Poll: Defense or Offense?
- Thread starter The_Lost_King
- Start date
Recommended Videos
I'm only terrible at RTS games, I suppose you could call me defensive' but I spend ages researching the technologies and upgrades for my units, without actually having many units, so when you turn up with your 400 strong army of peasant troops, there's not much my 5 knights in full armour can do about it.
I usually take the time to build up an army around the base. this allows me to prepare to go offense while simultaneously using them to defend. I build up the heaviest units for key targets, then send parts of my disposable force to every single target I can find. it is emotionally distressing for my opponent to see every structure they own under attack. meanwhile, my main force knocks down their front door. this works because my disposable forces caused my opponent to split his own force up to defend each target.
"The best defense is a good offense"
This rings true most of the time.
I'm always offensive in RTS games, and I role glass cannons in RPG's.
In shooters if im on offense i go straight through the middle, if im on defense i flank the enemy and hit them from behind.
Always be offending
This rings true most of the time.
I'm always offensive in RTS games, and I role glass cannons in RPG's.
In shooters if im on offense i go straight through the middle, if im on defense i flank the enemy and hit them from behind.
Always be offending
Generally I've found in RTSs that "defensive" players, are simply bad players that are unable to micromanage scouts and resources.
Scouting is by far the biggest problem. If a defensive player scouts properly they shouldn't lose, plain and simple. Defense has the natural advantage of added preparation time while the opponent travels. If you're opponent has built right on top of you (thus negativing travel time), this again, is primarily a scouting issue. Through proper scouting a defensive player should catch a glimpse of their opponents buildings, figure out the most logical strategy their opponent will take, and prepare for it.
Now occasionally you will encounter a "defensive" player that does all this and is able to shut down the assault. The issue then becomes confidence; many simply aren't confident enough to begin a counter assault -- at this point playing "defensive" becomes turtling. If you're thinking "rebuild" instead of "counter attack", that's not playing defensive and you might as well go play Minecraft on creative mode or Simcity as it's apparent you only want to is build.
Finally there's harassing. Many so called defensive players don't harass. They don't harass in the beginning, they don't harass if they shut down an assault, and they certainly don't harass during an assault. If someone goes all out offensive or if someone rushes, they are likely incredibly vulnerable at home, even sending two or three troops can be devastating.
I will say that RTSs with premade maps (eg. Starcraft) do allow for skilless offensive play. An offensive player can ignore scouting because they know exactly where the enemy is, but really this doesn't, or shouldn't, work too well outside of bronze league.
I don't mean to come off like a dick, or call all defensive players bad, but that generally is the case. I do speak from experience. I used to call myself "defensive", shake my fist at the sky complaining about "rushers", that is until someone I didn't even know (for whatever reason) whipped me into shape.
Scouting is by far the biggest problem. If a defensive player scouts properly they shouldn't lose, plain and simple. Defense has the natural advantage of added preparation time while the opponent travels. If you're opponent has built right on top of you (thus negativing travel time), this again, is primarily a scouting issue. Through proper scouting a defensive player should catch a glimpse of their opponents buildings, figure out the most logical strategy their opponent will take, and prepare for it.
Now occasionally you will encounter a "defensive" player that does all this and is able to shut down the assault. The issue then becomes confidence; many simply aren't confident enough to begin a counter assault -- at this point playing "defensive" becomes turtling. If you're thinking "rebuild" instead of "counter attack", that's not playing defensive and you might as well go play Minecraft on creative mode or Simcity as it's apparent you only want to is build.
Finally there's harassing. Many so called defensive players don't harass. They don't harass in the beginning, they don't harass if they shut down an assault, and they certainly don't harass during an assault. If someone goes all out offensive or if someone rushes, they are likely incredibly vulnerable at home, even sending two or three troops can be devastating.
I will say that RTSs with premade maps (eg. Starcraft) do allow for skilless offensive play. An offensive player can ignore scouting because they know exactly where the enemy is, but really this doesn't, or shouldn't, work too well outside of bronze league.
I don't mean to come off like a dick, or call all defensive players bad, but that generally is the case. I do speak from experience. I used to call myself "defensive", shake my fist at the sky complaining about "rushers", that is until someone I didn't even know (for whatever reason) whipped me into shape.
I have a tendency to be too defensive in RTSes because I'm bad at judging how big my force needs to be, so I hole up and make a giant one.
Except in Dawn of War II, where the only viable strategy is to get into a constant push-pull where you retreat but don't lose too much ground and chase down fleeing enemies but never too far.
And if anyone serves them to you and they aren't that colour and covered in seasoning slap them and tell them you ordered wedges not fat chips.
For the record in my state of Australia we use:
Chips for the thin flat ones
Fries for the thin square ones
(Hot) Chips for the thick square ones
Except in Dawn of War II, where the only viable strategy is to get into a constant push-pull where you retreat but don't lose too much ground and chase down fleeing enemies but never too far.
No these areNeutralDrow said:
And if anyone serves them to you and they aren't that colour and covered in seasoning slap them and tell them you ordered wedges not fat chips.
For the record in my state of Australia we use:
Chips for the thin flat ones
Fries for the thin square ones
(Hot) Chips for the thick square ones
My usual strategy in RTS games is to play defensively while building up a huge economy, sending a few moderate-sized groups of soldiers to harass my opponent. Then, my gigantic army of death suddenly sweeps through all of his cities backed up by tanks and air units. It works 85% of the time.
Unfortunately, I'm a defensive player. I dominate the CPU but when playing against actual people, it's a different story. My win/loss ratios in Warcraft 3 is about 1.75 wins to every loss, whilst my Starcraft 2 ratio is significantly worse. I suppose I'm just better at W3 than I am at S2?
Sleeping, that's where he is. Can you believe that? Sleeping on the job. Tsk. Might as well fill in for him *sigh*SckizoBoy said:
French Fries
Chips
Wedges
OT: I play way too recklessly myself. Always picking fights I know I shouldn't, always rushing in without a plan.
Guerilla.
It doesn't really fit either but that's my playstyle. I guess defense since I play on higher difficulties where the AI is constantly trying to kill me and has better stats than I do.
It doesn't really fit either but that's my playstyle. I guess defense since I play on higher difficulties where the AI is constantly trying to kill me and has better stats than I do.
In most games you win by executing an offensive strategy well so asking if you play offensive or not is like asking if you play to win or just to delay defeat.
I also think of "tower defense games" as "stupid boring loser games."
I also think of "tower defense games" as "stupid boring loser games."
I am a very definitive person when I play games. Consequently pretty bad a RTS games. I enjoy them to some degree but I have never been good at them. But I do tend to tank well in games where it's called for.
By your description chips sounds pretty similar to steak fries (a wedge is a type of steak fry), they are much thicker than fries and usually baked or grilled. However, chips seem to be skinless, am I correct in this assumption?SckizoBoy said: