10 replies to this topic

[NSanityHD]

Hey guys

 

So apparently according to some players ending a game as quickly as possible (under 8 mins) is unfair, lame and non-strategic. (??) Usually when I play a game regardless if it's ffg or tourny I try to end the game within at least 6 minutes, 10 minutes tops. Is this considered lame and unfair? -- The way I see it is each game I start I should try to end my opponent before he/she gets a chance to end me. (which is strategic, yes?) Usually I try to make 2 unit groups of tanks. 15-20 in group one and 15-20-28 in group two and I place the first group at the top edge of my opponent and the second at the bottom edge and waypoint both groups in like an X, effectively crushing my opponent from both sides giving them hardly any chance of defence or offence.

 

Is this a bad idea? Please advise.

 

Thanks.

[Gerrus]

i guess if ur opponent is  good allied u don't have to camp cuz u can't destroy thats mirage where u have to click on ur mouse non stop and thats sux ,even with deso or u know? let latof learn u some tricks he smashed all the allied players .

 

my advise to u just try to don't play vs noobs and keep playing with ur ballz .

 

peace

[NSanityHD]

Allied players would only be able to get mirage/prism tanks if they had battle labs, to which would be a long game. As far as short games to my knowledge Soviets would be easier to use against Allied. But I guess it all depends on the players game experience and strategy.

[rumblesom]

If you have more than 20 tanks it's a 'long' game imo. Two groups of 28 tanks each is even longer..

At that point vs allieds you'll very likely be facing mirages and so it's more about skilled spilt and deso use then.

[ExpaNd]

Hey guys

So apparently according to some players ending a game as quickly as possible (under 8 mins) is unfair, lame and non-strategic. (??) Usually when I play a game regardless if it's ffg or tourny I try to end the game within at least 6 minutes, 10 minutes tops. Is this considered lame and unfair? -- The way I see it is each game I start I should try to end my opponent before he/she gets a chance to end me. (which is strategic, yes?) Usually I try to make 2 unit groups of tanks. 15-20 in group one and 15-20-28 in group two and I place the first group at the top edge of my opponent and the second at the bottom edge and waypoint both groups in like an X, effectively crushing my opponent from both sides giving them hardly any chance of defence or offence.

Is this a bad idea? Please advise.

Thanks.

The waypointed x is a good idea, but remember a good opponent can take advantage of patterns

[Seke]

Hey guys

 

So apparently according to some players ending a game as quickly as possible (under 8 mins) is unfair, lame and non-strategic. (??) Usually when I play a game regardless if it's ffg or tourny I try to end the game within at least 6 minutes, 10 minutes tops. Is this considered lame and unfair? -- The way I see it is each game I start I should try to end my opponent before he/she gets a chance to end me. (which is strategic, yes?) Usually I try to make 2 unit groups of tanks. 15-20 in group one and 15-20-28 in group two and I place the first group at the top edge of my opponent and the second at the bottom edge and waypoint both groups in like an X, effectively crushing my opponent from both sides giving them hardly any chance of defence or offence.

 

Is this a bad idea? Please advise.

 

Thanks.

 

Not really lame unless breaking rules stated by host. There are some rushes that are pretty lame, but probably doesn't apply to you in this situation.

Edited by Seke, 07 February 2015 - 08:42 AM.

[NSanityHD]

If you have more than 20 tanks it's a 'long' game imo. Two groups of 28 tanks each is even longer..

At that point vs allieds you'll very likely be facing mirages and so it's more about skilled spilt and deso use then.

 

I usually don't like my games to take too long as it just gets boring just building armies that to some point lag the game like crap. Not to mention ending up having the potential to crash the game and then all is lost.

The waypointed x is a good idea, but remember a good opponent can take advantage of patterns

 

Thank you. And you're right. If said opponent has a form of good strategic defence response, right? (?)

Not really lame unless breaking rules stated by host. There are some rushes that are pretty lame, but probably doesn't apply to you in this situation.

As I explained, I like some of my games to be quick so I can then get onto the next one. Especially if it's 1v1.

[rumblesom]

rally pointing tanks in a battle other then to target enemy tanks I would never recommend. You must react to the exact circumstances of each instant. Furthermore by your description it sounds as though you would have two lines converging upon one mass of your opponents tanks, which is suicide. The principles of tank control are simple: have as many tanks in range of your opponents army at any given instant as possible, keep your turrets facing forward to the enemy, and disperse your fodder amongst your enemy ahead of your tanks.

Allow your fodder to fire/move freely during battle: if you continuously move fodder during the clash the enemy tanks are far less distracted by it.

Do not move your own tanks excessively during the clash. Each time tanks are given a command they hesitate before firing, thus a certain rythme is optimal while another will result in you firing half as many shots.

Try to take the advantageous position (if any) such as upon higher ground, unobstructed by extraneous terrain (trees, neutral structures, civilian vehicles) and be sure to not direct a tank command at the instant just prior to the clash.

In some cases you may initiate contact by approaching in a solid, tight group and clicking the lead tank of your opponent. If done at the proper time this can win you a tank, correctly release your fodder and produce an ideal tank formation.

[ZiGZaG]

Allow your fodder to fire/move freely during battle: if you continuously move fodder during the clash the enemy tanks are far less distracted by it.

I completely disagree with this statement. I consistently move my fodder to keep them in the line of fire. Especially with deso's.

[ExpaNd]

I completely disagree with this statement. I consistently move my fodder to keep them in the line of fire. Especially with deso's.

+1
FoddEr ConTroL

[rumblesom]

If your fodder consists of units which fire when still and not while moving it is absolutely advantageous to allow them to do so.

Fodder control is achieved in different ways.

Although it seems intuitive to reposition fodder ahead of your tanks, there is a certain frequency with which this is effective and exceeding it will result in their absorbing far less enemy fire.