...or does it work? The tactics I see in this game seem to fall into one of three categories, more or less. I'm going to use the names of games I've played (which some of you will recognize) to name them:
I really don't understand the SimCity approach. I have conquered many countries that do this, but I have not seen being Switzerland work in a game that, well, has CONFLICT right there in the name. I don't think most who do this have the attitude that it's hilarious to even suggest that they move outside their borders, but I do wonder how this approach can ever work. In the case of Benelux, I finally kicked him after asking more than once for him to help. I have to think the 23 coalition victories (out of 330 games played!) had to have been in coalitions where the others did all the heavy lifting (and light lifting). Or, maybe all those wins (and the 1 solo win he had) were when he played a more balanced approach, and now he's in "retirement" from the whole conquest thing.
But, maybe I'm missing something. Can this approach actually result in victory? And, if so, how?
- Command & Conquer - Some of you are familiar with the RTS game Command & Conquer, where the "tank rush" was a popular tactic: you build as fast as you can, then rush the enemy's base, hoping to overwhelm them before they get set up. This can work on the short-term, and it can work in the early going when no one has had a chance to research. But, if the enemy is prepared, you're probably going to end up throwing away your units.
- SimCity - I have an coalition member in one game I'm playing who spent the first several days doing nothing but building. I have Italy, and I was attacked by West Germany (Cold War map), and my ally has Benelux. I asked him to help, and he didn't do anything. I ended up driving West Germany back on my own. I asked him on day 8 if he was going to invade anyone, or maybe help me if I need help in the future, since all he's done the whole time is building. His reply: "yea, just need a military b4 I can invade anyone lol".
- Civilization - All civilizations throughout history have encountered war. You do need to build, but you also need to go to war. This is what I call the balanced approach, which I like to think I use most of the time. You need to build, but you also need to stop the bad guys from conquering you. And, you need to capture resources (and territory) so your economy can grow.
I really don't understand the SimCity approach. I have conquered many countries that do this, but I have not seen being Switzerland work in a game that, well, has CONFLICT right there in the name. I don't think most who do this have the attitude that it's hilarious to even suggest that they move outside their borders, but I do wonder how this approach can ever work. In the case of Benelux, I finally kicked him after asking more than once for him to help. I have to think the 23 coalition victories (out of 330 games played!) had to have been in coalitions where the others did all the heavy lifting (and light lifting). Or, maybe all those wins (and the 1 solo win he had) were when he played a more balanced approach, and now he's in "retirement" from the whole conquest thing.
But, maybe I'm missing something. Can this approach actually result in victory? And, if so, how?
