Build Strats & Economy
For some informative videos regarding WW2 history look up TIK. A lot of the information can be good for strategic translation in Utopia.
I've mentioned before how I'm committed to never attack unprovoked outside of war, and how I combat these aggressors. I've mentioned that my preferred targets are super-pumped going for abduction, but I've not yet mentioned one of my target preferences in war: trade deficit.
... Because my regard for economy and timing supersedes my admiration for army mass. Sure, army mass is incredibly important and dictates one of the fundamental gauges in top war. This isn't exactly what it looks like. We now dig into builds and science distribution. I also want you to begin to appreciate what exactly zone tactics do to the greater strategic theater.
I'm sure players like Madchess could guide science distribution much more efficiently than I could. Most of my mechanics, including science, are very figurative but functionally reliable. For instance, I run my science broadly with a nod toward housing. The rest is pretty even depending on the abduction environment. The reason I run a broad, even science strat is because 1) I use everything from combative casting to decent production. 2) Part of my challenge idiom is to not manipulate scientists. Thus, I sacrifice my ability to manipulate my scientists positions to force myself to adapt by other means. - the point here is that I would run across enemy provinces with science distributed in top-heavy formations that emphasized their strengths and i would attempt to best them with a static formation to hone my skills otherwise. The first age scientists were available I experimented with moving scientists and it's a marvelous addition to the game. So we aren't doing what I would do, we're trying to do what suits your role in TVK.
Ok. The reason for me digressing on what I was doing was to point out that it worked despite being at a disadvantage. My survivability as a self propelled attacker often lasts much longer than my kingdom mates because my strat is broad and includes economic virtue. This doesn't mean every attacker should be balanced, but that the working parts of zone tactics should. Those who have spearhead aspects should probably go with top-heavy science distribution,....with Madchess's mechanical tweaks in mind(see the Strategy forum for details).
Economically, the zone occupation should have decent tick to tick production with an eye toward enemy stockpiles. Stockpiling is ideal, but not pragmatically feasible. Why? Well, because that's exactly what I'm looking for to bolster my economy so I expect the enemy to think likewise. In war, we are looking for more acres and we want them evenly distributed. The zone is created to maintain production yield and relieve aid pressure on t/ms. Conversely, we are compacting enemy cores with attention to total reduction. This is why we have the spell and sabotage distribution presented in earlier posts. The healthier the zone, the more likely we are able to dig our chained out while stymying enemies. Enemies with trade deficits force a greater drain on the total kingdom effort.
As a reminder, the inherent build characteristics of TVK means enemy kingdoms will likely have top advantage. Just like good offense, we take what the defense gives us. The struggle is to beat kingdoms at their own game. They will have economy, but we want that economy to be narrow field; most likely in the t/m displacement. We on the other hand want broad economic capability.
In traditional chain formation it's difficult to maintain acceptable economy because the constant threat of disaster looms over formidable attackers. They must take land and dilute their paripheral offense/defenses(tpa/wpa) to stay afloat. They are then not only subject to t/m honor hawks but threats from enemy chained who've retained peripheral capability. Why? Because chains are slow in distilling enemy cores into manageable size, both in acreage and paripheral control tactics. I myself have razed bigs, stolen their resources and cast debilitating spells to help the war effort while chained. It's not until the damage is done that enemies counter raze and massacre my province. In chain alignments the cores trade blows with slow reductions in offense, plunging economies and dwindling peasant populations. When you press the nw tab on the kingdom page you'll have enemy attackers in max range until the core battle is resolved. In this model, with both kingdoms using similar tactics, it's the most active kingdom winning.
In zone based tactics the zone presents itself. If the zone can't be cleared we have a clear indication to WD before we suffer needless losses. This isn't a rule that is unbreakable, simply an indicator of status, just as honor yield.
Build Strats
Build strats are a constant motion entity. Most of my builds are somewhat fat with decidedly defensive and production emphasis. In short, I build my attacker types to maintain a zone. This isn't how every attacker or t/m should be built. In fact, we should build for our purpose. Killers should build to knock a t/m into core reach with the knowledge they'll be chained. Provinces like mine are built to dig out our chained provinces through attacks and aid while stalling enemy chain endeavors. The option remains, if my province can break a t/m I'm prepared to be chained. Raze is always a threat so the totality of kingdom economy should be maintained to rebuild. At no time should enemies that raze be ignored: If not the enemy province that razes, then an appropriate substitute. We're in the business of economy and we want that advantage in our court. It's my practice to have a small cache of resources at hand to keep troops paid, peasants fed and runes to take part in the blanket. I train thieves and keep guilds and WT going. Again, if my province experiences enemy ops and sabotage, I want them coming from enemy t/ms not the enemy core.
So if I'm running some weird strat, how do I handle enemy purpose built attackers? This is a matter of experience and one of the reasons I'm advocating divisions and thus micro. When I use to run a cleric and I faced tacticians my attention was on timing and relay tapping. When I was made to switch from running avian tac to undead cleric my experiments led me to spreading my generals over a tick array. I wanted fluidity in acre gains, build spread to mute raze effect and optimize opportunity attacks. By constant acre intake my losses to abandonment were obscured and I was able to ambush tacs to speed up my armies. The durability of cleric, or in our case paladin and undead, plays into the tactic. I was also running zone to reduce enemy gains and turn those max gains into glancing blows. Mind you, the enemy may attempt to match tactics, but experience pays dividends. You see the enemy in the round with armies in and out, moving your attacks through time limiters and alternatives like ambush, massacre, abduction. Again, this isn't a kingdom wide tactic, it's used to create zone supremacy. In essence I was an attacker killer and knew my best path to late war t/m breaking was through controlling the economic reigns in my sector. You need to micro this because I'm talking about top kingdom war activity over long periods. Most players simply can't endure the round the clock attention necessary to do what very few can. While relay tapping has risks I should inform the reader I was using relay taps while running a faery sage in The Faery Circle, so the actual offense necessary to break enemies is based in the lowest offensive race the game offers. You would not be disappointed in how this worked when I ran an orc cleric vs a trio of dwarf and human attackers.
Originally Posted by Bishop
Reply With Quote