User Tag List

First 2345 Last

Results 31 to 40 of 49

  1. #31
    pathwise dependent FDG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    MBTI
    ENTJ
    Enneagram
    7w8
    Socionics
    ENTj
    Posts
    5,908

    Default

    If that was a tournament, then I see nothing very strange with your actions. People play computer games they like all night long, for example, so it's not particularly strange to spend one night studying a game you enjoy.
    ENTj 7-3-8 sx/sp

  2. #32
    Senior Member ptgatsby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    ISTP
    Posts
    4,474

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Antisocial one View Post
    As I have said I can explain my actions/strategy.
    I don't see anything wrong with what you did. You took it more serious, but it's not exactly a social situation.

    Having played ladders and tournaments in a lot of games, people do take games really seriously. If you were doing it to win at all costs in a social situation... that might an issue. Doing it for a tournament of any type is very reasonable (assuming you aren't making kids cry rule-lawyering ). In between is... debatable, and the only thing that decides it is context.

    The only thing that got you in trouble was letting your ego take over. Never talk about how you do it. It's always natural ability and luck. Always.

  3. #33
    IRL is not real Cimarron's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    MBTI
    ISTJ
    Enneagram
    5w6 sp/so
    Posts
    3,424

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Antisocial one View Post
    Of course, I do that without problem.

    Actually, in many games you can't have a master plan before you start since many games are very random. So you must plan as you go.


    It is just that in this version of RISK allows this kind of thinking to be successful. Game allows alliance against me so creators were thinking that this will always balance the situation. But I have planned so much that I have managed to find a hole.


    As I have said I can explain my actions/strategy.
    True, but what I mean is would you put yourself at a disadvantage on purpose, by not planning from the start even though you could have--like for Risk, for example? It could be a nice challenge to see what you're capable of....

    Just wondering.
    You can't spell "justice" without ISTJ.

  4. #34
    Member Richard0612's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Posts
    30

    Default

    I could probably see how overthinking and obsessively planning could suck the fun out of a game, although trying to find holes in various different strategies could be fun (or maybe that's just me...). For example: two players each take turns using a certain strategy (perhaps agreed on beforehand to give some ideas?) and the other does all they can to find holes in said strategy.

  5. #35
    Senior Member Darjur's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5
    Posts
    493

    Default

    If you did that and then told me of that, I'd most likely demand a rematch and I'd try my best to beat you until I beat you. I'd probably end up planning up till 4am myself.

  6. #36
    Queen hunter Virtual ghost's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    8,692

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ptgatsby View Post

    The only thing that got you in trouble was letting your ego take over. Never talk about how you do it. It's always natural ability and luck. Always.
    I can't say it was a tourmanent it was something between.

    But I could not hide that I had a plan my strategy has so much unlikely moves that is hard to believe that I have figured them up during the game.
    I exactly knew how much soldiers I need for some noncombat actions.


    You can't watch how I am systemically erasing them from the board and then say that this is just a bad luck.

    It is normal that you capture 2 or 3 territories per turn and my ratio was
    12-15 territories per turn and all of it because I have found the hole.

    The reaction in the first turn was already "Eaa... I don't like this!" and in third turn was already obvious that I am going to erase them both.

    The main reason why they were not mad was because hey knew all along that something is wrong.


    As for
    "You are machine set to win and nothing we do can change that"

    That is a part of another story.

  7. #37
    Senior Member ptgatsby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    ISTP
    Posts
    4,474

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Antisocial one View Post
    But I could not hide that I had a plan my strategy has so much unlikely moves that is hard to believe that I have figured them up during the game.
    I know the game pretty well because we used to host mini tourneys at a local university... not so much 2010 in particular, but a range of them including 2010.

    You can easily hide your edge in the game... you chose not to.

    You can't watch how I am systemically erasing them from the board and then say that this is just a bad luck.
    Then you are missing the point. Right now, no matter how you rationalize it, you are bragging on what you did. That's where your strategy fails... you replaced localised tactics, successful ones, in place of the overall strategy. It's not being strategic at all... that would require long run planning, directional control... none of which you are doing.

    You are right - you can't watch how you systemically destroyed them and not know that you put effort/etc into it. You execute good tactics - command over a situation... but now you ask why this tactical win wasn't strategic. It's because you put no consideration into anything other than the battle you were in.

    Hence why I said that you won the battle but lost the war.

    This happened quite a bit in the MTG playtesting groups. The theory goes that you build the decks up and play a bunch of games. It serves two purposes - you practise against the standard decks and get to point out mistakes/alternatives to each other, and you get to refine the deck.

    There are players that get into these games intending to win. They fight and fight, don't help others, don't go over refining, rule lawyer and everything else. Those people tend to be pushed out of the play testing groups - it's the same thing. They should be thinking about the tournaments coming up, not winning this particular game.

    Keep your eye on what your strategy is. It currently shows that you care more about showing off than anything else - strategy, because that's the direction you chose to take. In a tournament, crushing someone is... well, good strategy if you are aiming to take the top spots (depending on the bracket system, anyway). Context - the strategy is all in the context of what you are achieving, always.

  8. #38
    Queen hunter Virtual ghost's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    8,692

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Cimarron View Post
    True, but what I mean is would you put yourself at a disadvantage on purpose, by not planning from the start even though you could have--like for Risk, for example? It could be a nice challenge to see what you're capable of....

    Just wondering.
    In this version of risk if you place yourself in disadvantage you will lose, the game is simply built that games are won before they even start.
    For the most part.


    But in most games things are much more random and I am still good at it, so planning a disadvantage is hard and pointless.
    Not to mention that people who played something with me notice when I am placing myself in disadvantage to make things more interesting.
    I am not saying this because I am narcissoid but because other person gets annoyed when they see that I am not playing properly.

  9. #39
    Queen hunter Virtual ghost's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    8,692

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ptgatsby View Post
    I know the game pretty well because we used to host mini tourneys at a local university... not so much 2010 in particular, but a range of them including 2010.

    You can easily hide your edge in the game... you chose not to.



    Then you are missing the point. Right now, no matter how you rationalize it, you are bragging on what you did. That's where your strategy fails... you replaced localised tactics, successful ones, in place of the overall strategy. It's not being strategic at all... that would require long run planning, directional control... none of which you are doing.

    You are right - you can't watch how you systemically destroyed them and not know that you put effort/etc into it. You execute good tactics - command over a situation... but now you ask why this tactical win wasn't strategic. It's because you put no consideration into anything other than the battle you were in.

    Hence why I said that you won the battle but lost the war.

    This happened quite a bit in the MTG playtesting groups. The theory goes that you build the decks up and play a bunch of games. It serves two purposes - you practise against the standard decks and get to point out mistakes/alternatives to each other, and you get to refine the deck.

    There are players that get into these games intending to win. They fight and fight, don't help others, don't go over refining, rule lawyer and everything else. Those people tend to be pushed out of the play testing groups - it's the same thing. They should be thinking about the tournaments coming up, not winning this particular game.

    Keep your eye on what your strategy is. It currently shows that you care more about showing off than anything else - strategy, because that's the direction you chose to take. In a tournament, crushing someone is... well, good strategy if you are aiming to take the top spots (depending on the bracket system, anyway). Context - the strategy is all in the context of what you are achieving, always.
    I don't know any other way to say something about my position. So it looks that I am bragging. Believe me I have a lot of things to bragg about but that is not my interest here.


    I totally understand what you are saying and I don't do this every week.
    I did it only once. Usually I already know what I will do in sitation like this
    but I don't plan the detail like in this case. I have created this thread exactly because it is so extreme case.

    I always know in what general direction I will go, but you must be adapting yourself all the time to actually have a good and efficient strategy and I do that.


    In video games this is even more expressed then it is in the board games and I am more into video games then board games.

  10. #40
    Diabolical Kasper's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Enneagram
    9w8 so/sx
    Posts
    11,544

    Default

    I have no interest in planning itís not really enjoyable unless I wing it but I do enjoy playing strategy games with my INTJ friend, itís hella competitive, we make each other think about every possible outcome before moving which neither of us are really used to when playing others, a wrong move will be noticed. Usually Iíll lose interest first and mentally give in so she kicks my ass but not before one hell of a challenge.

    That said I prolly wouldnít wanna play against you

Similar Threads

  1. How much self-confidence is too much self-confidence?
    By Virtual ghost in forum The Bonfire
    Replies: 35
    Last Post: 06-09-2009, 03:48 PM
  2. How much of you is your psychology?
    By Xander in forum General Psychology
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: 04-26-2008, 06:11 PM
  3. How much of strength/skill is mental??
    By mysavior in forum General Psychology
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 03-30-2008, 10:26 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO