Jump to content

Does anyone ground attack anymore?


Artigo
 Share

Recommended Posts

I haven't been outside of the top 250 in like 5 years and up here turtling is literally the only tactic.

 

Watching some fights in virtually every other tier, it seems turtling has pretty much taken over as the go-to strategy since it maximizes damage and minimizes losses.

 

Is this actually the case or do legitimate back and forth ground battles still happen? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The nature of war in CN is that infra melts pretty fast. I usually experience more ground fighting in the first week of a front than I expect to in subsequent weeks.

 

Naturally.  You are getting at least a week of ground fighting in the onset tho?

 

Inevitably the fight becomes each side exchanging missiles, but im curious if the other tiers see the en masse day one soldier sell-off that I'm accustomed to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I GA all the time.  And that includes when this last war started and I was still in the TOP 250.

 

Its the best way to lessen your tech losses.  if your opponent is still buying troops, I just make sure I buy more infra than them, so they cant win any counters, and I win 95% of my GAs.

 

But realistically running GAs against you super top tier guys is pointless, between your huge land values, and huge tech advantage, its almost impossible to beat you in a GA.

Edited by Sweeeeet Ronny D
Link to comment
Share on other sites

As Ronny said, ground attacks are still hugely important. If you have a sizable tech advantage on your opponents and a Foreign Army Base wonder to give you four of them, you can take a round's worth of nukes and have approximately the same amount of tech as you had at the start. 

 

I wouldn't even say that you need to have an infra advantage. As long as you have 2k infra worth of troops and the right improvements/wonders, you can consistently win GAs with judicious use of nukes (unless your opponent is extremely active) against people with 4-5x your infra.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

But realistically running GAs against you super top tier guys is pointless, between your huge land values, and huge tech advantage, its almost impossible to beat you in a GA.

 

4v1; 25k infra each is at least 200k troops a piece.  800k troops 80k tanks + CMs will definitely win close to, if not more than, 50% against 350k troops.  Even with land/tech advantage you're not going to be able defend 100% unless you're there to rebuy.

 

Assuming they can coordinate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Even if they coordinate, if you are fighting 4 20k tech nations, you have 3 times the tech, and that gives you a huge odds advantage, I know this because even having a 5-10k tech advantage this war on some of my opponents prevents them from winning any GAs against me, even after a nuke and coordination.

 

Also, running GAs against you, also means you can roll out on them, and I dont even want to know how much tech/land you steal per GA, But I am guessing that you can probably make up for most of those losses with a few GAs.  So tactically its basically pointless to try.

Edited by Sweeeeet Ronny D
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I never turtle as the more body count the better I feel...: :awesome: :war: It does seem to be a prevelant tactic these days but I don't understand the logic as you lose 20 spais and up to 5 million cash etc. with every DA you get hit with... :facepalm:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Even if they coordinate, if you are fighting 4 20k tech nations, you have 3 times the tech, and that gives you a huge odds advantage, I know this because even having a 5-10k tech advantage this war on some of my opponents prevents them from winning any GAs against me, even after a nuke and coordination.

 

Also, running GAs against you, also means you can roll out on them, and I dont even want to know how much tech/land you steal per GA, But I am guessing that you can probably make up for most of those losses with a few GAs.  So tactically its basically pointless to try.

Realistically I don't see any nations in my range below 35k, but I understand the point you're trying to make.  I don't know the *exact* correlation, but honestly tech doesn't contribute as much to actual % battle odds as I thought it might.

 

And against smaller nations this is true, but against nations with as large an infra count as I described again I wouldn't be winning all of my GAs and they wouldn't be losing all of theirs.  It's relative. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Even if that is the case and the war odds aren't crazy different, the tech/land you are stealing from them vs what they are stealing from you tactically doesn't make it necessarily worth it for them.

 

I just know earlier this war, I had around 20k tech, and my opponent had around 10k tech, and he had more troops than I did, and I still had over 60% odds on him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

I just know earlier this war, I had around 20k tech, and my opponent had around 10k tech, and he had more troops than I did, and I still had over 60% odds on him.

 

This was the case because both you and your opponent were below the amount of tech at which tech bonus to GA odds is capped. I have 46k tech atm and if I would be fighting a nation having 36k tech, my tech wouldn't give me any adavntage to GA odds, since both me and my opponent would have the same (maximum) tech bonus to GA odds.

Edited by murtibing
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Coordination is pretty rare.

 

The first time I've ever seen anyone co-ordinate was in the last war. 3 MI6 nations at war with the same nation and they're all on IRC. They dealt over 7k damage between them, in one day, It was beautiful.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

People want to maximize the damage dealt / damage taken ratio and/or difference and, to that end, "turtles" happen when a side is outnumbered either in nation count or in actual strength (not NS), with the latter happening only at the top end because of the 250 rank range rule.

 

If we had more even wars and/or a more even top tier and/or it was (much) faster to rebuild/get to the top we'd probably see many more Ground battles.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The confluence of events that would have to take place to create an even war(even if everyone wanted it....) are astronomically unlikely to occur anywhere, much less here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The confluence of events that would have to take place to create an even war(even if everyone wanted it....) are astronomically unlikely to occur anywhere, much less here.

If that's off the table the universal use of ground attacks is off the table as well. It is what it is.

Players (that last) tend to be rational thus, without balance, they'll enact the tactics which give them the best outcome given the circumstances.

One way to tackle it is to force players to use all the war mechanics, no matter if beneficial to them or not, if they want to use any. This solution is for game designers that believe in the expansion of the masochistic player market.

Another way would be the novel idea of bringing back balance into the game, by fixing the obvious disparities that plague some pairings at the top and at the bottom end of the NS ladder.
Any time any idea is proposed to either end, unfortunately, we have stakeholders that extensively complain about having to renounce to some of their advantages. A minority even goes around blackmailing people with threats of in game harm. We're thus full circle and back to square one: some mechanics remain neglected and people complain about how boring it is, blaming everyone else for "incompetence".

(In the end it's what I have been saying since at least 2011: CN War Is a Lie(tm). :) Sorry Ray... :P ) Edited by jerdge
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Other good points have been made on the mechanics and I wont waste time restating them.

 

But one thing no one has mentioned is the psychological aspect of war. It is the most important aspect, and yet the least discussed and understood.

 

Your opponents are in a defensive position, and lack the wherewithal to defeat you in conventional terms. Yet they clearly have a strong desire to make their resistance as painful and unprofitable for you as possible (to deter anyone that might launch a similar assault in the future.) Turtling makes sense here not just as a mechanic but also as psychology. If they were buying troops and contesting the ground you would be having more fun, win OR lose! so rulers that believe they are under unjust and unprovoked attack are simply being rational when they refuse to give you the satisfaction. 

 

I cant remember the last time I have seen an opponent turtle, personally. The last time I did it might be all the way back in late 2010. So from my perspective, no I dont think anything has changed in the broader sense - I think what you are seeing is caused by a combination of broken mechanics in your range, and unwilling partners who did not want to dance and are determined to make sure you dont enjoy it - annoying for you but of no relevance to those not in that situation.

Edited by Sigrun Vapneir
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...