ffa strategies

User avatar
France [Armag] diarouga
Ninja
NWC LAN Gold
Posts: 12710
Joined: Feb 26, 2015
ESO: diarouga
Location: France

Re: ffa strategies

Post by [Armag] diarouga »

Kawapasaka wrote:
Goodspeed wrote:You can get away with it obviously, if no one is smart enough to punish you. But it's very easy to check people's decks and send some cav their way if they're missing vill cards.
If you play with a set of people who know the game mode well and are playing to win (and not getting distracted by fools all in rushing), it's not worth the risk. The advantage you get from it is minimal anyway. You can even find yourself targeted by temporary alliances in imp just because you have a better deck than everyone else.


Your idea of "playing to win" is meaningless though because it's entirely dependent on how everyone else is "playing to win". Suicide rushing isn't suicide rushing if everyone else is suicide rushing. You think picking a full treaty deck is bad, but I do it when I'm playing to win just off the assumption that I won't get rushed. Which is, as always, just luck. There is no right or wrong strategy, just a passive meta because FFA players like being passive.

Thing is, going eco theory 15 cdb age up and training 5huss is worth for sure. It's probably even the best way to play because if the others go full treaty, they'll take too much damage to your raids and fall behind (and as you said, people tend to attack the weakest players to kill them without taking damage) and if they raid too, then you need these huss to defend.

I'm quite sure that if you assume everybody is smart and tries to win, people will go greedy (like only send 1 or 2 supremacy cards) and raid a lot. It would be interesting to host a 8 players FFA with the best sup and treaty players. Although treaty players will be more comfortable in late game, I'm quite sure the supremacy players will get a better eco because of the raids.

Also if going greedy while making a few units becomes the standard, you can be sure that everybody will raid the guy who goes full treaty because he won't have units to defend, and thus it's free to raid him.
Assuming perfect play, it's also better not to fight your opponent's raiding units there as killing the treaty guy is more important as he will outscale if he doesn't get rekt.
User avatar
Netherlands Goodspeed
Retired Contributor
Posts: 13002
Joined: Feb 27, 2015

Re: ffa strategies

  • Quote

Post by Goodspeed »

Kawapasaka wrote:
Goodspeed wrote:You can get away with it obviously, if no one is smart enough to punish you. But it's very easy to check people's decks and send some cav their way if they're missing vill cards.
If you play with a set of people who know the game mode well and are playing to win (and not getting distracted by fools all in rushing), it's not worth the risk. The advantage you get from it is minimal anyway. You can even find yourself targeted by temporary alliances in imp just because you have a better deck than everyone else.
Your idea of "playing to win" is meaningless though because it's entirely dependent on how everyone else is "playing to win". Suicide rushing isn't suicide rushing if everyone else is suicide rushing. You think picking a full treaty deck is bad, but I do it when I'm playing to win just off the assumption that I won't get rushed. Which is, as always, just luck. There is no right or wrong strategy, just a passive meta because FFA players like being passive.
But there is a right or wrong strategy, though. There always is, in every game. The fact that there's a luck factor doesn't mean everything does equally well. I can go all in with 2/7 off suit in poker and still win but my odds aren't great. In high level games, you can typically assume people go for the strategy that maximizes their odds of winning.
User avatar
Netherlands Goodspeed
Retired Contributor
Posts: 13002
Joined: Feb 27, 2015

Re: ffa strategies

Post by Goodspeed »

[Armag] diarouga wrote:
Goodspeed wrote:You can get away with it obviously, if no one is smart enough to punish you. But it's very easy to check people's decks and send some cav their way if they're missing vill cards.
If you play with a set of people who know the game mode well and are playing to win (and not getting distracted by fools all in rushing), it's not worth the risk. The advantage you get from it is minimal anyway. You can even find yourself targeted by temporary alliances in imp just because you have a better deck than everyone else.

I'm not sure honestly, that's a tough call. Going eco theory/mill upgrade sounds bad as you will indeed get raided and you won't be able to gather food/gold in the middle of the map, but going 3cdb/4cdb/700w sounds bad too. Two late game cards is a big deal frankly, that's like -10v for hours.

I guess the optimal play is something in between like 3v/eco theory/cav HP or wood upgrades. That way you can get full huss batches to defend raids/punish the greedy guys and you only miss one late game card (worth 5v), which is less important than getting rekt in early game.
I guess 3v 4v shouldn't be necessary, but iirc you can have all the important cards and still have 3v 4v no problem. There are some treaty cards that you don't need, like fur trade. Could be wrong though. Personally I'm fine with losing 1 mill card for early tempo, because the game is decided by diplomacy and scaling in the end anyway. Also you're less likely to be a target early on because you have tempo cards.
User avatar
France [Armag] diarouga
Ninja
NWC LAN Gold
Posts: 12710
Joined: Feb 26, 2015
ESO: diarouga
Location: France

Re: ffa strategies

Post by [Armag] diarouga »

I guess it depends.

My point is that 18 cdb age up like in treaty is a mistake for sure as it is way too greedy and you'll get raided to death. I guess 4v is fine since you most likely won't send all your shipments before like the 1 hours mark (also it allows you to get 86 cdb) and getting 100 score ahead thanks to these early vills is surely better than having a +10% attack card.

I remember there was a 8 player FFA with nobuman, koreyan, H2O, airlity etc.
No Flag RefluxSemantic
Gendarme
Posts: 5996
Joined: Jun 4, 2019

Re: ffa strategies

Post by RefluxSemantic »

Goodspeed wrote:Look at you guys strategizing. Now consider your strategy doesn't matter when one guy decides that he's going to kill himself to take you out.

What aoe3 strat achieves that actually? How is he taking himself out?
User avatar
Netherlands Goodspeed
Retired Contributor
Posts: 13002
Joined: Feb 27, 2015

Re: ffa strategies

Post by Goodspeed »

By sacking his eco. He'll get smashed by an early imp push from whoever is closest to him
No Flag RefluxSemantic
Gendarme
Posts: 5996
Joined: Jun 4, 2019

Re: ffa strategies

Post by RefluxSemantic »

Goodspeed wrote:By sacking his eco. He'll get smashed by an early imp push from whoever is closest to him

But what if there's 4 players and 2 go for imperial stuff and 2 rush the others? Then the guys rushing take out the two greedy players and are then in a 1v1 where both ended up rushing. So there was no taking yourself out at all. In this case it's better to rush than to also go for a boom!
User avatar
European Union scarm
Howdah
Posts: 1439
Joined: Dec 7, 2018
ESO: Malebranche

Re: ffa strategies

Post by scarm »

This entire discussion is way too theoretical considering that 99% of FFAs hosted on ESO are some PR 10-20 dudes smashing random shit at each other.
User avatar
Austria supahons
Dragoon
Posts: 357
Joined: Feb 11, 2018
ESO: supahons

Re: ffa strategies

Post by supahons »

Goodspeed wrote:Look at you guys strategizing. Now consider your strategy doesn't matter when one guy decides that he's going to kill himself to take you out. Do you now understand how much more fun the game mode is when you can rely on everyone to play to win?
Yes, but it's FFA. The all-in rush player makes the game even more unpredictable. It isn't a nice move, but a FFA is rarely based on reciprocity. You can't assume that everyone is playing rationally, fair and reflects their actions. I think the only thing you should expect is that the others don't cheat, that should be all.

It is not really compareable to risk, if you backstab people there it's certain that you won't be invited to the next risk evening and you lose face.
A no rule game is more like a trip to foreign country, where they charge tourists more, because they can.

eg. i played a 2v3 with someone and he decided to 4v1 me for the lulz, the other players let him join their team.
User avatar
Netherlands Goodspeed
Retired Contributor
Posts: 13002
Joined: Feb 27, 2015

Re: ffa strategies

Post by Goodspeed »

scarm wrote:This entire discussion is way too theoretical considering that 99% of FFAs hosted on ESO are some PR 10-20 dudes smashing random shit at each other.
Oh sure. But I have played high level FFAs before and they're a lot of fun. Much less fun if there's a scrub who all in rushes people.
User avatar
European Union scarm
Howdah
Posts: 1439
Joined: Dec 7, 2018
ESO: Malebranche

Re: ffa strategies

Post by scarm »

Is there really a need to keep on calling me scrub or douche just because you disagree with my understanding of an FFA?
Australia Kawapasaka
ESOC Pro Team
Posts: 1116
Joined: Jan 25, 2019
Location: Wales (new, south)

Re: ffa strategies

Post by Kawapasaka »

Goodspeed wrote:
Kawapasaka wrote:
Goodspeed wrote:You can get away with it obviously, if no one is smart enough to punish you. But it's very easy to check people's decks and send some cav their way if they're missing vill cards.
If you play with a set of people who know the game mode well and are playing to win (and not getting distracted by fools all in rushing), it's not worth the risk. The advantage you get from it is minimal anyway. You can even find yourself targeted by temporary alliances in imp just because you have a better deck than everyone else.
Your idea of "playing to win" is meaningless though because it's entirely dependent on how everyone else is "playing to win". Suicide rushing isn't suicide rushing if everyone else is suicide rushing. You think picking a full treaty deck is bad, but I do it when I'm playing to win just off the assumption that I won't get rushed. Which is, as always, just luck. There is no right or wrong strategy, just a passive meta because FFA players like being passive.
But there is a right or wrong strategy, though. There always is, in every game. The fact that there's a luck factor doesn't mean everything does equally well. I can go all in with 2/7 off suit in poker and still win but my odds aren't great. In high level games, you can typically assume people go for the strategy that maximizes their odds of winning.


Arguably if you aren't prepared for an all-in rush you aren't playing to win either.
User avatar
Netherlands Goodspeed
Retired Contributor
Posts: 13002
Joined: Feb 27, 2015

Re: ffa strategies

  • Quote

Post by Goodspeed »

scarm wrote:Is there really a need to keep on calling me scrub or douche just because you disagree with my understanding of an FFA?
I'm not calling you anything. But there's 2 possibilities:
1. You think all in rushing is actually a good strategy in FFA. This would make you a scrub
2. You like to ruin the game for other players. That would make you a douche

So it's really one or the other
User avatar
United States of America Papist
Retired Contributor
Donator 03
Posts: 2602
Joined: Mar 29, 2015
ESO: Papist

Re: ffa strategies

Post by Papist »

FFA is a lot of fun. If you're playing to win, the best course of action is to relocate to the edge of the map and build up there. Depending on the kind of player you are, you can build large or small - I personally prefer a compact base because it's easier to defend, especially if you get attacked by multiple people. Building on the edge also makes it less likely that you'll get attacked by multiple people because you won't be directly in someone's path.

Rushing and timings are generally a bad idea if you're playing with 5+ players. While you might be able to take out 2 or 3 guys, there's generally going to be at least one player who's fully teched and boomed by the time you're ready to fight him, and then you just lose. Attacking early is also frowned upon by most FFA players, so you're very likely to get teamed if you do it.

For me, the thing that makes FFA special is the politicking. A lot of people will cry about 2v1/imbalanced teams, but without it, FFA is basically just treaty. Diplomacy, deceit, coalition-building, and grand strategy is what sets FFA apart from the other game modes.
The function of man is to live, not to exist.
User avatar
European Union scarm
Howdah
Posts: 1439
Joined: Dec 7, 2018
ESO: Malebranche

Re: ffa strategies

Post by scarm »

Then stop those sidejabs lol. And again, i am not doing that. First of all i rarely play FFA because its too casual to me. Second of all i am on purpose using unviable shit for fun. Because i enjoy it. Be it Flamethrower rushing or sending fusiliers. And no i am not ruining anyones game by "illegitimizing the result", because me doing stupid shit is no different than all the other players doing stupid shit, except they are trying to win and don't know what they are doing is bad while i do and just don't care whether i win or lose. Also its not like i quit after doing it. I just get rekt afterwards obviously (or sometimes win). And i can't see how making it my purpose in a game to be "Player with most kills" is any better or worse than aspiring to be the "Last Man Standing". And again what i was originally referring to is people frowning upon teaming up.
User avatar
United States of America Papist
Retired Contributor
Donator 03
Posts: 2602
Joined: Mar 29, 2015
ESO: Papist

Re: ffa strategies

Post by Papist »

Goodspeed wrote:
scarm wrote:Is there really a need to keep on calling me scrub or douche just because you disagree with my understanding of an FFA?
I'm not calling you anything. But there's 2 possibilities:
1. You think all in rushing is actually a good strategy in FFA. This would make you a scrub
2. You like to ruin the game for other players. That would make you a douche

So it's really one or the other


1. It's not a good strategy, but it's fun if you're the person doing it. And in smaller FFAs (5 or less), it actually can be a viable strategy if it's done well and the other people aren't expecting it.

2. This is a very odd statement. Playing in a way other people don't like makes you a douche? Couldn't I say the same thing about any strategy/playstyle in any game mode?
The function of man is to live, not to exist.
User avatar
Netherlands Goodspeed
Retired Contributor
Posts: 13002
Joined: Feb 27, 2015

Re: ffa strategies

  • Quote

Post by Goodspeed »

Might want to read the discussion before commenting
User avatar
Netherlands Goodspeed
Retired Contributor
Posts: 13002
Joined: Feb 27, 2015

Re: ffa strategies

Post by Goodspeed »

scarm wrote:Then stop those sidejabs lol. And again, i am not doing that. First of all i rarely play FFA because its too casual to me. Second of all i am on purpose using unviable shit for fun. Because i enjoy it. Be it Flamethrower rushing or sending fusiliers. And no i am not ruining anyones game by "illegitimizing the result", because me doing stupid shit is no different than all the other players doing stupid shit, except they are trying to win and don't know what they are doing is bad while i do and just don't care whether i win or lose. Also its not like i quit after doing it. I just get rekt afterwards obviously (or sometimes win). And i can't see how making it my purpose in a game to be "Player with most kills" is any better or worse than aspiring to be the "Last Man Standing". And again what i was originally referring to is people frowning upon teaming up.
It's okay, you can do whatever you want. I'll remember your name for if I ever host an FFA again though :P
User avatar
European Union scarm
Howdah
Posts: 1439
Joined: Dec 7, 2018
ESO: Malebranche

Re: ffa strategies

Post by scarm »

Fine by me. Very unlikely that you actually play the game again and i feel like doing an FFA lol.
User avatar
Netherlands Goodspeed
Retired Contributor
Posts: 13002
Joined: Feb 27, 2015

Re: ffa strategies

Post by Goodspeed »

That it is. Not gonna lie though, this thread does make me feel like playing FFA a bit. Just a bit
User avatar
United States of America bittersalt123
Howdah
Posts: 1055
Joined: Oct 28, 2017

Re: ffa strategies

Post by bittersalt123 »

FFA just allows you to do weird strats with no consequences which is just fun.
"It makes a lot of sense to me that you're a Floridian." fightinfrenchman

Who needs water when you've got Brawndo – The Thirst Mutilator?

Secretary of State: But Brawndo's got what plants crave. It's got electrolytes
Australia Kawapasaka
ESOC Pro Team
Posts: 1116
Joined: Jan 25, 2019
Location: Wales (new, south)

Re: ffa strategies

Post by Kawapasaka »

I think I've been struggling to convey my perspective on this so far, but now I believe I've found the words:

FFA is an inherently unfair game-mode. At any point in time you can get ganged up on and destroyed and there's nothing you can do about it. This is, in the same sense as an all-in rush vs a passive boomy player, "ruining" someone else's game. The fact that the rushing player is probably hurting his own chances of winning while the players 2v1ing probably aren't does not change the fact that someone was a victim of the unfair format. And that's just the nature of the game. Playing to win might mean having to deal with players who aren't playing to win.
User avatar
Netherlands Goodspeed
Retired Contributor
Posts: 13002
Joined: Feb 27, 2015

Re: ffa strategies

Post by Goodspeed »

Yes, this perspective clearly shows a lack of experience with diplomacy-focused games which is a point I've been trying to get across. Have you played the board game Diplomacy? This also is an "inherently unfair" game in the way you describe, but through diplomacy it becomes fair. Of course, for it to be fair it relies on people playing to win and not making decisions that they know are bad for them.
Australia Kawapasaka
ESOC Pro Team
Posts: 1116
Joined: Jan 25, 2019
Location: Wales (new, south)

Re: ffa strategies

Post by Kawapasaka »

I don't see how getting 2v1'd can ever be fair.
User avatar
European Union scarm
Howdah
Posts: 1439
Joined: Dec 7, 2018
ESO: Malebranche

Re: ffa strategies

Post by scarm »

The latter is an assumption that you just usually cant make thats the point. Many people play risk and other games for fun but arent the competitive kind. They aren't in reality fully rational actors. Neither are players in FFA because they are usually low PR.

edit: Also just do add to Papists point: I just now played a 1v1, where i got both a tomahawk and a cherokee, and lamed a vill/was planning on denying the agra. The other person resigned. Don't you think they are also pretty salty now and wanted to play an actual 1v1? Was what i did bad? I only did the most optimal play, and tried to win though.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests

Which top 10 players do you wish to see listed?

All-time

Active last two weeks

Active last month

Supremacy

Treaty

Official

ESOC Patch

Treaty Patch

1v1 Elo

2v2 Elo

3v3 Elo

Power Rating

Which streams do you wish to see listed?

Twitch

Age of Empires III

Age of Empires IV