... for bad players.

rant #1 Elitist Africa

https://www.warzone.com/MultiPlayer?GameID=34131915

So there is an huge difference from similar 1vs1 templates like Biomes or Mastermania. In Africa you have income.
Therefore the way you pick is completely different.

Usual picking sequence in Biomes or Mastermania ( I'll use the color of the former since are similar to Africa's ones) is:

+4s (like Maghreb or Madagascar) double spawns
red / +3s double spawns
light greens
brown
dark green double spawns /islands

In Africa you really want to get at least 3 income so that you can get a +4 bonus turn1. The picking sequence becomes:
+4s double spawns
red / light green double spawns
light greens /browns
+3s double spawns
dark green/orange double spawns
dark green /islands

In short you try to start turn1 with some income. At least 3 is ideal, so the double spawns that in Mastermania or Biomes are very good because they can give 3 income turn2, here are devalued because they gives you -1 or -2 turn1, crippling your ability to fight / get the +4 bonuses.
Oranges here are a bit better than in other templates while the islands are way worse.

Edited 4/18/2023 14:02:08

Nice

Interesting, what bothers me on INSS maps (which I otherwise love to play) is the discrepancy in color/income depending on the maps. The fact that it's often close but not matched makes it even harder cause you transfer automatisms from one map to another.

Edited 4/18/2023 13:54:24

my issue when shifting from one to the other is that sometimes i pick less than ideal, especially Aseridith.

Oh, I have no problem with that, I always pick less than ideal.

https://www.warzone.com/MultiPlayer?GameID=33412724

you picked the right number there.

rant #2

In Biomes you can get some "megabonus" for completing all the bonus in a color. The most relevant is all deserts (yellow) that gives you +4 (as islands but getting all the islands is not easy). In poor distributions is a real possibility. Tthe other megabonuses grant +1 or +2 so they are not important but it's good to remember they exist when deciding where to expand.

Interesting, never paid attention to those. Thanks for sharing!

i'm impressed by your understanding of the game and your hunger and dedication to keep improving!

we would love to have you in 101st, it's a friendly and strategic minded clan where you can get training from players from Python, one of the top clans in the game. also, if you like chess we also have an active chess channel on our discord, with many top chess players.

either way, best of luck with your warzone career, i'll be rooting for you and watching with interest!
Quicksilver

lol, my career is at the end ;-)

rant #3

https://www.warzone.com/MultiPlayer?GameID=34124104

in this template many players forget that you can remove your commander from the frontline. The template is luck based, one of the easiest way to lose a game while ahead is to leave your commander unguarded


Edited 4/18/2023 20:15:29

Rant #4

Fogless fighting

https://www.warzone.com/MultiPlayer?GameID=34162872

funny fact : me and Orchid never agreed on how to pick (big or small bonuses) but on one thing we agreed: clustering is bad.
The map is virtually divided in 2 with only 2 bridges between the islands and Scandinavia.
Greenland, even adding Iceland and Svalbard, has less total income than Scandinavia + Baltics.
=>
- if you go full west and the other guy goes full east, you dead
- If you go full east and the other guy divides his picks between the two areas, you dead

So, you always need a foot in both areas or at least you need to control the 2 bridges.

Thanks to emergency Blockade it's also possible to "seal" the enemy and recover in the late game; it's not important if he has +3/+4 income if you have a lot more space to grow.

another tip: fire cards like there is no tomorrow. You get a lot of cards so it's usually best to use them asap.

Rant #5 Aseridith Island

https://www.warzone.com/MultiPlayer?GameID=34176876

another INSS bonus template. The map is not easy and takes a while to master.
The focal point is that there is a red bonus for 7 and you need to cover it or you need a very good reason to prioritize somewhere else (double spawns).
it's important to notice that you get 8 spots, so you need to pick 16 and you can't get too many spots that give you negative income. With 2 reinf. card it's possible to amend 6 spots but it's way better to use cards for fighting or taking territories.

so, while the initial picks are similar to other INSS templates (check rant #1), for the late picks it's not wrong to take seaports or grasslands instead of islands or pastures (violet).

If you check the game above you will see that there is a double spawn in Narazar. The double spawn has a great advantage in respect of any single spawn:
turn1 you can attack with 1 and then 2 to take it, avoiding the negative and getting 1 income.
The same can be obtained using a seaport.

Finally a tip regarding islands:

Marbrand (at north, center of the map) is good since it borders a red bonus
Eraddam (the westernmost - is it correct ? ) is good too, you can to the brown bonus
Baramunz (in the center, above the "continental mass) is in a strategic position between good bonus

The other islands are clearly inferior since they are far from good bonus or surrounded by seaports.

Rant #6 Archipelago Brawl

https://www.warzone.com/MultiPlayer?GameID=34180295

simply put : in this map there are great bonuses, good bonuses, acceptables ones and terrible ones.

Consequently:
Picking Pagera first is correct 90% of time. 1 territory +1 income => you can get a +4 bonus turn1 !!!
Picking Ogera as second pick is correct 80% of time. 2 territory +2 income, great deal !
then there is a bunch of good bonuses that give you +3 for 3 territories, +4 for 4 territories etc...
In most cases it's really easy to realize who has 1st move (it's cyclic and both players are probably going for Pagera)

the game above is one of the rare situations in which Pagera and Ogera are not great.
- there are no +4 you can get turn1 if you pick Pagera
- Ogera has a counter
However even if not great. those 2 places brings an immediate advantage in income.

One picking strategy I don't like is to pick Pagera and Oakburn (the island south east linked to Pagera) as 1-2. It's not impossible to end without Pagera and Ogera and yes, you are going to win when you get Pagera but there are few games you would lose if you get Pagera, even without Oakburn, meanwhile there are a lot of games you are going to lose if you dont get Pagera and use your second pick in Oakburn.

So the template is quite luck based. But with good picking you can win 40/50% of games where you dont get 1st pick.

Rant #7

in this game luck is involved. Sometimes you get 1st pick and sometimes you dont. Sometimes your 8th, 9th picks are badly matched with opponent picks and you have no foot in a specific area. Sometimes you decide that another attack is your last attack and your just captured territory is taken by the last attack of the opponent, both unaware you were going to meet.
The above is unavoidable. But you can also increase the luck factor toying with the settings, so luck in combat and random move order.

Edited 4/28/2023 13:33:32

Rant #8

tied with the post above. Some templates include luck so you can try to go safe ( i.e. always attack 4vs2 or try your luck, attacking 3vs2). It's part of the strategy.

https://www.warzone.com/MultiPlayer?GameID=34105428
https://www.warzone.com/MultiPlayer?GameID=34131956

note how Airnewbie is able to get double bonus turn1 in both games. I tried maaanyyy times to do the same and I have never suceeded.

https://www.warzone.com/MultiPlayer?GameID=34170006

here his strategy is denied, but he is still able to win a lot of 3vs2 in Scandinavia and then in Greenland to secure the win.

some maps are large and some maps appears large.

Let's take as example :

MAP Medium Earth, 131 territories. Ex https://www.warzone.com/MultiPlayer?GameID=1775443 ( 2011 baby !)

MAP Modified Medium Earth, 129 territories. Ex https://www.warzone.com/MultiPlayer?GameID=25468189

at first sight ME is bigger, right ? 2 more territories!
No, not really.
Those 2 extra territories transform East US and East Russia in bad bonus. So, while in MME America and Russia are often picked, in ME East Russia is used only in relation with Central Russia, East US is barely picked and Canada is usually unexplored since is surrounded by bad bonuses*.
Moreover the template itself favors the smaller bonuses, since luck on a 6 or 7 territories bonus can be really frustrating, while on MME nothing can go wrong if you try to get Australia or Greenland turn2.

In short some maps have some parts that are not used and so the actual "pickable" area differs from the area of the map. Europe AD 1600, to say one, has a lot of useless territories in the Ottoman empire.

Interestingly, at the moment, no QM template is an extreme example of the above

*bad bonus are those bonus that gives the same income of bonus with less territories.
Compare to Mexico, N.Africa and E.Africa are clearly worst.
All other 4s are more efficient than Middle East
Greenland, Australia, Caucasus are better than Europe, West US, Canada

Information is power but not a definite one. A good intel is very important. It really helps you take the best decisions. It's still possible to lose even with a perfect intel of course because here are a lot of possible decisions every turn.
Let see how to use the information, we have with a couple examples:

https://www.warzone.com/MultiPlayer?GameID=34460488

easy one, i had full intel on opponents picks. So i decided which bonus develop turn1/2 and then I simply needed to trade s.am/mexico and then play many turns with more income. Of course 1 income difference is not that much and the game was decided by our crossed decisions. However knowing to be ahead means you can stay defensive and avoid risks.

https://www.warzone.com/MultiPlayer?GameID=34480316

this one is very interesting. The moment we met turn2, Eagle has full intel on my picks and has probably figured what I took. At that point he knows exactly my income and that i have to use all of it to take E.Russia.
That attack vs Mexico crippled me. I was ready to lose Mexico but I losing it with him taking double bonus was really bad. He won thanks to intel but he still had to take a decision. If I opted to go strong in Mexico we would have started turn5 same income but he would have no place to expand easily.
[Yes, I could still win that game but ... ]

I am playing Biomes 3v3 in CL and joined Aseridith tournament. It has thrown me off so much!

In Biomes, you have +5 income, so the expansion potential is the most important; on Aseridith you have 0 base income, just one block card, and lots of bonuses with negative income; early income is the most important.

yes, happened to me too.
You are right in general, except that in Aseridith you can develop income later if you have access to the 7 or the exclusive on reds/blacks

Not attacking IS an option.

In most cases the game forces you to attack every turn so you can get card pieces. In those templates where you can get cards you need to remember attacking is not mandatory

The first trap is about what you get. Even if you get card pieces, are they worth ? Priority, blockades or even +1 are they worth the 3 armies you need to attack ?

The second "trap" is about timing:
- You need X turns to complete a card. In most cases you have to attack for 3 turns before getting the +3 or +5 reinf. In some rare cases it's better to simply defend and have your income advantage grow/stop the opponent from getting his card.

Even in templates where you get no cards fro attacking, most players are biased toward aggresion:

https://www.warzone.com/MultiPlayer?GameID=34510903

In this game i had 75% intel on opponent picks turn1. At turn 3, seeing how many he deployed I was quite sure he was in Panonia. So he had no expansion (except Dacia, but it was quite unlikely).
I simply stayed still and won without any attack last turn.

[In this case the other player was also "forced" to attack since i could complete Lusitania and end with a +1 income vs him]

Rant #9

Title of the topic

Ilpeggiore strategic Topic ... in correct English I should have written - Ilpeggiore's strategic Topic ... -

but

Ilpeggiore is Italian, can be translated Theworst.

so you can read the title:

Theworst strategic topic ...

end of the OT, requested by 3.1415926535 of the Cats