Doesn't Play Well With Others

    This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our Cookie Policy.

    • Doesn't Play Well With Others

      I like clean lines. I also like personal responsibility. I want to be a good team player, but that obviously means something different to me than it means to other folks. What it doesn't mean to me is having you inside my shirt with me while I'm trying to fight. If I want your help, I'll ask for it; otherwise, why don't you work over there, and I'll work over here?

      Don't get me wrong: I appreciate a joint effort when necessary. Russia has gotten huge and too powerful for you or me to take down individually? No problem, let's do this togther, buddy. Navy wasn't your strong suit, and Indonesia is now griefing you for it? I'm on my way.

      I don't need you taking Pristina while I take Skopje on Day 3, though. Back up!

      I understand that any situation could be or become one that requires teamwork. And I recognize that any damage my teammates take is less damage I have to take. I get it. But, honestly, unless it's a dire situation (in which case I may ASK for assistance), I'd rather control big, whole, clean regions of the map than have you help me clear out the troops of a player that I've already caused to quit.

      And that kind of touches on the real Issue I have with most close-quarters "teamwork": The vast majority of the time, I'm doing 95% of the work, but splitting the spoils 50-50 (or worse) with my "helper". Claiming the territories and cities I've spent time, troops, and resources emptying alone is not the kind of "help" I need from anyone.

      How do we avoid that when we're working together against the same enemies and toward the same goal? Easy, wait until I ask for help. Geopolitical borders and geographical barriers don't HAVE to be hard and fast dividing lines for us, but they can serve as a good guidelines. I like you okay, mate, but I don't need you with me inside of Cuba when there's still all of South and Central America to take.

      Here's a general rule of thumb for playing with me: If you see me working in a region, don't even head toward that region if there are other viable options. In fact, let's all work in our own separate, sizeable areas until and unless someone says, "Hey, can you guys give me a hand here?" That should be like a 90%-10% division (of time), though. Working together is great, but we don't need to be holding hands... until we do.

      The post was edited 1 time, last by PerigeeNil ().

    • agree I prefer to have an ally as neighbor and we have each others back but move in our own direction. And if that ally is attacked and can help I will but ; if they are reckless and get into trouble doing something stupid I cant just drop every thing and come to the rescue.

      I have had alliance partners that are more worried about racing me to cities than doing their own work; so just tell them go hunt your own prey dont try to steal my kill.

      I have had partners were could work in close proximity together but had active/open communication. But it was agreed we would basically divide sections of country and some times I could have taken it all but having an ally grow was too my best interest too. But we were Myanmar and Thailand so we were tightly grouped and had to work together to beat back some bigger countries like china and India.
    • Buckeyechamp wrote:

      I have had alliance partners that are more worried about racing me to cities than doing their own work;
      This is probably the single thing in the game that makes me angriest. I'm a big fan of "matchups" when it comes to meeting one military force with another. So, if I can destroy some unprotected ground forces from a distance with ONLY aerial firepower, I will. This is NOT an invitation for my teammates to rush their ground forces in to claim the cities/territories I've just cleaned out. And then there's the REAL racing! I've had coalition mates RUSH their troops to cities to which I've already drawn my lines. ARE YOU KIDDING ME RIGHT NOW?! GO FIGHT SOMETHING!

      "I have had partners were could work in close proximity together but had active/open communication. But it was agreed we would basically divide sections of country and some times I could have taken it all but having an ally grow was too my best interest too."

      Absolutely. This is the best case scenario, right? 'You take everything north of the Yangtze; I'll take everything south.' or 'You take cities A, B, and C, and I'll take cities X, Y, and Z.' That's fine - better than fine, in fact; it's great. But did you seriously just direct your troop transport to Fiji seven minutes before mine AFTER I bombed the troops out of Fiji AND directed my troops there?! I know you had to see my line when you drew yours!

      The worst part is that I am not an unreasonable or unkind person. If you need/want a certain area or city; I can't even imagine a scenario where I won't step back and let you be the one to fight and conquer it. Even if you were completely on the other side of the world, and I was conquering all of Africa and you said, "Hey, man, can I have Khartoum? My mom grew up there, and it's special to me." Absolutely! But don't sit back while I work my butt off conquering all of Africa and then zip your measley little motorized infantry troop into Khartoum without saying anything after I clear it out and before I claim it myself.

      The post was edited 1 time, last by PerigeeNil ().

    • another reason not to join coalitions with randoms :D

      PerigeeNil wrote:

      This is probably the single thing in the game that makes me angriest. I'm a big fan of "matchups" when it comes to meeting one military force with another. So, if I can destroy some unprotected ground forces from a distance with ONLY aerial firepower, I will. This is NOT an invitation for my teammates to rush their ground forces in to claim the cities/territories I've just cleaned out. And then there's the REAL racing! I've had coalition mates RUSH their troops to cities to which I've already drawn my lines. ARE YOU KIDDING ME RIGHT NOW?! GO FIGHT SOMETHING!
      I am The Baseline for opinions
    • SIdenote: Don't draw days and days worth of lines all over creation. Draw yourself a little section and 'git out tha way'.

      I'm in a game right now in which Russia and I totally cleared out Europe. Saudi, who's an okay player and a fair enough character, spent 20+ days making ZERO headway on getting into Africa. That's nto a knock on them; it was a tough task. Complete stalemate down there the entire time. So, Russia and I came down, worked with Saudi, and blew out all of the remaining Africans in like two game days. Now Africa's all big and empty. So,... Saudi draws lines through virtually every territory in all of Africa. Ummm... what are you doing, bro? I get that this is your baby, but you don't get to claim an entire continent after spending 20+ days not even being able to gain a foothold. You dedicated more to this than anyone, so go ahead and choose any big ol' chunk you want, but this is going to go much better if we split it up into at least some kind of sections.
    • Teburu wrote:

      another reason not to join coalitions with randoms :D

      PerigeeNil wrote:

      This is probably the single thing in the game that makes me angriest. I'm a big fan of "matchups" when it comes to meeting one military force with another. So, if I can destroy some unprotected ground forces from a distance with ONLY aerial firepower, I will. This is NOT an invitation for my teammates to rush their ground forces in to claim the cities/territories I've just cleaned out. And then there's the REAL racing! I've had coalition mates RUSH their troops to cities to which I've already drawn my lines. ARE YOU KIDDING ME RIGHT NOW?! GO FIGHT SOMETHING!

      This solid point is not lost on me, Teburu. Lol.

      The problem is that now I'm a Moderator, and I fear that if I get too involved with the REALLY competitive folks, there will eventually be accusations of favoritism.
    • Here's another one:

      I put together a nice African coalition. We conquered all of Africa, so we're collecting ourselves, cleaning up the last few stray territories, and discussing what we're going to do next. We decide on South America. One country rushes off immediately before everyone else, headed for Patagonia. They get there, meet some resistance, and start fighting their way through the South American coalition up into Argentina. "Hey, can you guys come help take some pressure off of me in South America?" he asks. "Sure," I say, and ship some stacks to Manaus, Brazil. I log back in to see that I've taken Manaus, but he's drawn lines into every open territory around Manaus. Meanwhile, all of Chile and parts of Argentina are untouched.

      WHAT are you doing, man?! Do you mind giving me a little space to set up here so I can help you? How is it that you need help down south, but you've somehow got enough extra troops to be crowding me up north?
    • PerigeeNil wrote:

      SIdenote: Don't draw days and days worth of lines all over creation. Draw yourself a little section and 'git out tha way'.

      I'm in a game right now in which Russia and I totally cleared out Europe. Saudi, who's an okay player and a fair enough character, spent 20+ days making ZERO headway on getting into Africa. That's nto a knock on them; it was a tough task. Complete stalemate down there the entire time. So, Russia and I came down, worked with Saudi, and blew out all of the remaining Africans in like two game days. Now Africa's all big and empty. So,... Saudi draws lines through virtually every territory in all of Africa. Ummm... what are you doing, bro? I get that this is your baby, but you don't get to claim an entire continent after spending 20+ days not even being able to gain a foothold. You dedicated more to this than anyone, so go ahead and choose any big ol' chunk you want, but this is going to go much better if we split it up into at least some kind of sections.
      absolutely.. dont go on a run that you cant take and hold within like 24 hr max
    • don't worry, PerigeeNil. It's not you, it's just that the average player in a team is here for the safety of numbers and a empty border that intimidates him less.
      Running an online alliance is pretty much like running a small company, except you need to find other way than money to keep your employees productive. May they play or work, they are humans.
    • Yep; I have the same situation sometimes. In one game, I was conquering Italy with only a couple southern cities left and UK, who hadn’t done anything prior to help with the combat there, flew in a recon division and pathed them through all the Italian territory. I just repathed mine to counter, but what generally happens is those people get warned, kicked, and conquered. I also like clean territory lines; in my primary Cuba game, my coalition is the only one left. Therefore, I divided the remaining territory in partitions as equitable, aligned, and balanced as humanly possible with latitudinal guidelines. So far, my allies in that Flashpoint are following the plan and it’s working excellently for everyone.
    • It is actually one of the best reasons to play in alliance.

      Sometimes, you don't want to be less afraid of your ennemies than of your allies, because the range of what you can encounter is the rollecoaster



      On the extreme bottom, you have the guy that doesn't know how to count to 5 for coalitions, gives all your informations to your opponent and basically OBEYS to him without being a multi account, just because the other guy said "we will spare you". Of course, when he is killed because "learn to count up to 5", he will turn to you and shout at you for not preventing the situation.

      On the bottom, you have the guy that will positively NEVER answer to call for help or cooperation EXCEPT if it involves taking empty territory, but that will shout like a Aircraft Carrier siren 24/24 if he is even remotely threatened. You use more of your time to get him to stop crying, than you can actually fight.

      On the low average, you have the guy that swears he is a pro, gets attacked, lose one infantry, call the other player a cheater/gold user, and archive.

      On the average, you have the guy that will, whenever attacked, right click select all his units, then add destination randomly in the opponent territory, and then pray.




      On the other extreme, you encounter sometimes a competitive trained player, that was at first reluctant to do diplomacy with you (because of all the examples above), but gradually understands you are one of those rare individuals with a functional brain. He then commits to you, and there, you probably have won the game before it even began.

      "Being an normal ally" ---> "Being an archangel of skill, in CoN"

      :D

      I don't say that all alliance players are good (far from it, actually), but when you are in an alliance, you usually find more easily reliable and trustable people. Less mental charge due to retards.
      Running an online alliance is pretty much like running a small company, except you need to find other way than money to keep your employees productive. May they play or work, they are humans.
    • Teburu wrote:

      while its kinda annoying when ppl race with you for a country you defeated on your own it rarely has any impact :D
      and these are usually the players that will rush in anywhere and then get rekt by any player with half a brain cell; at that point i'd just sit there and watch
      I call them Looter...you always get them. Rule in my coalition is. Who hunted the prey gets the loot...I once had a guy only building up infantry to loot like crazy as soon as i killed the main force...pretty annyoing...
      Alle sagten: Das geht nicht. Dann kam einer, der wusste das nicht und hat es einfach gemacht.
    • Opulon wrote:

      On the extreme bottom, you have the guy that doesn't know how to count to 5 for coalitions, gives all your informations to your opponent and basically OBEYS to him without being a multi account, just because the other guy said "we will spare you". Of course, when he is killed because "learn to count up to 5", he will turn to you and shout at you for not preventing the situation.


      On the bottom, you have the guy that will positively NEVER answer to call for help or cooperation EXCEPT if it involves taking empty territory, but that will shout like a Aircraft Carrier siren 24/24 if he is even remotely threatened. You use more of your time to get him to stop crying, than you can actually fight.

      On the low average, you have the guy that swears he is a pro, gets attacked, lose one infantry, call the other player a cheater/gold user, and archive.

      On the average, you have the guy that will, whenever attacked, right click select all his units, then add destination randomly in the opponent territory, and then pray.


      On the other extreme, you encounter sometimes a competitive trained player, that was at first reluctant to do diplomacy with you (because of all the examples above), but gradually understands you are one of those rare individuals with a functional brain. He then commits to you, and there, you probably have won the game before it even began.
      You get pretty much a lot of player types covered. I love the way you write. Can you make a new thread with all playertypes you have met in CON? I bet it will get pinned and the sitecount will skyrocket...
      Alle sagten: Das geht nicht. Dann kam einer, der wusste das nicht und hat es einfach gemacht.
    • Opulon wrote:

      It is actually one of the best reasons to play in alliance.

      Sometimes, you don't want to be less afraid of your ennemies than of your allies, because the range of what you can encounter is the rollecoaster



      On the extreme bottom, you have the guy that doesn't know how to count to 5 for coalitions, gives all your informations to your opponent and basically OBEYS to him without being a multi account, just because the other guy said "we will spare you". Of course, when he is killed because "learn to count up to 5", he will turn to you and shout at you for not preventing the situation.

      On the bottom, you have the guy that will positively NEVER answer to call for help or cooperation EXCEPT if it involves taking empty territory, but that will shout like a Aircraft Carrier siren 24/24 if he is even remotely threatened. You use more of your time to get him to stop crying, than you can actually fight.

      On the low average, you have the guy that swears he is a pro, gets attacked, lose one infantry, call the other player a cheater/gold user, and archive.

      On the average, you have the guy that will, whenever attacked, right click select all his units, then add destination randomly in the opponent territory, and then pray.




      On the other extreme, you encounter sometimes a competitive trained player, that was at first reluctant to do diplomacy with you (because of all the examples above), but gradually understands you are one of those rare individuals with a functional brain. He then commits to you, and there, you probably have won the game before it even began.

      "Being an normal ally" ---> "Being an archangel of skill, in CoN"

      :D

      I don't say that all alliance players are good (far from it, actually), but when you are in an alliance, you usually find more easily reliable and trustable people. Less mental charge due to retards.
      That definitely covers it. You should make it into a YouTube video: “The 5 Types of Conflict of Nations Players”.
    • Opulon wrote:

      It is actually one of the best reasons to play in alliance.

      Sometimes, you don't want to be less afraid of your ennemies than of your allies, because the range of what you can encounter is the rollecoaster



      On the extreme bottom, you have the guy that doesn't know how to count to 5 for coalitions, gives all your informations to your opponent and basically OBEYS to him without being a multi account, just because the other guy said "we will spare you". Of course, when he is killed because "learn to count up to 5", he will turn to you and shout at you for not preventing the situation.

      On the bottom, you have the guy that will positively NEVER answer to call for help or cooperation EXCEPT if it involves taking empty territory, but that will shout like a Aircraft Carrier siren 24/24 if he is even remotely threatened. You use more of your time to get him to stop crying, than you can actually fight.

      On the low average, you have the guy that swears he is a pro, gets attacked, lose one infantry, call the other player a cheater/gold user, and archive.

      On the average, you have the guy that will, whenever attacked, right click select all his units, then add destination randomly in the opponent territory, and then pray.




      On the other extreme, you encounter sometimes a competitive trained player, that was at first reluctant to do diplomacy with you (because of all the examples above), but gradually understands you are one of those rare individuals with a functional brain. He then commits to you, and there, you probably have won the game before it even began.

      "Being an normal ally" ---> "Being an archangel of skill, in CoN"

      :D

      I don't say that all alliance players are good (far from it, actually), but when you are in an alliance, you usually find more easily reliable and trustable people. Less mental charge due to retards.
      and then there is the guy who's basically playing simcity :D
      I am The Baseline for opinions