Sequential vs. Freestyle

by **FlyinHi** on Wed Jul 25, 2007 1:21 pm

Which one is truly better, or just more popular amongst the CC crowd.

by **disk** on Wed Jul 25, 2007 1:27 pm

Freestyle is a complete waste of time in my opinion. I see no purpose for it other than to get an unfair advantage over others. My only experiences playing it has been in games where I joined accidently. I think many people set these games up--especially 1-vs-1 games--as noob traps.

On every single occassion I played this game, my opponent must have been sitting there clicking on "refresh" repeatedly and incessently in order to get to play what amounted to a double turn.

by **FlyinHi** on Wed Jul 25, 2007 1:33 pm

I agree. At first I thought it was cool, but then quickly changed my mind. Maybe a fog of war while playing freestyle would make it a little better.

by **bigbullyweedave** on Wed Jul 25, 2007 3:00 pm

Played freestyle when I first started playing CC because I was on it almost 24 hours a day. These days I avoid it. Interestingly though when I mainly played freestye I got myself up to almost 2000 points. These days now that I only play sequential I struggle to get much above 1500.

by **lalaland** on Wed Jul 25, 2007 3:03 pm

I try to play mainly sequential. The only reason I will play freestyle is if I want a shorter game, since sometimes if you play 6 player sequential it can sometimes take up to almost a week for your next turn.

by **Ham** on Wed Jul 25, 2007 5:35 pm

I used to like Freestyle because I got to play my turns more frequently. I soon found out that that if you werent on at the right time it could screw you out of the game.

by **treefiddy** on Wed Jul 25, 2007 5:51 pm

I like freestyle better because it's normally a faster game. It's the same reason I like Escalating card games.

I still join mainly sequential because I hate the thought of someone pulling the de facto double turn on me.

by **OnlyAmbrose** on Wed Jul 25, 2007 6:09 pm

I like Freestyle when I have a lot of spare time on my hands, which is rarely. If I know that I'm going to have school, practice, work, or something else for the next few days, I only take sequential games. You're at a huge disadvantage if you can't check on your computer every hour or so in a freestyle game.

by **boberz** on Thu Jul 26, 2007 3:27 am

disk wrote:Freestyle is a complete waste of time in my opinion. I see no purpose for it other than to get an unfair advantage over others. My only experiences playing it has been in games where I joined accidently. I think many people set these games up--especially 1-vs-1 games--as noob traps.

On every single occassion I played this game, my opponent must have been sitting there clicking on "refresh" repeatedly and incessently in order to get to play what amounted to a double turn.

you seem to be saying that it is unfair that somebody is commited to the game.

by **alster** on Thu Jul 26, 2007 4:15 am

Sequential with no cards or flat rate - i nmy opinion - provides the most strategic game play. With esc. cards and freestyle, the strategy parts is somewhat shadowed by other considerations. It's a matter of taste, but personally I only set up seq. games. (Joining freestyle games for fun is a different matter.)

by **Coleman** on Thu Jul 26, 2007 7:04 am

Free Style and Escalating just have radically different styles then the other settings. They aren't without strategic game play. Delaying collecting cards to ensure you have the upper hand after others turn theirs in is a strategy. Not sleeping so you can get double turns is a strategy.

That said, I prefer no cards adjacent.

by **3seven1** on Mon Jul 30, 2007 3:40 pm

I can see how freestyle would be a faster game but I like Sequencial better. To me that has more stradegy.

by **Suntzu** on Mon Jul 30, 2007 3:43 pm

SEQUENTIAL of course.SUNTZU

by **Bob Janova** on Mon Jul 30, 2007 5:08 pm

Freestyle seems really good at first glance, but there are so many cheap tricks that ruin it. (In realtime, waiting for the other people to play to get an advantage ... if everyone tries that it is suddenly not realtime any more. In 2 player, waiting almost a day and forcing the other person to miss their turn. In teams, using forts between team members to allow a second attack phase, while skilled, is very irritating to play against.)

So now I play sequential.

I don't like escalating cards much as it basically comes down to who gets to cash at the right time and cause a card cascade. Flat rate adds a bit of interest to the purely strategic no cards.

by **bob72** on Mon Jul 30, 2007 5:27 pm

alstergren wrote:Sequential with no cards or flat rate - i nmy opinion - provides the most strategic game play. With esc. cards and freestyle, the strategy parts is somewhat shadowed by other considerations. It's a matter of taste, but personally I only set up seq. games. (Joining freestyle games for fun is a different matter.)

all games involve skill and luck 9 rounds in flat rate could mean a 6 army bonus or 30 army bonus. where is the skill in that.

Escalating is knowing when to strike too soon and you lose too late and you've lost neither is strategically better.

I like freestyle as i have that notifier so i regularly get first play.

by **tim02** on Mon Jul 30, 2007 7:09 pm

I find I like freestyle better because then every day you get to play a turn
most importantly when you are in a 6 player sequential with deadbeats it takes for ever

by **chessplaya** on Tue Jul 31, 2007 6:44 am

alstergren wrote:Sequential with no cards or flat rate - i nmy opinion - provides the most strategic game play. With esc. cards and freestyle, the strategy parts is somewhat shadowed by other considerations. It's a matter of taste, but personally I only set up seq. games. (Joining freestyle games for fun is a different matter.)

I am gonna have to disagree with u there alster.... escalating cards... is nowhere to be compared with freestyle... as much as ppl dont like to admit it .... and ppl say escalating cards are the easiest option ... for me escl. option is a tough 1 .. i mean srsly some couple noobies can nuclear bomb the game but if u r going against strong solid strategist u gonna face a whole lot of trouble with escl.

Chessplaya

by **Captain_Kris** on Tue Jul 31, 2007 8:55 am

Since I can only play 4 at a time, I go with the generally quicker freestyle mostly now. Sitting in a chair hooked up to my chemo IV for hours at a time gives me a lot of time to surf the web.

And a realtime freestyle game can be nasty wicked fun.

by **0ojakeo0** on Tue Jul 31, 2007 11:03 am

freestyle seq take waaaay tooo long

by **chessplaya** on Tue Jul 31, 2007 11:06 am

exactly why 84% chose sequential :wink:

by **jako** on Tue Jul 31, 2007 11:29 am

sequential all the way, freestyle is just stupid cause its all speed. if u take some time to formulate ur strategy, then ur screwed. sequential is the real setting for hardcore strategists, and sequential can be fast too. it all really depends on people. i have played games where sequential turns were less than 5 mins.

by **johhny-turbo** on Sat Aug 04, 2007 1:04 pm

I play almost exclusively freestyle since it can take awhile for a turn in sequential to come up. Also I like having to think on your feet.

by **johhny-turbo** on Sat Aug 04, 2007 1:10 pm

jako wrote:sequential all the way, freestyle is just stupid cause its all speed. if u take some time to formulate ur strategy, then ur screwed. sequential is the real setting for hardcore strategists, and sequential can be fast too. it all really depends on people. i have played games where sequential turns were less than 5 mins.

Actually having to think fast adds another layer to strategy in my opinion. Do you examine where to strike for the best result or do you just rely on your gut to get the advantage in before your opponent?