Moderator: Community Team
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
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 !
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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
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.
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.
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.
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
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.
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.
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.
Return to Conquer Club Discussion
Users browsing this forum: No registered users