Strategies

This strategy focusses on training so many men into soldiers to fight for your country. Because of this, you are able to have a big army in no time, yet your soldiers aren't as good.

Reinforcements

Cities that normally give 1 reinforcement gain +0 reinforcement
Cities that normally give 2-4 reinforcement gain +1 reinforcement
Cities that normally give 5-6 reinforcement gain +2 reinforcement
Cities that normally give 7 and up reinforcement gain +3 reinforcement

Bonusses / Losses

Note the attack/defence behind the name is already set right.

Infantry (4/5)
Infantry lose 1 attack
Infantry lose 1 defence

Tank (5/4)
Tanks lose 2 attack
Tanks lose 1 defence

Marines 4/4
Marines lose 2 attack
Marines lose 1 defence

Militia 3/5:
Stays the same


Battleship (6/5)
Battleship loses 2 attack
Battleship loses 1 defence

Submarine (5/4)
Submarine loses 2 attack
Submarine loses 1 defence

Transport (1/2)
Stays the same

Stealth (4/4):
Stealth loses 2 attack
Stealth loses 1 defence

Bomber (4/4)
Bomber loses 2 attack
Bomber loses 1 defence

Air Transport
Stays the same

Sentry Plane
Stays the same



Basically, all your units get a bit weaker but you will have more reinforcements to use. This might be really useful to make big stacks to scare your enemy or just to have fun with a lot of men.

I did not balance the stats out so it might be unbalanced but it's about the idea generally.

I like it.

Well marines would actually be 4/3 but other than that I just think it's too weak and I couldn't imagine ever using it.

That's why I like it.

I think if the battle mechanics were difrent it would be viable but with the current system it isnt

If the stats are a bit balanced to suit the extra reinforcements this can be a viable tactic.

I'm quite sure the strength of this strategy comes to life once you have a lot of cities = a lot of reinforcements, especially in China for example.

That way you will have so much more men than your enemy and your able to fight equally against them.

Perhaps making the units a bit cheaper? Then it would look a bit like imperialist, though.

It can be implemented with current Guerilla somehow.

As guerilla is all about Militia, not very powerfull unit, feature can be added in this strategy, like "forrest brothers joins your fight agains capitalistic pigs" from time to time, after that there are 5-10 units pops up from some forrest.

I don't think the increase in troops comes anywhere NEAR covering the decrease in troop strength you're describing. You'd need to probably DOUBLE the number of reinforcements AND make them cheaper.

An interesting concept in principle, but in specifics way too underbalanced

''I'd like to see a Trench Warfare strategy. Lesser mobility but lower cost and a big bonus to infantry-line defenses.''

Idea from Raider over the shoutbox that I liked.

作者： King Cow, 14.02.2011 at 06:26

''I'd like to see a Trench Warfare strategy. Lesser mobility but lower cost and a big bonus to infantry-line defenses.''

Idea from Raider over the shoutbox that I liked.

Me and him brought this up when I happened to turn Saudi Arabia into a citadel of infantry and militia lines the likes of WW1 envy, because I figured since I had picked Perfect Defense as my strategy, I might as well play on my strengths(he has a screenshot, pretty epic). I mean, if we have Guerrilla, Blitzkrieg, Sky Menace, Naval Commandeer, all pretty niche and historically reference-able strategies, why not have Trench Warfare?

http://i487.photobucket.com/albums/rr235/Cundiff6/Citadel.jpg

Unless you have Perfect Defense(Which even if you do, I've found out the benefits are really not that much since the defense part if so widespread across units, leading you just to stack dozens into cities and hold out), building lines around key points or fronts is really only going to reassure yourself, and warn the opposition to rethink any ideas. Just my two cents.

作者： Kannibal, 14.02.2011 at 19:04

作者： King Cow, 14.02.2011 at 06:26

''I'd like to see a Trench Warfare strategy. Lesser mobility but lower cost and a big bonus to infantry-line defenses.''

Idea from Raider over the shoutbox that I liked.

Me and him brought this up when I happened to turn Saudi Arabia into a citadel of infantry and militia lines the likes of WW1 envy, because I figured since I had picked Perfect Defense as my strategy, I might as well play on my strengths(he has a screenshot, pretty epic). I mean, if we have Guerrilla, Blitzkrieg, Sky Menace, Naval Commandeer, all pretty niche and historically reference-able strategies, why not have Trench Warfare?

http://i487.photobucket.com/albums/rr235/Cundiff6/Citadel.jpg

Unless you have Perfect Defense(Which even if you do, I've found out the benefits are really not that much since the defense part if so widespread across units, leading you just to stack dozens into cities and hold out), building lines around key points or fronts is really only going to reassure yourself, and warn the opposition to rethink any ideas. Just my two cents.

Well the problem with something like trench warfare is you aren't mobile, thats why there wasn't much trench warfare in WWII because of the invention of the airplane, you get out maneuvered since people can drop units behind you or bomb you, and if you're near water you have to protect that from battle ships and to be honest, at this point 30 battleships are gonna breeze by most things. Not to mention the mobility planes have makes them pretty hard to defend against.

It's a defensive oriented strategy, mobility isn't the highest of concerns. Throw down units and lines around powerhouse cities and move your reinforcements and forces in a convoy like pattern to maximize their range where you need it. If you know what you're doing, its hard to get outmaneuvered when you learn the value of range stats, where in if you're zooming all over the map I can imagine you'd overestimate some moves.

If you do go on the offense, do what Trench Warfare historically did. Build up assaults splinters, and go on drives through forces and cities(albeit slower than you would with other strats), building up, reinforcement, and advancing your lines. If we have Sky Menace and Blitzkrieg for high octane pushes into regions, we should have an attrition focuses strat to counter it. Tortoise and the Hare basically.

This idea isn't bad, but it already exist, somewhere between imperialism and guerilla warfare

Well that can't really be counted, since there is nothing actually between Imperialism and Guerrilla Warfare, as you can't combine strategies.

Like it but your better off going around lol
How about not being able to fly over non friendly airspace and giving all countrys a starting airforce.

Also could add Sea zones and do the same thing for port citys and naval units
set it up as defencive lines you cant see without a spy plane

I really don't see how this is that much different from Perfect Defense.
In PD you get stronger defensive infantry at the cost of your attack units (tanks and bombers). Even bombers lose range, sort of fitting in with the lack of mobility suggested here.
I think that enacting Trench Warfare would create an inferior PD clone, where instead of having tanks and bombers lose 1 attack, all units lose mobility, and no one is going to pick that. Unless you make infantry and militia even better defenders than PD, at which point they'd be so overpowered it would be absurd.

Ok i got this idea from the us military :search and destroy steath detection is 2+[it was originally the view rang but it seamed overpower and make stealth useless. but it still on the table if you like that.] 1- movement and 30+ cost for all units, infantry 2+ attack and 2- tank attack

Patriot:

+1 reinforcements in every city
+2 defense in home turf and cities (anywhere within your territory, but not in the enemies, and only in a territory you have held for 3 or more turns)
because of demand of resources +30 cost for every unit, +10 upkeep

Would it be possible to give each strategy a 'unique' unit, or be able to build specific rare units...

say,
Heavy tank = tank commander
Light tank = blitzkrieg
partisan = guerilla warfare
anti tank infantry for perfect defense


You get the idea.

The problem with that being those units are rare for a reason. They're overpowered, and if you could build as many of them as you like, with the native benefits your strategy gives you, you'd be insanely overpowered. I mean, who'd bother with marines anymore if they could Partisan rush your capital? And how would Tank Commander ever stand a chance against a rolling mob of 150 anti-tank infantry?

作者： nonames, 29.03.2011 at 06:39

Patriot:

+1 reinforcements in every city
+2 defense in home turf and cities (anywhere within your territory, but not in the enemies, and only in a territory you have held for 3 or more turns)
because of demand of resources +30 cost for every unit, +10 upkeep

militia

So was looking over the origional idea and i think it would be feasible with low cost transports and longer ranges

One-Sentence Idea: Mobilisation

A strategy that provides additional reinforcements, lower costs for militia and higher costs for everything over 200/300?

Well, if everyones posting strategies here, I may as well.

Ultimate Besieger/Blockade Builder:

Stronger defence lines (+1 for Militia, +2 for Infantry) and higher attacks in cities at the cost of weaker defence in cities (-1 defence for Militia and Infantry)

Wave Attack:

Stronger attack and cheaper Militia and Infantry at the cost of more expensive tanks and bombers.

Turtling:

+10 attack for every group of 10 units with the disadvantage of weaker defence.

+10 attack? you want everybody in the game to get raped?

作者： FaLLenXH3R0ESx, 07.12.2011 at 22:17

+10 attack? you want everybody in the game to get raped?

+10 attack for every group of 10. Thats +1 attack per unit.

Ivan visited this 246d ago and Amok the coder never has so no point posting really.

Geneva Hater:
You can build nukes in your capitals that have more than 5 reinforcements.
-2 defense to all units.
+30 cost to all units.
Nukes would be 20/1, have range of 17 and cost 500 each.

作者： notserral, 15.02.2012 at 20:10

Geneva Hater:
You can build nukes in your capitals that have more than 5 reinforcements.
-2 defense to all units.
+30 cost to all units.
Nukes would be 20/1, have range of 17 and cost 500 each.

Axaxaxaxa the name is absolutely hilarious, +rep

They should probably cost a bit more than bloomin' air transports though!

作者： Yihka, 01.02.2011 at 16:15

This strategy focusses on training so many men into soldiers to fight for your country. Because of this, you are able to have a big army in no time, yet your soldiers aren't as good.

Reinforcements

Cities that normally give 1 reinforcement gain +0 reinforcement
Cities that normally give 2-4 reinforcement gain +1 reinforcement
Cities that normally give 5-6 reinforcement gain +2 reinforcement
Cities that normally give 7 and up reinforcement gain +3 reinforcement

Bonusses / Losses

Note the attack/defence behind the name is already set right.

Infantry (4/5)
Infantry lose 1 attack
Infantry lose 1 defence

Tank (5/4)
Tanks lose 2 attack
Tanks lose 1 defence

Marines 4/4
Marines lose 2 attack
Marines lose 1 defence

Militia 3/5:
Stays the same


Battleship (6/5)
Battleship loses 2 attack
Battleship loses 1 defence

Submarine (5/4)
Submarine loses 2 attack
Submarine loses 1 defence

Transport (1/2)
Stays the same

Stealth (4/4):
Stealth loses 2 attack
Stealth loses 1 defence

Bomber (4/4)
Bomber loses 2 attack
Bomber loses 1 defence

Air Transport
Stays the same

Sentry Plane
Stays the same



Basically, all your units get a bit weaker but you will have more reinforcements to use. This might be really useful to make big stacks to scare your enemy or just to have fun with a lot of men.

I did not balance the stats out so it might be unbalanced but it's about the idea generally.

This strategy sounds extremely underpowered, but you gave me an idea for another.

What if Imperialist got a reinforcement bonus in addition to its cheap units, so that it could actually become useful?