Which country could be suitable for a low activity gaming?

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

    • I always thought India was pretty good for that.

      You do have to watch out for Pakistan early on (ally with them or take them out), but after that your borders are pretty well protected by natural boundaries like mountains, jungle and rivers where you can defend fairly easily; and you've only got two coastal entry points to defend.

      You've also got 2 or 3 AI countries that you can comfortably reach before anyone else can, and then the possibility to expand quickly into city-rich Indochina once you're ready.

    • WalterChang wrote:

      I always thought India was pretty good for that.

      You do have to watch out for Pakistan early on (ally with them or take them out), but after that your borders are pretty well protected by natural boundaries like mountains, jungle and rivers where you can defend fairly easily; and you've only got two coastal entry points to defend.

      You've also got 2 or 3 AI countries that you can comfortably reach before anyone else can, and then the possibility to expand quickly into city-rich Indochina once you're ready.
      I was thinking to pick it in my actual game for these reasons. The only problem that i see is the jungle terrain of Indochina. But although this "problem" is a help to avoid early rushes.

    • Kaiservar wrote:

      WalterChang wrote:

      I always thought India was pretty good for that.

      You do have to watch out for Pakistan early on (ally with them or take them out), but after that your borders are pretty well protected by natural boundaries like mountains, jungle and rivers where you can defend fairly easily; and you've only got two coastal entry points to defend.

      You've also got 2 or 3 AI countries that you can comfortably reach before anyone else can, and then the possibility to expand quickly into city-rich Indochina once you're ready.
      I was thinking to pick it in my actual game for these reasons. The only problem that i see is the jungle terrain of Indochina. But although this "problem" is a help to avoid early rushes.

      Airborne infantry are quite fun to use. You need to be able to be active for a couple of hours at a time while you do your attacks though.
      Failing that, you can build amphibious combat vehicles, which are good in jungle terrain, if you'd rather go for the ground assault option that requires less activity on your part.

      ... or just clear everything out with planes before you go in with your slow-moving infantry!
      Speaking of which:

      KFGauss wrote:

      Don't planes fly over all terrain at the same speeds?

      Mischievous comment - you know what I mean!

      But just for anyone who doesn't know what I mean: obviously you need decent air defences whatever you do. If you're playing a more passive game, then you'll want a good number of SAMs at at least level 2 (for the improved range) to defend against any Strike Fighter spam players - you'll ideally want Air Superiority Fighters as well, but if you're not very active then you can't really do without the SAMs.

      The good thing about India is that the entry points to your homeland are well protected by natural chokepoints, which means can concentrate your air (and ground) defence in a relatively small number of places, safe in the knowledge that you aren't going to get flanked. You're still vulnerable to Naval Infantry attacking your coast and then building pontoons or airfields to get more units in, or to airborne assaults doing the same thing - but nothing's perfect.

      (You're also still vulnerable to people like @KFGauss who do things like churn out 8 complete wings of SFs by about Day 15 or something, and then just obliterate everything infront of them with sheer brute force and ignorance. Fortunately, coming up against that sort of player is very rare in my experience.)

      The post was edited 1 time, last by WalterChang ().

    • WalterChang wrote:

      KFGauss wrote:

      Don't planes fly over all terrain at the same speeds?
      Mischievous comment - you know what I mean!

      But just for anyone who doesn't know what I mean: obviously you need decent air defences whatever you do. If you're playing a more passive game, then you'll want a good number of SAMs at at least level 2 (for the improved range) to defend against any Strike Fighter spam players - you'll ideally want Air Superiority Fighters as well, but if you're not very active then you can't really do without the SAMs.

      The good thing about India is that the entry points to your homeland are well protected by natural chokepoints, which means can concentrate your air (and ground) defence in a relatively small number of places, safe in the knowledge that you aren't going to get flanked. You're still vulnerable to Naval Infantry attacking your coast and then building pontoons or airfields to get more units in, or to airborne assaults doing the same thing - but nothing's perfect.

      (You're also still vulnerable to people like @KFGauss who do things like churn out 8 complete wings of SFs by about Day 15 or something, and then just obliterate everything infront of them with sheer brute force and ignorance. Fortunately, coming up against that sort of player is very rare in my experience.)
      "Ignorance"? =O That's a pregnant word.

      I try to not be ignorant. What do people like me need to learn so that we are no longer ignorant? :huh: :P I'm not looking for a forum-food-fight; but I am curious why you chose that word.

      PS: Here are two Day 15 OOBs.
      In the first, for various reasons, I was contributing 18 planes (ASF + SF) to our coalition by Day 15.
      In the seconds, operating essentially unopposed while I consumed inactives, I had 24 planes (ASF+EAA+SF).
      In either case if I were to concentrate my planes against one AA-defended stack or city at a time, I suspect that I could heal the planes faster than an opponent could replace destroyed AA units.
      Churning out 8 complete wings by Day 15 is a bit of a stretch, but I know what you mean. Maybe @xovault can do it from a Germany start against ineffective opponents.
      1X WW3 Chad Coalition - What's your ACTUAL Day 5, 10, 15, 20, ... Order of Battle (OOB)
      1X Pacific Theater Bayan Olgii Solo - What's your ACTUAL Day 5, 10, 15, 20, ... Order of Battle (OOB)

      PPS: Always remember that being hyper-active is one of the reasons an air-power snowball will work well. More is involved in that approach than just the units you build.

      The post was edited 1 time, last by KFGauss ().

    • Kaiservar wrote:

      A balanced one. A safe place to begin but not so isolated that it would be impossible to win.

      In fact, Kazahstan is a sweet spot to a slow and isolated begining but with opportunity to expand.
      Another you might consider is Sweden.

      Yes, you can get caught off guard early on if you're not watching, but if you spam national guard everywhere to start with to build up your defence, and maybe underground bunkers as well, you can feel fairly safe while you get your offensive units up and running. Then think about taking over Norway and Finland, or even the European mainland, depending on who's active and who isn't.

      Sweden is relatively secure, just out of the way of the scrum of central Europe in the early game; but it's near enough to pounce on it and capture lots of cities in quick time when you feel ready.

      Another one could be Argentina? You've got lots of space (and mountains and jungle) to spot people coming at you over land before they get near your cities, so you can generally react to threats. Depending on how active/aggressive your neighbours are, you can sometimes get left alone for weeks on end in South America!

    • KFGauss wrote:

      "Ignorance"? =O That's a pregnant word.
      I try to not be ignorant. What do people like me need to learn so that we are no longer ignorant? :huh: :P I'm not looking for a forum-food-fight; but I am curious why you chose that word.

      PS: Here are two Day 15 OOBs.
      In the first, for various reasons, I was contributing 18 planes (ASF + SF) to our coalition by Day 15.
      In the seconds, operating essentially unopposed while I consumed inactives, I had 24 planes (ASF+EAA+SF).
      In either case if I were to concentrate my planes against one AA-defended stack or city at a time, I suspect that I could heal the planes faster than an opponent could replace destroyed AA units.
      Churning out 8 complete wings by Day 15 is a bit of a stretch, but I know what you mean. Maybe @xovault can do it from a Germany start against ineffective opponents.
      1X WW3 Chad Coalition - What's your ACTUAL Day 5, 10, 15, 20, ... Order of Battle (OOB)
      1X Pacific Theater Bayan Olgii Solo - What's your ACTUAL Day 5, 10, 15, 20, ... Order of Battle (OOB)

      It's just an expression: "Brute force and ignorance" means using overwhelming power without much subtlety.
      As in: "How did you get that piano up the stairs?"
      "Brute force and ignorance, mate."
      You can also add to it with "Brute force, ignorance and coarse language," which means pretty much the same thing.

      I use that expression because... A coalition partner of mine in a current game has... let me check...
      39 (!) SFs on Day 16. The only other thing he's mobilised is MotInf, and lots of that too. Literally nothing else at all. He's just swarming people one at a time, and there isn't much subtlety to it that I can see! It's proving pretty bloody effective, though.

      I suspect he's probably used some gold? I don't know. But I guess if you spend zero resources on anything at all bar MI and SF, then you might be able to pull that off without gold? What do you think?

      The post was edited 1 time, last by WalterChang ().

    • you can get that number if you play with USA in x1 speed and by the fact you got no ship maybe some covette
      In x1 speed USA got 3 components citys and 2 electronics city's you can do it if you get EAA at start then spam SF
      But that leave you open to sea attack
      And now aircraft are nerf so you may lose all your aircraft by 1 missile or 1 bomber that destroy your airfields

    • WalterChang wrote:

      ...

      39 (!) SFs on Day 16. The only other thing he's mobilised is MotInf, and lots of that too. Literally nothing else at all. He's just swarming people one at a time, and there isn't much subtlety to it that I can see! It's proving pretty bloody effective, though.

      I suspect he's probably used some gold? I don't know. But I guess if you spend zero resources on anything at all bar MI and SF, then you might be able to pull that off without gold? What do you think?
      In the Pacific Theater game above I started in a 5-city country, expanded pretty fast and was only building planes and cheap Nt Gds. That gave me 24 planes. For him to have 39 SF on Day 16 I suspect that he either used a little Gold, or started with a more prosperous country than I had, or (knowing that he could call on allies) was simply expanding even more aggressively than I was in my game. I'll guess that a little of all three was involved.

      I predict he will continue to be bloody effective. Even if he loses 9 planes to someone who has built some SAMs, ASF or other AA, he'll still have 30 left. 30 will kill many, many enemy ground troops. Your buddy's ground troops only have to stroll along behind the planes.

    • WalterChang wrote:

      Kaiservar wrote:

      A balanced one. A safe place to begin but not so isolated that it would be impossible to win.

      In fact, Kazahstan is a sweet spot to a slow and isolated begining but with opportunity to expand.
      Another you might consider is Sweden.
      Yes, you can get caught off guard early on if you're not watching, but if you spam national guard everywhere to start with to build up your defence, and maybe underground bunkers as well, you can feel fairly safe while you get your offensive units up and running. Then think about taking over Norway and Finland, or even the European mainland, depending on who's active and who isn't.

      Sweden is relatively secure, just out of the way of the scrum of central Europe in the early game; but it's near enough to pounce on it and capture lots of cities in quick time when you feel ready.

      Another one could be Argentina? You've got lots of space (and mountains and jungle) to spot people coming at you over land before they get near your cities, so you can generally react to threats. Depending on how active/aggressive your neighbours are, you can sometimes get left alone for weeks on end in South America!
      Argentina is similar to Canadá, but it is a relative small difference/advantage: more AI and Chile that could be very easy to defeat.

      The big problem could be Bolivia, because Brazil ever tends to go Suriname/Georgetown and then, figth with Venezuela.

      Sweden is attractive to me, but it is matter of luck. If Norway is a good player, he would want to take Sweden to open way to Poland, Germany... For other side, i never meet a good player using Finland, so,maybe it is possible to do some polítics to avoid Norway.

    • KFGauss wrote:

      WalterChang wrote:

      ...

      39 (!) SFs on Day 16. The only other thing he's mobilised is MotInf, and lots of that too. Literally nothing else at all. He's just swarming people one at a time, and there isn't much subtlety to it that I can see! It's proving pretty bloody effective, though.

      I suspect he's probably used some gold? I don't know. But I guess if you spend zero resources on anything at all bar MI and SF, then you might be able to pull that off without gold? What do you think?
      In the Pacific Theater game above I started in a 5-city country, expanded pretty fast and was only building planes and cheap Nt Gds. That gave me 24 planes. For him to have 39 SF on Day 16 I suspect that he either used a little Gold, or started with a more prosperous country than I had, or (knowing that he could call on allies) was simply expanding even more aggressively than I was in my game. I'll guess that a little of all three was involved.
      I predict he will continue to be bloody effective. Even if he loses 9 planes to someone who has built some SAMs, ASF or other AA, he'll still have 30 left. 30 will kill many, many enemy ground troops. Your buddy's ground troops only have to stroll along behind the planes.
      Playing with Russia i managed to have 30 or more planes/helos at day 20 to 23, but Russia is a powerhowse in all sense -if you play it well-

      The point is not lose units or lose the less possible to avoid use components in infantry. If course, forget armor and even navy, in some cases.

    • KFGauss wrote:

      I predict he will continue to be bloody effective. Even if he loses 9 planes to someone who has built some SAMs, ASF or other AA, he'll still have 30 left. 30 will kill many, many enemy ground troops. Your buddy's ground troops only have to stroll along behind the planes.
      Actually, I miscounted. He 'only' had 35 SFs, plus the one start-up ASF on Day 16.

      Yes, it's going to continue to be very effective. He started as Brazil on WW3, so that's 2 homeland cities each producing Components, Supplies and Electronics. And because he's only apparently researching 2 unit lines, he's been able to to use his Rare Material to upgrade his homeland Industrial Complexes from an early stage. He also started with rural provinces that produce those 3 resources (which, oddly I think, he hasn't upgraded).

      He's playing a high risk game, though. His homeland isn't protected at all. All of his units are overseas, smashing up other people's countries. I guess if he suddenly got invaded, he could just zoom back with his airforce within a few hours and put it down?

      I wouldn't ever play like that, I don't think. I'm too risk averse, for one thing. But more importantly to me, the whole appeal of the game is being able to use the breadth of the tech tree in combined arms. I like constructing interesting or unusual combinations of units in order to surprise people with unexpected types of attack. Give me a good battle over a quick win any time.

      That said, I don't think I would have coped with this guy if he'd been my opponent. I would have built SAMs and ASFs if I hadn't allied with him, because I could tell what he was doing. But I don't think I would've built enough of them to deal with quite that volume of planes, plus the stacks and stacks of infantry. Perhaps I could have stopped him from getting to that point in the first place, I don't know. But it's made me rethink a little bit.

    • Once the "snowball" reaches critical mass, it'll roll over almost everything except another snowball.

      Imagine if he lost all of Brazil. That would hurt, but his planes would still be rampaging through the rest of the map (accumulating VP).

      If a win is your goal (and if you're active enough) in a typical public game . . .

      On the other hand, I agree that there are plenty of other ways to have fun.

    • KFGauss wrote:

      WalterChang wrote:

      ...

      39 (!) SFs on Day 16. The only other thing he's mobilised is MotInf, and lots of that too. Literally nothing else at all. He's just swarming people one at a time, and there isn't much subtlety to it that I can see! It's proving pretty bloody effective, though.

      I suspect he's probably used some gold? I don't know. But I guess if you spend zero resources on anything at all bar MI and SF, then you might be able to pull that off without gold? What do you think?
      In the Pacific Theater game above I started in a 5-city country, expanded pretty fast and was only building planes and cheap Nt Gds. That gave me 24 planes. For him to have 39 SF on Day 16 I suspect that he either used a little Gold, or started with a more prosperous country than I had, or (knowing that he could call on allies) was simply expanding even more aggressively than I was in my game. I'll guess that a little of all three was involved.
      I predict he will continue to be bloody effective. Even if he loses 9 planes to someone who has built some SAMs, ASF or other AA, he'll still have 30 left. 30 will kill many, many enemy ground troops. Your buddy's ground troops only have to stroll along behind the planes.
      On gut feel, 39 Strikers by day 16 seems a lot. I can get to 80+ asf by day 30 with any country, but I don't think I can achieve 1/2 those numbers (regardless of country) by the midpoint as production volume skews more heavily towards late game & I also build other units too. But if he is singularly focusing on strikers & with Russia, I imagine it's doable. If he doesn't have 3 airbases, or less but without rec offices & not on constant production I'd suspect some gold use.

      It's been a while since I've played, but by day 16, I might have 20 lvl 4 asf. They are my priority unit because without air control, the ground is liable. You don't need parity in numbers tho, because those asf will chew through even double the amount of strikers. Assuming similarly levelled strikers, you'd expect to lose 1 asf for every 3 striker kills. Mix in NASF to stretch the ratio if need be + a lvl 5 hospital and he is not a problem. If he'd bothered to build asf himself to cover, he'd actually be more problematic even tho he'd end up with less strikers.

      To me, these types are the easiest opponents because they only have a single dimension to their attack. Once that is neutralised, they are exposed. Against super heavy strike players, I find I can't always rely on SAM's early on due to their immobility and the relatively low number of them I have at that stage of the game. Calling in allies is usually a dud as hardly anyone develops their own asf. Presumably why the striker players run rampant.

    • Kaiservar wrote:

      I don't know why people don't build ASF regulary. It is weird for me.
      I think because they are defensive units and people prefer attacking ones. The few times I've seen people build them, and I've asked them why, it turns out they thought they were primary air to ground attack jets. From the people I've spoken to, they don't understand the importance of controlling the air as a means to improve the survivability and operational effectiveness of ground troops.