What do you like/dislike of scenarios?

I wonder what are the community's taste on them.

I personally like:

- Good or at least decent borders.
- Countries and cities named correctly.

- All default units available, plus special units (like in Ancient).
- Scenarios that have units type marked (so I don't have to go to units to figure what works as a marine).

- Scenario planned for an hour ( 30 mins is a bit too fast but okay, 2 hours sucks tho).

- Logical, non-random events (I seriously hate how outta nowhere they thrown 50 marines at your cap...)


Dislike:
- Trenches
- lots of no-go areas

- Broken gameplay (just pick RA and spam tanks from A to B...)
- Broken countries ("noob you're supposed to hold until they kill you")

- Lots of cities (Some city density is fine, but lots of cities just blow my PC).

- 15+ Players to start (Unless is Tik's ww2, otherwise it will most likely not fill anysoon)
- Scenarios that requires 6+ minutes turn (4 minute is the ideal for me. 5 is fine).

Oh and those were you control a distant country, like UK players controlling Egypt... chances are that you or a new player forget it.

I personally hate autists there, nothing else. They are the reason why the most of your dislikes are here (trenches, no-gos, broken countries, too long turns, lots of cities).

I am fine with long scenarios because they're just like world map 50k, you either have time for it or not. Short scenarios are quicker and of course more fun, though.

But my favorite kind of scenarios are the realistic ones, and even though you should basically stick to how it happened in real life, you can still try new stuff out.

Edit: players who don't check their countries before the game starts basically don't deserve to play scenarios, so UK controlling Egypt is fine.

If I can't fucking attack my neighbour immediately, I hate it. Bonus points if RP is in the title.

Some maps come down to how many times you played it and most of high ranks dont tell you what to do and flame you for everything

I also hate events. However i prefer games without events at all or first turn events only. I Do not enjoy scripted Games. But Also i set all my games to 6 min turns screw you Clovis.

I like custom units, for example Aetius'/Pyrrhus' units in Neuordnung, 20att / 10 def tank [unit type: other]. Because infantry cannot destroy 40t tank of steel.

I like scenarios for being able to recreate/reenact historic wars, like Napoleon War, Great Turkish War, Danelagen, WW1, WW2

I like scenarios for allowing creators to make futuristic wars with imaginery warring sides and units. Endless possibilities. From Star Wars to Destoria and Dreamworld.

I don't like scenarios for being misused to create RP.

I like interesting unit systems, a good mix of land and sea, I would like a long game if my program wasn't so full of stuff that I can't get 3 hours in a row, I like large and important event (such as "X joins the war so Y faction gets country A,B and C", not "Y faction gets 5 inf in X city because a tiny offensive happened there"), I like having to cooperate with your allies, I like elite units, I like 16th-19th century maps

I don't like trenches (other than certain cases when they're used as a mechanic rather than a frontline), memorisation-based maps, extensive use of events, stalemates (oh god please no), autistic attack unit/defense unit (as in, how much they're used), lack of transports, trains, wallspam, trenches combined with wallspam (OH GOD PLEASE NO), extremely low city density, extremely high city density, slow units, autistic amount of units, autistic income/reinf ratio, allyfag (in GGG), having to fund people, scripting, having to die nomatter what, having Turkey against a Balkan nation in the map because the game will be invaded by nationalists

Напишано од SQUARED, 09.03.2016 at 13:49

Напишано од Guest, 09.03.2016 at 09:17

I personally hate autists there, nothing else.
...
But my favorite kind of scenarios are the realistic ones

The most autistic scenarios on AtWar are the realistic ones. Relying on event units to win the game take less skill than a RP or world 50k does.

Unlocking units after X amount of turns also contributes to this autism, again where is the skill involved?

By your logic, Rise of Nations and its counterparts are autistic games because you go through epochs developing new weapons.

Напишано од SQUARED, 09.03.2016 at 13:49

Напишано од Guest, 09.03.2016 at 09:17

I personally hate autists there, nothing else.
...
But my favorite kind of scenarios are the realistic ones

The most autistic scenarios on AtWar are the realistic ones. Relying on event units to win the game take less skill than a RP or world 50k does.

Unlocking units after X amount of turns also contributes to this autism, again where is the skill involved?

I mean, they're my favorite on 1st try because I know what is gonna happen. But they get boring after 2nd play

Напишано од SQUARED, 09.03.2016 at 15:32

I don't know what that is but it does sound autistic, you're right.

Maybe you could enlighten me though. How exactly does producing an OP unit after a certain amount of turns use skill? It takes 0 skill. Its literally roleplaying by waiting until X turn then you can spam X unit. It's autism.

Ever played Rise of Nations, Age of Empires, Empire Earth, Age of Mythology. You go through eras, stone age, classic age, medieval age, enlightement age, industrial age, nuclear age, information age. Every age have its own developed weaponry. So when you get to that age you unlock it and become able to buy it in quantity you want. Why is that autistic? In AtWar if someone created such map, like Sapien (although i think it is RP), you get upgraded units, everyone does. How that changes your gameplay or affect skill? You still have to do all the work.

Напишано од SQUARED, 09.03.2016 at 17:45

in most cases there are no units to counter it.

In that case i agree with you, but usually there are units to counter event units or 'upgraded' units because where is logic to put some OP unit for one player but ignore the opposition. It doesn't have to be the same turn both warring states get upgraded unit, and it doesn't have to be same unit type, but creator should be careful what he's doing.

A mix of units that each one has a counter. With different types terrain to make land, sea, and air a fun and enjoyable.

Напишано од clovis1122, 09.03.2016 at 09:10

I wonder what are the community's taste on them.

I personally like:

- Good or at least decent borders.
- Countries and cities named correctly.

- All default units available, plus special units (like in Ancient).
- Scenarios that have units type marked (so I don't have to go to units to figure what works as a marine).

- Scenario planned for an hour ( 30 mins is a bit too fast but okay, 2 hours sucks tho).

- Logical, non-random events (I seriously hate how outta nowhere they thrown 50 marines at your cap...)


Dislike:
- Trenches
- lots of no-go areas

- Broken gameplay (just pick RA and spam tanks from A to B...)
- Broken countries ("noob you're supposed to hold until they kill you")

- Lots of cities (Some city density is fine, but lots of cities just blow my PC).

- 15+ Players to start (Unless is Tik's ww2, otherwise it will most likely not fill anysoon)
- Scenarios that requires 6+ minutes turn (4 minute is the ideal for me. 5 is fine).

What I do not like about the game and thus far is only issue I have once you go across the Oceans to attack another player that usually takes 3-5 turns to get there they leave there should be a way to accomplish the goal and earn more sp's and or reps towards conquering there capitol this is getting way rediciously an habit and it needs to stop Please look into this matter thanks

I have played ww1, and personally, it is fun when I am playing Germany. I like the trench warfare, it''s very slow paced and relaxing I can just sit down, and have a drink and watch other people and occasionally move my units.

Напишано од PleaseMe, 10.03.2016 at 03:38

I have played ww1, and personally, it is fun when I am playing Germany. I like the trench warfare, it''s very slow paced and relaxing I can just sit down, and have a drink and watch other people and occasionally move my units.

You lazy basterd!

What I like about scenarios is that people play the scenarios that are not good quality and neglect the ones that had more work put in and are generally more enjoyable.

Напишано од Black Vortex, 13.03.2016 at 10:54

What I dislike about scenarios is that people play the scenarios that are not good quality and neglect the ones that had more work put in and are generally more enjoyable.

FTFY

I hate when there is a powerful type player like the shogun in the shogunate and Un in rp. They stop me from becoming op