The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums here.
The Guiding Principles and New Rules document is now in effect.
Zombiemambo Registered User regular
February 2007 edited February 2007 in Games and Technology
As the title suggests, I am pretty terrible at strategy games (both real-time and turn-based), and I'm pretty sure I know why; I don't think ahead more than 1 or 2 moves. The problem is, I don't know how to think ahead more than 1 or 2 moves. I see the nearest beneficial opportunity and I take it, even if in the future there are better alternatives. My current infatuation is Battle for Wesnoth, and I'll be using it as an example here.
There is a village in the hex next to you, and an enemy is next to it as well. His unit is more powerful than yours.
What I would do: take the village and die two turns later.
What I should do: that's what I want to know.
I want to stress this point: I don't want strategies. I want to know how to formulate strategies. How do you know what to do? What not to do? Should I just give up?
Zombiemambo on
«12»
-
Tiemler Registered User regular
February 2007 edited February 2007
I find that I'm not very good at games like chess which involve perfect knowledge of the playing area and the disposition of pieces, predictable if/then consequences, etc.
In contrast, I'm very good at games which involve fog of war, uncertainty, scouting, deception, risk/benefit analysis, and calculated risks. Which really has more to do with strategy.
Sun Tzu's 'The Art of War' is my favorite source material on the subject, and it has shaped my playing style a great deal.
In answer to your question, whether to take the village. If the village affords sufficient defensive advantages to give your force the ability to resist the enemy attack, then take it. If not, then withdraw and move reinforcements into place and wait until you have local superiority before doing battle.
In most games, armies take a significant investment of resources to build. Losing one to temporarily hold a piece of real estate, even one that yields lots of resources, rarely pays off. The goal in war is not to take and hold territory, but to destroy the enemy's ability to continue armed resistance, at which point your forces can take all the territory you wish at the conflict's resolution.
So, it comes down to this. Will your army be able to hold the village long enough for this captured territory to yield resources greater than the value of the army itself? If not, then it is a poor investment to try and hold it against a superior enemy force. It has to be very good defensive terrain to be worthwhile, and valuable enough that taking it away from the enemy helps your war effort and hurts his own.
Tiemler on
-
FreddyD Registered User regular
February 2007 edited February 2007
It sounds like you need to brush up on your tactics. Myth is a great game to start with if you want to learn how to move and maneuver soldiers. Advance Wars is another. I would also recommend chess puzzles.
War strategy mostly focuses on the logistical concerns of running a large war campaign and you don't really see a lot of that in most traditional RTS games.
FreddyD on
-
Mr. White XD Registered User regular
February 2007 edited February 2007
I'm pretty bad too, Ive played warcraft 3 for about the last two years, and probably haven't won more than 5 games against the computer.... LET ME BUILD IN PEACE!!!!
I've never tried the "deeper" war strategy games and such, I always want to, but everyone in my town would consider Clue the deepest strategy board game they've played, I have no one except the internet to teach me, and the wall of text in the FAQs hit like a brick.
Mr. White XD on
-
gneGne Registered User regular
February 2007 edited February 2007
Warcraft 3 is pretty deep ya know..
gneGne on
-
Gaming-Module Registered User regular
February 2007 edited February 2007
I suck at real time strategy games because of a spatial perception problem I have. I have a hard time focusing in on any single portion of the battlefield during a fight. All I see is this mob of dudes fighting, where I hear higher level players can see a bunch of individual fights comprising the battle, thus allowing them to focus in on any number of them rapidly to make micromanagement decisions.
Microing in an RTS literally makes me mentally tired after awhile.
Gaming-Module on
-
natxcross Registered User regular
February 2007 edited February 2007
Zombiemambo wrote: »
There is a village in the hex next to you, and an enemy is next to it as well. His unit is more powerful than yours.
What I would do: take the village and die two turns later.
What I should do: that's what I want to know.
Sounds like you know what not to do, which is half the problem solved already. Start out simple - keep avoiding actions that lead to obviously bad consequences. Work your way up from there, keeping everything Tiemler said in mind; the objective is the enemy's ability to fight, not territory.
natxcross on
-
Mulletude Registered User regular
February 2007 edited February 2007
In any strategy game it is very important to know what works best against what. Most games have a good counter for any enemy. Know the best unit or combination of units to engage specific enemies with and always have local superiority. Better to strike with massive local superiority than to try and spread your units out.
Alot of random stuff there, but it is helpful.
Most of my recent experiances have been with the Combat Mission games.
Mulletude on
XBL-Dug Danger WiiU-DugDanger Steam-http://steamcommunity.com/id/DugDanger/
-
DeaconKnowledge Registered User regular
February 2007 edited February 2007
The best part for any RTS is to know what to build first. There's usually an order for the low level stuff.
DeaconKnowledge on
My NEW Wii code - 5227 1968 3982 4139. My Wii needs your Miis! Please give generously!
Animal Crossing - 3566 5318 4585/2492 7891 0383 Deacon/Akisha in Crayon -
jogernaut BisonopolisRegistered User regular
February 2007 edited February 2007
Tiemler wrote: »
See Also🖥️️🎮 - Frostpunk 2, Lorn's Lure, Welcome to Empyreum & Deckception out today! - Page 39[Tabletop Games] The White Throne of Midnight Regrets - Page 10[Marvel Snap] A card game where you'll hardly play mainstream Marvel characters. - Page 35[Game On!] Dawn of War: Dark Crusade Patch 1.2 Out! (NSF56k)I find that I'm not very good at games like chess which involve perfect knowledge of the playing area and the disposition of pieces, predictable if/then consequences, etc.
In contrast, I'm very good at games which involve fog of war, uncertainty, scouting, deception, risk/benefit analysis, and calculated risks. Which really has more to do with strategy.
I'm the completely the opposite. I can play decently(well, I used to) at chess yet get completely owned in RTSes. I usually get wiped out before I even have enough units to mount an attack.
jogernaut on
-
Aroduc regular
February 2007 edited February 2007
Fully understanding the game engine is really the key, especially for turn based games. What works in one, may be tantamount to suicide in another. Fire Emblem, for example, is very much a game of defense and baiting the enemy into situations that are extremely disadvantageous for them. Civ IV on the other hand, is a game of aggression and attrition and bringing sheer overwhelming power to a point is the most effective way to fight.
Once you fully grok the engine, you'll get a good feel for the utility values of your units and the various resources in the game and are able to make better decisions about how to deploy things. Also, learning how to judge momentum and who currently has it is an important skill to develop. If the enemy's got all the breaks and you're on your heels, then you need to be able to recognize that and fall back to your best spot in order to make sure they don't slaughter you. And if you've got it, you need to learn patience, and how to pick and choose your fights so that you don't make a huge mistake and throw it all away.
Aroduc on
-
Zen Vulgarity What a lovely day for tea Secret British ThreadRegistered User regular
February 2007 edited February 2007
Combine Aroduc's "understanding of the engine" idea with stratagem from noteworthy strategists (Sun-Tzu, Ceaser, et. al.) and you're going to have a very good, general idea of what to do. Since you already have the competency to know that "durr, this idea is stupid," you're ahead of the game.
If you're really confused by a certain situation, create a flowchart for a general strategy.
Is the Area resource-laden? Yes/no
If yes, is it defensible? Yes/no.Etc.
Lastly: Replays. My, god. Watch some of those crazy tournament cats and you'll get some amazingly retarded/brilliant strategies. Then just apply them as you see in the field.
Zen Vulgarity on
-
Zombiemambo Registered User regular
February 2007 edited February 2007
Wow, alot more useful advice than I could have hoped for. Thanks, guys! Keep 'em coming.
Zombiemambo on
-
Gorilla Salad Registered User regular
February 2007 edited February 2007
Create as many soldiers as you can, rush it.
Gorilla Salad on
-
Zen Vulgarity What a lovely day for tea Secret British ThreadRegistered User regular
February 2007 edited February 2007
Statis Fieldhalf the rush, crush half the troops, warp in troops when rushees run away.
Zen Vulgarity on
-
Aroduc regular
February 2007 edited February 2007
Senor Fish wrote: »
Create as many soldiers as you can, rush it.
Yeah, Pickett's Charge won the war for the South. We should learn from that.
Aroduc on
-
Squashua __BANNED USERS regular
February 2007 edited February 2007
The AI is semi-mediochre, but if you can master Dice Wars as a start, then you can go to other stuff like Risk, etc. easily.
- You are always purple.
- Starting order is random.
- The largest connecting set of locations in your color determines how many reinforcement dice you get for next turn.
- Reinforcement dice are randomly placed.I weaned on Axis & Allies as a kid. PC games are simple because I've either had a terrible AI or a CHEATING AI (the worst).
Squashua on
-
Gorilla Salad Registered User regular
February 2007 edited February 2007
Aroduc wrote: »
Yeah, Pickett's Charge won the war for the South. We should learn from that.
Definatly. Because it's a video game. No effect on real life, ya know?
Gorilla Salad on
-
Ethan Smith Origin name: Beart4to Arlington, VARegistered User regular
February 2007 edited February 2007
Read The book of Five Rings, and the 33 Laws of War.
5Rings is hard, and since it's technically about single combat, you have to understand a shit ton of allegory and metaphor.
33 Laws, on the other hand, is right out there, and teaches you a bunch of stuff about war in general.
Ethan Smith on
-
Zen Vulgarity What a lovely day for tea Secret British ThreadRegistered User regular
February 2007 edited February 2007
Ethan Smith wrote: »
Read The book of Five Rings, and the 33 Laws of War.
5Rings is hard, and since it's technically about single combat, you have to understand a shit ton of allegory and metaphor.
33 Laws, on the other hand, is right out there, and teaches you a bunch of stuff about war in general.
Ni To Ichi Ryu is not technically for just single combat, since it also focuses on the mind, the discipline a person needs to have before/during combat. Also, Musashi indicates that his techniques were not developed just for against one person.
33 Laws is
Zen Vulgarity on
-
Ethan Smith Origin name: Beart4to Arlington, VARegistered User regular
February 2007 edited February 2007
Zen Vulgarity wrote: »
Ni To Ichi Ryu is not technically for just single combat, since it also focuses on the mind, the discipline a person needs to have before/during combat. Also, Musashi indicates that his techniques were not developed just for against one person.
33 Laws is
The thing is that, to understand how to use them while not in single combat, you have to extrapolate, and metacabolate.
And here I'm just sitting here with my beer, and then I was like 'FUCK THAT'.
I totally was.
Ethan Smith on
-
Mitsuhide Registered User regular
February 2007 edited February 2007
I'm horrible at FF:Tactics. Seriously, horrible. I just can't get around the mission that starts with the cutscene in which the leader of the Black Knights(?) threatens a guy in an alley. I was all psyched to get into this game, hardcore. Instead, I suck hardcore.
Mitsuhide on
-
Ballman Registered User regular
February 2007 edited February 2007
I'm horrible at FF:Tactics. Seriously, horrible. I just can't get around the mission that starts with the cutscene in which the leader of the Black Knights(?) threatens a guy in an alley. I was all psyched to get into this game, hardcore. Instead, I suck hardcore.
Hold me. I'm so terrible at FF:Tactics. I've tried starting the game three separate times and I get so frustrated at that same section that I give it up every time.
I think I share the same problem as the OP: I have a problem seeing more than two or three moves in advance. It's not that I'm incapable of planning in general, it's just something about this kind of application. For what it's worth, I'm also terrible at chess (not that I've ever actively tried to be otherwise).
Ballman on
-
Sheep Registered User, __BANNED USERS regular
February 2007 edited February 2007
Kinda off topic...
Usually on Sunday's I'll visit me mom and play a game of cards, usually something like Skip Bo or Uno, etc. I despise playing with my brother. Not because he sucks, but because he won't even begin to formulate an idea, arrange his cards, inspect the playing area, etc, until it is his turn.
Watching him play videogames is even more aggravating. He simply has a completely different logic behind things. Once again, he doesn't suck, it's just that he's so slow and different that I want to strangle myself.
Hold me. I'm so terrible at FF:Tactics. I've tried starting the game three separate times and I get so frustrated at that same section that I give it up every time.
I remember that map giving everyone I ever watched playing FFT some form of trouble.
Sheep on
-
Sheep Registered User, __BANNED USERS regular
February 2007 edited February 2007
Kinda off topic...
Usually on Sunday's I'll visit me mom and play a game of cards, usually something like Skip Bo or Uno, etc. I despise playing with my brother. Not because he sucks, but because he won't even begin to formulate an idea, arrange his cards, inspect the playing area, etc, until it is his turn.
Watching him play videogames is even more aggravating. He simply has a completely different logic behind things. Once again, he doesn't suck, it's just that he's so slow and different that I want to strangle myself.
EDIT
Since we're on the subject...
One game I simply can NOT wrap my mind around is Go. I dunno. It's "difficulty in simplicity" is something completely against what my mind has been trained for.
Sheep on
-
Ethan Smith Origin name: Beart4to Arlington, VARegistered User regular
February 2007 edited February 2007
No one I know understands Go, and the board I got is WORTHLESS, because I pwn everyone at it.
Ethan Smith on
-
Gihgehls Registered User regular
February 2007 edited February 2007
I can't find anyone to play Go with either. If you can learn go, the principles learned can be applicable to just about EVERYTHING. Even morning freeway traffic.
Gihgehls on
-
Ethan Smith Origin name: Beart4to Arlington, VARegistered User regular
February 2007 edited February 2007
Gihgehls wrote: »
I can't find anyone to play Go with either. If you can learn go, the principles learned can be applicable to just about EVERYTHING. Even morning freeway traffic.
"HA HA! I HAVE SURROUNDED YOUR BLUE BUGGY WITH RED HUMMERS! SURRENDER, YOU HAVE NO CHANCE!"
Ethan Smith on
-
Clawshrimpy Registered User regular
February 2007 edited February 2007
I made peace that It's very difficult for someone with a learning disability to play games like Dawn of War or Starcraft, and that's why I'm just trying to enjoy Super Robot Wars as much as possible.
Clawshrimpy on
-
Ethan Smith Origin name: Beart4to Arlington, VARegistered User regular
February 2007 edited February 2007
I have a learning disability.
I play DoW.
Personally, I like games with less micro though, as its then more about thinking and less about who's closer to carpal tunnel.
Ethan Smith on
-
P10 An Idiot With Low IQ Registered User regular
February 2007 edited February 2007
An excellent (and imo, fairly easy) strategy game series is Total War. It mixes an overhead map where you control your kingdom's diplomats, generals, princes, governors, etc. and an amazing battle system, that manages to be an RTS, but it's actual realistic. You can learn some interesting facts about medieval warfare, too.
P10 on
Shameful pursuits and utterly stupid opinions
-
Sceptre Registered User regular
February 2007 edited February 2007
Mr. White XD wrote: »
Not as deep as most Strategy board games. You can sit down and start playing wc3 immediately.
I don't think deep = complicated. Just because a game is easy to pick up, does not make it easy to master, or even make it possible to see all the possible strategies and nuances the game has to offer.
Sceptre on
-
SirToasty Registered User regular
February 2007 edited February 2007
I beat Fire Emblem 7 (the one on the GBA. I think it is 7.) only once. It kicked the crap out of me. I had to create a plan for my exact movements on the last fight and re think what I did last time and try a different move. It took weeks to finally get the right pattern. I even hear that that is one of the easiest FEs. I love the game, but it is so damn hard for me.
What I am trying to say is, I suck really bad at strategy games also.
SirToasty on
-
SirUltimos Don't talk, Rusty. Just paint. Registered User regular
February 2007 edited February 2007
Remember to always be flexible with your strategies. More often than not you will find that circumstances change and more doors or open up or close than you had previously.
What I mean is that you should be able to adapt to the situations around you. If you are going through with a plan and an opportunity presents itself to change the plan and do even more damage to the foe (or benefit yourself further) then don't be afraid to change your strategy to take advantage of this.
Likewise, things don't always go in your in favour so it's important to be able to adapt to unexpected surprises and change your strategy so it's more in line with the current state of affairs.
Of course, the trick is to actually know when you should change your strategy.
SirUltimos on
-
Stolls Brave Corporate Logo Chicago, ILRegistered User regular
February 2007 edited February 2007
SirUltimos wrote: »
Remember to always be flexible with your strategies. More often than not you will find that circumstances change and more doors or open up or close than you had previously.
What I mean is that you should be able to adapt to the situations around you. If you are going through with a plan and an opportunity presents itself to change the plan and do even more damage to the foe (or benefit yourself further) then don't be afraid to change your strategy to take advantage of this.
Likewise, things don't always go in your in favour so it's important to be able to adapt to unexpected surprises and change your strategy so it's more in line with the current state of affairs.
Of course, the trick is to actually know when you should change your strategy.
Q'ed for T. If there's one thing years of failing at RTS multiplayer matches has taught me, it's always, always, always have a back-up plan. In most games, that sizable combined-arms force you're building up just outside the enemy's doorstep can be brought to its knees really damn quick, and a halfway decent opponent will be able to launch a counterattack in short order, if not simultaneously.
Train extra troops, leave some scouts in the field for advance warning or to harass incoming enemies, create chokepoints and go after resource gatherers, set up some cover in case your offense has to retreat under fire - whatever you do, have something on reserve to make sure the enemy's plan doesn't go smoothly either. Keep a cluster of guys - any guys, really - on reserve as your general 'OH SHI-' response team. And while I'm guilty of this myself, resist the urge to try to sweep an enemy fortification off the map in one huge strike. If you can break their defensive position or cripple their production facilities with a small group of units, that keeps them busy rebuilding and gives you time to follow up with another, larger strike.
Stolls on
kstolls on Twitch, streaming weekends at 9pm CST!
Teardown
Now playing:and
Baldur's Gate 3 (co-op)Sunday Spotlight:
Horror Tales: The Wine -
Majidah Registered User regular
February 2007 edited February 2007
Your method of strategy formulation where you select the best thing to do at any given time is not nessecarily bad. The only flaw is, as you've pointed out the ability to plan for the future. Whenever you play a strategy game, you've got many options. Your goal is 1) focus on the good options, 2) select the best option, 3) chain these good decisions together. Grandmaster chess players don't spend a lot of time making a move, they just no so freaking much about chess that they make the best move almost automatically. They don't usually have a deep algorithm they run, they can just tell because they've seen so many board positions.
I loves me some wesnoth too, so I'll use your wesnoth example. To play wesnoth well, you've got to manage unit's health and your armies momentum that is, how quick and reliably you're moving your units to the front. It's very much a fire-emblem-style bait your opponent into unfavorable decisions.
For health management, Try end your turn in cover (forests, towns, etc) and ONLY attack if it's free or at least very much in your favor. eg, use ranged units to attack units without a ranged option or use a 10/3 unit in forest (60%def) to attack an 5/2 unit on grass (40%def). Always ask yourself, "what am I spending (in hps or town control) and what am I gaining."
For momentum, decide on turn 1 if you're going to drop forces until you can't pay upkeep (rush tactics) or if you're going to try to gain enough money to drop more forces (attrition). and STICK TO THIS PLAN. changing horses in midstream leaves a big hole in your advancing front.
Majidah on
-
Evil Multifarious Registered User regular
February 2007 edited February 2007
Wesnoth is a very interesting game because it focuses so much on basic economy and momentum. As Majidah said, you have to think "what is the point of capping this village? If he has a unit powerful enough to destroy mine, even when I'm on a village, why would I bother putting my unit there?" Retreat the unit out of range of his powerful unit; the unit will probably sit on the village or come at you as an attacker, if he's already got the village capped.
Even then, the situation has layers. If your unit caps the village and can hold its own for a turn or two, would you have reinforcements that can help it out, or is it proper fucked? If you can reinforce that area, and do so before your opponent does as well, then you might get a foothold in that village.
Thinking ahead is a matter of imagining what might happen, methodically and logically. I create a system of branching "what-if's" in my head and try to figure out which branch is best. Sometimes - quite often actually - the branches get very complex and hard to follow so you have to focus on only a few at a time, unless you're writing everything down.
Evil Multifarious on
-
Elendil Registered User regular
February 2007 edited February 2007
Do you have any idea what it's like to love Fire Emblem, but be awful at strategy games? It's like autoerotic asphyxiation--fun at first, then you die naked and alone.
Elendil on
-
JJ DailyStormer Registered User regular
February 2007 edited February 2007
DoW is a great game to play if you suck at strategy.
All you mostly need is a good build order then it's knowing when to retreat or attack.
JJ on
-
Evil Multifarious Registered User regular
February 2007 edited February 2007
JJ wrote: »
DoW is a great game to play if you suck at strategy.
All you mostly need is a good build order then it's knowing when to retreat or attack.
Boooo
BOOOOOO
That is why I don't play DoW, really.
Evil Multifarious on
«12»
Sign In or Register to comment.