Map Database  •  FAQ  •  RSS  •  Login

The playstyle triangle

What type of player are you?

Aggressive player
0
No votes
Aggressive player
0
No votes
Bait player
0
No votes
Bait player
0
No votes
Bait player
0
No votes
Bait player
0
No votes
 
Total votes : 0
<<

Esthlos

User avatar

Knight

Posts: 676

Joined: 23 Jun 2013, 16:02

KaM Skill Level: Beginner

Post 19 Jul 2013, 16:18

The playstyle triangle

Taking the cue from this video, I was wondering... could it apply to KaM too?

The "passive" player is a towers spammer. He/she will focus on the defence of his/her town, while trying to get a strong economy and then a very huge army before finally attacking, and often finds him/herself sieged by other players.
Food is a major concern for this type of player, as he/she needs his/her troops to stay alive while that huge army is being built up.
The key sentence for this player is "safety first!"

The "aggressive" player is a troops spammer. He/she will focus on strong and recurring fast attacks, and often finds him/herself sieging other towns.
Weapons are a major concern for this type of player, as he/she needs a lot of them in order to spam troops fast and attack again.
The key sentence for this player is "attack again!"

The "bait" player is a tricky explorer. He/she will focus on knowledge and exploration of the map. Then, he will beat other players with that, for example by forcing a battle while sneaking a few soldiers in the enemy town, in order to severely damage the most of it... he/she builds over time and through favourable exchanges the military and economic advantage needed to achieve victory.
He/she will not really focus on food or weapons until he/she has enough information.
The key sentence for this player is "hey, look over here!"

The "passive" player is countered by "aggressive" players, as he/she lets them expand freely and finally, after a long (and probably boring for the aggressive player) siege he/she finally gets overrun.

The "aggressive" player is countered by the "bait" players, as the "aggressive" player will often fall for the bait and get tricked into unfavourable exchanges.

The "bait" player is countered by "passive" players, as the passive player will rarely try to "make things happen", and will rarely fall for a bait.

And now, what about you... what kind of player are you? Do you recognize yourself in any of these categories, or do you think they do not apply at all to KaM players?
Just when you think you know something, you have to look at it in another way, even though it may seem silly or wrong. You must try! - John Keating, "Dead Poets Society"
<<

Bence791

Knight

Posts: 618

Joined: 20 Jul 2012, 20:25

KaM Skill Level: Beginner

Location: Hungary

Post 19 Jul 2013, 16:54

Re: The playstyle triangle

I didn't watch the video, but what you have written is... well... Let me write what I think there is in KaM, basing on this "comparison" or whatever.

The description you have given is actually pretty bad for the passive player. They are the campers. They don't have a strong economy, only towers and many archers. May NEVER attack. If he did, he is crushed by the "aggressive players" and is defeated. Most randoms go in this category. "I have time, you won't have troops!"

"Bad pt, no camping, a try to be offensive": Happens to do a bad in-pt performance, doesn't camp but goes offensive and suffers huge losses, often loses the game in a short time. Some randoms go in this category. "Hey, look at this! Ow damn!"

"Bad pt, bit of camping, then offensive": Happens to do a bad in-pt performance, so he camps for 10 minutes or so until he gets enough troops, helps on the frontline to repel the enemy but isn't offensive for a while, so he can build a bigger army. Then he plays decently. "Wait a minute".

"Good pt, a bit of camping in hope the enemy attacks and loses, then decent": Happens to do a good in-pt performance, after that, he maybe camps awaiting the enemy to attack and then do a counterattack so he has a higher rate of success in the second battle. "Haha come at me bro!"

"Good pt, bit of passiveness, then decent": Does well in pt, then he sets up his army on the frontline (instead of camping) together with his allies. Is aggressive, when the situation is appropriate to be so. "Here my army is, come at me!"

"Rusher": Very good in-pt performance, but he has a weak economy so he has to attack pretty fast after pt's end. If he has decent allies, he usually wins. "The faster, the better".

"Lategamer": Often has a bad in-pt performance, but a very strong economy, which will allow him to spam like crazy lategame. He needs good allies that keep the enemy away while he is catching up with army. Best example for it is Da Revolution ;) "Help me, and I'll help you later".


Maybe those last sentences aren't good, wanted to follow the basic post ;) There isn't any sort of playstyle triangle, mostly the "mix" of lategamer and rusher wins. Simple as that.

P.S.: I don't get the role of "Bait"...
The Kamper is always taking my colour!

<<

Esthlos

User avatar

Knight

Posts: 676

Joined: 23 Jun 2013, 16:02

KaM Skill Level: Beginner

Post 19 Jul 2013, 21:41

Re: The playstyle triangle

I didn't watch the video, but what you have written is... well... Let me write what I think there is in KaM, basing on this "comparison" or whatever.

The description you have given is actually pretty bad for the passive player. They are the campers. They don't have a strong economy, only towers and many archers. May NEVER attack. If he did, he is crushed by the "aggressive players" and is defeated. Most randoms go in this category. "I have time, you won't have troops!"

"Bad pt, no camping, a try to be offensive": Happens to do a bad in-pt performance, doesn't camp but goes offensive and suffers huge losses, often loses the game in a short time. Some randoms go in this category. "Hey, look at this! Ow damn!"

"Bad pt, bit of camping, then offensive": Happens to do a bad in-pt performance, so he camps for 10 minutes or so until he gets enough troops, helps on the frontline to repel the enemy but isn't offensive for a while, so he can build a bigger army. Then he plays decently. "Wait a minute".

"Good pt, a bit of camping in hope the enemy attacks and loses, then decent": Happens to do a good in-pt performance, after that, he maybe camps awaiting the enemy to attack and then do a counterattack so he has a higher rate of success in the second battle. "Haha come at me bro!"

"Good pt, bit of passiveness, then decent": Does well in pt, then he sets up his army on the frontline (instead of camping) together with his allies. Is aggressive, when the situation is appropriate to be so. "Here my army is, come at me!"

"Rusher": Very good in-pt performance, but he has a weak economy so he has to attack pretty fast after pt's end. If he has decent allies, he usually wins. "The faster, the better".

"Lategamer": Often has a bad in-pt performance, but a very strong economy, which will allow him to spam like crazy lategame. He needs good allies that keep the enemy away while he is catching up with army. Best example for it is Da Revolution ;) "Help me, and I'll help you later".
To me, all these seem either aggressive players who are having a bad game and are trying to catch up or a mix of the passive and aggressive playstyles.

Except the "lategamer", which is exactly the "passive player".
(The video explains it pretty well in my opinion)
P.S.: I don't get the role of "Bait"...
He/she is the one that tries to trick other players, that makes you think he/she is doing something (like battling) while he/she is actually sneaking a few units in your town.
Yet, being KaM a game where the map is permanently revealed once explored, where you can zoom out freely and where you even get a notification when your town is under attack, I doubt this play style to be any effective unless the enemy tunnelvisions hard and focuses entirely on what he/she is doing at the moment...
Just when you think you know something, you have to look at it in another way, even though it may seem silly or wrong. You must try! - John Keating, "Dead Poets Society"
<<

Ben

User avatar

Former Site Admin

Posts: 3814

Joined: 08 Jan 2009, 23:00

Location: California - Pacific Time (UTC -8/-7 Summer Time)

Post 20 Jul 2013, 01:10

Re: The playstyle triangle

Please change "Passive Player" to "Camper" please :P

Seriously though, I can't consider myself to be of any one kind of gamestyle, because being predictable is a liability. Sometimes I am aggressive right off the bat, but most of the time I am quite passive for a few minutes after PT, but I'm not camping. My soldiers are outside trying to get into a good position on the map.

And it doesn't matter what, if you are a good player, you are going for weapons before/while going for food. Making a fisher after your iron smithy or making a butcher after your tannery, for example. If you rush bakeries while you are still eating beginning sausage, than you are not playing right. I see some people making three or four bakeries during peacetime. Like seriously? Why do you need 100+ loaves in your storehouse? They are doing absolutely nothing, especially while you are being overrun by the enemy. Basically what I am saying is that you can't really secure your food before starting weapons, because then you are in the category "Newbie/Beginner," and I don't think anybody wants to be that ;)

Anyway, a good player's economy is going to be pretty much the same no matter what unless he is going for a rush, and that works out quite differently. A rusher is still going for fast wood, still going for fast iron, and still going for fast gold. He is just going to ignore food as much as possible. He wants to win the game as soon as peacetime is over.

Maybe my message is unclear (I admit that my thoughts are terribly unorganized in this post), but basically the only two "play styles" for strong players are "rusher" and "non rusher." Weaker players may try rushing/not rushing, but they may not actually do it properly, so it's hard to consider them to be part of a certain category.

Of course, these are just my opinions. Othery may (and probably will) disagree ;)
I used to spam this forum so much...
<<

Bence791

Knight

Posts: 618

Joined: 20 Jul 2012, 20:25

KaM Skill Level: Beginner

Location: Hungary

Post 20 Jul 2013, 07:07

Re: The playstyle triangle

Except the "lategamer", which is exactly the "passive player".

No... The lategamer sacrifices his rush for a quite strong economy in pt, but with a relatively (relative to rushers, still can be much better than the newbies') weak army. He helps his allies, but his weapon production will own anyone else LATER. That's why he needs good allies who can keep fighting 3v4 (if his army was bad)... He isn't a camper, that's not the same. I have a replay of a typical lategame base of Da Revo, on The Final Frontier loc 5 (maybe r5116 or so) and on Golden Cliffs loc 6. He should be the first player to be crushed as soon as possible, I think you know what I mean.
He is just going to ignore food as much as possible.
Exactly. The rusher usually goes for 1 butcher (+1-2 fishers if possible) for quite a long time (for 20-30 minutes), later on a late bakery may be built. No vineyards either. And because his army consists of swordfighters (25+), militia (changing, usually 15-20+) and bowmen (40+), he'll be quite strong right after pt, but I think as you know, he will mainly train militia and bowmen later on, since swordfighter production is pretty slow. So he needs to expand to 5 pigfarms that he'll have enough leather to afford axefighter + bowmenspam (+ swordfighters and militia, but those aren't related to leather), and usually some more woodcutters. But usually starvation comes which slows his economy down, this might be fatal, which leads to his weapon production's end sometimes. And that leads to a defeat. So he is rather fast before his economy starves to death ;)
He/she is the one that tries to trick other players, that makes you think he/she is doing something (like battling) while he/she is actually sneaking a few units in your town.
And how does he/she "trick" players? Luring? Doesn't work. And you can't sneak a "few" units into a decent town since it has a good tower defence (no backdoors undefended). And you should rather use them on the battlefield... If someone from your team did it, he/she lost all his/her troops and that ends up in a 3v4 situation for a while... And that's a good game for you and your allies.
The Kamper is always taking my colour!

<<

Esthlos

User avatar

Knight

Posts: 676

Joined: 23 Jun 2013, 16:02

KaM Skill Level: Beginner

Post 20 Jul 2013, 08:35

Re: The playstyle triangle

And it doesn't matter what, if you are a good player, you are going for weapons before/while going for food. Making a fisher after your iron smithy or making a butcher after your tannery, for example. If you rush bakeries while you are still eating beginning sausage, than you are not playing right. I see some people making three or four bakeries during peacetime. Like seriously? Why do you need 100+ loaves in your storehouse? They are doing absolutely nothing, especially while you are being overrun by the enemy. Basically what I am saying is that you can't really secure your food before starting weapons, because then you are in the category "Newbie/Beginner," and I don't think anybody wants to be that ;)
"Food is a major concern" is not the same as "food is the only concern"; "food is a major concern" simply means you are going to actually feed your troops from time to time.
Maybe my message is unclear (I admit that my thoughts are terribly unorganized in this post), but basically the only two "play styles" for strong players are "rusher" and "non rusher."
If you like to call them this way you're free to, of course... if the rusher is one that attacks as soon as possible and the non rusher is one that playes defensive and only attacks when he thinks he's ready, then the concept is the same as the one of "passive" and "aggressive" playstyles.
Of course you can't find yourself perfectly fit in one category... that's why it's a categorization and not an exact description.
Every player will most probably have a mix of those playstyles; you fall into the category that is more similar to what you usually do.

Do you usually tend to spam troops as soon as possible and send them all to attack? Then you're an "aggressive player".
No... The lategamer sacrifices his rush for a quite strong economy in pt, but with a relatively (relative to rushers, still can be much better than the newbies') weak army. He helps his allies, but his weapon production will own anyone else LATER. That's why he needs good allies who can keep fighting 3v4 (if his army was bad)... He isn't a camper, that's not the same. I have a replay of a typical lategame base of Da Revo, on The Final Frontier loc 5 (maybe r5116 or so) and on Golden Cliffs loc 6. He should be the first player to be crushed as soon as possible, I think you know what I mean.
He gives up early aggression to build up, then crushes everything later when he's ready. That's a passive player.
Obviously he doesn't camp if he has allies to protect him; if he does not have them, then he can only camp, be crushed or adopt an aggressive playstyle.
He/she is the one that tries to trick other players, that makes you think he/she is doing something (like battling) while he/she is actually sneaking a few units in your town.
And how does he/she "trick" players? Luring? Doesn't work. And you can't sneak a "few" units into a decent town since it has a good tower defence (no backdoors undefended). And you should rather use them on the battlefield... If someone from your team did it, he/she lost all his/her troops and that ends up in a 3v4 situation for a while... And that's a good game for you and your allies.
  • Yet, being KaM a game where the map is permanently revealed once explored, where you can zoom out freely and where you even get a notification when your town is under attack, I doubt this play style to be any effective unless the enemy tunnelvisions hard and focuses entirely on what he/she is doing at the moment...
Last edited by Esthlos on 13 Sep 2021, 14:13, edited 2 times in total.
Reason: Fixed a double post
Just when you think you know something, you have to look at it in another way, even though it may seem silly or wrong. You must try! - John Keating, "Dead Poets Society"
<<

Bence791

Knight

Posts: 618

Joined: 20 Jul 2012, 20:25

KaM Skill Level: Beginner

Location: Hungary

Post 20 Jul 2013, 10:10

Re: The playstyle triangle

Passive players in KaM just camp from the first to the last minute... That is what you should understand.
The Kamper is always taking my colour!

<<

sado1

User avatar

Council Member

Posts: 1430

Joined: 21 May 2012, 19:13

KaM Skill Level: Skilled

Post 20 Jul 2013, 12:52

Re: The playstyle triangle

No, I think I understand what he means. He means that the army choice - more leather focused - is temporarily passive, because that army needs to wait until the spam kicks in. Then, when the player defended himself after the rush, he can counterattack. That doesn't mean he camps all the time with his PT army tho - he just doesn't attack immediately.
<<

Ben

User avatar

Former Site Admin

Posts: 3814

Joined: 08 Jan 2009, 23:00

Location: California - Pacific Time (UTC -8/-7 Summer Time)

Post 21 Jul 2013, 02:04

Re: The playstyle triangle

Another thing:
"Food is a major concern" is not the same as "food is the only concern"; "food is a major concern" simply means you are going to actually feed your troops from time to time.
Well to be honest, if you have enough food for army feeding by peacetime, then you are not focusing enough on military (which is bad). However, if you do have food by the time the peacetime armies are hungry, and can actually afford the economic upset to feed them, then you are either not focusing on military enough, or you are an extremely good player.
...if the rusher is one that attacks as soon as possible and the non rusher is one that playes defensive and only attacks when he thinks he's ready, then the concept is the same as the one of "passive" and "aggressive" playstyle
Okay I see what you mean. I certainly agree with you here. The actual names for the terms don't matter; just what the playstyle is like ;) For the record, I think that your terms are better words.

P.S., I voted as a "Passive Player" because I am usually not attacking until at least five minutes after peacetime even on small maps. This is; however, only on TeamSpeak games, because I am attacking randoms immediately after peacetime :P

P.S.S., I am also thinking that "bait player" isn't really a playstyle. From what I see of your description, I am thinking that a "bait player" could be for both passive/aggressive players. Your description just describes a good fighter/strategist, in my opinion.
I used to spam this forum so much...
<<

ChrisEggII

User avatar

Sword Fighter

Posts: 254

Joined: 01 May 2012, 15:04

Website: http://www.youtube.com/user/krzysiek000

Location: Poland

Post 21 Jul 2013, 17:13

Re: The playstyle triangle

Well, I don't belong to any type in 100%, but I prefer passive game with making fun from other players.

I chose a "passive player", because I usually wait for first enemy attack. Many players are sending everything what they have and in 70% I win with my partners' help. One problem: after this I usually can't help my team, because I need 10-20 minutes to rebuild my army. I don't prefer defence because I'm good in economy (No, I'm not! I ALWAYS have problems with food and wood). I prefer this, because I'm not a good tactician and I lose too many soldiers in "open" battles.

I have something from "bait" too, but spying isn't my best side. I know other ways to trick other people, for example: In one game, 2vs2, I hid my army. Only small group of militians and 2 armies of bowmens stayed between towers. When one player attacked, of course he won. His friend sent more soldiers to help him. When they were in my city, I attacked them from all sides. Of course I lost, but they hadn't many soldiers as well. When they were destroying my barracs, my partner attacked their villages, where they hadn't any soldier.
Also it's fun to make rage for other players. Did anyone try singleplayer's tactic with bowman? :lol:
<<

thunder

User avatar

Moorbach's Guard

Posts: 1044

Joined: 15 Apr 2012, 12:11

KaM Skill Level: Fair

Location: In the Market

Post 21 Jul 2013, 19:11

Re: The playstyle triangle

Long posts;P can we talk about the circle? For example how many triangles does circle need?
What is the Pi? Why is cirle hard to draw it without calipers?,,, etc.

okay im sorry.XD

I dont think campers are always passive players, just sometimes they cant do better. I've had some games where i made longterm cities, what need longer pt then 60, just plus 5-10 minutes after pt but the enemy made rush city (opponent of the longtermcity, but has awsome pt army) so i should to defend my city. I didnt have chance to attack out that was an meaningless idea.

I think KAM triangle is almost rectangular, because there are heroes also;) heroes are a little bit outstander, leavers, trolls, farmers, laggers, scientists...(abusers?)

Hard to see these peeks of the triangle, but yeah i think it' s usefull.

Return to “Feedback / Discussion”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests