Winning wars

[StratOcastle]

One very simple strategy is to make sure every enemy province is breakable by means of wpa, tpa or marching. Often I'll find apparent enemy UBs ignored. The point is that an enemy broken by one means can be made breakable by all three.

I'm calling attackers that clear zones as "running interference". Your killers and t/m breakers are generally open to enemy attacks so I'm addressing the roving large economy provinces as interference types.

In The Virtual Kingdom I break the kingdom into divisions to simplify communication and cut down on wave drag. This is directed at less experienced kingdoms that don't understand the counter measures enemies may use to derail kingdom timed waves.

I'll emphasize that some tactics that kingdoms avoid are pure hearsay. For instance, NM is fine as an individual use barrage. You don't need to NM wave. You can use NM to achieve extra taps to place an enemy province in max gains for an attacker who might be ripe for chaining. As an individual elf cleric I would NM/NS an enemy and offer him up to one of our attackers while I attack another to compress a like nw enemy. This was done in Jerks so we were warring enemies of some reputable might. I learned this tactic from a ghetto mute who handled himself with barely any communication in kingdom. He was reportedly a grumpy old man and acted the part the few times he expressed himself in kingdom chat.

[MeIkor]

[...] I'll emphasize that some tactics that kingdoms avoid are pure hearsay. For instance, NM is fine as an individual use barrage. You don't need to NM wave. You can use NM to achieve extra taps to place an enemy province in max gains for an attacker who might be ripe for chaining. [...]

Usually runes and mana give you a lot of different options to handle a situation. If you want to do something that is not only beneficial but a very strong choice, you need to compare your action with a very good alternative. This is very hard to see as a single province. You might do a strong tactical decision by NM an attacker a few times, but on the other hand you might lose on the strategic front, where your king needed you for example to ET enemy thieves or fireball an enemy UB province. IMO these kind of tactics are not usually avoided because of hearsay, but because they are inefficient or dont fit very well into the long term strategy. Using these king of tactics often is an invitation for selfish people to act like a maverick instead of a teamplay.
Everybody makes mistakes, leadership does most mistakes, because there are people who actually need to make decisions all the time. In my experience its better for the kingdom and outcome of a war to follow a bad decision as a team than to make a lot of good decisions alone.

[Bananamancer2000]

Usually runes and mana give you a lot of different options to handle a situation. If you want to do something that is not only beneficial but a very strong choice, you need to compare your action with a very good alternative. This is very hard to see as a single province. You might do a strong tactical decision by NM an attacker a few times, but on the other hand you might lose on the strategic front, where your king needed you for example to ET enemy thieves or fireball an enemy UB province. IMO these kind of tactics are not usually avoided because of hearsay, but because they are inefficient or dont fit very well into the long term strategy. Using these king of tactics often is an invitation for selfish people to act like a maverick instead of a teamplay.
Everybody makes mistakes, leadership does most mistakes, because there are people who actually need to make decisions all the time. In my experience its better for the kingdom and outcome of a war to follow a bad decision as a team than to make a lot of good decisions alone.

This has ups and downs. Maverick style players can inflict a lot of damage, achieve some very tactical things on their own. If you have 90% of the team following strategy, following orders, things like ET shouldn't be so lacking. Sometimes however your maverick has split armies hitting max gains while your chains are starving for land, and sitting at max mana. I think it's rare to need 100% to pull off your strategy, if you plan around it. You aren't fighting below 100%.

[Chris121]

I think it's rare to need 100% to pull off your strategy, if you plan around it. You aren't fighting below 100%.

If you plan around it, that is true as a good leader in that situation would adopt an achievable strategy based on the resources they have (ie the people who will follow the strategy). However if you give that leader another 10% resources, they could adopt a better strategy. So I am firmly of the view that you are indeed fighting below 100%. Perhaps above 90% (if you have 10% maverick), but nonetheless below 100%.

[Jo3MoMMa]

One very simple strategy is to make sure every enemy province is breakable by means of wpa, tpa or marching. Often I'll find apparent enemy UBs ignored. The point is that an enemy broken by one means can be made breakable by all three.

I'm calling attackers that clear zones as "running interference". Your killers and t/m breakers are generally open to enemy attacks so I'm addressing the roving large economy provinces as interference types.

In The Virtual Kingdom I break the kingdom into divisions to simplify communication and cut down on wave drag. This is directed at less experienced kingdoms that don't understand the counter measures enemies may use to derail kingdom timed waves.

I'll emphasize that some tactics that kingdoms avoid are pure hearsay. For instance, NM is fine as an individual use barrage. You don't need to NM wave. You can use NM to achieve extra taps to place an enemy province in max gains for an attacker who might be ripe for chaining. As an individual elf cleric I would NM/NS an enemy and offer him up to one of our attackers while I attack another to compress a like nw enemy. This was done in Jerks so we were warring enemies of some reputable might. I learned this tactic from a ghetto mute who handled himself with barely any communication in kingdom. He was reportedly a grumpy old man and acted the part the few times he expressed himself in kingdom chat.

We should play together. We think alot alike, you just word it way better.

[StratOcastle]

We should play together. We think alot alike, you just word it way better.

Agreed. I'm no leader but read the field alright.