My Philosophy on Strategy Guides

[Aezeal]

Well, I disagree. I think any strategy guide only needs to (1) be effective enough to give you standard early expansion, (2) not leave you crippled in the mid or late game, and (3) offer some new ideas.

Well that is totally ridiculous, if it's giving a regular quality strategy that offers nothing more than what players usually do then there would be no need for it. A strategy guide should improve the quality of your game after reading and using it.

[Gandalf Parker]

Originally Posted by Aezeal

A strategy guide should improve the quality of your game after reading and using it.

When you said that in your head, where was the emphasis?
Was it "the qaulity of your game."?
Or was it "the quality of your game."

What game would it improve? If its mega map? cbm? solo?
What game would it need to improve the quality of to be considered a "guide"?

[vfb]

Originally Posted by Aezeal

Well that is totally ridiculous, if it's giving a regular quality strategy that offers nothing more than what players usually do then there would be no need for it. A strategy guide should improve the quality of your game after reading and using it.

For me, quality is measured in "how much fun am I having". New ideas are fun, unless they are totally broken. I've played Caelum mammoths, and doing the same thing again would not be as much fun as trying out an army of Storm General commandos.

[Aezeal]

I think all good guide's I've readcould have improved megamap, cbm, solo and MP games. And that is because they include tactics better than what the average player usually uses.

So to answer the first question I mean it should improve the gameplay of the average player and not be on a level they already know. (obviously a guide won't improve the games of the best players here)

Ow and the emphasis is on all words I use, they are all important, actually I've been thinking to post in all CAPS in every post but ... well I decided not to, ain't I nice?

[Aezeal]

You don't need a strategy guide then, you need a thread with silly idea's which could be usefull.. there is a differce, I think a strat guide should help you in SP (which most fun idea's could do) but also in MP (which is a bit more demanding)

[Gandalf Parker]

Originally Posted by Aezeal

You don't need a strategy guide then, you need a thread with silly idea's which could be usefull.. there is a differce, I think a strat guide should help you in SP (which most fun idea's could do) but also in MP (which is a bit more demanding)

Actually some of the best mp guides tended to ruin my solo play if I used them. And didnt do much for my enjoyment of mp. I can understand the strong desire to win in others but it doesnt define my idea of the best gaming experience. That concept of guides, in my opinion, when taken to the extreme leads to the people who enter a forum and the first thing they want are the cheat codes to a game. (Im not saying anyone here of course, its just my view of an extreme I-want-a-guide-to-win viewpoint)

[vfb]

Originally Posted by Aezeal

You don't need a strategy guide then, you need a thread with silly idea's which could be usefull.. there is a differce, I think a strat guide should help you in SP (which most fun idea's could do) but also in MP (which is a bit more demanding)

I wasn't even considering SP. I think it's usually assumed that if someone's writing a guide, it can be used in MP. SP-only strat guides usually have some sort of disclaimer attached.

[KissBlade]

I think it all comes down to what you're looking for in a guide. For example, I'm with Aezeal, in that when I'm checking a guide for a nation, I'm expecting to be able to improve my game with the nation after reading it. If a guide specifically said, "A different approach to etc etc nation" then I'd expect to see some variation. Otherwise, I'm fine with just something that reads pretty standard, gives a good analysis as well as some strategies.

[Redeyes]

I don't have any real expectations when reading a guide, I'll judge it at the value of what it teaches me. Sometimes it will greatly influence my gameplay, other times I'll learn some neat little trick or how to put my gems to better use in the early game.

I would rather ask from the author of a guide "What are you trying to teach who?"
Sometimes guides are explicit, sometimes it takes quite some thought on how and where to apply the strategies continued within...
You'll usually see statements such as "use your sacreds to expand", but nothing about how to script them or which commander to use. Those guides would be for the intermediate player, who knows how to apply useful and concentrated information into their ordinary gameplay.

Thinking that all guides should be equally suited for everyone, or even containing something for everyone, seems a bit silly, but I don't think anyone expects that.

[Gandalf Parker]

Originally Posted by Redeyes

You'll usually see statements such as "use your sacreds to expand", but nothing about how to script them or which commander to use. Those guides would be for the intermediate player, who knows how to apply useful and concentrated information into their ordinary gameplay.

The problem then is that some would call it a tutorial. We do have a thread label for tutorial. I think as far as this thread goes we might be talking about tutorial, guide, and tips. Maybe FAQ. But even then we seem to be lacking enough labels for everyone.