This is my personal struggle. Coming from the boardgame community, I got used to having my own group willing to meet on a scheduled day/night for at least a few hours to 'progress the game'. While the one side moved, the other side watched, waiting impatiently for battle resolution. RTS is of course much different.
The way this game gets played can vary greatly from player to player. Players from all over the world, with their own schedules. Some are more competitive, even dogmatic, while some may be more patient and social(message me). Complete strangers are often tasked with high levels of cooperation. Then of course it's war, losses are always stressful to the extent one takes the game seriously. There's also the internet connection. A lot can go wrong with a session.
Singleplayer is always there with the save waiting for you. I'm not sure if it's a question of how much more realistic the AI can play, or the fact that it is just AI with no glory. But part of me will always prefer multiplayer. There are places to articulate your game preferences, and hopefully I'm doing that here.
I like playing with 6+ chill people who like historic starts that are considerate about speed and pausing, but not too impatient to allow it, reliable enough to show up on schedule, communicative enough to stay in touch as to allow organization, and available enough to put in at least a few hours a week as opposed a few hastily organized sessions with whoever is available on the fly to finish a game in 3 days. If you can't make a session that's fine. If you can't schedule one, that's not.
I prefer people who simply enjoy learning history while looking to apply realistic strategies over those who take apart the mechanics to find unrealistic ones. That may keep me from being able to conquer the world with Lithuania, but that's not my intent. I enjoy playing over winning; and while a loss can be upsetting, I will always play to a realistic conclusion.
For people with this intent, I'm happy to put in the work to help organize, document, be available, and upload AARs with plenty of maps. I had a discord server. But with only a couple people at any given time that are of the same purpose, who are then reliant on the participation of others, it just wasn't worth it. For all the enjoyment of playing with such a group, there come's a point where the perpetual availability of singleplayer becomes preferable. That's where I am now.
I can have a preference for a mod, start time or country, but I don't demand it. Neither do I demand playing over a particular platform as Radmin. My experience of Gameranger is that it's fine. Game stability is based of the connection of each individual and not the platform used. I live in Florida but work in the evenings, and have plenty of days off. I'm not available for ALL of them, but having a schedule of once a week would be nice. This would give me time to update a nice AAR. The regularity of playing and posting an AAR once a week could gather a following.
I have a low tolerance for toxicity myself and have apparently created people calling me toxic by banning some people who actually were. I enjoy working within an alliance, but 'as my own man' so to speak. I'm not role playing my historic counterpart, but I am trying to improve my country as best I can. If in my effort to put together such a game you find me too demanding or toxic, I have no control over that. Only a few people I've met understand what I'm trying to do and want to do that. The rest play in a way I don't really enjoy. As long as you enjoy playing together, that's great.
The way this game gets played can vary greatly from player to player. Players from all over the world, with their own schedules. Some are more competitive, even dogmatic, while some may be more patient and social(message me). Complete strangers are often tasked with high levels of cooperation. Then of course it's war, losses are always stressful to the extent one takes the game seriously. There's also the internet connection. A lot can go wrong with a session.
Singleplayer is always there with the save waiting for you. I'm not sure if it's a question of how much more realistic the AI can play, or the fact that it is just AI with no glory. But part of me will always prefer multiplayer. There are places to articulate your game preferences, and hopefully I'm doing that here.
I like playing with 6+ chill people who like historic starts that are considerate about speed and pausing, but not too impatient to allow it, reliable enough to show up on schedule, communicative enough to stay in touch as to allow organization, and available enough to put in at least a few hours a week as opposed a few hastily organized sessions with whoever is available on the fly to finish a game in 3 days. If you can't make a session that's fine. If you can't schedule one, that's not.
I prefer people who simply enjoy learning history while looking to apply realistic strategies over those who take apart the mechanics to find unrealistic ones. That may keep me from being able to conquer the world with Lithuania, but that's not my intent. I enjoy playing over winning; and while a loss can be upsetting, I will always play to a realistic conclusion.
For people with this intent, I'm happy to put in the work to help organize, document, be available, and upload AARs with plenty of maps. I had a discord server. But with only a couple people at any given time that are of the same purpose, who are then reliant on the participation of others, it just wasn't worth it. For all the enjoyment of playing with such a group, there come's a point where the perpetual availability of singleplayer becomes preferable. That's where I am now.
I can have a preference for a mod, start time or country, but I don't demand it. Neither do I demand playing over a particular platform as Radmin. My experience of Gameranger is that it's fine. Game stability is based of the connection of each individual and not the platform used. I live in Florida but work in the evenings, and have plenty of days off. I'm not available for ALL of them, but having a schedule of once a week would be nice. This would give me time to update a nice AAR. The regularity of playing and posting an AAR once a week could gather a following.
I have a low tolerance for toxicity myself and have apparently created people calling me toxic by banning some people who actually were. I enjoy working within an alliance, but 'as my own man' so to speak. I'm not role playing my historic counterpart, but I am trying to improve my country as best I can. If in my effort to put together such a game you find me too demanding or toxic, I have no control over that. Only a few people I've met understand what I'm trying to do and want to do that. The rest play in a way I don't really enjoy. As long as you enjoy playing together, that's great.
Last edited:
