>Strategy game
>Rewards being aggressive so heavily that the optimal strategy is always to just bum-rush the enemy
No wonder this shit died and Fire Emblem survived.
 Shopping Cart Returner Shirt $21.68 |
 Ape Out Shirt $21.68 |
Shopping Cart Returner Shirt $21.68 |
>Turtling
>Ever
There are a grand total of 0 games where turtle strategies work that result in fun games.
This. Turtling is terrible and every game is better when the devs try to incentive the player not to go for it.
I unironically love turtling. Terran mech turtling with siege tanks was fun
The best games always let you bum rush. its fun
Big alpha strikes tend to be the meta in any Strategy game that uses the Player Phase -> Enemy Phase format.
You can't be out of position if your enemy doesn't have units to counter attack you with. (which is why tons of these sorts of games give the enemy surprise reinforcements that can act immediately as a band-aid for the system when they should just drop there being separate player and enemy phases and either alternate per action, or order within a round based on a speed stat, instead.)
Are there any good strategy games where turns are done unit by unit until every unit has gone?
Darkest Dungeon
I wanted a Strategy game (needs a grid homie), not a 4 homies in a row game.
Unit-by-unit turn order with more than eight units would be agonizingly slow, your best bet is a party-based TRPG.
Post skin color or you cant say that
I'm as white as they come, (literally a Caucasian Albino) what are you gonna do about it
Final Fantasy Tactics and the like?
I thought FFtactics used an internal speed stat for turns. I was thinking something more like chess where you're guaranteed 1 move at a time between each army.
it does.
not him, but I think you'll have a hard time finding a decent recent game with that requirement.
most strategy games purposefully include ways to manipulate combat order now.
that's a shame, i was curious to see how a system like that might be handled by the devs.
I don't really think there's room for improvement, which is why strategy games outside of the classics added modifiers to the turns.
Any game with that system almost always end up devolving into speed becoming a god stat because you end up double or even triple turning the enemies when you stack enough of it.
Not to mention the general combat is also usually just an exercise of dog piling everyone onto the target whose turn is closest to your next turn to stop them from acting.
Most RTS games are like this too and it's obnoxious. Almost every AoE 2 game involves bum rushing your opponent as early as possible and ending the game as quickly as possible
The def edition did add in a setting that makes it so you can't attack your opponent until X minutes have passed, but barely anyone plays it because they just want to rush rush rush and end games as soon as possible, fricking adhd zoomers
people use rushes because they're a moron check.
Unironically just play simcity, bro. Of course people are gonna try to break each others shit asap in a competitive game
There's literally no competitive discipline where the concept of tempo doesn't exist. All turn based games have it too.
That's the optimal strategy in real life dumbass. You always want to engage the enemy on your terms - never on theirs.
Russia, take notes.
Russia's strategy isn't the issue. It's the moronic amounts of corruption and unprofessionalism at every stage that make their industrial and manpower advantages basically nil.
>Russia's strategy isn't the issue
Meatwaves. Chimpouts using missiles to attack public power sector and and terrorize civilian targets instead of frontlines. Airdropping elite forces into Kyiv unsupported only to have them all turned into mincemeat on Day 1 of the war. *Literally just invading Ukraine*.
??? Historically the attacker has always been the side at a disadvantage because they have to enter the defender's range and terrain and obstacles pretty much always favor defense.
The Iraq War disagrees with that statement.
Wars favors the aggressor nowadays. Defense lines are more like chains, easily penetrable with enough breakthrough and worthless afterwards.
>Casually ignore the siege of Kyiv for my argument to work, pl0x
Modern wars are always an army worth trillions of dollars stomping on some dirt farmers with 200 year old guns, or if they're lucky 50 year old guns they got from the same country that's about to stomp them with said trillion dollar army. I don't think any kind of war theory can be learned from that.
ignore the siege of Kyiv for my argument to work, pl0x
What point are you trying to make, exactly? The siege of Kyiv was a strategic fricking catastrophe. A 40-mile convoy that got fricked up and bogged down for two weeks after Ukrainians on literal mountain bikes destroyed both ends of the column, got them stuck, and then startegically targetted the tankers sent to refuel the vehicles, before the Russians finally shit their pants and fled, abandoning a ton of equipment.
What point were you trying to make by bringing up the siege of Kyiv? Lmao
>iraq war
Was against a carboard army with 0 morale.
>The Iraq War disagrees with that statement.
Fake meme war just like all the American wars. Shooting sandpeople from 300 kilometers away does not count.
"No!"
Recent years have revealed that modern peer-to-peer warfare (ie not USA stomping some random sand shithole flat) has devolved back into WW1 style static lines and constant shelling, now with drones!
>Rewards being aggressive so heavily that the optimal strategy is always to just bum-rush the enemy
>majority of strats are to plug up a choke point with a trash enemy and whittle down enemies
wut?
You're playing wrong
>You're playing wrong
are you trying to pretend that securing and plugging bottleneck areas with fodder has not been the tried and true method for beating most levels in even the first AW game?
It can buy you time to build up your forces, but it can't win you anything. You have to blitz the enemy when you're ready to win.
Nah. I used them to plug bottlenecks while my arty worked and I built even better arty as Grit. It's tried and true because the enemy units waste a turn killing your trash mobs and then can't act again
Works even better when you sandwich their infantry between your tank and the rest of their column. Ai won't rotate or sacrifice its unit to your tank and you don't have to kill it so you can just chill while you bully them with arty. I bet they haven't fixed that.
I was talking about a game with another player but yes, you're right. There's a challenge map vs two COs that's great for Grit for that reason
>It can buy you time to build up your forces, but it can't win you anything
>first AW game
>time to build up your forces
this strategy was pretty much known from the get-go and it is more useful in missions where you are severely limited in building an army.
most of 1's missions are preset armies and battlegrounds without being able to build more units.
why are you lying?
>You have to blitz the enemy when you're ready to win.
You're telling me in order to win a strategy game I eventually have to ATTACK them with my ARMY?!
I bet you play aoe2 like sim city and get mad if someone attacks you before imp.
I liked it
Lol dumb Black person
If you try turtling in FE Engage you will get fricked quickly
bruh, imagine being so bad at video games that you got your ass kicked by fire emblem on NORMAL.
>meanwhile, Radiant Dawn Normal is actually Hard Mode
>Redoing my army
I hope he meant swapping units, I don't want the timeline where FE gets so casual it lets you reassign stats.
Why are people talking about the stupid Russian war
Most of them were after during the Iraq/Bosnian War, smdh
The Iraq Army was formidible on paper but lacked the mobility of the Western Coalition and folded in days, but you don't know that.
Moreover, the goat farmers you highly regard simply served as field subjects for weapons development, but again, you don't know that.
people who dont care about advance wars or video games only know about advance wars as that nintendo game that was delayed because of a war so they just see advance wars as /misc/ threads
Shut up b***h I made threads inviting people to play with me online and everyone ignored me so frick you Imma talk about how shit Russia is
I was playing the original advance version and I guess I got filtered because I was enjoying it but then I got to the first real fog of war mission and it’s fricking bullshit that you can’t see the enemy but they can see you. I just stopped playing after and haven’t played since. I’ll probably go back to play it eventually and I know I can look up enemy location but what tf were they thinking.
fire emblem has a garbage tactical combat system as well unfortunately
But much better waifus
What are you talking about? That's why I fricking love this game
What happened here
Why did they add people of color?
Maybe I’m just a huge pussy but I find constant aggression in games exhausting so I’ll play to a certain point and then always stop with games that only encourage it. Also the same strategies wind up working every time so it’s just a race to whomever can do that thing first and that’s it, that’s the exclusive deciding factor.
That's the entire reason rushBlack person love it.
It take next to no brain: just scout and execute the corresponding build order as fast as possible - you win or you lose immediately, without any of your neuron ever having to risk getting tired.
Holy cope I fricking suck at rts too, but your behaviour is just embaressing. Scouting out and defending against rushes is one of the most foundational things you learn if you try to improve. And if you hate it that much then just stay playing at a level where no one ever clicks a military unit until 40 minutes in. That's completely fine if you don't cry like little pissbabies that you can't into earlygame.
No how about I just don’t play at all, which is what I said I wind up doing. Why are you such an assmad little homosexual? I’m fully willing to consent it’s just not for me. You know what I hope you get raped.
>so it’s just a race to whomever can do that thing first and that’s it
woah, I never though of comps this way fr
Fine, but don't spread your stupid coping lies then
>Also the same strategies wind up working every time so it’s just a race to whomever can do that thing first and that’s it, that’s the exclusive deciding factor
Just because you always lose against the same shit doesn't mean that's the only way to win. It just means you don't know how to beat that shit yet.
meant for
Shut up homosexual, get raped. I’ll say whatever the frick I want. Try to stop me. Do something about it.
I can't stop you from spewing bullshit but I can and will call you a dumb, coping crybaby every time you do
Yeah that’s right you can’t do shit
Frick off or keep wasting your time replying to me
What are the chances of her making a comeback?
gitgud
Reminds me of a different game.
>still unable to save mid-game in Versus
If they never patch this, the old GBA versions will be more playable than this mess.
the optimal strategy is to bum-rush contested cities, not enemy
learn the difference