Sillysoft Forums

[imapickle]

I am tired of everytime i sign into the forums seeing that the last post in the strategy section was "bombdiggityfresh 30 december". Since lux is supposed to be a strategy game, it would be nice to have some more discussion of strategy.

So here are my pickly ponderings on the subject of strategy.
I have two questions, not based on any particular expertiences of mine. They are just things i have been wondering about.

One possible strategy is to stack armies in various locations around the map, so as to have access to other players to make a kill. In lux this does not seem to happen. If you stack armies in a continent that somebody else is "going for" this is roundly condemned by all the players.
The extreme example is when someone "goes for north america" which really seems to depend on the goodwill of other players, who give up a potentially useful satellite, with access to make a kill in south america, just because a player with a few more armies in the region is claiming it.
So what do people think? Under which circumstances would players consider doing this?

Another thing i dont see very often is people splitting australia. If someone is sat in new guinea and i have the rest of australia, then i am blocking everyone else from killing them. So it is in their interests to sit there. Further, since everyone else is blocked to that player i basically own exclusive rights to that players cards, so it may be also in my interest to let them stay.
So the question is: in what situations and at what stage of the game is the possibility to corner somebody more important than the 2 income?

Sincerely,

Pickle

[Nimrod7]

The problem with these two situations is that most players are obsessed with income. Players are rarely willing to share and will either half kill or suicide to attempt to get income.

[imapickle]

I am wondering if the reason is that, with 30 second timers, there is simply not time to weigh up the pros and cons of such strategies.

[Nimrod7]

The desire for income doesn't have anything to do with how fast the timer is in my opinion.

[soundboy]

[imapickle]

But wiping the board is just technique. Deciding whether it is better to take oz or block someone there actually requires one to do some more deep thinking about the game. Which (for many of us at least) takes time..

[mazza]

what you mention about placin armies in different places is a sound strategy, and what u say bout losing sats to accomodate others is also correct....the problem today is the way classic folk play, and i am certainly one of them. I dont agree with the "way" classic is played, however, it is the most effective way, which is why the things r done the way they are, i suppose. I found yesterday with the Silent tourney (luxtober) to be one of the more "liberating" days of playing classic. No chat means no diplomacy to a degree, and more players were placin in others continents purely as a strategy. there was little giving away of any income via farming, which made all players throw out the norm way of playing, and come up with other ways to win....... it was great.

[Milltycoon]

In the relatively few times that I have played the board game Risk, or the internet game Conquer Club (which for a while was more frequently), the strategies were always very different than here. If someone had income, everyone was obsessed with hitting it, lest that player _get an extra two troops for his next turn!!!_ We would intentionally place troops inside other peoples' continents to prevent anyone from getting income.
But yes, in this particular Risk variant, no one ever does this. I also don't--I head for the nearest income I can secure, and bargain my way into having it just as long as I will _not_ hit my neighbors, and I thus burn to allow them to get their income. It is very diplomatic for a war game, and I recognize and rationalize this. Maybe it is the act of physically seeing your border decimated in a huge, instant explosion that gets people upset, or watching your entire army that you worked for 20 rounds to build get taken off the board in less than 3 seconds. Those things don't happen in real Risk.
What does happen, though? The same number of long boring marathons, the same number of players who get pissed at other players over the course of a game, and much of the same negotiations/alliances/half-kills, etc., that occur here. So the game is what it is anyway.

[dollabillz]

the reason not-dicking-people-out-of-income evolved into the way classic is played is because having one really weak player usually isn't beneficial to you either in the short-term where that player will likely be killed by someone other than you for a big gain, or in the long-term where that player will dick you around in future games.

[Dominator]

Theres a huge difference in the board game of risk and lux. The mentality of the players is completely different. First of all, the board game takes several hours to complete .. and your probably going to play a single game at a time. In lux .. your game is going to be over in 10 minutes and your possibly going to be playing another game with the same group of people.

A lot of the diplomacy in lux stems from long term benefits .. which you don't really see in other risk variations. Yeah, it might be a bad idea to let someone get a continent in the short run ... but in the long run .. that person will respect you and farm/leave continents for you in the future. Playing over 1000 games is a ton of risk. If you don't have players that will respect you .. your going to have a tough time winning.

Sometimes its a great move to stay in a continent .. depending on how the game evolves and the players on the board ... it comes down to your ability to gauge other players reactions.

As for sharing continents ... I've done this many times .. in sa it normally works out the best. But, again, it comes down to who is playing and how the board is set up .. tough to give a general response to the situation, because there really isn't one.

[pls]

Ever play a bots+you game where one or more bots are Reapers? The Reaper's strategy is to build on one country so that after a few turns this country is unassailable. Then Reaper sits back and waits until one or two weak players have been eliminated, lines up his kills, and then of course moves much faster than a human can to nuke several other players in a row.

[dollabillz]

reaper's an asshat