Landing next to the base and not attacking it but an enemy unit.

[Mizywill]

I know strategy is a complicated thing and so far I'm probably not scoring big with my threads, but this is another curiosity of mine. I've seen this in others' replays and in my own games, where a unit will land next to the enemy's base but instead of attacking it they attack an adjacent unit.

I would think in general you just lost your chance, they'll take you out in the next move and if you don't have the visibility then you lost your openings.

I'm sure there's a lot players consider when making these plays but I would probably always go for the base hit if I'm in this position. after all, I consider the runner a disposable unit, for the mst part, and don't want to waste the opportunity.

Maybe I'll never see Masters with this approach ...

[pookywb]

Here's my take. One of the most certain ways to win is by amassing a larger force and slowly and surely pushing towards their base. You GET that larger force by killing their units (especially their high wit cost units) and leaving your units alive.

To try to guarantee that I will win further on down the line, I will almost never attack the base until I know the game is in the bag. If I send a runner who can either attack the base or kill a sniper, I'll kill the sniper. Same goes for a medic. Et cetera.

This (along with smart playing elsewhere) allows me to build up a superior force that, with careful planning, will pretty much guarantee I win the game.

[Tripwire]

You're thinking way too much about a simple game like this.

I attack a unit if it's in a position to threaten a crucial unit of mine or if losing the unit hurts my opponent more than 1 hp of his base.

I attack his base if I know I can kill it and need that 1 hp off. Just won a game where I do both actually. Just need my opponent to surrender, then I'll post a replay link.

He surrendered. Replay

I won the game on turn 6 already, btw.

[Mizywill]

(07-18-2012 05:26 AM)Tripwire Wrote:  You're thinking way too much about a simple game like this.

I know, can't help it, it's the OCD in me and ADD in me kills my patience to formulate complicated strategies

Anyway I see the taking out a sniper or scrambler etc, but a runner? Surely that's not right.

[Tripwire]

(07-18-2012 05:44 AM)Mizywill Wrote:  

(07-18-2012 05:26 AM)Tripwire Wrote:  You're thinking way too much about a simple game like this.

I know, can't help it, it's the OCD in me and ADD in me kills my patience to formulate complicated strategies

Anyway I see the taking out a sniper or scrambler etc, but a runner? Surely that's not right.

Runners are really strong - strongest unit in the game for their wit cost.

There's been a few games where I opt to take out a runner instead of hitting the base or another unit, just because of their high move and sight range.

[Mizywill]

Last post for me on this thread and I'll take a break from it.

I understand what you're saying about the runner and I use them all the time, but the key with the runner is to get in quick and deal a point. When you get in with one and opt to take out another runner I feel you just wasted the one you sent in. I would rather leave it and either make it waste it's attack on me so it can't hit my base, or prepare another way of handling it. I'ld rather deal with the runner I know than the one I don't. After all, he's just going to replace it anyway.

But I think I understand if it's really important to you that they don't lift your fog of war.

[Tripwire]

(07-18-2012 05:56 AM)Mizywill Wrote:  Last post for me on this thread and I'll take a break from it.

I understand what you're saying about the runner and I use them all the time, but the key with the runner is to get in quick and deal a point. When you get in with one and opt to take out another runner I feel you just wasted the one you sent in. I would rather leave it and either make it waste it's attack on me so it can't hit my base, or prepare another way of handling it. I'ld rather deal with the runner I know than the one I don't. After all, he's just going to replace it anyway.

But I think I understand if it's really important to you that they don't lift your fog of war.

Games like this are all about positioning and abusing fog of war, while at the same time trying to prevent your opponent from doing the same. If your opponent is not able to see your moves, you've won already.

The runner is so strong because it can threaten multiple positions at once, gives you line of sight for 3/4ths of the map, can move across the map in 2 turns and is a huge threat to the Medic and Sniper. Tbh, it'd probably contribute to a more strategic feel if movement was reduced to 4.

Take a look at Battle for Wesnoth, if you're into these types of games. Played that game for about 5 years now - vision and abusing fog of war is even more important there than in this game.

[Glorishears]

You're right that killing a runner right next to your opponent's base is often a bad trade -- your runner is worth more than his (his: 1 to spawn, 1 to move once, 2 total; yours: 1 to spawn, say 3 to move across the board, 4 total).

BUT

By the same token, 5 wit (4 to get the runner there, one to hit the base) can be too high of a price to pay for one base hit.

There's discussions up and down the forums about whether the first player has too much of an advantage because they get five wits before the second player does anything. Just 5 wits.

If you're going to try to win by runner-sniping your opponent's base, you're giving up SIXTEEN WITS before you end the game with that fifth hit - 4 hits * 4 wits per hit (5 wits to get each hit minus one wit for your opponent to kill your runner).

Sixteen wits is enough on many maps for your opponent to completely block their base with soldiers. By the time you come in with your last runner trying to finish them off, that army of soldiers will be advancing at you in lockstep and you won't have anything to kill them with.

So, no, it's not good to trade runners deep in your opponent's territory. But it's not good either to trade a runner for a single base hit, either.

Buffing your runner helps. You may be able to trade one advanced runner for two of theirs, and that might be worth it (or for two base hits).

Killing healers and especially snipers helps. A sniper "next to their base" might still be 3 slow moves away from the spawn -- that's worth 6 wits, and is totally worth trading an advanced runner for, not even counting the initiative advantage you'll probably get.

And this is why runner rushes ARE popular on Long Nine. There's more spaces a defender needs to block and they're farther from the spawns, so building a wall of soldiers costs more than it does on other boards. Not only is it relatively easy for a runner to get from spawn to enemy base, there's lots of space up and down the board, making it easier to dodge any sentries along the way.

Even on Long Nine, given a choice between a single base hit and killing that sniper, you take out the sniper.

And all this has been without thinking about initiative, visibility, opening a path for another unit, or any other considerations. With those in mind, sometimes you should kill a runner rather hit their base.

[swimj]

But also...if you're playing someone who you feel is a lot more experienced than you, it's unlikely you can win with a coordinated attack, since their strategy will just be better than yours. In that case it might be better to abuse FTA and get some early damage in with runners and hope you can slip in a soldier/runner later. Can work on long nine/sharkfood.