Why can players play anonymous?
I understand if the developers want to be anonymous. I also find it cool if you can pick a name for certain games, like there is a napoleon in the civlords game or a Cpt. Hook on WSI.
But I think you should not be able to hide your identity.
anonymous
22 posts
• Page 1 of 3 • 1, 2, 3
Re: anonymous
by piranha » Tue Apr 05, 2011 11:30 am
There was requests for this feature. I think the player is revealed after the game. It allows you to be undercover so the enemy cant know your strategy.
-
piranha - Site Admin
- Posts: 1188
- Joined: Fri Feb 12, 2010 9:44 pm
Re: anonymous
by ezras » Tue Apr 05, 2011 4:18 pm
Yeah, it also can prevent grudges. If someone does not like you in one game they will not be biased in another. I use it sometimes because then people will not target me right away, knowing how weak I am.
- ezras
- Posts: 140
- Joined: Fri Dec 03, 2010 3:42 pm
Re: anonymous
by zorro » Fri Apr 08, 2011 2:13 pm
The strategy argument is a poor one. How is it fair that I should not know someones strat but he may know mine?
All arguments are from the view of the one who plays anonymously. Obviously those who have to play with them may not like it but have to live with it even if they would not want to play with someone.
I really dont like it and I havent found where it tells me after a game whom I played with. I would like to see an option to turn this off.
All arguments are from the view of the one who plays anonymously. Obviously those who have to play with them may not like it but have to live with it even if they would not want to play with someone.
I really dont like it and I havent found where it tells me after a game whom I played with. I would like to see an option to turn this off.
- zorro
- Posts: 101
- Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2011 11:01 am
Re: anonymous
by ams16 » Fri Apr 08, 2011 4:01 pm
I don't like it either. It seems built for people who habitually break alliances.
- ams16
- Posts: 94
- Joined: Sat Jan 22, 2011 4:06 am
Re: anonymous
by LPhillips » Sat Apr 09, 2011 5:36 am
Heck, I've avoided commenting before. But I want to say something because I have diarrhea of the fingers or something. Or maybe I think my opinion is just that important. Or maybe I just hate whining?
If you're going to get beaten up because people know you're not especially good, this is a nice feature. If you're going to get ganged because people know you generally perform better than them, this is a nice feature. If you're playing a ladder game (or simply want your general playing style to not be known before you ever make a move) this is a nice feature.
If your strategy is single, stagnant, and/or predictable, then you really can't blame people for having an advantage over you when they know your name. I don't think I have played any two games absolutely the same way yet. Sometimes I mercilessly burn and hunt my neighbors, sometimes I hunker down, hemmed in, and wait for my strength to build, hoping not to be sandwiched between a battle of titans, sometimes I send squads into enemy territory just to prevent them from expanding while I grab everything I can. Mix it up; it works. No one should know what you're going to do beforehand. Maybe if they play a dozen games with you without FoW they might be able to predict your general stratagems and reactions to specific situations.
This is by no means a single-edged sword. People also sacrifice credibility to use this feature. You don't just lose infamy; you also lose fame. I'm more likely to accept KGB's offer of peace than I am "Cyndane", because I've watched KGB on some of the public games and his play is generally impressive. Who the heck is Cyndane that I should care what he says? On the other hand, I won't step in and slaughter Cyndane from a recent laughable/fun grudge as I might Itangast, or target him because I've beaten him in the past as I might Ezras.
So I don't see a really legitimate cause for complaint over this feature. I'm even using it myself right now in some games, as overposting on the forums and some kind compliments have netted me a reputation. Also it's just dang entertaining. I mean, LPhillips is a lame Warlord name. It would be very nice to have the names of the participants announced at the end of the game, maybe an automated message to all participants. Unless you want only the players who survive until winning conditions are met to have the privilege of knowing their conquerer.
If you're going to get beaten up because people know you're not especially good, this is a nice feature. If you're going to get ganged because people know you generally perform better than them, this is a nice feature. If you're playing a ladder game (or simply want your general playing style to not be known before you ever make a move) this is a nice feature.
If your strategy is single, stagnant, and/or predictable, then you really can't blame people for having an advantage over you when they know your name. I don't think I have played any two games absolutely the same way yet. Sometimes I mercilessly burn and hunt my neighbors, sometimes I hunker down, hemmed in, and wait for my strength to build, hoping not to be sandwiched between a battle of titans, sometimes I send squads into enemy territory just to prevent them from expanding while I grab everything I can. Mix it up; it works. No one should know what you're going to do beforehand. Maybe if they play a dozen games with you without FoW they might be able to predict your general stratagems and reactions to specific situations.
This is by no means a single-edged sword. People also sacrifice credibility to use this feature. You don't just lose infamy; you also lose fame. I'm more likely to accept KGB's offer of peace than I am "Cyndane", because I've watched KGB on some of the public games and his play is generally impressive. Who the heck is Cyndane that I should care what he says? On the other hand, I won't step in and slaughter Cyndane from a recent laughable/fun grudge as I might Itangast, or target him because I've beaten him in the past as I might Ezras.
So I don't see a really legitimate cause for complaint over this feature. I'm even using it myself right now in some games, as overposting on the forums and some kind compliments have netted me a reputation. Also it's just dang entertaining. I mean, LPhillips is a lame Warlord name. It would be very nice to have the names of the participants announced at the end of the game, maybe an automated message to all participants. Unless you want only the players who survive until winning conditions are met to have the privilege of knowing their conquerer.
- LPhillips
- Posts: 965
- Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2011 3:25 am
Re: anonymous
by kenc80 » Sat Apr 09, 2011 1:51 pm
haha. moonknight was cobra. there you go.
nah i like the undercover names its cool i think. I definitely play differently depending on who i think it is. I do however, wish there was a more consistent "final reveal" at the end of the game.
nah i like the undercover names its cool i think. I definitely play differently depending on who i think it is. I do however, wish there was a more consistent "final reveal" at the end of the game.
- kenc80
- Posts: 344
- Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2010 9:16 pm
- Location: South Carolina, USA
Re: anonymous
by Moonknight » Sat Apr 09, 2011 3:17 pm
wow, sorry i'm not further advancing the fame of myself on this website...
why so serious?
why so serious?
- Moonknight
- Posts: 784
- Joined: Tue Dec 07, 2010 2:57 am
Re: anonymous
by LPhillips » Sat Apr 09, 2011 7:26 pm
Moonknight wrote:wow, sorry i'm not further advancing the fame of myself on this website...
why so serious?
Can't tell if you're joking or not. I take it that you also cannot tell how serious others are being. That's emotionless text for you.
- LPhillips
- Posts: 965
- Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2011 3:25 am
22 posts
• Page 1 of 3 • 1, 2, 3
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests