By day 5, what are your usual units?

    This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our Cookie Policy.

    • xovault wrote:

      KFGauss wrote:

      xovault wrote:

      56 cities will be conquered by day 8 with now 38 NG's.
      That's impossible - According to everything I've read here, you're making big mistakes. Therefore you must be losing (Maybe you are losing and you just don't know it yet =O ) ;)
      It's not impossible. Current = 46 cities with NG's timed to hit another 10 by end of day. I'm not a complete noobie. Rank 48, 18 games - 89% win rate. 11 K/D (If any of that really matters anyway) But If I'm making mistakes, happy to hear them. Always want to learn.
      not possible, there is no way you have not lost any NG or Planes in ur conquest of the world, you lack so much in hitting capability…I don’t understand what I’m seeing.

    • japan samurai wrote:

      xovault wrote:

      KFGauss wrote:

      xovault wrote:

      56 cities will be conquered by day 8 with now 38 NG's.
      That's impossible - According to everything I've read here, you're making big mistakes. Therefore you must be losing (Maybe you are losing and you just don't know it yet =O ) ;)
      It's not impossible. Current = 46 cities with NG's timed to hit another 10 by end of day. I'm not a complete noobie. Rank 48, 18 games - 89% win rate. 11 K/D (If any of that really matters anyway) But If I'm making mistakes, happy to hear them. Always want to learn.
      not possible, there is no way you have not lost any NG or Planes in ur conquest of the world, you lack so much in hitting capability…I don’t understand what I’m seeing.

      EAA's are the hitting force. With European cities being so densely concentrated, EAA's on patrol attack can clear out countries in no time at all. Had 1st one on day 4. 5th one just built now. Before I have them; a roving 10 stack + T.A support does the job with no losses. ASF's around day 3 when I have at least a couple of them, help ping around extra damage.

      I lost a couple NG's to insurgents I believe. That's it. I just don't take losses to inactive players. There's no need to. If I can help it, I'm not engaging in any melee with an inactive where any unit loss is expected.

    • KFGauss wrote:

      xovault wrote:

      56 cities will be conquered by day 8 with now 38 NG's.
      That's impossible - According to everything I've read here, you're making big mistakes. Therefore you must be losing (Maybe you are losing and you just don't know it yet =O )
      ;)
      uno reverse card moment
      "El experto en todos fue una vez un bêginara"

      "You didn't see me sneak under the door" :evil: :evil:

    • KoopKoopyGuy wrote:

      xovault wrote:

      KFGauss wrote:

      I But If I'm making mistakes, happy to hear them. Always want to learn.
      Unfortunately, you are making mistakes.
      Especially by using your stats to "prove" your argument.

      Many users here do that too.
      The stats weren't mentioned to prove anything. I even put in brackets that they don't matter. I mentioned them specifically to KFGauss to dispel his implied suggestion that I'm a complete noob with his continued "you probably lose all the time" comments".

      I back my point elsewhere & with the screenshots. Your main points are that I'm wasting resources and it prevents me from building a stronger army. To the former, I could only expand this fast due to NG spam. Therefore they have been a return on investment not a waste of resources.

      To the latter, I already pointed out that this is a contextual strat (which I'm also just testing) were a stronger army is not needed at the start due to lack of threats. If that is the case I can a) still produce strong, relatively expensive units that lead to slower expansion and are overkill for what is in front of me at that stage of the game or b) weaker cheaper units that lead to fast expansion and can deal adequately with what is in front of me. b seems the optimal solution in this case. I can then later build a stronger army faster, due to a quicker developed economy.

      Look, the concept is not hard to grasp and is the core of my argument - not my stats.

    • But how long does it take for you to realize that investing way too much resources in NGs is a complete waste and that in day 5 players may have got stronger units instead of national guards??


      Fast expansionism doesn't mean anything, you need to be lucky enough to not find a player that may use SFs, ASFs, SAM and Armored vehicles, or else you will need to make out a massive effort to defend your territories.



      However, argumenting with you that spamming and centralizing national guards is a **BAD** choice probably will not work as we have completely different brains just like any human being, resulting in different opinions.

      Have a great day/night.
      National Guards Should Not Be Underestimated 8)

    • japan samurai wrote:

      commander_alb wrote:

      Guys, so no-one of you start building artillery?? This is actually the fist unit I research and then place it at the door of any city I want to conquer in order to minimize losses.

      Anyway, I'm very surprised by the amount of units you manage to have in just 5 days. I usually focus on growing the economy and limit troops losses
      no.Like unless you do that you’re gonna need a ton of ASF to protect your Arty from air threats and make sure they hit hard enough to prevent units from rushing you too quickly
      So in the initial days you just go head down against surrounding cities through melee attack and waves of infantry + air support? I don't see much alternatives

    • xovault wrote:

      KFGauss wrote:

      xovault wrote:

      56 cities will be conquered by day 8 with now 38 NG's.
      That's impossible - According to everything I've read here, you're making big mistakes. Therefore you must be losing (Maybe you are losing and you just don't know it yet =O ) ;)
      . . . But If I'm making mistakes, happy to hear them. Always want to learn.
      I think you made one mistake - You seem to have overlooked or not appreciated the meaning of the Winking emoji at the end of my tongue-in-cheek comment.

      Pay no attention to the nay-sayers. Some folks here confuse incompetent opponents with being good themselves, and they are pretty confident in their opinions.

      However, for a public game with allies, if your allies are complementing what you are doing and if you all intend to win quickly, then I think you're doing just fine (if you care what I think).

      Choosing the quickest and simplest way to achieve your goal(s) is simply not wrong, no matter how much dogma or conventional wisdom disagrees with it.

      When you report that your coalition won, or at least did well, your revenge will be sweet.

      If I were you, I'd be investing more in the EAA/ASF/SF side of your OOB, but no matter what, if you're currently having fun, you're doing it right.

    • Blitzkrieger64 wrote:

      My usual units by Day 5 are level 4 ICBM. This is made possible by all the +75% gold offers I'm getting. I no longer need to think to play this game. I just watch for the next +75% offer. It's great!!
      I’m not impressed with those offers either, but for real what units do you like to have?
      With the amt of gold being spent one can only wonder how big their wallets are.
      "El experto en todos fue una vez un bêginara"

      "You didn't see me sneak under the door" :evil: :evil:

    • I want as many boots on the ground possible because My stratergy is to attack 2 countries at once.
      "YES WE CAN!" - Barack Obama
      Mr. Gorbechev, tear down this wall! - Ronald Reagan
      We choose to go to the moon in this decade and do other things. John F. Kennedy
      The only thing we need to fear is fear itself. - Franklin D. Roosevelt
      Do not let anyone tell you who you are. - Kamala Harris

    • KoopKoopyGuy wrote:

      But how long does it take for you to realize that investing way too much resources in NGs is a complete waste and that in day 5 players may have got stronger units instead of national guards??


      Fast expansionism doesn't mean anything, you need to be lucky enough to not find a player that may use SFs, ASFs, SAM and Armored vehicles, or else you will need to make out a massive effort to defend your territories.



      However, argumenting with you that spamming and centralizing national guards is a **BAD** choice probably will not work as we have completely different brains just like any human being, resulting in different opinions.

      Have a great day/night.
      But how long does it take for you to grasp the continually stated point that this was a decision based on a non-competitive map. My allies are in Europe and the rest of Europe was largely inactive. Rest of the map had no competition & not an immediate threat anyway.

      The assessment was that people around me wouldn't have stronger units or make much of a fight. Spamming NG is neither "bad" nor "good". Depends on context. In this context it was fine. I don't know how you keep missing the logic of the argument. If there were better players around me, I would have cut down on the NG and brought out the artillery sooner.