Conquer Club

To Hold Your Own, or To Hold Theirs

Information on tactics, scenarios, and all that you'll need to be successful in-game!
Forum rules
Please read the Community Guidelines before posting.

How do you like to defend your continents?

From the countries within my continents.
23
25%
From the countries that border my continents.
69
75%
 
Total votes : 92

Postby RobinJ on Wed Jun 13, 2007 7:08 am

The1exile wrote:Both win one 32% of the time.

However, that is irrelevant because both winning one and losing one would have the same odds wherever you had your armies so you could have all the armies back on indo with those odds. i am merely assessing the best tactic of wearing the enemy down, which is to have single armies (losing 1 for 1 isn't wearing them down).


I'm sorry man but others more intelligent than myself have proved that it is advantageous to stagger your defence. I think Sully proved it and you can't argue with him because he is a genius with figures
nmhunate wrote:Speak English... It is the language that God wrote the bible in.


Highest Score: 2437
Highest Place: 84
User avatar
Sergeant 1st Class RobinJ
 
Posts: 1901
Joined: Mon Aug 21, 2006 1:56 pm
Location: Northern Ireland
Medals: 13
Standard Achievement (3) Doubles Achievement (2) Triples Achievement (2) Quadruples Achievement (1) Terminator Achievement (2)
Cross-Map Achievement (2) Ratings Achievement (1)

Postby Bodmanbod on Wed Jun 13, 2007 7:22 am

RobinJ wrote:
The1exile wrote:Both win one 32% of the time.

However, that is irrelevant because both winning one and losing one would have the same odds wherever you had your armies so you could have all the armies back on indo with those odds. i am merely assessing the best tactic of wearing the enemy down, which is to have single armies (losing 1 for 1 isn't wearing them down).


I'm sorry man but others more intelligent than myself have proved that it is advantageous to stagger your defence. I think Sully proved it and you can't argue with him because he is a genius with figures


staggering your defence is only good for defending though, it leaves you nearly optionless for attacking.

if you look at oceaniania: if you have 11 armies on indonisia and they have 1 on siam and 10 on india (assume somebody else holds china) then you have the upper hand. they can only attack with the armies they get on their next turn (could be as little as 3 armies) si if they were to attack you they could only attack with 1 + their turns armies, but you can attck with 11 + your turns armies. if you have equal armies each turn for each player then you have the upper hand defensively and better chances for attack.
Private 1st Class Bodmanbod
 
Posts: 96
Joined: Wed May 02, 2007 9:24 am

Postby The1exile on Wed Jun 13, 2007 10:24 am

RobinJ wrote:
The1exile wrote:Both win one 32% of the time.

However, that is irrelevant because both winning one and losing one would have the same odds wherever you had your armies so you could have all the armies back on indo with those odds. i am merely assessing the best tactic of wearing the enemy down, which is to have single armies (losing 1 for 1 isn't wearing them down).


I'm sorry man but others more intelligent than myself have proved that it is advantageous to stagger your defence. I think Sully proved it and you can't argue with him because he is a genius with figures


Where?

As far as I can see from your previous post you've fallen into the misconception that rolling more dice gives better odds.
Image
User avatar
Lieutenant The1exile
 
Posts: 7140
Joined: Tue Aug 15, 2006 7:01 pm
Location: Devastation
Medals: 15
Standard Achievement (3) Doubles Achievement (2) Triples Achievement (1) Terminator Achievement (2) Assassin Achievement (2)
Speed Achievement (1) Cross-Map Achievement (2) Ratings Achievement (1) Tournament Achievement (1)

Postby ZawBanjito on Wed Jun 13, 2007 11:19 am

The staggered defense is for people who have no intention of winning their games. Statistics are meaningless. What matters is opportunity. Staggering your troops reduces your opportunity for movement. It is pure defense without any effectiveness for offense and therefore NO DEFENSE AT ALL.

What you call the "Sully Defense" is also pretty iffy for me. I have yet to see it actually work like it's supposed to.

My personal advice boils down to this, for any game type, for 90% of all situations, 1) Reduce your borders, 2) KEEP ALL YOUR TROOPS ON THE BORDERS.

And all things being equal, take Siam, don't take Central America.
User avatar
Colonel ZawBanjito
 
Posts: 387
Joined: Mon Jan 23, 2006 12:25 am
Location: Somewhere
Medals: 7
Standard Achievement (2) Doubles Achievement (1) Triples Achievement (1) Terminator Achievement (1) Freestyle Achievement (1)
Cross-Map Achievement (1)

Postby Petrelli4Prez on Wed Jun 13, 2007 4:35 pm

The1exile wrote:
RobinJ wrote:
The1exile wrote:Both win one 32% of the time.

However, that is irrelevant because both winning one and losing one would have the same odds wherever you had your armies so you could have all the armies back on indo with those odds. i am merely assessing the best tactic of wearing the enemy down, which is to have single armies (losing 1 for 1 isn't wearing them down).


I'm sorry man but others more intelligent than myself have proved that it is advantageous to stagger your defence. I think Sully proved it and you can't argue with him because he is a genius with figures


Where?

As far as I can see from your previous post you've fallen into the misconception that rolling more dice gives better odds.


It appears that you're basing your math on a single attack. Once you add in multiple dice throws, the laws of probability would greatly favor the attacking player against the one defending with only one die.
User avatar
Private Petrelli4Prez
 
Posts: 21
Joined: Mon May 21, 2007 2:42 pm
Location: Utah

Postby Petrelli4Prez on Wed Jun 13, 2007 4:37 pm

ZawBanjito wrote:The staggered defense is for people who have no intention of winning their games. Statistics are meaningless. What matters is opportunity. Staggering your troops reduces your opportunity for movement. It is pure defense without any effectiveness for offense and therefore NO DEFENSE AT ALL.

What you call the "Sully Defense" is also pretty iffy for me. I have yet to see it actually work like it's supposed to.

My personal advice boils down to this, for any game type, for 90% of all situations, 1) Reduce your borders, 2) KEEP ALL YOUR TROOPS ON THE BORDERS.

And all things being equal, take Siam, don't take Central America.


What is the difference between taking Siam and taking Central America? It doesn't cause you to defend any more borders, and therefore shouldn't even be considered. If you're strong, you might as well take both Central America and North Africa.
User avatar
Private Petrelli4Prez
 
Posts: 21
Joined: Mon May 21, 2007 2:42 pm
Location: Utah

Postby ZawBanjito on Thu Jun 14, 2007 4:23 am

Petrelli4Prez wrote:What is the difference between taking Siam and taking Central America? It doesn't cause you to defend any more borders, and therefore shouldn't even be considered. If you're strong, you might as well take both Central America and North Africa.


If you're strong, you might as well take the whole of Africa and North America. Until that point comes, however, I find it advantageous not to move from Venezuela and Brazil.

S. America only provides two extra armies. If you have to defend both borders, then your opportunity for offense is severely limited and defense is handicapped. Venezuela and Brazil, being next to each other, can compliment their defense. People will think twice about breaking a continent if there are troops immediately available to take it back.

If you are strong, however, take Central America and move up from there. Taking North Africa is a suckers bet 9 times out of 10. It puts you on a border with Europe, and commits you to an African position that is worth less than the effort. I've found myself way better off in the long run putting some effort into taking North America, and keeping Brazil in reserve, backing up the defense of Venezuela.

S. America + N. America = 7 bonus armies, 3 borders.
S. America + Africa = 5 bonus armies, 4 borders.

And N. Africa, defensively, is a country of death. All them borders, and everywhere you move you're blocking yourself in.
User avatar
Colonel ZawBanjito
 
Posts: 387
Joined: Mon Jan 23, 2006 12:25 am
Location: Somewhere
Medals: 7
Standard Achievement (2) Doubles Achievement (1) Triples Achievement (1) Terminator Achievement (1) Freestyle Achievement (1)
Cross-Map Achievement (1)

Postby yeti_c on Thu Jun 14, 2007 4:31 am

In regards to Australia on Classic - It's better to hold Siam if you have anything over 5... as that gives you more territories to attack to gain cards - of course the opposite can be true... it gives the others more territories to attack from to attack you...

C.
Image
Highest score : 2297
User avatar
Lieutenant yeti_c
 
Posts: 9670
Joined: Thu Jan 04, 2007 9:02 am
Medals: 46
Standard Achievement (2) Doubles Achievement (2) Triples Achievement (2) Quadruples Achievement (3) Terminator Achievement (1)
Assassin Achievement (1) Freestyle Achievement (1) Fog of War Achievement (3) Cross-Map Achievement (3) Ratings Achievement (3)
General Achievement (1) Map Contribution (13) Tournament Contribution (1) General Contribution (10)

Re: To Hold Your Own, or To Hold Theirs

Postby Gweeedo on Sat Jan 18, 2014 5:10 am

I was just wondering if anything has Changed.

Back in 2007:
From the countries within my continents.
13
22%

From the countries that border my continents.
46
78%

Loads of Different maps.
New Strategy's.
Crappy dice.
User avatar
Sergeant 1st Class Gweeedo
 
Posts: 524
Joined: Sat Feb 23, 2013 9:49 pm
Medals: 11
Standard Achievement (2) Assassin Achievement (1) Manual Troops Achievement (1) Fog of War Achievement (2) Trench Warfare Achievement (1)
Speed Achievement (2) Ratings Achievement (2)

Previous

Return to Strategy

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users

cron