So what's your play style?

[Kelric]

Over the years I've noticed that my general tactics and strategies haven't varied much no matter what the game or the genre. Sure they change a bit when I have a new idea or the game calls for a slight variation but on the whole I stay close to my roots.

In a RTS/TBS I guess I'm a bit of a turtler. Rarely do I play aggressively until I'm sure my borders are secure. Once I decide I am as safe as I am going to get I will start sending out armies. This doesn't mean I sit back and build impregnable walls of turrets and armies, it just means I like to make sure I won't be leaving my land open for the pillaging of the women and raping of the villages. I almost never send out multiple small armies but prefer to send out several large ones (or one large one, depending on the game). I try not to make a move unless I've thought it out and decided how it could go wrong, where it weakens me, what my new weak spot or choke points will be with the new territory, all that sort of stuff.

However, if I notice a weakness in my enemy before I am completely prepared to strike or see how he is going to exploit one of my weaknesses, I can and will move earlier. I just prefer to set the entire campaign up to my choosing and on my battlegrounds. I usually call my style of play Aggresively Defensive.

The odd thing is that with all of my careful planning, once the game turns and I know I am going to win (or should win) I sometimes will get very impatient and just try to pound the enemy into submission with wave after wave of whatever I can throw at them. This has backfired into a loss a few times, but that's rare.

With RPGs/FPSs I try to leave no stone unturned. I explore every room, I kill every enemy behind me, I try to discover all the secret areas and I'm meticulous in collecting loot and amassing wealth. I prefer to play medium armor and medium weapon type of guys that should form the core of any group. I'm not much of a spellcaster and prefer to use spells that will directly benefit me at the expense of an enemy. Simply dealing him 20 damage isn't enough, I'd rather deal him 10 and give myself 10 health at the same time with a spell. With guns involved I do enjoy sniping and in some games I'm actually pretty good at it. Still, I usually go for the average/medium foot soldier with basic abilities.

[martindemon]

Strategy games:
My nature is very defensive, with EXTREME turtling if the resources are there. If the resources are scarse, I must force myself to take risks and I feel really insecure and extremely nervous. Same thing in chess; I must force myself to be agressive to be able to win against good players. But when playing against less competent players, I become the DESTROYER I still remember when I beat the hell out of ont of my friend at warcraft2. One time with a great army, and the second time with a super rush And then 30 to -1 at Duke Nukem We did not play again.

FPS:
I'm a sniper, and sometimes (not often) a camper. I also like very much all kill in one shot weapons, my prefered being the double bareled shotgun and the flak cannon. In fact, I like the flak more than the rocket It's because I'm not very precise in action (when moving) but my reflexes are very fast. So a big dangerous spread is well adapted.

RPG:
I play the pure mage or the pure fighter because I always want to deepest capacity of the class. The exception is Morrowind because you can have the best armor and cast the best spells, which suits me very well, despite what a few say about balance. I say fun is more important than balance.

[yossar]

I tend towards mages first and rogues second in RPGS, but other than that I don't think I tend to play a certain way. I guess I do prefer slightly offbeat strategies over common ones. Nothing like beating someone in a multiplayer game with a bizarre strategy and leaving them thinking "WTF?" Or running around in Diablo 2 with a melee Necro or something and having everyone call you a "Stupid Noob". I guess you could call me a strategy troll, since sometimes I play a certain way just to get a reaction from people.

[Blackhawk]

RTS/TBS - super defensive. I lock myself down and build defenses, then build up my bases/cities, then build up one or two massive armies of elite troops. I go out, conquer a layer or so of enemy cities, then turtle again for a while until they're all locked down, then repeat. My lack of aggressiveness has made multiplayer strategy games almost impossible for me - I just end up getting rushed five minutes in.

FPS - I'm ammo conservative. Big guns with rare ammo almost never get fired unless I know I'm in a level-ending fight. Until then I stick with the pistol of basic rifle. In games that allow it, I'm the sort to circle all the way around the enemy base with the sniper rifle, taking out everything visible before I set foot inside.

I'm also an FPS perfectionist. I've been known to quicksave, enter a room, take out the baddies within, and yet take significant damage myself, then reload and try that room over until I have the tactics just right. The challenge for me comes from polishing my approaches and tactics. That's why I dislike shooters without saves - I don't get my satisfaction and fun just from advancing, but from advancing in a certain wayl.

RPG - I really vary, depending on my mood, but I'm exceedingly thorough, leaving no chest unturned.

All in all, my thorough play styles in all the different genres means that I tend to spend half again as long on games as other people. If everyone is saying a particular game takes 20 hours, I can count on it taking me 30.

[Jeff V]

In wargames, I generally play using period doctrine. If the game favors ahistorical play, I stop playing it.

In RTS games, I enjoy a meal of turtle soup if it presents itself. In most RTS games, you are better off carrying the battle to the enemy turf; not only does it disrupt his plans and force him to react to your every whim, but even failed assaults often result in collateral damage, knocking down structures and slaughtering peasants. I'll even bring along some peons to loot resources while I'm at it.

In RPGs, I usually try to accomplish the next objective ASAP. Lingering makes the game all boring and unfinished.

[Jaymann]

It really doesn't matter what the genre is, where these options are available, this is what I do:

Build up in the easy areas to the max allowed. Search every nook and crannie for goodies. Probe far enough to engage the enemy then retreat to an ambush point. Snipe the bad-asses.

[Ripstar]

In RTS I build up a strong base then start with outlying out posts which act as sentinels for attack with which I guage the strength of the attacker.
I usually have a highly manouverable wing of my army which is used to strike at the weak areas my scouts locate while the main slow heavy units hold the bread basket.

In FPS I prefer to use a pistol as long as possible and go only for head shots. Same thing in on-line fps. Makes it up close and personal, no camping always on the move.

RPGS I explore everything. If I have a party sometimes I will send out one unit to scout and set the other units to ambush anything my scout can't handle.

Sometimes in large campaigns with lots of units I will also try to set up actual historically accurate manouvers, which sometimes work out surprisingly well.

[Jow]

I very rarely play TBS, but when I play RTS I'm all about disrupting the other guy quickly and early (not necessarily rushing, just harrassing) and not necessarily worrying about making a supremely secure base. I think most people play the opposite way, so when they're not allowed the time to develop that security they're out of their element.

[SuperHiro]

RTS- Turtle til about "Tier 2", then it's very aggressive.

RPG- Elf Warrior. Basically, dex-based fighting stuff. What can I say, I like kung-fu.

Strategy- Diplomacy for the win.

FPS- Medic-role or heavy weapons

[razgon]

RTS: Turtlestyle, then letting the enemy smash themselves to death at my gates, then rush my 5 million man army against the heretics

FPS: really, really, slow, sneakish like, ambushing kinda style

Strategy: Be friends with everyone,strong borders, then attack where weakest opponont is...generally playing it safe.

RPG: Mage, or warrior/mage/healer...good ol' Pool of Radiance's Fighter/Mage/Cleric build spoiled me

[tiny ogre]

You people and your careful tactics and stealth make me sick!

1) Find the biggest weapon available.
2) CHARGE!
3) Die.
4) Repeat.

No guts (strewn all over the map), no glory!

In Battlefield (1942), any available tank counts as the biggest weapon by far. Although something like, say, a battleship, may be technically a larger weapon, it is miserable at charging into the enemy base. I've tried.

The C-130 in Desert Combat was an occasional exception. You could plow that thing into an enemy base pretty effectively.

I play a mage in WoW. In Alterac Valley here's my favorite "tactic":

1) Buff up (ice armor, ice barrier, mana shield)
2) Blink into back of enemy lines where all the cowardly casters hang out
3) AoE until I'm almost dead (which does not take very long, but on a good run I can do 2000 points to multiple targets)
4) Ice Block, twiddle my thumbs for 10 seconds while they swing at me
5) Blink back out and run back behind our lines where our cowardly casters hang out

Making it all the way to step 4 is a huge bonus, and step 5 is a major victory However, when your own team sees a crazy mage blowing stuff up in the enemy lines, they will often charge too, and sometimes good things will happen.

[Kelric]

I did forget to mention that I enjoy suicide runs in multiplayer FPSes. Good times, good times.

[Orgull]

Intersting. I used to turtle all the time in RTS and TBS games, but recently I've tried deliberately being more aggressive and it's turned out to be a lot of fun.

Right now I'm playing Civ 3 and I'm Warrior Rushing my nearest neighbors. Once they're dead, all the sweet resources are mine and by the time my next nearest neighbors show up, I have 4 times the land and cities

I've been a defensive player all my life and I ususally lose at higher diffivulty levels. I also tend to always lose when we play Risk. Lately though I've won a few times because I've stopped being afraid to take risks and try aggresive new strategies.

For those who always do it the same way, try the opposite approach sometime, it may re-invigorate the genre for you.

[Matrix]

RTS: I am VERY aggresive, i tend to atack with multiple armies into multiple places. In AOK DM i was considered best riding player online by the top players at the time. I tend to expand VERY Agressively and play with little difeense but have few movable armies usualt my i play very streched out preffering to keep my atacks like stings, and so you will see my army coming together for powerfull blow and then spliting apart for harrasment, all the time. I tend to exploit weakness very quickly, and with my style of play i usualy destroy defensive players quickly, due to them not be able to pin point me on the map.


RPG. I like ability to change style and have variety so i can switch strategy depending on situation. Curently Guild War, i Have E/Mes who is perfectly suited for my strategy. His abiliy to change is amazing.

[SuperHiro]

I did forget to mention that I enjoy suicide runs in multiplayer FPSes. Good times, good times.

It's the best. It may sound morbid but in actually it's the most alturistic thing possible in a FPS. In America's Army, on the Bridge map (oh god). I used to run towards the offensive side with a cooked grenade. I'm fairly sure that goes against the Army ROE. Probably explains my 9 honor.

[Kraken]

The words that best describe me are cautious, slow, builder, and explorer. Only when I have a solid base and good knowledge do I start to expand, and even then I prefer to do it incrementally, consolidating my gains as I go, unless I happen upon an obvious enemy weakness.

I play mostly TBS, and enjoy big epic games where long-term strategy pays off. I hate anything that moves too fast, which pretty much rules out all multiplayer. I like to sit back, size up the situation, think about a long-term plan, and carry it out at leisure.

[Arcanis]

My stratagy depends some on the game but RTS i'm a big turtle to the point of making it a war of attrition so they have to come after my resorces since they have been throwing men to the meet grinder on my defences. But you can't do this unless the game allows a self sustaind source of income or you have tons at your disposle that can be defended with some ease. The only turn based i played was Heroes Of Might and Magic and I guess R:TW would fall unded that too. Those i'm more agressive in. I like to spread my borders as far as possible and hurt the enemy but not mind if they retake something when i can come back and kick the daylights out of them to get it back.

RPG i play everything under the sun. If it solo i go more toward a defensive setup and win through out lasting my enimies, but sometimes i just rost them over an open fireball and comment about how they taiste like chicken. Group based rpg i'll play whatever nich needs filling often artilery or light warrior/scout.

edit: Forgot FPS depending on game if slower i go sniper all the way, i just love one shot kills when they don't even know your there. But UT2k4 i'm the worlds biggest flack monkey. In single player i got the tiltle flack monkey like 20 times by the time i won. I snipe too but normaly only on assoult and capture the flag when i find a good spot they have to pass to get away with the flag or to cover my teamates retreat with the flag.

[Kasey Chang]

I'm a careful calculating type of guy.

If I play FPS, it's "explore the path, try to catch the enemy from max range". So DF / Marine Sniper series are kinda right up my alley.

If I play RTS, I'm the guy that likes to setup defenses and resources until the town can take care of itself, THEN build up a force to attack.

[raydude]

RTS: I tend to be more offensive than not. Scouting and exploring the map is a big deal to me. The sooner I can find the enemy, the sooner I can fight him. Also, I try to find spots that can be easily defended and built up as future base locations.

FPS: I play more of a support role. Either a medic or engineer when the game has those types of classes.

If there are paths that can be shut down by one person I'm usually that person. In ET there was one path that required the attackers to enter a cave and climb up a ladder. This was the back entrance into the defending base. I was usually waiting at the top, prone, with an MG42. I'd sometimes stay there the entire round, just closing down that path.

Strategy/Turn-based: Recon and try to find weak spots. Always try to patrol either unexplored areas or likely avenues of attack. Build up armies and harass/goad the other player into coming out according to my plan, letting me attack him where he is weak.