Well Today I played a game with Countersmurf and a few other boys and it seems that General Stormfury is perplexed on what would be best Offensive and Defensive strategies.
Now I know that sometimes the best way to strike is to hit hard and fast, yet I've seen some folks actually hold back and go on the air defense defensive before unleashing a barrage of ICBM's which decimate your cities.
But the real question is this: what constitutes a better strategy? Going offensive first then Defensive? or holding back and letting others make their mistakes at launching their Missles and then after defeating their attacks, counter strike and hit with an all out barrage?
Also which is better? Going against known Targets first and taking out silos and radar stations? or holding back and then coming at them (your opponents) with ICBM and Missile barrages to weaken their strike /Counter strike Capabilities.
So then what's the best plan of action... thoughts?
Tucsoncoyote (Aka General Stormfury)--
Debrief: Best Offensive/Defensive Strategies.
Moderator: Defcon moderators
-
Tucsoncoyote
- level1
- Posts: 32
- Joined: Thu May 03, 2007 3:44 pm
- Location: Tucson Arizona
- Contact:
I don't think there is one stratagy that could be declared the "best", but what I find to be the most effective for default scoring (and with which I have had no small number of victories, I currently average winning about 8 or 9 of every ten games) is this:
First: Defend your units first. Hide them from immediate radar range, and group them to provide the maximum amount of protection (this includes your navy, with the exception of subs).
Second: Use bombers immediatly at Defcon 1 to target your enemies installations. Don't worry about cities, your first goal should always be to destroy as many of thier missles as possible before they can launch them, as well as elminating thier defenses. Keep your silos hidden, and launch a full fighter spread immediatly after your bombers go up in order to tangle up thier intercepters. I have personally found that six tightly grouped missles can take out almost any silo, but upwards of eight may be needed if the silos are mass grouped.
Third: Use your subs to hit coastal cities. A good combination of silos strikes from the air and city strikes from the ocean will get them desperate and ruffled. As they realize their military is being hit hard and that they are losing in points they will be more likely to get desperate and jump the gun on their counter attack.
Fourth: Keep bombers on your carriers ready to go. That way you can either launch quickly against enemy ships, or use them to target enemy silos once they launch. You don't need to kill the silos while launching, you just need to be able to hit them before they can switch back to defensive mode.
Fifth: Once you have eliminated as many silos and airfields as possible with bombers and subs, then you launch your silos against cities hit any remaining visable silos first). As soon as you switch to launch mode you should scramble any fighters you have, sending them to thier maximum range, in order to intercept any counter attack bombers.
Sixth: If you did it properly, all (or at least 80 - 90%) of your silo nukes should be able to find their targets, and under normal city/population settings most cities should be reduced to below 500,000.
I hope this helps someone. It's been a good stratagy that has treated me well over the last six months.
First: Defend your units first. Hide them from immediate radar range, and group them to provide the maximum amount of protection (this includes your navy, with the exception of subs).
Second: Use bombers immediatly at Defcon 1 to target your enemies installations. Don't worry about cities, your first goal should always be to destroy as many of thier missles as possible before they can launch them, as well as elminating thier defenses. Keep your silos hidden, and launch a full fighter spread immediatly after your bombers go up in order to tangle up thier intercepters. I have personally found that six tightly grouped missles can take out almost any silo, but upwards of eight may be needed if the silos are mass grouped.
Third: Use your subs to hit coastal cities. A good combination of silos strikes from the air and city strikes from the ocean will get them desperate and ruffled. As they realize their military is being hit hard and that they are losing in points they will be more likely to get desperate and jump the gun on their counter attack.
Fourth: Keep bombers on your carriers ready to go. That way you can either launch quickly against enemy ships, or use them to target enemy silos once they launch. You don't need to kill the silos while launching, you just need to be able to hit them before they can switch back to defensive mode.
Fifth: Once you have eliminated as many silos and airfields as possible with bombers and subs, then you launch your silos against cities hit any remaining visable silos first). As soon as you switch to launch mode you should scramble any fighters you have, sending them to thier maximum range, in order to intercept any counter attack bombers.
Sixth: If you did it properly, all (or at least 80 - 90%) of your silo nukes should be able to find their targets, and under normal city/population settings most cities should be reduced to below 500,000.
I hope this helps someone. It's been a good stratagy that has treated me well over the last six months.
-
Tucsoncoyote
- level1
- Posts: 32
- Joined: Thu May 03, 2007 3:44 pm
- Location: Tucson Arizona
- Contact:
Well I can see the logic here from both sides but I would like to point out that even if you used all your nukes in an En masse strike against the biggest cities in the world, The odds of you getting through is perhaps slim to none, if everyone is in Defensive mode, and you're in Offensive mode.
For Example if you are trying to hit a city that is heavily protected by Silos/Sams, and they are in defensive mode, the odds are that your missiles / Bombers/MRBM's Might not make it through. Also sometimes when you have your sub pop up and Go active with an MRBM launch it's almost as if the air Defenses train on your subs just as the break the surface (which suggests to me a good solution if they were to fix the game further would be to give the Subs a case of "Blind Shooting" (Blind shooting is where you target your cities but you don't surface, (thus you remain in Passive mode and makes it hard for anyone to detect (this one slight change would make it harder for the surface ships to detect unless either the carriers were in Anti-Sub Mode, or the Surface Fleet were close enough in Radar Range to detect the launch. Otherwise it would be like getting a free shot off with no one detecting you.
As for the Bomber Strategy, I try to get the planes airborne within moments after going to Defcon 1, and usually by the time they are airborne some fleets are already detecting them heading outbound and target them (of course using fighter cover to counterstrike fleets is a good idea.. I feel by reducing surface contacts, it gives you a better chance of your bombers getting through.
Now as for the whole ICBM/AirDefense Mode, When you go to ICBM mode, you can really pick and choose your targets. But if you have Radars that can detect you, the enemy silos tend to make quick work of your inbound flights, thus making it harder to hit a target.
(also is it wise to use multiple strikes on a single city? I mean i've tried launching 3 to 5 nukes sometimes at the major metro areas, and usually some if not all of them get taken out, This sort of supports Feud's theory about how to strike the enemy first and foremost.. what you have to do is hit them with the sub launches. but without proper fighter recon, there's just no real room for hitting a target if you can't penetrate deep into enemy territories.
I think the bottom line is that Feud might have the right strategies here for the attacks but I noted that if you can't get close to shore with your ships (Due to enemy surface ship attacks, it' ends up futile. if you try to use subs you can't very well see deep into enemy territories and if you go active then you make yourself a viable target for destruction.
in short there has to be some sort of balance here between hitting cities and Military targets of opporituntiy.. and that is what kind of frustrates me a little. Not knowning if using an MRBM on a Radar or a Silo is worth the effort if your sub is going to be blown out of the water . Also another flaw I have found is that you can't send bombers out to the carriers to refuel and re-arm so you can pentrate deeper. usually if you try to penetrate deep with Bombers it usually means that you're going to be taking casualties from being shot at.. and remember each missile not fired by a bomber or a silo is just the same as losing a whole silo. (Heck I've had cases where I've had 4 or 5 SRBM's at an airbase, with no Bombers to fly them.. a complete wasted effort.
In conclusion I'm starting to wonder if Feud does have the right strategies here, or if you should take your game onto a defensive mode first then go offensive in a counter attack. After all once they launch their missiles, the enemy can switch back. but remember, you have to launch within seconds I feel of one of their launch detects. else it's wasted effort.
but that's just my thoughts, At least i can say one thing.. I do play a semi-defensive game and usually when the game ends, I have still a fairly functional Radar and Silo placement that keeps me somewhat safe.. provided I don't get totally over run.
but other then that, I'm "Golden".
Tucsoncoyote(Aka General Stormfury)
For Example if you are trying to hit a city that is heavily protected by Silos/Sams, and they are in defensive mode, the odds are that your missiles / Bombers/MRBM's Might not make it through. Also sometimes when you have your sub pop up and Go active with an MRBM launch it's almost as if the air Defenses train on your subs just as the break the surface (which suggests to me a good solution if they were to fix the game further would be to give the Subs a case of "Blind Shooting" (Blind shooting is where you target your cities but you don't surface, (thus you remain in Passive mode and makes it hard for anyone to detect (this one slight change would make it harder for the surface ships to detect unless either the carriers were in Anti-Sub Mode, or the Surface Fleet were close enough in Radar Range to detect the launch. Otherwise it would be like getting a free shot off with no one detecting you.
As for the Bomber Strategy, I try to get the planes airborne within moments after going to Defcon 1, and usually by the time they are airborne some fleets are already detecting them heading outbound and target them (of course using fighter cover to counterstrike fleets is a good idea.. I feel by reducing surface contacts, it gives you a better chance of your bombers getting through.
Now as for the whole ICBM/AirDefense Mode, When you go to ICBM mode, you can really pick and choose your targets. But if you have Radars that can detect you, the enemy silos tend to make quick work of your inbound flights, thus making it harder to hit a target.
(also is it wise to use multiple strikes on a single city? I mean i've tried launching 3 to 5 nukes sometimes at the major metro areas, and usually some if not all of them get taken out, This sort of supports Feud's theory about how to strike the enemy first and foremost.. what you have to do is hit them with the sub launches. but without proper fighter recon, there's just no real room for hitting a target if you can't penetrate deep into enemy territories.
I think the bottom line is that Feud might have the right strategies here for the attacks but I noted that if you can't get close to shore with your ships (Due to enemy surface ship attacks, it' ends up futile. if you try to use subs you can't very well see deep into enemy territories and if you go active then you make yourself a viable target for destruction.
in short there has to be some sort of balance here between hitting cities and Military targets of opporituntiy.. and that is what kind of frustrates me a little. Not knowning if using an MRBM on a Radar or a Silo is worth the effort if your sub is going to be blown out of the water . Also another flaw I have found is that you can't send bombers out to the carriers to refuel and re-arm so you can pentrate deeper. usually if you try to penetrate deep with Bombers it usually means that you're going to be taking casualties from being shot at.. and remember each missile not fired by a bomber or a silo is just the same as losing a whole silo. (Heck I've had cases where I've had 4 or 5 SRBM's at an airbase, with no Bombers to fly them.. a complete wasted effort.
In conclusion I'm starting to wonder if Feud does have the right strategies here, or if you should take your game onto a defensive mode first then go offensive in a counter attack. After all once they launch their missiles, the enemy can switch back. but remember, you have to launch within seconds I feel of one of their launch detects. else it's wasted effort.
but that's just my thoughts, At least i can say one thing.. I do play a semi-defensive game and usually when the game ends, I have still a fairly functional Radar and Silo placement that keeps me somewhat safe.. provided I don't get totally over run.
but other then that, I'm "Golden".
Tucsoncoyote(Aka General Stormfury)
Tucsoncoyote wrote:Well I can see the logic here from both sides but I would like to point out that even if you used all your nukes in an En masse strike against the biggest cities in the world, The odds of you getting through is perhaps slim to none, if everyone is in Defensive mode, and you're in Offensive mode.
For Example if you are trying to hit a city that is heavily protected by Silos/Sams, and they are in defensive mode, the odds are that your missiles / Bombers/MRBM's Might not make it through.
While you may be somewhat limited (SA hitting Moscow in six player FFA isn't likely), believe me when I say that if I want to hit a city, I WILL hit that city. You just have to know how to place your silos for the most effective strike.
Tucsoncoyote wrote:As for the Bomber Strategy, I try to get the planes airborne within moments after going to Defcon 1, and usually by the time they are airborne some fleets are already detecting them heading outbound and target them (of course using fighter cover to counterstrike fleets is a good idea.. I feel by reducing surface contacts, it gives you a better chance of your bombers getting through.
Well, if you are waiting for DEFCON 1 you are waiting too long, all of your bombers should be in the air once DEFCON 1 hits. Your fleet should be running block for your bombers, clearing the path well before they get there.
Tucsoncoyote wrote: Also another flaw I have found is that you can't send bombers out to the carriers to refuel and re-arm so you can pentrate deeper.
Actually, you not only can do this, but should be doing so, do to bomber losses (you need to shuttle bombers around to maximize nuke usage).
This thread may be better placed in the Strategic Air Command section rather than the Debriefing Room, but that's a minor point.
I don't think there's any one overpowering strategy that will help you win all types of games. What one needs to consider as far as strategy goes is what type of game you're playing (Default, Survivor, Diplo, Genocide, or some custom variant), the options the host has set up, number of players, whether there are any alliances either before or in-game, and if there are, who's allied with who, what territory you're playing, all of these play a role in any viable strategy one would formulate. Figuring out what is best for any situation is a ongoing process.
In most default-scoring games Feud's strategy is perfectly valid, and I've adopted much of what he's suggested, and though I haven't garnered many victories as of yet, his ideas make the most sense to me.
Haven't played many true ffa games (most of the 6-player games I've played involved alliances being formed at some point), but I'm not so sure if going for the biggest cities right away is the best way to go. You might do just was well targeting (and hitting) several medium-sized or small cities as you would if you targeted one or two major cities (which you might have trouble with because of mass AA fire depending on how the silos are set up, and they may have been hit hard before you even got there). Certainly if the opportunity presents itself to hit a major city with bombers or subs in an early-Defcon-1 exchange I'll take it, but mainly I'll go after visible installations first, trying to reduce an enemy's ability to counterattack. Sure I may fall behind in points, but there's often enough available points in smaller cities that I can bounce back by the time I start launching my silos.
Just a couple of thoughts anyway
Take Care
-Church
I don't think there's any one overpowering strategy that will help you win all types of games. What one needs to consider as far as strategy goes is what type of game you're playing (Default, Survivor, Diplo, Genocide, or some custom variant), the options the host has set up, number of players, whether there are any alliances either before or in-game, and if there are, who's allied with who, what territory you're playing, all of these play a role in any viable strategy one would formulate. Figuring out what is best for any situation is a ongoing process.
In most default-scoring games Feud's strategy is perfectly valid, and I've adopted much of what he's suggested, and though I haven't garnered many victories as of yet, his ideas make the most sense to me.
Haven't played many true ffa games (most of the 6-player games I've played involved alliances being formed at some point), but I'm not so sure if going for the biggest cities right away is the best way to go. You might do just was well targeting (and hitting) several medium-sized or small cities as you would if you targeted one or two major cities (which you might have trouble with because of mass AA fire depending on how the silos are set up, and they may have been hit hard before you even got there). Certainly if the opportunity presents itself to hit a major city with bombers or subs in an early-Defcon-1 exchange I'll take it, but mainly I'll go after visible installations first, trying to reduce an enemy's ability to counterattack. Sure I may fall behind in points, but there's often enough available points in smaller cities that I can bounce back by the time I start launching my silos.
Just a couple of thoughts anyway
Take Care
-Church
90% of my games are 6ppl games, everything except diplo, true FFA and Alliance (permament or not, doesnt matter) alike. Those who played with me do know I am rather formidable enemy, and I base my gaming on like 700 games till now...
After like half of a year or more, I am used to execute one of two opposite strategies, or their mix.
1.
I strike just after def 1 with like everything I've got (only option as Europe I guess, use em or loose em, I guess), killing everything in my reach, or...
2.
I do the turtle way, sneaking till the very end. Managing subs is vital here. Second option doesnt mean i leave biggest enemy cities alive :p ... I just save my silos.
But as always, right mix of those above is the key. Just remember to defend your carriers, and leave last wave of bombers to strike enemy that just changed his silos to nuke mode...
It is always importand to know your enemies too. When I fight with a pro, I dont even think of going for some other player's cities he will kill ASAP. Waste of resources. Most common, subnuking Moscow or Cairo from Indian Ocean, when ussr is not allied with Europe. That just wont work if European player has at least minimal exp in defcon.
But with rookie players, I will take that risk. I managed to kill Tokio as NA or SA few times (USSR can do it blindfolded like 10 minutes ealier that anyone else...). Same with other combinations, I suppose most of us here already know em.
PS. IMO games with equalized cities are hardest to play, and require most defcon skills. Maybe we could make another all-star with that setting? That guarantee it wont be over like 10 minutes of def 1... Like most pro games lately.
PS2. Some asian players tend to use "Cairo is mine" silo (placement VERY near of Cairo, giving it clear first shot at Cairo, couse bombers arm their nukes like 4 times longer). I have seen it working, but I am not sure I would like to loose that much defensive power. Do you have any exp using that setting?
PS3. Mod, please move it to Strategic Air Command subforum...
After like half of a year or more, I am used to execute one of two opposite strategies, or their mix.
1.
I strike just after def 1 with like everything I've got (only option as Europe I guess, use em or loose em, I guess), killing everything in my reach, or...
2.
I do the turtle way, sneaking till the very end. Managing subs is vital here. Second option doesnt mean i leave biggest enemy cities alive :p ... I just save my silos.
But as always, right mix of those above is the key. Just remember to defend your carriers, and leave last wave of bombers to strike enemy that just changed his silos to nuke mode...
It is always importand to know your enemies too. When I fight with a pro, I dont even think of going for some other player's cities he will kill ASAP. Waste of resources. Most common, subnuking Moscow or Cairo from Indian Ocean, when ussr is not allied with Europe. That just wont work if European player has at least minimal exp in defcon.
But with rookie players, I will take that risk. I managed to kill Tokio as NA or SA few times (USSR can do it blindfolded like 10 minutes ealier that anyone else...). Same with other combinations, I suppose most of us here already know em.
PS. IMO games with equalized cities are hardest to play, and require most defcon skills. Maybe we could make another all-star with that setting? That guarantee it wont be over like 10 minutes of def 1... Like most pro games lately.
PS2. Some asian players tend to use "Cairo is mine" silo (placement VERY near of Cairo, giving it clear first shot at Cairo, couse bombers arm their nukes like 4 times longer). I have seen it working, but I am not sure I would like to loose that much defensive power. Do you have any exp using that setting?
PS3. Mod, please move it to Strategic Air Command subforum...
-
caranthir.pkk
- level3
- Posts: 265
- Joined: Sun Jan 14, 2007 2:03 pm
- Location: France
- Contact:
-
Ace Rimmer
- level5
- Posts: 10803
- Joined: Thu Dec 07, 2006 9:46 pm
- Location: The Multiverse
-
Smiling Buddha
- level3
- Posts: 263
- Joined: Fri Apr 20, 2007 7:35 pm
- Location: Omnipresent Occupation: Supreme Buddha
-
caranthir.pkk
- level3
- Posts: 265
- Joined: Sun Jan 14, 2007 2:03 pm
- Location: France
- Contact:
Ace Rimmer wrote:Which forum would that be? ...and is it bad that I just skimmed over all of the above due to the length of the posts?
Wow, my first guess would be strategic air command. As would my second...and third...
Why? Because "the real question is this: what constitutes a better strategy?"
The prosecution rests its case.
-
Ace Rimmer
- level5
- Posts: 10803
- Joined: Thu Dec 07, 2006 9:46 pm
- Location: The Multiverse
caranthir.pkk wrote:Ace Rimmer wrote:Which forum would that be? ...and is it bad that I just skimmed over all of the above due to the length of the posts?
Wow, my first guess would be strategic air command. As would my second...and third...
The prosecution rests its case.
Sorry, guess I misunderstood. I took that to mean a forum other than one affiliated with IV.
Smoke me a kipper, I'll be back for breakfast...
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest