Position

In-depth tactical discussion on how to lose the least

Moderator: Defcon moderators

PsychicKid
level2
level2
Posts: 240
Joined: Sun Oct 01, 2006 12:17 am

Postby PsychicKid » Tue Mar 20, 2007 10:06 pm

I find that the big problem North America has is its ocean situation. What does one do if Asia decides to come after you, or SA places everything in the Pacific, or Russia places in the Pacific and comes with Asia, or Europe and Africa join up in the Atlantic? There's just too many different possible situations where one coast of the US (or even both) will get royally screwed over, and it's impossible to defend two oceans with a split Navy.

Any ideas about this?
User avatar
Ace Rimmer
level5
level5
Posts: 10803
Joined: Thu Dec 07, 2006 9:46 pm
Location: The Multiverse

Postby Ace Rimmer » Tue Mar 20, 2007 10:19 pm

I forsake one coast for the other. I typically try to protect one coast and the Artic area. Almost no-one will want to risk loosing massive numbers of bombers trying to cross the mainland USA. A good line of sight and good base placement can make mince meat out of any wave of bombers if spotted in time.

This applies to the naval situation as well, perhaps a small "guerrilla" force on one side and the mass on the other. In this way (playing as xander said) you really only need to defend your units, not your cites.
Smoke me a kipper, I'll be back for breakfast...
PsychicKid
level2
level2
Posts: 240
Joined: Sun Oct 01, 2006 12:17 am

Postby PsychicKid » Tue Mar 20, 2007 10:37 pm

Usually I'll do a layout similar to this: http://img61.imageshack.us/img61/5719/s ... 001bb1.jpg

Sometimes my air bases are placed a little bit further north (Still within protection range) incase Mexico has silos, or I feel SA is a big threat. And sometimes my eastern silo placements will differ a little bit, but the general idea is the same.

Sometimes I split my navy up differently too. Once ocean may have 4 battleships, 8 carriers, and the other side may have 8 battleships and 4 carriers. I usually use my subs for their nukes instead of sinking ships, since I feel that they're too risky to lose. Sometimes I'll split them up and park them at seperate territories and strike cities when the time is right, or focus on one territory and overwhelm their military. Depends on my mood usually.

How does a setup like this typically fair?
User avatar
shinygerbil
level5
level5
Posts: 4667
Joined: Wed Dec 22, 2004 10:14 pm
Location: Out, finding my own food. Also, doing the shinyBonsai Manoeuvre(tm)
Contact:

Postby shinygerbil » Tue Mar 20, 2007 11:20 pm

That doesn't look bad; it's quite closely-knit without being all in one place. Obviously everyone's different, so I would do things a little differently - for example I quite like having my airbases close together. Also, I would split my subs up a bit more, either 4 groups of 3 or 6 groups of 2.

On the whole, though, that seems like a fairly decent setup. Usually when I'm NA I'll also cluster more silos towards New York and just live with the losses on the West Coast that that entails.
Here is my signature. Make of it what you will.
Image
PsychicKid
level2
level2
Posts: 240
Joined: Sun Oct 01, 2006 12:17 am

Postby PsychicKid » Wed Mar 21, 2007 12:43 am

True, but the west coast just has too many people. 20 million, a little under 25 million if you include Phoenix and Seattle is a lot to sacrifice. The US is tricky like that. At the minimum, I place at least two silos on the west coast. If I do two on the west instead of three, I usually place that extra silo near Chicago so it gets more protection or closer to the coast to protect New York and Washington.
User avatar
Ace Rimmer
level5
level5
Posts: 10803
Joined: Thu Dec 07, 2006 9:46 pm
Location: The Multiverse

Postby Ace Rimmer » Wed Mar 21, 2007 1:04 am

I like it when other players stretch their silos like that. Make them easy targets once you find them, especially if you sync launch your own silos for that last minute win.

Now, it's a pretty decent setup but one that I am accustomed to neutralizing.
Smoke me a kipper, I'll be back for breakfast...
User avatar
caranthir.pkk
level3
level3
Posts: 265
Joined: Sun Jan 14, 2007 2:03 pm
Location: France
Contact:

Postby caranthir.pkk » Wed Mar 21, 2007 1:29 am

Ace Rimmer wrote:I like it when other players stretch their silos like that. Make them easy targets once you find them, especially if you sync launch your own silos for that last minute win.

Now, it's a pretty decent setup but one that I am accustomed to neutralizing.


Its too close to the border, radar will pick it up at dfc 4 and it will be gone come dfc 1. Needs to be farther back ;)
User avatar
shinygerbil
level5
level5
Posts: 4667
Joined: Wed Dec 22, 2004 10:14 pm
Location: Out, finding my own food. Also, doing the shinyBonsai Manoeuvre(tm)
Contact:

Postby shinygerbil » Wed Mar 21, 2007 3:00 am

That's another thing. You'd better hope that South America likes you! ;P
Here is my signature. Make of it what you will.

Image
PsychicKid
level2
level2
Posts: 240
Joined: Sun Oct 01, 2006 12:17 am

Postby PsychicKid » Wed Mar 21, 2007 3:34 am

So what sort of alternative strategy would you recommend? Placing the silos farther north would protect them from SA radar, so I should experiment with that. Also, I don't quite understand how this sort of placement makes them easy targets. Perhaps you could elaborate?
User avatar
KingAl
level5
level5
Posts: 4138
Joined: Sun Sep 10, 2006 7:42 am

Postby KingAl » Wed Mar 21, 2007 3:44 am

I believe Ace is advocating placing silos closer together so that they can defend each other better.
tl8
level1
level1
Posts: 40
Joined: Sun Nov 26, 2006 7:45 am
Location: Toowoomba, Australia

Postby tl8 » Wed Mar 21, 2007 7:32 am

xander. You don't put in 2 cents you put in 2 million cents. Oh well. I guess we can't change anyone that launches an all out attack on noobs. But yes it was in survior mode (and thanks for the tip about attack and not defend(You are actually saying that)) :D
User avatar
Ace Rimmer
level5
level5
Posts: 10803
Joined: Thu Dec 07, 2006 9:46 pm
Location: The Multiverse

Postby Ace Rimmer » Wed Mar 21, 2007 7:43 am

PsychicKid wrote:So what sort of alternative strategy would you recommend? Placing the silos farther north would protect them from SA radar, so I should experiment with that. Also, I don't quite understand how this sort of placement makes them easy targets. Perhaps you could elaborate?


Unless you plan on backstabbing first and early or you implicitly trust your neighbor or you know you can easily overpower him should he backstab... Always place your silos out of all other territories radar.

KingAl wrote:I believe Ace is advocating placing silos closer together so that they can defend each other better.


Correct. I always make sure that every silo's range overlaps every other silo. Makes for good timed launches and better protection for your units.
Smoke me a kipper, I'll be back for breakfast...
User avatar
Trident
level2
level2
Posts: 160
Joined: Fri Mar 30, 2007 6:59 am
Location: Canada

Postby Trident » Sun Apr 01, 2007 10:01 pm

i agree that any territory is winnable. but the only disadvantaged one i can think of would be europe simply beacuse of it's small size you can easily scout out the entire area using fighters or even naval units.
reaps
level1
level1
Posts: 13
Joined: Tue Mar 20, 2007 5:14 am

Postby reaps » Sun Apr 01, 2007 10:23 pm

What you think is its weakness i think is its main advantage, a small landmass and concentrated population means that its easy to have overlapping radar coverage aswell as overlapping fields of fire for your AA turrets. you only have waters on one side of your territiory so you can concentrate your naval resources instead of trying to hold 2 oceans.

And because your structures are close together, its easier to hit targets simultaniously with more than one silo or bomber launch and to set up a nice cloud of fighters if bombers are coming. Not to mention that Russia will always want to cosy up.

Ive succesfully defended Europe from being backstabbed and having Africa, Russia and South America launch everything they have at me and still come out of it with silos, airbases, about 75% of my navy and about half my population ready for retalition.

Every area has its strengths and weaknesses, you have to find out what they are and use them to come out on top.
MikeTheWookiee
level4
level4
Posts: 657
Joined: Wed Mar 07, 2007 11:58 pm
Location: Kashyyyk / Cambridge (commuting)

Postby MikeTheWookiee » Mon Apr 02, 2007 10:01 pm

I remember... when the game was only recently out... everybody thought Europe was the best place to be, and Africa was the absolute worst. People quit if they got Africa (some even if they didn't get Europe). We all decried Asia as useless, too. People used to complain that euro-russia was the 'uncrackable' alliance, that they could never be defeated. Who says all that now? Things have changed, and will continue to change.

Currently in vogue is Africa-Asia, who used to get beaten up regularly. Once someone figures out a demon strategy for, say, South America, people will like it again. In a couple of months we'll all want to be Europe once more.

What I'm trying to say is this: relax. It's more worthwhile working out good strategies for each territory in each scoring mode. Your choice (willing or random) of continent is less important than what you do with it.

Return to “Strategic Air Command”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest