View Full Version : How would you describe the strategy of MP BS:M...
04-26-2007, 08:05 AM
...in its simplest form?
For me, this game is about "creating threats".
By doing this, you force the opponent to react to it, and because of the fact that this game is almost paper, scissors, rock (IMO), you'll know what the opponent will do to counter this threat, and so you can react accordingly.
Playing the Solomon Islands map as the US, you have a battleship approaching their airfields. You KNOW that the opponent will start sending out as many torpedo bombers as they can to eliminate this threat. So this gives you air superiority- you'll be able to send out whatever planes you like to attack whatever target you like without having to worry about enemy fighters or enemy torpedo/dive bomb attacks on your crucial units.
Obviously each situation is unique and it may never be as simple as that, but that's just an example.
I think these two abilities are important for any strategy game, especially BS:M:
1. The ability to recognise the basic factors that affect the outcome of any battle, engagement, strategy etc.
2. Having a good sense of "theory of mind", i.e. being able to guess your opponent's strategies and moves based on how you would react to something or how you think most people would.
04-26-2007, 02:48 PM
Hum... I was reading thoroughly and I came to the conclusion that you are taking the long way around to explain something much more basic at its core.
This game, when it comes to carriers vs carriers (Op. Midway for instance) is all about air superiority: the first "team" which get close to total control of the sky, especially with fighters, is improving by 75% over the opponent is ability to win. The opponent team cannot launch any squads in the air without seeing them being destroyed while taking off; so it's a painful process to get rid of the enemy aircrafts overhead looking down to annihilate any "flyable" resistance.
When it comes to warships only, the tactics are mostly about (especially with heavier ships like cruisers and battleships) which team is going to "cross the Ts" at the right moment. Period. Too quickly and the opponent team will stay out of range (especially when it's the one whose goal is to defend an objective vital to the enemy), too late and your ships will be obliterated by the enemy's ships which have already "crossed the Ts", gunning you down with the fullest of their broadside.
When it's a mix of the two precedent scenarios, the carrier(s) must find a way to conceal it(them)self(ve) while sinking incoming enemy warship readily accessible to them: it's crucial because it's much easier to a warship to sink it with air support than with only its own guns. Furthermore, most of the time, enemy aircrafts having the payload to inflict damage to your carrier(s) are not in sufficient numbers (normally that is) for you not being able to shoot them down with your carrier's AA (and with damage control assigned to the right spots). The role of the warships will be to destroy their counterparts and only then to attack the enemy's carrier(s).
I hope that it all makes sense, I will reply to any questions you would like to ask in the future...
04-26-2007, 05:22 PM
Even though what you described is generally what happens, i.e. damaging the enemy fleet, so that it's easier for you to keep yours, so that you can use your fleet to destroy the objectives; it's not something that occurs all the time and is not something that guarantees a win. Even though what you described is a strategy and the basic idea behind a lot of MP maps (Coral Sea, Battle of the Philippines), it's not what I was asking for in terms of its simplicity. In fact, the Coral Sea map is an example of my idea- both teams start off with the exact same threats (ships) that they must gain the upper hand over (air/sub attacks to soften them up for ships). If all the ships meet in the middle and you win, then obviously you have the advantage- both in terms of the remaining units and the newly found air superiority. However, engaging the enemy fleet with yours isn't the only viable tactic. Sometimes opportunities arise where you might be able to sink the enemy carriers with only one unit (perhaps). Even if the enemy have all their ships left, it only takes one plucky destroyer to sink both carriers if you can use their speed to slip past.
Once on the philippines map I took the last remaining destroyer away from the carrier and approaching enemy destroyers (4 of them) and proceeded to sink the enemy carrier and destroy the airfield. My teammate could have, but didn't, used this opportunity to send squadrons of dive bombers to attack the airfield, which would've made my job easier and less tense (My DD was almost gone).
A good tactic on Surigao Straight as the US is to send the destroyers east so that it looks as if you're going to attack the IJN fleet from the rear. Even though the IJN should ignore them, a lot of players make the mistake of responding to this "threat" by sending a number of ships (and quite often too many) north away from the fleet to engage them. This opens up a clear path for your PT boats to attack the battleships.
04-27-2007, 06:33 AM
You covered the basic rules in the first post well enough. The ideal core strategy in most wargames is to take the initiative in acting first, and forcing the other team to react to your teams actions. Create situations where your overall strategy forces them to react tactically the way you want. Sometimes that may include playing a tactical defensive game. It doesn't always mean sending all ships full steam ahead.
Take the initiative, don't let the other team force you to react too much, and you will tend to win most matches. Unless they just shoot better than you, of course. :)
vBulletin® v3.8.7, Copyright ©2000-2013, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.