Centralised or decentralised?

[-SafaN-]

Hi all!

I would like to excersise with polls, and i thought lets have a useful one

Its a bit about centralisation: Are we focussing on one city to be the best (lots of crawlers, all sp's and such), or are we gonna spread all those things, developping all cities equal.
In the former u have little efficienty but the city will be the main target of our opponents, and once taken down we're lost.
In the other scenario we will lose a bit by inefficienty but we can lose one or more citys before we fall.

All in one city + PB is all lost i think?

Any thoughts?

[Micha]

Usually secret projects should be spread over the empire. Crawlers will be used where they are needed, especially later on when nutrients become valuable. Considering our small base sizes we should of course have many cities equally big.

Hm, I think that´s about it

[Whoha]

Lets spread our sps out over the 4 core cities.

[conmcb25]

Usually when I click the vote about a jillion times, I can finally register a vote. This time it didn't work so consider this a vote for decentralization. Im not that great of a SMACX player but it just seems like it is not a good diea to put all your eggs in one basket.

[arginine]

I figured we would have growing cities, big cities, and ****ty cities for oddball reasons. I am for decentralized, with the possible exception of homing for energy crawlers for efficiency reasons.

[jtsisyoda]

If we grab the ME, we can rehome some crawlers to that base and make it the HQ (if it's not already very close). Otherwise, I prefer having the majority of my bases nearly equal strength.

[#endgame]

Decentralised, I think.

-- CTO #endgame

[conmcb25]

I FINALLY got my vote to register BTW