Builder, fighter, farmer.........

[RobWorham]

OK, kick off is around the corner, it would be a good time to see how our team is comprised with regard to personal style / expertise.......

Builder : You like to build, build, build; only going to war when attacked, or when you really have to to survive or grow.

Fighter : You don't care too much for the builder aspects of the game, except to increase your military potential. You would rather just churn out units and dish out doom to your neighbours in bucket loads.......

Farmer : You build and war in equal proportions. You're not overly aggressive but don't let an opportunity pass you by, but you don't neglect the more peaceful aspects of the game just for the sake of some carnage....

Please post your personal style/leaning below so we can get an idea of our composition.

[RobWorham]

Farmer Rob at your service

[UnOrthOdOx]

Need I answer?


To be most specific:

I am a firm believer in the pop rush. To a fault, frankly.

As such, I value FOOD. Above nearly all else. With food I can make specialists, so who cares about the gold. With food I can whip buildings and units, so who cares about hammers?

When it comes to actual combat, you can expect some unique philosophies, or at least ones that appear unique. I find, especially in demogames, teams to be most unimaginative with the use and utility of their units. To the trained eye, however, they will see I essentially follow Sun Tzu's rules for engaging the 3 armies, adapted to CIV. This is a striking contrast to the typical team mentality of line up huge stacks and stronger stack wins.

I almost always disguise my true military goals as well. And yet, will telegraph them often enough as well, or even tell opponents flat out they are about to be killed by unseen forces, just so one never knows exactly what I am doing, or whether my chest thumping in diplomacy is backed up by smoke and mirrors, or swords and shields.

Speaking of diplomacy, I am a no good dirty rotten son of a motherless goat who will purposely speak ambiguously, show you what I want you to see, skip over what I do not want you to see, and allow you to believe what you want without correcting you if it benefits me, with a particular talent for royally pissing off opposing teams who feel blindsided. But, I do NOT lie.

I also know how to push most of the Templar's buttons if we ever need to.

Edit: I see Plato has joined. I'll let him add whatever he wants to my description of my diplomacy, should he feel I missed something.

[GeoModder]

Originally posted by UnOrthOdOx
I also know how to push most of the Templar's buttons if we ever need to.

Keeping the Templars' tone towards in mind from the day our team was assembled, that might come handy.

Guess the farmer description suits me the most, though it's not exactly spot on.

[FeMme]

Call me Farmer FeMme


She'll be coming 'round the mountain when she comes....

[fed1943]

Tricky question...

My expertise (if any) builder.

My style (playing single) build to war, war to build.

Any way, in a team, partners can see me as a builder.

Best regards,

[Nugog]

Originally posted by fed1943
Tricky question...
build to war, war to build

I tend to come across as very aggressive - but generally do not push for pointless war.

If there is a reason to go to war however............

[Nugog]

Originally posted by UnOrthOdOx
Speaking of diplomacy, I am a no good dirty rotten son of a motherless goat who will purposely speak ambiguously, show you what I want you to see, skip over what I do not want you to see, and allow you to believe what you want without correcting you if it benefits me, with a particular talent for royally pissing off opposing teams who feel blindsided. But, I do NOT lie.

[Nugog]

Re: Builder, fighter, farmer.........

Originally posted by RobWorham
You would rather just churn out units and dish out doom to your neighbours in bucket loads.......

But this does have a certain appeal.

[Chuckman]

Build, build, build and then build some more. Let's win the space race.

[GeoModder]

We don't have units, we have WARBITS!

[Nugog]

[Kiwallabok]

i, too, would be thef armer type of those 3

[UnOrthOdOx]

Re: Re: Builder, fighter, farmer.........

Originally posted by Nugog


But this does have a certain appeal.

Shoulda been a part of the original Team Mercenary. (Civ III version)

It was designed SPECIFICALLY as a means to allow 0 investment in the tech race. No libraries, no universities, 0% from day one. All tech was either bought at discounted prices once the knowledge was spread around, or as payment for certain deeds.

Quite literally, NOTHING but units and neccessary buildings to support that massive army, and enough gold in the bank to insta-upgrade them. As the vikings.

Still have fond memories of the biggest baddest civ in the game getting all pissed we allowed ourselves to be hired against them and deciding to invade us. Little did they realize we had 3K in the bank, and many trading partners on another continent not wanting to see said civ get even bigger. In 3 turns, our military went from being weak to most to being strong vs everyone, and a team learned the meaning of pain when I have the lighthouse and zerks.

Too bad that game fell apart shortly after. I was looking forward to raising their cities and auctioning off the slaves. There was to be no occupation of cities. Man I miss slaves...

[Lancer]

All depends. If we have good defensive terrain with our backs covered by all means lets spread our enlightened leadership aggressively by the sword. Particularly if we have a trusted friend out there who helps us take out the trash. Otherwise if we're surrounded we need to consider a strong defense with mobile units to take out the unwary or wounded around our cities. Call it the Switzerland strategy. Too strong on the defense to screw with, we could watch how the chips fall and see if we can't join in at right moments when wars press hard on those around us and likely cities become drained for fronts far away.

In this situation a show of strength can be helpful. Run ten pikemen up to the borders and mention that we haven't weakened our cities worth mentioning by running them out. Let them see forts on hills well defended. Knights charging up border roads. Make them realize that conquest would cost more than our civ is worth, that's Switzerland.

Another thing is to present reasons to those we don't attack as to why we are attacking. Something that the others haven't done themselves so that they will feel that due to their innocence that even though we are aggressive we pose no threat to them.

Let's let our situation determine our stance.