It is currently Sat Jun 24, 2017 4:45 am



Welcome
Welcome to Victoria 2 multiplayer forum.


Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 5 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: My perspective on what went wrong this game
PostPosted: Sun Nov 29, 2015 9:15 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jan 31, 2015 10:31 pm
Posts: 191
* Putting new players on big countries
* Not explaining how going over infamy is a terrible idea and you must do everything to prevent it
* Prussia sabotaging himself by not peacing out with China
* Not informing new player Prussia that giving Slayzer military access would make him go over infamy
* Not allowing new player Prussia to change his decision about military access once he realized he fucked up and ruined his country to give Austria military access in a strategically unimportant war for him.



That was first session. Although the game had not really gone to **** yet, you could see the seeds that were sown for the second session which could've already been prevented. This is why I'm against only replaying the second session, because even the first session had its problems that lead to the stupid situation that was the second session.

* Chad playing dumb and acting as if releasing Danzig as Prussia isn't stupid abuse. This was sort of solved by giving him the 5 infamy again, but now the truce was over with the Russian alliance(admittedly I didn't realize this at the time, if I had I would've addressed it).
* The monumental **** up that was Slayzer joining a war that already surrendered isolating Prussia even further because now Russia could only attack Prussia and no longer Austria
* Also led to Markoni going over infamy because Slayzer refuses to lower the infamy he sustained adding a wargoal on someone who joined a war
* Markoni already being over infamy realizing the only way he can now stay alive is by "winning the game" and just going nuts with infamy


That's when I left to go to a party, but apparently afterwards more new players went over infamy and basically allowed Russia to do to them what they should've been doing to Russia.

I propose we replay the game, with the same treaties as we had session one, but now the newer players actually know what they should NOT be doing and will probably perform much better. I personally think the UK and Prussia players were good at the game, just not good at the house rules that take a while to get used to. So doing the game again from the start would allow them to prevent those mistakes they made in regards to the rules/treaty breaking/infamy.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: My perspective on what went wrong this game
PostPosted: Tue Dec 01, 2015 1:20 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Nov 18, 2015 2:35 pm
Posts: 109
There were several retarted things I made and I would like to write them down so other newer players can learn from my mistakes:
1st retarted thing I made was that I choose to play Prussia. When I joined this tournament, only 2 GPs were not taken - UK and Prussia. I was retarted that I didnt choose UK instead (or some smaller country), because playing Prussia and having 4 pro players around is not the best start for player like me, especially since I was not familiar with competitive strategies for research buildup, industry, nor unit composition.
2nd retarted thing I made was not reading well the treaty I signed. Violation of one small part of a treaty means the same huge consequencies. In this case, it would be better to evaluate whether it has any point so sign the treaty or better to not sign treaty at all - it might minimize the risk of going over infamy for newer players.
3rd retarted thing I made was giving France a space he needed to prepare and invade me. I should have first focus on Europe, then expand elsewhere. Invading France first and beating his *** would be definetly better to do as Prussia since the beginning (Im not saying it would be easy though)

There are several other smallers and less important mistakes I made (like not putting 100% tax and tariff) but I talked a lot to slayzer and red several guides. I have still a lot to learn but hopefully now I will be able to play that game on a total different way.
I decided to leave Prussia so somebody skilled can play it way better than I or other newer player.
Probably will be applying for a secondary power.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: My perspective on what went wrong this game
PostPosted: Tue Dec 01, 2015 9:00 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jan 31, 2015 10:31 pm
Posts: 191
[quote="DuroSVK"]There were several retarted things I made and I would like to write them down so other newer players can learn from my mistakes:
1st retarted thing I made was that I choose to play Prussia. When I joined this tournament, only 2 GPs were not taken - UK and Prussia. I was retarted that I didnt choose UK instead (or some smaller country), because playing Prussia and having 4 pro players around is not the best start for player like me, especially since I was not familiar with competitive strategies for research buildup, industry, nor unit composition.
2nd retarted thing I made was not reading well the treaty I signed. Violation of one small part of a treaty means the same huge consequencies. In this case, it would be better to evaluate whether it has any point so sign the treaty or better to not sign treaty at all - it might minimize the risk of going over infamy for newer players.
3rd retarted thing I made was giving France a space he needed to prepare and invade me. I should have first focus on Europe, then expand elsewhere. Invading France first and beating his *** would be definetly better to do as Prussia since the beginning (Im not saying it would be easy though)

There are several other smallers and less important mistakes I made (like not putting 100% tax and tariff) but I talked a lot to slayzer and red several guides. I have still a lot to learn but hopefully now I will be able to play that game on a total different way.
I decided to leave Prussia so somebody skilled can play it way better than I or other newer player.
Probably will be applying for a secondary power.


Hey man really cool that you can be self-reflective about your mistakes. I definitely think Two Sicilies into forming Italy is a much smarter choice for a first multiplayer game. You don't have too many natural enemies and the fronts you have are small and easily defensible. If you ever want any help you can hit me up on steam. Also yeah the treaty thing can be tricky at first, but I'm pretty sure had you asked Slayzer nicely he would've reversed your decision, not all is lost when you break a treaty accidentally, typically people are willing to give some leeway :).

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: My perspective on what went wrong this game
PostPosted: Wed Dec 02, 2015 1:59 am 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 31, 2013 1:13 pm
Posts: 780
Location: Belgrade,Serbia
I told him to break the treaty.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: My perspective on what went wrong this game
PostPosted: Wed Dec 02, 2015 1:10 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jan 31, 2015 10:31 pm
Posts: 191
Slayzer wrote:
I told him to break the treaty.



You're literally hitler


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 5 posts ] 


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
suspicion-preferred