 rounds or so are pretty boring, but after that it heats up quickly. It requires you be quick on your toes and be alert at all times. Seq is generally to slow for me when it comes to Speed games.

FabledIntegral wrote:Why do people like sequential - where a huge portion of the game goes to whoever goes first. Also in 8 player games, a lot less strategy is involved since if you get stuck in the situation where you have to cash first, or skip a cash, either you cash first for 4 armies, or risk someone else sweeping the process - either way you lose because of the turns.

yeah - I miss playing sequential - all those games where luck is involved. At least freestyle allows for strategy and anticipation of another's moves.

quite a sweeping statement lol...so your saying in 5 or 6 player games, who goes first wins if its sequential lol

FabledIntegral wrote:Why do people like sequential - where a huge portion of the game goes to whoever goes first. Also in 8 player games, a lot less strategy is involved since if you get stuck in the situation where you have to cash first, or skip a cash, either you cash first for 4 armies, or risk someone else sweeping the process - either way you lose because of the turns.

yeah - I miss playing sequential - all those games where luck is involved. At least freestyle allows for strategy and anticipation of another's moves.

Absolute hogwash I say! I've won many a game in which I was the last to do my first turn. The order has much less to do with winning than starting position and strategy.

IronE.GLE wrote:

FabledIntegral wrote:Why do people like sequential - where a huge portion of the game goes to whoever goes first. Also in 8 player games, a lot less strategy is involved since if you get stuck in the situation where you have to cash first, or skip a cash, either you cash first for 4 armies, or risk someone else sweeping the process - either way you lose because of the turns.

yeah - I miss playing sequential - all those games where luck is involved. At least freestyle allows for strategy and anticipation of another's moves.

Absolute hogwash I say! I've won many a game in which I was the last to do my first turn. The order has much less to do with winning than starting position and strategy.

Sorry - by saying "ALSO in 8 player" games... my wording was off. What I meant was in smaller games, player who goes first has a very large advantage. In 8-player games, a lot less depends on what you can actually do and more so on what the others do do. You got to get lucky and hope your turn just lands at the right time at the right cash. And I've played my fair share of sequential games - a lot turn out like that.

FabledIntegral wrote:

IronE.GLE wrote:

FabledIntegral wrote:Why do people like sequential - where a huge portion of the game goes to whoever goes first. Also in 8 player games, a lot less strategy is involved since if you get stuck in the situation where you have to cash first, or skip a cash, either you cash first for 4 armies, or risk someone else sweeping the process - either way you lose because of the turns.

yeah - I miss playing sequential - all those games where luck is involved. At least freestyle allows for strategy and anticipation of another's moves.

Absolute hogwash I say! I've won many a game in which I was the last to do my first turn. The order has much less to do with winning than starting position and strategy.

Sorry - by saying "ALSO in 8 player" games... my wording was off. What I meant was in smaller games, player who goes first has a very large advantage. In 8-player games, a lot less depends on what you can actually do and more so on what the others do do. You got to get lucky and hope your turn just lands at the right time at the right cash. And I've played my fair share of sequential games - a lot turn out like that.

Different game styles require different skills and strategy. In some aspects, it's like comparing apples and oranges, but there are similarities-- base strategy isn't all that different. There's definitely more skill required in Sequential than in Freestyle- no question nor is it debatable imo. If you put a 'good' speed freestyle player in a sequential game he will lack the strategy ( ie blocks, kill requirements, sweeping abilities, etc) but if you put a 'good' sequential player in a speed freestyle-- he will not lack the strategy aspect of the game but lack in speed (ie click speed, how quickly they can process information)--the ability to adjust/adapt quickly to the constant change and pace of the game.

Scott-Land wrote:

FabledIntegral wrote:

IronE.GLE wrote:

FabledIntegral wrote:Why do people like sequential - where a huge portion of the game goes to whoever goes first. Also in 8 player games, a lot less strategy is involved since if you get stuck in the situation where you have to cash first, or skip a cash, either you cash first for 4 armies, or risk someone else sweeping the process - either way you lose because of the turns.

yeah - I miss playing sequential - all those games where luck is involved. At least freestyle allows for strategy and anticipation of another's moves.

Absolute hogwash I say! I've won many a game in which I was the last to do my first turn. The order has much less to do with winning than starting position and strategy.

Sorry - by saying "ALSO in 8 player" games... my wording was off. What I meant was in smaller games, player who goes first has a very large advantage. In 8-player games, a lot less depends on what you can actually do and more so on what the others do do. You got to get lucky and hope your turn just lands at the right time at the right cash. And I've played my fair share of sequential games - a lot turn out like that.

Different game styles require different skills and strategy. In some aspects, it's like comparing apples and oranges, but there are similarities-- base strategy isn't all that different. There's definitely more skill required in Sequential than in Freestyle- no question nor is it debatable imo. If you put a 'good' speed freestyle player in a sequential game he will lack the strategy ( ie blocks, kill requirements, sweeping abilities, etc) but if you put a 'good' sequential player in a speed freestyle-- he will not lack the strategy aspect of the game but lack in speed (ie click speed, how quickly they can process information)--the ability to adjust/adapt quickly to the constant change and pace of the game.

I disagree - I've played my fair share of sequential games on Classic (8-player escalating), and more than often it has come down to the point where I've had to either cash at 4, or not see another turn. Nothing I could have done would prevent another from sweeping, everyone friggin' managed to total 5 cards after leaving easy sweeps for others. I strongly believe sequential grants large advantages to whom get the "right turn at the right time." As much as you want to plan it out - the other 7 players get to take complete turns with cashes in between. I'm not saying that there isn't strategy and that's always the case, but it's happened to me quite often, hence I would argue freestyle is more significant because everyone has the opportunity to do something at the same time. Take out the speed factor and say everyone has the same speed - and strategy is just as important if not more important than sequential.

The classic map is too small to play 8 player seq. esc.

North America or larger gives the required distance to play that setting.

Pedronicus wrote:The classic map is too small to play 8 player seq. esc.

North America or larger gives the required distance to play that setting.

exactly. I pretty much avoid escalating games on anything but the larger maps now unless it's only 4-5 players. 6 is OK on classic but also sort of pushing it.

miamipc wrote:seriously. its for tools. you sit there there for 4 minutes and 50 seconds before someone make a move. its not fun. its just people looking for an easy win off someone impatient

A gross generalization once again and don't you think that these all inclusive statements always contain a certain ammount of ignorantization? Freestyle is the only setting that actually allows all players in the game to take turns simultaneously and your "4 minutes and 50 seconds" makes think you are referring basically to speed games.

The SIMULTANEOUS TURNS ASPECT alone makes freestyle special. If you don't have an appreciation for special games or a change of pace from the other game settings, then you have the choice not to play it, but
don't revell in your ignorance making derogatory statements about those who enjoy it.

FabledIntegral wrote:

Scott-Land wrote:

Different game styles require different skills and strategy. In some aspects, it's like comparing apples and oranges, but there are similarities-- base strategy isn't all that different. There's definitely more skill required in Sequential than in Freestyle- no question nor is it debatable imo. If you put a 'good' speed freestyle player in a sequential game he will lack the strategy ( ie blocks, kill requirements, sweeping abilities, etc) but if you put a 'good' sequential player in a speed freestyle-- he will not lack the strategy aspect of the game but lack in speed (ie click speed, how quickly they can process information)--the ability to adjust/adapt quickly to the constant change and pace of the game.

I disagree - I've played my fair share of sequential games on Classic (8-player escalating), and more than often it has come down to the point where I've had to either cash at 4, or not see another turn. Nothing I could have done would prevent another from sweeping, everyone friggin' managed to total 5 cards after leaving easy sweeps for others. I strongly believe sequential grants large advantages to whom get the "right turn at the right time." As much as you want to plan it out - the other 7 players get to take complete turns with cashes in between. I'm not saying that there isn't strategy and that's always the case, but it's happened to me quite often, hence I would argue freestyle is more significant because everyone has the opportunity to do something at the same time. Take out the speed factor and say everyone has the same speed - and strategy is just as important if not more important than sequential.

You take the speed out of it then you have Casual Freestyle= ) No, I know what you meant. I only play 6 man seq and on occasion 7. Like Pedron said, Classic is too small for 8 man seq. Nice in speed because the games end relatively fast with the exception of stales. You get a guy that wants to isolate you-- now you have 4 terr's instead of 5. Miss a card the first round and all the sudden you're in the hole.

Perhaps you are playing with guys that are not very good. Obviously if a player sweeps, a block or two were missed. More times than not a hanging is not a direct result of poor dice but a poor attempt. Ever consider that it is the lineup that is lacking strategy and not the game itself ?

Nah - what I meant to say was generally I'm not the one that even gets to make the move. As a result of all the other players on the map, I either cash around 6 or 8, or skip the cash and then I never see another turn. Thing is, when someone has 5 cards, and another just cashed 20, and I had no idea who was going to skip or not and who was going to actually cash (as a lot will just miss their turn or just simply deploy and not attack). I can make some moves for specifics I see, but generally, unless I'm missing something, I can't keep everyone from each other, nor can everyone else. It just seems to me that, once again if you take out the speed factor of who's faster than who else, that freestyle gives everyone on the map a more fair chance at winning. And more far chances lead to higher skill, or that's what I envision.

You can take this with as many grains of salt as you'd like, as it's merely anecdotal, but from what I've seen, the best freestylers have a higher win percentage than the best sequential players. To me, this would seem to indicate that sequential is more difficult, and therefore requires more skill. Unless, of course, you think that it means that freestylers are just better, on average.

FabledIntegral wrote:Nah - what I meant to say was generally I'm not the one that even gets to make the move. As a result of all the other players on the map, I either cash around 6 or 8, or skip the cash and then I never see another turn. Thing is, when someone has 5 cards, and another just cashed 20, and I had no idea who was going to skip or not and who was going to actually cash (as a lot will just miss their turn or just simply deploy and not attack). I can make some moves for specifics I see, but generally, unless I'm missing something, I can't keep everyone from each other, nor can everyone else. It just seems to me that, once again if you take out the speed factor of who's faster than who else, that freestyle gives everyone on the map a more fair chance at winning. And more far chances lead to higher skill, or that's what I envision.

From my limited knowledge of freestyle its fast, furious and also depends quite alot on what other players do (more so with lesser ranked players). Also it is annoying when people just wait and wait (im impatient).

I perfer to sit back, have a cigar and sip my wine and take my time playing a game. Ive never played more than 6 player in sequential though. I prefer 4 and 5 player

I played my first speed freestyle the other day. Awesome. My stinkin hand was shaking at one point. It is great, more strategy is involved for sure and less luck of the dice as in 8 player escalating. I made it to three of us left and cashing at 75. I was out skilled in the end but I will play again for sure. I used every second of that 5 minutes and the two minutes extra at times figuring game play, planning attacks, counting armies, watching others deployments, if they are forting yet or not and whatever else was going on at the same time and felt rushed the whole time. Freakin rad dude. I have played hundreds of 8 player games ahead of this also so it wasn't like I was new. Just new to speed freestyle 8. See you later

Timminz wrote:You can take this with as many grains of salt as you'd like, as it's merely anecdotal, but from what I've seen, the best freestylers have a higher win percentage than the best sequential players. To me, this would seem to indicate that sequential is more difficult, and therefore requires more skill. Unless, of course, you think that it means that freestylers are just better, on average.

To me, it would indicate that the higher ranked sequential players get fucked over by luck more often because it's not *quite* as fair.

herndawg wrote:I played my first speed freestyle the other day. Awesome. My stinkin hand was shaking at one point. It is great, more strategy is involved for sure and less luck of the dice as in 8 player escalating. I made it to three of us left and cashing at 75. I was out skilled in the end but I will play again for sure. I used every second of that 5 minutes and the two minutes extra at times figuring game play, planning attacks, counting armies, watching others deployments, if they are forting yet or not and whatever else was going on at the same time and felt rushed the whole time. Freakin rad dude. I have played hundreds of 8 player games ahead of this also so it wasn't like I was new. Just new to speed freestyle 8. See you later

That's awesome-- always nice to see a post about speed freestyle where it's a positive one. Good luck in your next one.

FabledIntegral wrote:

Timminz wrote:You can take this with as many grains of salt as you'd like, as it's merely anecdotal, but from what I've seen, the best freestylers have a higher win percentage than the best sequential players. To me, this would seem to indicate that sequential is more difficult, and therefore requires more skill. Unless, of course, you think that it means that freestylers are just better, on average.

To me, it would indicate that the higher ranked sequential players get fucked over by luck more often because it's not *quite* as fair.

Nah there's a simple answer-- it's the competition that decreases the Seq player's win percentage. As you will see in Callouts, the many different threads-- Captain's Games, 2500+Majors, and ultimately 3000+ ( although not many as of late). Each players goals are to get into ' the big games'. For one they lose less points but it also means stiffer and better competition which means you will win fewer games. At the top of the scoreboard you will see that the freestyle players have a higher win percentage, that's because most of them are speed freestyle players with the exception of MHennigan ( he plays both casual seq/freestyle ) Speed lineups are not filled with all high ranks-- some middle and some low. With the addition of CM, it's very hard for the lower ranks to win- in turn it gives the higher ranked players more opportunities to win which they do.

EDIT: I bet if you compared the top 3 seq players vs 3 speed freestyle players and took the average rank of players the seq players beat and compared it to the average rank of the speed freestyle players beat ..... it would be 3X or more.

Scott-Land wrote:

FabledIntegral wrote:

Timminz wrote:You can take this with as many grains of salt as you'd like, as it's merely anecdotal, but from what I've seen, the best freestylers have a higher win percentage than the best sequential players. To me, this would seem to indicate that sequential is more difficult, and therefore requires more skill. Unless, of course, you think that it means that freestylers are just better, on average.

To me, it would indicate that the higher ranked sequential players get fucked over by luck more often because it's not *quite* as fair.

Nah there's a simple answer-- it's the competition that decreases the Seq player's win percentage. As you will see in Callouts, the many different threads-- Captain's Games, 2500+Majors, and ultimately 3000+ ( although not many as of late). Each players goals are to get into ' the big games'. For one they lose less points but it also means stiffer and better competition which means you will win fewer games. At the top of the scoreboard you will see that the freestyle players have a higher win percentage, that's because most of them are speed freestyle players with the exception of MHennigan ( he plays both casual seq/freestyle ) Speed lineups are not filled with all high ranks-- some middle and some low. With the addition of CM, it's very hard for the lower ranks to win- in turn it gives the higher ranked players more opportunities to win which they do.

EDIT: I bet if you compared the top 3 seq players vs 3 speed freestyle players and took the average rank of players the seq players beat and compared it to the average rank of the speed freestyle players beat ..... it would be 3X or more.

I'm not arguing that the higher rank freestyle players would be better in any sense... what I'm saying is the gamestyle itself. Yes CM gives a large advantage, etc. My point isn't about the players themselves, it's about the gamestyle and how IT plays off. Not who is on the leaderboard and what those players could do, but the actual strategy of freestyle vs the actual strategy of sequential.

I was merely answering why top speed freestylers have a higher win percentages over the top sequential players. it's the lineup-- lineup in a speed freestyle game isn't as nearly as skilled as the upper shelf sequential games.

Scott-Land wrote:I was merely answering why top speed freestylers have a higher win percentages over the top sequential players. it's the lineup-- lineup in a speed freestyle game isn't as nearly as skilled as the upper shelf sequential games.

That's a very good point. I hadn't thought of it that way.