How many unit types you use?

[Commy]

Originally posted by Flubber
Lets put it this way . . . If I were fighting you,I would LOVE to see all those clean units coming at me. Even if I lose a unit for every one I kill, I still win the battle of the minerals. Assumign similar industrial capacities, you lose . . . PERIOD.

Flubber, if I were fighting you, I wouldn't be stupid enough to send units into your territory, especially if I had clean units...

While you most likely are much better than me at SMAC, if you attacked me first (assuming you did not use missiles or PBs), you would exhaust more resources attacking me than I would defending against you...the same would go for almost any war, with almost any decent players...the defender has the advantage in wars...

On the other hand, in small battles between individual units, the attacker usually has the advantage, unless attacking a base...

Let's make a scenario...let's say I have 3 4-1-2 units in my base, and a 1-3-1 garrison...all units have clean reactors...

You have 5 8-1-2 speeders, and you decide to attack my base...there's just one problem, you can't get within range of my base without getting attacked first...so say that all your units are elite, and are three squares from my base (and therefore could theoretically attack my base next turn)...assuming I'm not sleeping that day, and I have a road in every square (like I always do), then I use my 3 speeders to attack 3 of your speeders...obviously, with 4-1 odds, I'd most likely win each battle, and each speeder would most likely not be damaged below 50%, and therefore, would have 1/3 of a movement point left...if each of these speeders used that movement point to attempt to form a ZOC, I could guarentee that altleast one of your speeders could not attack my base the next turn...if you attack my base with the other speeder, you wipe out the garrison, but you won't be able to take the base...if you attack two of my speeders in the field, I use the third one to wipe out one of your 2 remaining speeders, and then return it to base...I now have 2 units, and you only have 1...

In any case, I would only loose 2 units, and you'd lose atleast 4, possibly 5 if you decided to attack in the first place...I'm sorry, but the cost of adding clean reactor to 4 units is not the same cost of 4 8-1-2 units...

[Flubber]

Commy

Nice but very basic analysis of the difficulty in attacking a prepared base with ground troops. It repeats the types of things I have been saying on here for about 3 years . . . that the best defense is in having a ready offensive force with mobility to crush attackers etc.

I agree completely that if I was ever stupid enough to send an unarmoured ground force against the base, they have to attack first or they die futilely. In your scenario, I would be better off to bring a couple of extra 1-1-2s or 1-1-1s as sacrificial lambs OR a couple of 1-3-2s if I had a morale advantage that would make them survivable OR a worm OR some arty to strike at your roads OR OR OR . . . IT would be silly beyond belief to send 5 8-1-2s

Too bad it has absolutely nothing at all to do with the clean ability issue.

The point on clean is that for units that actually fight and die, the ability is rarely worthwhile as the payback of 1 mineral a turn "saved" only gets "repaid " if the unit lives long enough . Even then, you have to consider what you could have done with the minerals or energy credits from the rush/upgrade. heck if I could say use that same money/minerals to rush a crawler that could even crawl an empty forest tile for minerals, I am AHEAD a mineral a turn

[Flubber]

Originally posted by Commy


Flubber, if I were fighting you, I wouldn't be stupid enough to send units into your territory, especially if I had clean units...

I would most definitely be sending units at you--While my skills have some gaps, the thing I have been good at is military tactics. Check with my PBEM opponents

Originally posted by Commy

if you attacked me first (assuming you did not use missiles or PBs), you would exhaust more resources attacking me than I would defending against you...the same would go for almost any war, with almost any decent players...the defender has the advantage in wars...

On the other hand, in small battles between individual units, the attacker usually has the advantage, unless attacking a base...

I agree that a player has an advantage with respect to battles fought in their own territory. It pretty obvious . . . shorter attack lines, ability to use sensors, quick retreat to bases with repair and defence enhancing facilities-- I hesitate to use the word "defender" since as I have repeated on here many times, with tech parity there is no unit or combination of units that can have even a 50% chance of survival if in the open against an attack from the available enemy units. Build any group and put them in the open and an enemy can build a stack costing the same minerals that can kill it .

All that said, you don't want wars in your own territory. If all I has was ground forces, I wouldn't send FIVE expensive units on a suicide mission against a base. I would be more likely to send 10 or 12 cheap 2-1-2s and 4-1-2s on raids against your crawlers, formers and infrastructure-- You know-- appear, kill a crawler and use the last 1/3 of a movement point to tear up a road or borehole. I don't even need to kill all that much if I keep you from developing in certain directions and can cause you to build military infrastructure while I surge onward with techa nd economy

Originally posted by Commy

Let's make a scenario...let's say I have 3 4-1-2 units in my base, and a 1-3-1 garrison...all units have clean reactors...

You have 5 8-1-2 speeders, and you decide to attack my base...there's just one problem, you can't get within range of my base without getting attacked first...so say that all your units are elite, and are three squares from my base (and therefore could theoretically attack my base next turn)...assuming I'm not sleeping that day, and I have a road in every square (like I always do), then I use my 3 speeders to attack 3 of your speeders...obviously, with 4-1 odds, I'd most likely win each battle, and each speeder would most likely not be damaged below 50%, and therefore, would have 1/3 of a movement point left...if each of these speeders used that movement point to attempt to form a ZOC, I could guarentee that altleast one of your speeders could not attack my base the next turn...if you attack my base with the other speeder, you wipe out the garrison, but you won't be able to take the base...if you attack two of my speeders in the field, I use the third one to wipe out one of your 2 remaining speeders, and then return it to base...I now have 2 units, and you only have 1...

In any case, I would only loose 2 units, and you'd lose atleast 4, possibly 5 if you decided to attack in the first place...I'm sorry, but the cost of adding clean reactor to 4 units is not the same cost of 4 8-1-2 units...

As I said before, your scenario was ridiculous. Against an enemy with limited defenders and a good offensive stack, it is obvious you need to either have good defenders or sacrifice some units on the way in. So maybe some armor 3 ECM defenders if I could get a morale advantage, maybe ONE 8-1-2 and a few 4-1-2s.

If I can't get defensible units then I think just a few cheapo units to send ahead to die so my good offensive units can shoot first

Oh and maybe I would bring along some formers and instabuild a road connecting to your road so I DO get the first shot.

[Commy]

Let's just say for fun, that you and me were at war...

We both have all the level five techs, and roughly are equal in power...

My strategy probably isn't the best, but all the same, here it is...

Let's just say that by pure luck I manage to do a surprise attack on you...All the below would be done on the same turn...

First, I send in interceptors to attack your formers and crawlers...if any of your interceptors scramble, then our ships will fight weapon to weapon...let's say that you scramble an air defense and match each of my attacking interceptors, and let's say that, given equal weapon values and all else, I loose half my interceptors, and you loose half your interceptors...

Next, I attack with bombers, which take out formers and crawlers...

Next would come the missiles, if any...they'd most likely attack bases on the coast and bases, if any, bordering me...

Next would be amphibious assualt...any decent bases on the coast would be hit hard with missiles, and with any luck, most of the garrison will be gone...so now, I attack those bases with marines and amphibious units...the transports carrying these units will already be in position the turn before to move in on target bases...the amphibious units themselves will have no armor, but the transports will also be carrying garrisons, some with ECM, some with AA tracking, along with a few speeders...

Any transports carrying marine units that fail to successfully destroy all defenders will bring the garrisons and speeders back to home...

If we had a land border, I'd start moving in what I call field armies...a few garrisons, maybe 2 or 3, with ECM and AA tracking...there would also be attacking units, a few infantry with high weapon, no armor, and a few speeders that would also have high weapon, no armor...

Probe foils would be sent into coastal bases to do whatever damage they could...

If the game was a bit later, and I had Adv. Ecological Engineering, I would use numerous sea formers to attempt to sink some of your bases (I'd only do this if I knew you didn't have pressure domes)...

All this, if I pulled it off right, and it was my lucky day, might get me a few coastal bases, your former and crawler armies would be damaged badly, your airforce (interceptors) damaged, and I'd have armies ready to attack your bases within the next turn or two...

And on your turn, you'd (most likely, I don't know your strategy) destroy any fleeing transports and their cargo with bombers, use any remaining interceptors and SAM artillery and units to attack my bombers, use speeders, infantry, and/or bombers to attack my field armies, and most likely, most of my probe teams would now be dead from attacking your defensive probe teams...

All in all, I'd probably have exhausted many troops, and would now have to deal with your counterattack and cleaning up any of my troops in your territory...

[Commy]

Okay, now, here is a list of all the units I'd use in the campaign, with ** by all the ones that I'd give clean reactors...

1-1-6 transports**, each containing...
2--8-1-1 amphibious units
2--1-4-1 ECM, AA tracking units

The amphibious units would most likely all die, if a few survived they'd be sent back to the homeland...the garrisons put into the newly conquered bases, if any, would most likely not live long either...on the other hand, if the transports, mostly empty, weren't attack by your bombers or ships, they could come back, possibly to get more units...I'd put clean reactors on these, because they have the highest chance of survival (although still slim) since you might instead decide to bomb my units on the ground or my bases...also, transports are handy to keep around, and I'd hate having to support them...

The interceptors and bombers...

8-1-?? (movement depends on morale, I don't know the default)** bombers
8-1-?? SAM **

Half the interceptors would survive the next turn, probably a third would make it back to base after your SAM land units, if any, made their move...

If most of your interceptors are drawn out, the bombers are relatively safe that turn...it is highly unlikely that your land SAM units could destroy even a good number of my bombers or interceptors, especially if your interceptors are already tied up...

Next is field armies...

1-4-1 ECM AA tracking
8-1-1**
8-1-2** SAM (attack any interceptors or bombers you use to counterattack)

The garrisons for the field armies would be expendable, I guess, but hopefully, the offensive units wouldn't be hurt, and would have a chance to attack, get a base, and set camp (probably have some 1-4-2 ECM AA tracking units move around, also cover conquered bases), so I'd give the offensive units clean, as hopefully, once in a garrisoned base, they'll survive...

This strategy isn't perfect (probably crappy compared to some of the stuff done on PBEMs), but my first wave would most likely fail, and then you'd counterattack, and probably stretch my defenses so far I'd try and sue for peace, you'd get any base I took from you back, and then we'd hit a stalemate, possibly leaning in your favor...

The point is, this is just to give you an idea of what units I'd put clean reactor on...not all of them, but a good majority, especially the ones kept in my territory to deal with any counterattacks that aren't even mentioned...

[Flubber]

Originally posted by Commy

If most of your interceptors are drawn out, the bombers are relatively safe that turn...it is highly unlikely that your land SAM units could destroy even a good number of my bombers or interceptors, especially if your interceptors are already tied up...
.

I generally have a couple of chopper interceptor units that are in a base back a tile or two from the frontlines. Each one would likely kill 4-8 bombers unless they had interceptor coverage.

A couple of points more generally

1. I am paranoid about opponent's troop dispositions, almost extremely so . .. I have had more than one treatymate complain about my attacks on them when I perceived a threat. If see TWO choppers in range of me, I think you are preparing for war.

2. My patrolling or offshore radar platforms should reveal any amphibious forces PRIOR to your attack and unless they are sitting in bases, they should be dead dead dead.Make a big stack to protect yourself and I'll self destruct them to death.

3. You assume getting a LOT of forces in place without my noticing. In my PBEMs I almost always demanded nonmilitarized zones. As soon as there was more than 1-2 offensive units in strike range of me I would consider war imminent and act accordingly.

4. I would not consider it smart to have significant crawlers within range of a hostile air force. Even with a one turn suspicion that the attack was coming, some of that stuff would be moved to the protection of a base. But more generally I try to develop crawler fields deeper inside my empire. generally if an enemy can get to my crawler field from their territory and then kill 3 or more crawlers before running out of movement, thats too much

5. I would use far less interceptors than you seem to contemplate. I kill interceptors with SAM rovers and I kill bombers with SAM choppers. I usually don't want interceptors scrambling and would prefer to see how your bombers or missiles would fare against a aerocomplex and AA combo.

6. You have to assume that I would see your buildup coming and respond according to the circumstances. If you are building amphibious forces, I increase water patrols and my offshore radar platform. The plan is to find you and kill you on the water. Heck -- I might even start raising land just to creat an outcriopping or finger of land. I did that once -- saw an opponent with large amphibious forces and I raised land such that my nearest 4 or 5 bases to him were now 2 tiles inland!!
If you build choppers, I upgrade some AA troops and ensure sensors for added defense. Missiles . . depends on my armour possibilities-- If I can field some 1-<4>-1 AA troops inside an AC with sensor coverage, I will take those odds. Your intereceptors I would largely ignore except to make sure I have a couple of SAM rovers. If you stack too many they get self-destructed to death

Interesting to talk tactics.Whenever I have lost to another human, its never been about tactics. I have lost by being out-built or out-teched or when I was ganged up on. I don't think I was ever truly suprise attacked-- Like I said, I am paranoid to the extreme. ( It probably came from one of my first PBEM games where a player accidentally sent an email to EVERYONE in the game (all 4) instead of just the other two. It was a reply to a reply to a reply that showed clearly that all 3 of the other players planned to gang up on me in about 10 years after some preparation. . . all while professing peaceful intentions to me. It was actually funny to read people talk about how I was buying their story . As I say, one of my very first PBEMs and it led me to TRUST no one.

[Commy]

Paranoid? Oh, I used to be that way, but I haven't played MP for a very long time (and I don't think with anyone from Apolyton)...

Anyway, it appears that most of military tactics in MP depends on your infiltrators...as said again and again, SMAC is a Rock Papers Scissors game...no matter what you have, something else could destroy, there is no ultimate defense...

About infiltrators though...I was reading some parts of The Art of War (thought it may help in Shogun, a rather good strategy game for real time), and one line really got me interested and I had an idea for SMAC...something like this..."if you are traveling far, prepare like you are going a short distance; likewise, if you are traveling near, make your enemy think you are preparing for a long journey..."

I thought maybe if I build units that will have nothing to do with my actual strategy...for example, if I knew you had infiltrated me, I might build a hole bunch of speeders or tanks, all with amphibious ability, and build a few transports...then, instead of doing amphibious assaults, I do a direct attack on land...risky, but all the same...

On the other hand, I could build a whole bunch of units with both amphibious and air superiority special abilities...expensive, yes, but you wouldn't exactly know how I would use the units...

[Flubber]

Commy

Misdirection is a key element. I would frequently do things like build a couple of probeships which would promptyly hide in my crawler fields. The could probe an approaching ship but more likely, they would never be used. Their value is in the fact that my opponent had no idea where they were. Everywhere he tried to expand or build, he had to bring probe protection or sweep the adjacent seas.

I have heard the rock /paper scissors idea with SMAX before and I agree with it some extent but I think that more prevalent is the idea that outside bases, the player that shoots first wins. The only ways therefore to overcome an opponent is to suprise them or overwhelm them with numbers or superior forces. . . . and lets face it , most people will make tactical mistakes.

Thats why in most of my PBEMS I worked hard to prevent my opponents having any real shoot first capability. The only bases I wanted them to be able to reach very well would be my hardened military outposts.

[Commy]

Are tachyon shields commonly used by players? I know they kind of come late in the game, but, if someone got them before everyone else, they could have a huge military advantage, as attacking first would not always yield victory...

[Chaos Theory]

Tachyon fields come in the late mid game. I'd use them, given the opportunity, at selected peripheral bases. Combine this with aerospace complexes and AAA, and defenders are more-or-less impervious to air. However, if I see you do that, I'll attack in another way, perhaps amphibiously, perhaps by probe, perhaps just to nettle you, but your defenses, unless skillful, serve to redirect my strength, rather than blunt it. If your defenses are too complete, I'll outbuild you, relying on more parsimonious defense.

[Sikander]

Tachyon and Aerospace Complexes? Unleash the Blink dogs of war I say!

[Chaos Theory]

If you have Blink Displacers, the game should have already been over. The gap between Tachyon Fields and Blink Displacers is quite large.

[Commy]

If a base has AA and ECM units, and has perimeter defense and tachyon shield, and isn't on the coast, how would you attack the base? If it had an aerospace complex, even missiles wouldn't be effective, and with ECMs, the only units that would even stand a chance would be slow infantry...probe teams wouldn't even work, as it is relatively easy to have a decent probe garrison...

Although, given your point that you could just redirect your military, I guess if its the only base left standing, its pretty much screwed...

[Chaos Theory]

Specifically for this case:

If you have just one or two hardened defenders, I may sacrifice some units to destroy them, and take the base. If you have many, and I'm still intent on taking the base, I'd rather siege it. If you have some counterattackers, I'll scorch your terrain with throwaway units (Impact needlejets are great). No terraforming -> few minerals -> few units supported -> fewer defenders. If you can defend the terrain as well, I'd better attack somewhere else first.

In SMAX, there's an interesting ability called dissociative wave. It is useful on offense, to cancel defensive abilities like AAA and ECM, though not base defenses. I haven't had the opportunity to use wave much, but it's available in the late mid game or early late game, and serves as at least a partial solution to entrenched defense.

[Minute Mirage]

All this talk about PBEM tactics makes me sad that I never got to test Flubber in a battle in Classic Game 1. Then again, my superior economy had already assured me victory so the rest would just have been a formality...