Since SC2 is about attack.

[SeaMonkey]

Usually in SC1 it was a concentration of effort to destroy as many units as possible per turn. Things haven't changed that much, but now I find myself being a little more cautious and there are instances when I try to weaken enemy units that are in proximity for a counter-attack.

I find that I take less casualties to my assaulting units in the preceding turns since my opponent usually reinforces or moves away instead.

It just seems to me that the essence of SC is to efficiently manage your MPPs.

Isn't that how you get ahead in life, efficient management of your assets? :cool:

Oh yeah, I forgot....a lot of you out there want the government to do that for you.

You know they'll do a good job!

[Retributar]

Yeah!,...the Government has been doing such a good 'Job', that money will soon only be worthwhile as toilet-paper is!. So use it first, before you throw it into the street!.

[Liam]

You're wrong about one point, you should attack even if he can withdrawl, but have the units to fill in the cracks in your lines if he should counter attack and you do not wish to lose what you committed to the field. Also Recon the area to see if he's planning a counter or has reserves, otherwise what's wrong with an attack? You yourself, may retreat as well... But you force his hand, he will counter and gamble to take out your forces if you planned the attack well....or he operates out and pays the morale cost and the operational cost and then he must reinforce, relocate and work his way back into the field, all costly... Retreating costs too! Especially on the Russian Front and in a way on the Normandy-Western Front later in the War.. It does become a war of attrittion

and cash is not the key alone, I beat plenty of players who have more units and more cash, because they didn't spend their booty right, and they're units are weak and I keep killing them as they produce them.. Strategic Position can be as important in the long run as Cash, as the Axis find themselves in 1941 right before Barby in SC2

It is the key to not just victory but also to the MPP advantage in the long run...

They had to plan effectively to get there that is, not just attacking it's knowing when, where and how to attack..and when where not to defend

You think it wise, to sacrifice 5 corps if it buys you 25 turns of 50MPPs? Think of the that a moment for defense and whether it works or not. Think of Brest Bordeaux region defense parameter

it all makes sense.. not always possible vs an able Oponent

[Retributar]

Make's Sense Liam !. You Gotta Know When To Hold-Em, And Know When To Fold-Em!.

[TaoJah]

Well, against the allied AI the game is definatly not about MPPs. It's about attack, attack, attack and get the game over with in 1942.

You don't need that many MPPs. You need 500 to buy advanced infantry 3, another 750 to get tanks as high as possible and then some MPPs to always repair your units.

If you go for an early victory, you don't need other researches and you don't need more troops then the ones you get from the start, so MPPs are pretty much worthless.

[sabazius]

But TaoJah, I think most of us quickly discovered that anyone can kick the AI's ass with very little effort. After doing this a couple times I realized it wasn't the most exciting way to spend an evening. MPPs might be less important against the cpu but against a decent human player they're hardly 'worthless'.

[SeaMonkey]

Yeah sorry about not qualifying that. My postings are always about H to H competition.

I haven't played the AI since the early days of SC1, unless I was designing a scenario specifically for an AI position.

If anything, I'll set up a hotseat and play with myself.

[Liam]

Absolutely Retri:

this is a Gambling Poker game with the better players almost 30% I'd say is all on the gut instinct. once you know the moves and the dos and don'ts.. You're planning to hit that IW3 by Barby and if you don't then you're toast.. You can retreat all you like if like doesn't favor you at all you're toast. I have played games where 5 chits in IW over 3 years bought 1 IW

then again SC2 in another fashion is nothing like Poker, which is 10% skill and 90% luck.. If it were so much that way I'd have at least 50/50 chance of beating Terif every time. Since I'm a better Poker player more 55/45

Originally posted by Retributar:

Make's Sense Liam !. You Gotta Know When To Hold-Em, And Know When To Fold-Em!.

[Scook]

If you want to use the poker analogy, only a handful of players win consistently in a game of luck. Say, for example, Chris Ferguson (Jesus); he finishes in the money more often than not. Does he win all the time? No, and one hand never kills his whole match. Recovery from the unexpected is key in both poker and in SC2. Oh, and not giving up too early helps too.

[Liam]

True Scook, but Gus Hansen probably won't win much at SC2 vs a Terif type Character. Sure Super Subs will kill the Allies or level 5 Tanks in 1940 might do wonders but it will not win every game... Just a few... Unless of course in SC2 he's as lucky as he is in Poker

P.S. When I thought I had a French Fleet Bug from Moving into the Artic, 4 Paris Battleships out of 5 survived with a 1/5 chance. Also when I did my first BetaTest all but 2 French Ships and transports survived. So Of course Luck can be Huge in this game. Imagine those Multiplied Attack points taking down a miracle target But you have get to get there first

[ September 26, 2006, 02:49 PM: Message edited by: Liam ]

[Scook]

Heh, thats why we likes the rematch, don't we, my Precious? Yes, we do, do we, Precious!

I will just throw some numbers out, say a good player will win 70% of the time. In a short run, the record can be something like 4-10, then hit a streak of 20 in a row.

So, I would like to see a best of 5 or 7, that would really help minimize luck.

Oh, and yes, SC2 is about attack. But don't help the bad guy by bleeding yourself at the wrong time. I see too many people lose patience in winnable games and attack, only to lose a very high number to the riposte.