ffa strategies

No Flag deleted_user
Ninja
Posts: 14364
Joined: Mar 26, 2015

Re: ffa strategies

Post by deleted_user »

I pike them because inevitably the "diplomatic" relationships that form are against the player with the highest score i.e. me because no one good plays FFA, and I don't want to play 1v3, believe it or not. I pike HollowingWolfPaw because he just admits that all 1v2s are dishonorable unless against the best player. That's hardly diplomacy, that's someone who can only find joy in winning and who can't win by himself.

The few FFAs I've enjoyed are with pals like Ward, Mitoe, and Jane, where yes, there are legitimate diplomatic elements at play, but largely, it's still casual and just fun.

A few more FFAs I enjoyed because I crushed a player and allowed them to re-boom behind my base in exchange for "favors."

But the typical FFA game is bad and so I pike people who think it's good.

One player will undoubtedly reach V with a treaty BO untouched while, if you don't want to die of boredom, you play actively on the map and are just down 300 score, and 100 imperial cuirs insta-spawn outside your un-walled base while you're just teching to V yourself.

If a "good" FFA naturally finds all players in late-game, just resign, because the game isn't fun late-game.

Diplomacy is a fun strategy game, now imagine playing diplomacy but also having to endure mortaring 15 layers of walls, getting opri boxed, and cuir-spammed at the same time just to get to play it. These detract, and don't add.
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:Might want to read the discussion before commenting


Yeah, I did. And my point stands. Someone isn't a douche just because they don't play the way you think they should.
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

Post by Goodspeed »

Kawapasaka wrote:I don't see how getting 2v1'd can ever be fair.
In games with diplomacy, you can leverage your position to convince other players to stop attacking you. For example if there's 3 players left in an FFA and you're getting 2v1'd, one of those players is necessarily making a mistake by eliminating you. After all, when 2 are left, whoever has the advantage wins. Whenever one of the players in a 3 player game gets in a position where he is ahead of the other 2, the game should shift to them being targeted. Theoretically it should end in a draw, but people always make mistakes in the end.
That's a basic concept but it gets much more complicated very quickly if you want to get into it. Diplomacy is fun, which is one of the reasons FFA is fun.
User avatar
Netherlands Goodspeed
Retired Contributor
Posts: 13002
Joined: Feb 27, 2015

Re: ffa strategies

  • Quote

Post by Goodspeed »

deleted_user wrote:If a "good" FFA naturally finds all players in late-game, just resign, because the game isn't fun late-game.
I suppose that's the core disagreement between you and FFA players. I tend to agree with you about that particular point, but the diplomacy and other fun things about the game mode make it worth at least sticking around for a few hours :P
They're a lot more fun in AoE2, where late game isn't a broken lame fest and resources actually run out.
Australia Kawapasaka
ESOC Pro Team
Posts: 1116
Joined: Jan 25, 2019
Location: Wales (new, south)

Re: ffa strategies

Post by Kawapasaka »

Yeah this is just a difference in philosophy I guess. In my mind, in FFA you have an obligation to nobody, and that's the point. You shouldn't even have an obligation to yourself to win.
User avatar
Netherlands Goodspeed
Retired Contributor
Posts: 13002
Joined: Feb 27, 2015

Re: ffa strategies

Post by Goodspeed »

scarm wrote: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.
The most important part of playing an FFA is finding the right people to play with. Simply hosting a game on ESO and waiting for it to fill up inevitably leads to a shit game, in my experience.
User avatar
Italy gamevideo113
Howdah
Posts: 1899
Joined: Apr 26, 2017
ESO: gamevideo113

Re: ffa strategies

Post by gamevideo113 »

Goodspeed wrote:
deleted_user wrote:If a "good" FFA naturally finds all players in late-game, just resign, because the game isn't fun late-game.
I suppose that's the core disagreement between you and FFA players. I tend to agree with you about that particular point, but the diplomacy and other fun things about the game mode make it worth at least sticking around for a few hours :P
They're a lot more fun in AoE2, where late game isn't a broken lame fest and resources actually run out.

True, FFAs in AoE2 are a blast. Will definitely play some when the DE comes out.
I think it’s even easier to 1v2 in AoE2 due to defense being an overall stronger playstyle. Walls aren’t easily destroyable by non-siege units, some civs have bombard towers which oneshot almost every unit. Also you need alliances to trade
It’s just a shame that this “gamemode” is so time consuming
[Some people aspire to be pr30+, some people aspire to have fun, and some people aspire to play 3v3 Deccan.] - vividlyplain - 2019 Who (nationality) rape ?
stupid logic. noob players can say op?
toxic, Insult, Racism ?
No Flag RefluxSemantic
Gendarme
Posts: 5996
Joined: Jun 4, 2019

Re: ffa strategies

Post by RefluxSemantic »

Goodspeed wrote:
scarm wrote: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.
The most important part of playing an FFA is finding the right people to play with. Simply hosting a game on ESO and waiting for it to fill up inevitably leads to a shit game, in my experience.

I'd phrase it differently: FFA is a shitty game mode in your eyes unless you find a group of people that is willing to play FFA the way you have decided it is supposed to be played. It's probably more effective for you to host a NR40 FFA instead.
User avatar
Italy gamevideo113
Howdah
Posts: 1899
Joined: Apr 26, 2017
ESO: gamevideo113

Re: ffa strategies

  • Quote

Post by gamevideo113 »

I think GS's opinion is reasonable honestly, i don't understand why so many people are arguing about the legitimacy of not playing to win. Of course it's not forbidden to play a FFA without aiming for the win, it's just unreasonable from a logical point of view. In a competitive environment, every player would play to win, and you need to be able to make that assumption if you want to have some sort of strategical plan. If one player went AFK, another one nuked his neighbour with a pike rush kamikaze-style, a fourth player just resigned immediately and a fifth one boomed up to sling P6 which then deletes his units to donate xp to others, what would the point of playing even be? You literally couldn't make assumptions about what the other players are doing because you wouldn't even know if they are actually playing or just wasting some time for the sake of it. Ok, maybe it's fun, but nonsensical for sure. There's a reason why that almost never happens in supremacy. You would never go into a sup game with the intent of losing the game on purpose, so why should you do it in a FFA?
[Some people aspire to be pr30+, some people aspire to have fun, and some people aspire to play 3v3 Deccan.] - vividlyplain - 2019 Who (nationality) rape ?
stupid logic. noob players can say op?
toxic, Insult, Racism ?
No Flag deleted_user
Ninja
Posts: 14364
Joined: Mar 26, 2015

Re: ffa strategies

Post by deleted_user »

Operating on the maxim of "to have the most fun," piking an opponent and not waiting to get 1v2'd is more fun. It's not wrong to revel in another person's loss - that's what winning is - the absorption of fun of one from another.

Serial killers are having lots of fun.
User avatar
Netherlands Goodspeed
Retired Contributor
Posts: 13002
Joined: Feb 27, 2015

Re: ffa strategies

  • Quote

Post by Goodspeed »

You can do that in a regular 1v1, though. And if you really want to increase your odds of winning that badly, you can always noobbash. Joining an FFA for the purpose of suicide-killing another player is like going to a concert with a boombox and playing your own music. You had fun, but why were you even there? You could've done that in your own house without ruining it for others.

It comes down to what you said about reveling in another's loss. And that goes back to the initial point: It's a dick move.
No Flag deleted_user
Ninja
Posts: 14364
Joined: Mar 26, 2015

Re: ffa strategies

Post by deleted_user »

GS is implicating morality. An anarchist state is not moral by any definition.
User avatar
Italy gamevideo113
Howdah
Posts: 1899
Joined: Apr 26, 2017
ESO: gamevideo113

Re: ffa strategies

Post by gamevideo113 »

supahons wrote:https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/free-for-all
https://www.dictionary.com/browse/free-for-all
https://www.macmillandictionary.com/dic ... ee-for-all

:hmm: :salt:

What's the point of these definitions? There isn't a rule that says you can't rush another player. You just wouldn't do it, if you were to play in your own interest (which should be winning the game).
[Some people aspire to be pr30+, some people aspire to have fun, and some people aspire to play 3v3 Deccan.] - vividlyplain - 2019 Who (nationality) rape ?
stupid logic. noob players can say op?
toxic, Insult, Racism ?
No Flag RefluxSemantic
Gendarme
Posts: 5996
Joined: Jun 4, 2019

Re: ffa strategies

Post by RefluxSemantic »

gamevideo113 wrote:I think GS's opinion is reasonable honestly, i don't understand why so many people are arguing about the legitimacy of not playing to win. Of course it's not forbidden to play a FFA without aiming for the win, it's just unreasonable from a logical point of view. In a competitive environment, every player would play to win, and you need to be able to make that assumption if you want to have some sort of strategical plan. If one player went AFK, another one nuked his neighbour with a pike rush kamikaze-style, a fourth player just resigned immediately and a fifth one boomed up to sling P6 which then deletes his units to donate xp to others, what would the point of playing even be? You literally couldn't make assumptions about what the other players are doing because you wouldn't even know if they are actually playing or just wasting some time for the sake of it. Ok, maybe it's fun, but nonsensical for sure. There's a reason why that almost never happens in supremacy. You would never go into a sup game with the intent of losing the game on purpose, so why should you do it in a FFA?

The problem with gs's statement is that it claims pike rushing or something like that is stupid while you can clearly demonstrate that a pike rush (or something like that) is a perfectly reasonable way to play an FFA. Gs has been operating under the completely false assumption that rushing someone means you also kill yourself.
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 »

Which is true.
If you go 3v/700w/600w/3 huss rush (which is what you need to kill someone while defending the raids), then the other players will be in age 3 with already 2TCs and 3 eco shipments.
Also it means -4 shipments for late game.

In the end, they'll reach imperial with 2 factories, 6-7 eco upgrades+ capitol and full vills when you'll reach age4 with barely 99vills and you'll die.

Conclusion : You killed someone and ruined his fun and then got killed because you had to commit to it.
Thus, not only did you play like a noob, but you also killed someone who wanted to play a serious FFA with smart diplomacy.

It's not like playing nr40 at all though, because people will make some units early on (like 5-10 huss semi) to raid hard the guys who go full nr40 since it doesn't hurt, and to defend the raids.

Basically, anything that hurts you is bad, even if you hurt your opponent much more because the other players will get ahead.
For instance trading 3 huss for 5 huss is bad in early game as you will need to remake them (that will slow down your age up and your boom) while the other guys will outboom.
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:You can do that in a regular 1v1, though. And if you really want to increase your odds of winning that badly, you can always noobbash. Joining an FFA for the purpose of suicide-killing another player is like going to a concert with a boombox and playing your own music. You had fun, but why were you even there? You could've done that in your own house without ruining it for others.

It comes down to what you said about reveling in another's loss. And that goes back to the initial point: It's a dick move.
Your analogy is flawed because bringing a boombox to a concert is typically a violation of the rules and will get you kicked out, whereas attacking early is allowed by generic FFA rules. Unless the lobby title explicitly says "no rush", you have no case here. Honestly, if it's such a problem for you, why not add a treaty timer to your games? That way there's no confusion, and no room for you to get angry when someone sieges down your base at 10 minutes.

And I'm also curious: is it still a "dick move" if the person doing it is playing to win?
The function of man is to live, not to exist.
User avatar
No Flag howlingwolfpaw
Jaeger
Posts: 3476
Joined: Oct 4, 2015

Re: ffa strategies

Post by howlingwolfpaw »

Lots of interesting replies...

Callen, how many games have we actually played? 1-2? I hardly know you other than here on this site. For you to assume to know me or how I play is pretty ignorant. However I will remember how you treated me when introducing myself to a streamed game, saying I suck. This is actually a projection and a reflection of your own character. for I am a understanding and fun player to actually play with. not to brag, but my win rate is over 70% of FFAs I play. that is not just luck, that comes with mastering the feel of each game and knowing how to play the unit counters. Of course many players are noobs, but noobs are unpredictable and do some of the lame teaming things more so than good players that want a good game.

I honed my skills in FFA, learning to defend rushes with treaty decks and take on multiple opponents.
I change my play style from time to time but I rarely rush anyone because I actually have the funnest with good battles. If I use my knowledge to the max and rush someone who has no army, sure I may win, but beating down a defenseless town is not really fun, I want people to have a chance. Its basically a time saver for me because instead of having to host multiple games, I can play a 1v1, then another opponent etc... I enjoy the economy as well as the fighting, and using a civ to its max potential and full unit counters. If all game meta was pike and muskets in the first 10 minutes then it would be a very dull game.

I get teamed up far more than I ever do, teaming is not fun for me, but at times it is necessary to take out other teamers, uses blockade, or if someone just keeps starting fights expecting karma not to come back to them, or in an end game scenario of 2 weak vs a strong. The teaming that is very bad is when there are like 5 players and 2 gang up on one, leaving others to boom up. I prefer good fair fights, but in FFA that is not always the case.

It is wise to let others fight it out, the more they fight the more resources and time they are losing to doing other things. So teaming up to quickly take out 1 person is poor form, and also makes the other person stronger. This is why we have a FFA clan, to root out the cheaters and people who play like narcissist.

I do want to say FFA is a place to test out strats and awkward unit combos. I teach many noobs who come in how to play and fight other armies. Its a good place to level up and build some skills to take to ranked games. It is a good place to practice being a good gamer too.

I also suggest banning france from FFA. The civ is utterly OP for it, and ruins the strategy of other civ unit balances. Games are just better for everyone without it from my observations.

What wins the late game is culv and cannon micro, I don't care how much peoples scores are ahead if they aren't going to use either effectively imbalances in eco can be overcome. So even if you are late to imperial if you play to counter units you still have a good chance to win.
No Flag deleted_user
Ninja
Posts: 14364
Joined: Mar 26, 2015

Re: ffa strategies

Post by deleted_user »

howlingwolfpaw wrote:Lots of interesting replies...

Callen, how many games have we actually played? 1-2? I hardly know you other than here on this site. For you to assume to know me or how I play is pretty ignorant. However I will remember how you treated me when introducing myself to a streamed game, saying I suck. This is actually a projection and a reflection of your own character. for I am a understanding and fun player to actually play with. not to brag, but my win rate is over 70% of FFAs I play. that is not just luck, that comes with mastering the feel of each game and knowing how to play the unit counters. Of course many players are noobs, but noobs are unpredictable and do some of the lame teaming things more so than good players that want a good game.

I honed my skills in FFA, learning to defend rushes with treaty decks and take on multiple opponents.
I change my play style from time to time but I rarely rush anyone because I actually have the funnest with good battles. If I use my knowledge to the max and rush someone who has no army, sure I may win, but beating down a defenseless town is not really fun, I want people to have a chance. Its basically a time saver for me because instead of having to host multiple games, I can play a 1v1, then another opponent etc... I enjoy the economy as well as the fighting, and using a civ to its max potential and full unit counters. If all game meta was pike and muskets in the first 10 minutes then it would be a very dull game.

I get teamed up far more than I ever do, teaming is not fun for me, but at times it is necessary to take out other teamers, uses blockade, or if someone just keeps starting fights expecting karma not to come back to them, or in an end game scenario of 2 weak vs a strong. The teaming that is very bad is when there are like 5 players and 2 gang up on one, leaving others to boom up. I prefer good fair fights, but in FFA that is not always the case.

It is wise to let others fight it out, the more they fight the more resources and time they are losing to doing other things. So teaming up to quickly take out 1 person is poor form, and also makes the other person stronger. This is why we have a FFA clan, to root out the cheaters and people who play like narcissist.

I do want to say FFA is a place to test out strats and awkward unit combos. I teach many noobs who come in how to play and fight other armies. Its a good place to level up and build some skills to take to ranked games. It is a good place to practice being a good gamer too.

I also suggest banning france from FFA. The civ is utterly OP for it, and ruins the strategy of other civ unit balances. Games are just better for everyone without it from my observations.

What wins the late game is culv and cannon micro, I don't care how much peoples scores are ahead if they aren't going to use either effectively imbalances in eco can be overcome. So even if you are late to imperial if you play to counter units you still have a good chance to win.
The earth is spherical.
No Flag deleted_user
Ninja
Posts: 14364
Joined: Mar 26, 2015

Re: ffa strategies

  • Quote

Post by deleted_user »

Goodspeed is an idealist with little exposure to blood.
User avatar
United States of America Cometk
Retired Contributor
Posts: 7257
Joined: Feb 15, 2015
Location: California

Re: ffa strategies

Post by Cometk »

I played a “high level” free for all once and bashed Veni_Vidi_Vici with Port Industrial 20 range goons

Was a good strat
Image
User avatar
Italy gamevideo113
Howdah
Posts: 1899
Joined: Apr 26, 2017
ESO: gamevideo113

Re: ffa strategies

Post by gamevideo113 »

RefluxSemantic wrote:
gamevideo113 wrote:I think GS's opinion is reasonable honestly, i don't understand why so many people are arguing about the legitimacy of not playing to win. Of course it's not forbidden to play a FFA without aiming for the win, it's just unreasonable from a logical point of view. In a competitive environment, every player would play to win, and you need to be able to make that assumption if you want to have some sort of strategical plan. If one player went AFK, another one nuked his neighbour with a pike rush kamikaze-style, a fourth player just resigned immediately and a fifth one boomed up to sling P6 which then deletes his units to donate xp to others, what would the point of playing even be? You literally couldn't make assumptions about what the other players are doing because you wouldn't even know if they are actually playing or just wasting some time for the sake of it. Ok, maybe it's fun, but nonsensical for sure. There's a reason why that almost never happens in supremacy. You would never go into a sup game with the intent of losing the game on purpose, so why should you do it in a FFA?
The problem with gs's statement is that it claims pike rushing or something like that is stupid while you can clearly demonstrate that a pike rush (or something like that) is a perfectly reasonable way to play an FFA. Gs has been operating under the completely false assumption that rushing someone means you also kill yourself.
In most cases pike rushing will put you at a severe disadvantage, i don’t think you can outright kill someone without falling behind everyone else. There’s a big difference between applying some pressure to get an advantage or directly going for the kill in the colonial age, in terms of investment. Ideally, you want to gain an advantage without being too hindered yourself, i think. That’s why i don’t think pike rushing to actually kill someone is a legit strat in FFA.
[Some people aspire to be pr30+, some people aspire to have fun, and some people aspire to play 3v3 Deccan.] - vividlyplain - 2019 Who (nationality) rape ?
stupid logic. noob players can say op?
toxic, Insult, Racism ?
No Flag deleted_user
Ninja
Posts: 14364
Joined: Mar 26, 2015

Re: ffa strategies

Post by deleted_user »

I piked Yuki/H2O in a FFA
User avatar
European Union scarm
Howdah
Posts: 1439
Joined: Dec 7, 2018
ESO: Malebranche

Re: ffa strategies

Post by scarm »

Just to repeat that example bc i think it mght have been lost in page switch and editing: I Yesterday played a 1v1 and lamed a vill and denied agra with 2 nats i got from treasures. The other person ragequit andwas probably pretty salty and wanted to play an actual game - yet i only played to win as you are claiming is the moral highground.

Also in regard to teaming up: In the FFAs i used to play with my friends when we were younger, i used to be teamed up on because i was the strongest individual player and therefore the threat, since they knew i could have eliminated anyone of them 1v1, one after each other. Therefore teaming up, even 3 or 4v1, was the right call and "playing to win". And i am not talking endgame here, i am talking age 3 or 4 or early age 5, to take me out asap. Was what they did "morally wrong"?

edit: This is why arguing that only playing to win is the right way to play can be reducted ad absurdum. If anyone truely played to win, anyone would have to play France, which according to howlinwolfpaw is the strongest civ by far (which is very believeable). Not choosing any civ but France is making it easier to eliminate you, and therefore illegitimizes the result. You can make that exact argument for literally any suboptimal play. Also if all players are playing optimally, non should attack and all should just boom as long as possible, since everyones eco will be the exactly the same assuming optimal play with france, so if anyones a fully rational actor an FFAS result would jsut be 7 Frances farming peacefully in a cold war situation.
User avatar
Italy gamevideo113
Howdah
Posts: 1899
Joined: Apr 26, 2017
ESO: gamevideo113

Re: ffa strategies

Post by gamevideo113 »

At this point this is just nitpicking. Personally I never mentioned morality. Nobody said you have to play in the most optimal way to win and tryhard at all costs. It’s just pretty damn clear that if you intend to stay with 30 vills for the first 15 minutes because you want to take down 1 out of 7 other players you either don’t understand how the gamemode works or you’re simply trolling/not playing to win but with other purposes, because it is not an effective strategy to even attempt to win the game, by any mean.
No, diplomacy is not morally wrong. It’s part of the gamemode.
And yes, denying agra is perfectly legit. Don’t blame the player, blame the game.

The optimal play isn’t necessarily treaty boom. As i and many others have already said, there are ways to put pressure on an opponent without putting yourself too far behind (raiding with 5 huss or 10 ashi or whatever). And you don’t even have to play in an optimal way. Aizamk doesn’t use optimal, highly efficient builds when he plays unstandard, but he is still at least trying to win and sometimes manages to do so.
Saying that an all in rush is a legit strat in FFA is like saying that you’d pike rush in 1v1, destroy a couple houses and a barracks and then you’re content with the game and you resign.
If you all in rush you’re not even trying to get an advantage over your opponents. You’re just randomly picking one of the other players and saying “you’re gonna lose with me because i decided i don’t really feel like winning this one”.
I mean, just look at how actual wars are fought. Nazi Germany didn’t just use all of their resources to attack Russia leaving all their other borders defenseless.
[Some people aspire to be pr30+, some people aspire to have fun, and some people aspire to play 3v3 Deccan.] - vividlyplain - 2019 Who (nationality) rape ?
stupid logic. noob players can say op?
toxic, Insult, Racism ?

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 16 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