Strategy

Message Topic Search Topic Options Post Reply Create New Topic Printable Version Translate Topic

Edited extensively based on feedback.
Yes I am in STEEL. Yes this is based on the recent ~NC~/STEEL incident. I really am trying to get strategy tips and keep my personal biases out of the post. It's not easy keeping bias out. I hope i did better this time.
Not getting into the personal reasons for one alliance wanting an altercation with another; but, talking about the strategy involved.
Basically, one alliance wants to provoke another into taking actions against them. Also, the two alliances are NOT in close proximity to each other.
So, the agressor alliance makes diplo attacks on the other and does NOT make army attacks. Reasoning:
1) The diplo attacks are on ALL members of the defensive alliance with out regards to member size. The Illy community may view it in bad taste, but it is not a grievous offense.
2) Army attacks would have to be limited to players of a certain size. If they attacked smaller players, the Illy community would probably be outraged.
3) Army attacks would takes days, thus leaving the aggressive cities undefended.
4) Make the defensive alliance jumpy and ready to retaliate. This is the primary response that the agressor wants to see.
So what are the possible reactions:
A) WAR - the defensive could declare war and the Illy community would have said they are justified. But the two alliances are spread far apart. The defensive would be sending its troops on attacks days and days long. Perhaps leaving its cities undefended for someone else to attack.
B) Diplo Attacks - Diplo attacks are a short-term approach. Yes you may take res, assassinate some commanders, and halt research; however, the attacker loses diplo on every attack, the defender loses none. As time goes on, the defender makes more diplos and the attacker loses more.
C) Do nothing - Why get involved in a war miles away, with no support, and leave yourself open to attacks at home. 
D) Public Opinion - The defensive alliance takes the attacks to the Illy community. Get not only your confeds and NAPs on your side; but also get the Illy community on your side (or most of it). Now War may be a viable option.

Edited by Machete - 11 Sep 2012 at 21:53

Author	Message Topic Search Topic Options Post Reply Create New Topic Printable Version Translate Topic
Machete Members Profile Send Private Message Find Members Posts Add to Buddy List Wordsmith Joined: 15 Jun 2012 Location: Koz Status: Offline Points: 172	Topic: Strategy Posted: 11 Sep 2012 at 20:13
	Edited extensively based on feedback. Yes I am in STEEL. Yes this is based on the recent ~NC~/STEEL incident. I really am trying to get strategy tips and keep my personal biases out of the post. It's not easy keeping bias out. I hope i did better this time. Not getting into the personal reasons for one alliance wanting an altercation with another; but, talking about the strategy involved. Basically, one alliance wants to provoke another into taking actions against them. Also, the two alliances are NOT in close proximity to each other. So, the agressor alliance makes diplo attacks on the other and does NOT make army attacks. Reasoning: 1) The diplo attacks are on ALL members of the defensive alliance with out regards to member size. The Illy community may view it in bad taste, but it is not a grievous offense. 2) Army attacks would have to be limited to players of a certain size. If they attacked smaller players, the Illy community would probably be outraged. 3) Army attacks would takes days, thus leaving the aggressive cities undefended. 4) Make the defensive alliance jumpy and ready to retaliate. This is the primary response that the agressor wants to see. So what are the possible reactions: A) WAR - the defensive could declare war and the Illy community would have said they are justified. But the two alliances are spread far apart. The defensive would be sending its troops on attacks days and days long. Perhaps leaving its cities undefended for someone else to attack. B) Diplo Attacks - Diplo attacks are a short-term approach. Yes you may take res, assassinate some commanders, and halt research; however, the attacker loses diplo on every attack, the defender loses none. As time goes on, the defender makes more diplos and the attacker loses more. C) Do nothing - Why get involved in a war miles away, with no support, and leave yourself open to attacks at home. D) Public Opinion - The defensive alliance takes the attacks to the Illy community. Get not only your confeds and NAPs on your side; but also get the Illy community on your side (or most of it). Now War may be a viable option. Edited by Machete - 11 Sep 2012 at 21:53

Aurordan Members Profile Send Private Message Find Members Posts Add to Buddy List Postmaster Player Council - Ambassador Joined: 21 Sep 2011 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 982	Posted: 11 Sep 2012 at 20:21
	Yeah, I buy that this is in no way biased or related to current events. Edited by Aurordan - 11 Sep 2012 at 20:21

Machete Members Profile Send Private Message Find Members Posts Add to Buddy List Wordsmith Joined: 15 Jun 2012 Location: Koz Status: Offline Points: 172	Posted: 11 Sep 2012 at 20:25
	yes based on current events but i tried real hard NOT to bring personalities into it i was trying to see what people thought of the strategy

Aurordan Members Profile Send Private Message Find Members Posts Add to Buddy List Postmaster Player Council - Ambassador Joined: 21 Sep 2011 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 982	Posted: 11 Sep 2012 at 20:34
	Well, it kind of reads like a propaganda piece, to be honest, but in that case, I'll say that if you're trying to provoke someone, and you end up having to just come to the forums and post what you're doing to provoke them because nobody was noticing, your strategy might be less than optimal. I don't think this was done as an alternative to all out war, I think it was just meant to raise some heckles.