Moderator: Community Team
kingarthur wrote:i reckon it depends on how strong a force you can place on the country. If its weak fortify your own. If your strong fortify the neighbouring country.
nmhunate wrote:Speak English... It is the language that God wrote the bible in.
RobinJ wrote:Then there is the Sully defence if you are weak - place most of the armies on one central territory, eg Northern Europe (strange example as Europe would be a rare place to start from but...) gives you the opportunity to attack Ukraine, Southern Europe and Western Europe if they are taken. Many players will feel it safer to allow you to keep your bonus as long as they are not exposed to a devastating counter attack from Northern Europe.
Ishiro wrote:I've often wondered how the majority of people feel and how they play when it comes to defending a border. For the simplest example, on the Classic Map, if you hold Oceania, do your put your defending army in Indonesia, or do you take and hold Siam?
Sparqs wrote:Ishiro wrote:I've often wondered how the majority of people feel and how they play when it comes to defending a border. For the simplest example, on the Classic Map, if you hold Oceania, do your put your defending army in Indonesia, or do you take and hold Siam?
For this case, there are many reasons to choose Siam. Circumstances of a particular game not withstanding, Siam is preferable:
A) You increase the number of territories subject to your big defensive stack. Defend from Indonesia and they only have to build on Siam, whereas defend from Siam and they must build up China and India. Getting bottled up can be frustrating - when they split their defense it's that much easier to rampage when ready.
B) You are holding an extra territory, possibly bumping you up an army and/or depriving the enemy.
C) You keep someone from taking Asia. Having the big stack there makes it tough to conquer, both probabilistically and psychologically
D) When someone does break your big stack, there is still one more to go before breaking your bonus. If I can, I like to leave 2 in Indonesia, for best defensive odds.
nmhunate wrote:Speak English... It is the language that God wrote the bible in.
This is true. Of course, everything is more dependent on specific situations than these generalities address, but I think there are additional mitigating factors. If the enemy is truly coordinating, Player A could plink at you from Siam, then fortify the remains out of the way to give Player B a shot. Also, I think that they are more likely to have the two 10-stacks there in the case of defending from Siam. That's both good and bad for you - more likely to be hit by coordinated attacks, but it also means you've drawn their forces from elsewhere.RobinJ wrote:Your points are very good but there some flaws:
A) While having Siam does make it easier to break out of Oceania, it can also expose you to more armies sometimes - player A holds China with 10 and player B holds India with 10, you hold Siam with 10 -> you are pretty likely to get broken if they co-ordinate their attacks. By contrast if Player A holds Siam with 10 it will be 10 versus your ten on Indonesia. Player B with 10 armies on India or China must fight through player A to reach you.
A valid critique. However, it seems not too infrequent that someone gets a chance to take Oceania early while their main force is concentrated elsewhere. I've certainly seen cases where the Siam/Indonesia decision had a strong impact on enemy ownership of Asia.C) The problem here is that the only person likely to be taking Asia is you, in Oceania, because it is the only area to expand into and no-one else will want to take Asia because it would mean too many borders and I think any strong foreign presence around the Oceanic region, be it Siam or Indonesia, is enough to deter any other player from taking Asia. If they are taking Asia then you have probably lost the game anyway.
detlef wrote:The issues at hand have more to do with what positional advantage that extra country gives you. In Middle Earth, for example, if you own Mordor, Holding South Gondor allows you to protect the same border that you'd have to otherwise fortify two countries to secure. There are many maps with this element.
Of times, early on in a game there's reason to adopt a "live and let live" approach in which you just hold your own borders, not those outside. If someone is looking to take that adjoining country, they may be content to just take it and not waste the armies going after you. This allows you to get your bonus and perhaps use those guys to bust them up or perhaps form a temporary cease fire on the border.
Sparqs wrote:D) When someone does break your big stack, there is still one more to go before breaking your bonus. If I can, I like to leave 2 in Indonesia, for best defensive odds.
If
Defender.Army = 1 Then
SetMode = "Rambo"
End If
The1exile wrote:Sparqs wrote:D) When someone does break your big stack, there is still one more to go before breaking your bonus. If I can, I like to leave 2 in Indonesia, for best defensive odds.
2 armies is not better defensive odds than one army.
Defenders winning both odds: 29%
Single army defender winning odds: 34%
What I would rather do is take Siam and pull back in indo so that they have to attack Siam, firstly crating a bottleneck so that another player can't attack me as well, and secondly wearing down the attacker:
- Code: Select all
If
Defender.Army = 1 Then
SetMode = "Rambo"
End If
Disclaimer: It's been years since I wrote real If Then functions in VB
nmhunate wrote:Speak English... It is the language that God wrote the bible in.
RobinJ wrote:If you have 2 on Siam, the attacker rolls 3 dice to your 2. If he wins he must face another 2 dice for Indonesia
The1exile wrote:RobinJ wrote:If you have 2 on Siam, the attacker rolls 3 dice to your 2. If he wins he must face another 2 dice for Indonesia
So?
That doesn't improve your odds, as I already proved.
If you're defneding with 2 armies, you'll win 29% of the time with bot.
With a single army, you'll win 24% of the time with no loss.
Therefore, it's better to have as many single armies in between you and the defender.
(yes, you can lose 1 to them losing 1, but that's irrelevant in this case, as you would have the army back defending with multiple armies in Siam in this instance)
The1exile wrote:read last line.
Return to Conquer Club Discussion
Users browsing this forum: No registered users