One Man Left Studios Community Forums
iPro vs Wolfpack Meeting : iPro discussion - Printable Version

+- One Man Left Studios Community Forums (http://www.onemanleft.com/forums)
+-- Forum: General (/forumdisplay.php?fid=1)
+--- Forum: Tournaments (/forumdisplay.php?fid=14)
+--- Thread: iPro vs Wolfpack Meeting : iPro discussion (/showthread.php?tid=2843)

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22

RE: Turn 23 - Thrutchy - 12-02-2013 10:45 PM

The problem is that they will have enough wits for another scrambler, especially if they do nothing.

RE: Turn 23 - terenceshiu2005 - 12-03-2013 12:28 AM

hehe, you all prefer to switch to defensive play. I am fine with it even though Im not willing to.

The reason I like Thrutchy's crazy attack because we could win this match if F1 doesn't (likely have) have a scrambler. also, they may not spawn a runner in their turn, who know? Big Grin. I don't want to switch to defensive play because we are in bad situation in term of units count or wits counts. we probably need to spend additional wits to retreat our units when they are putting more pressure in future turns. Why don't we attack. just like the meeting game vs Good Game. it is gambling. Smile

RE: Turn 23 - Thrutchy - 12-03-2013 01:04 AM

Haha! I really want to attack as well. Let's think of other variations that might work a little better. But, maybe what I proposed might work well and they don't spawn a runner because it is not so easy. I'm hoping they would be itching to scramble that scrambler and do it the easy way.

Here are other attack ideas to investigate:

* Instead of hiding the scrambler behind the medic, maybe move back the scrambled soldier and fake putting the scrambler behind it. hope they take the bait
* Them scrambling both of our scramblers might not be as bad as we think. We'll still have a lot of units left near their base. There might be a better position for us where we can takeover there spawn on the next turn and kill the closest scrambler to their base. We could even consider making it even easier for them to do this to get our units in a better position if they go that route.
* Some other meta gaming where we force a blind choice on them such that it gives us a gambling chance.

RE: Turn 23 - game_taker - 12-03-2013 04:06 AM

I still prefer defence.
(12-03-2013 01:04 AM)Thrutchy Wrote:  Here are other attack ideas to investigate:

(1) Instead of hiding the scrambler behind the medic, maybe move back the scrambled soldier and fake putting the scrambler behind it. hope they take the bait
(2) Them scrambling both of our scramblers might not be as bad as we think. We'll still have a lot of units left near their base. There might be a better position for us where we can takeover there spawn on the next turn and kill the closest scrambler to their base. We could even consider making it even easier for them to do this to get our units in a better position if they go that route.
(3) Some other meta gaming where we force a blind choice on them such that it gives us a gambling chance.
(2) Is a bad thing.
For (3) what I came up with. But if I had to change up Thurchy attack it would me moving scrambler H6->F7, this way even if they spawn a runner they wont see scrambler.

But even here we lose 4/5 units attack. They have 2 scramblers at there base.
I would really prefer Thurchy's defence instead.
Next turn. Assuming they don't do anything --> runner kills medic, heavy goes for base. Scrambler takes solider F3 and send its to finish base.

If they defend base w/ 2 soldiers 1 in D4, other D3.
Runner kill medic. (1)
Heavy hit base (2)
Scrambler F7 -> C8 (1)
Solider E7 -> C7 (1)
Runner I5 -> e7 or somewhere useful on left side(2)
This should put us in position 2 win.

All in all (1) seems best of Thurtchy's 3 options. But I would prefer the defence followed by attack next turn.

RE: Turn 23 - terenceshiu2005 - 12-03-2013 04:43 AM

Are they blocking the corridor or covering their scrambler?
50/50
I have 2 questions:
1) If they have a scrambler on D3, they have enough units to kill all our unit on their zone, those unit also can cover the scrambler. Why they move it to F1?
2) if is unreasonable to bank so many wits without a scrambler, right?

I have to go bed, it's already 3am

RE: Turn 23 - game_taker - 12-03-2013 06:00 AM

if we do the defence we can move runner first allowing us to see what's in d3. if no scrambler the defence should allow us to win if they are unable to spawn new scrambler + steal heavy at same turn. if they do steal heavy we will be able to steal there scrambler which will open a lot of attack startigies for us.

RE: Turn 23 - terenceshiu2005 - 12-03-2013 12:35 PM

3 days ago now. Shall I spawn a runner to f7? Will they spawn a runner to kill it?

RE: Turn 23 - terenceshiu2005 - 12-03-2013 04:30 PM

Boosted runner?

RE: Turn 23 - Thrutchy - 12-03-2013 04:50 PM

Assuming we are going defense, i think we should put a runner on a more aggressive E7. If we see something on D3 we could still attack. Assuming we see nothing new, heavy to D6 and scrambler to F7 seem good. They can only kill our runner, but we can attack kill many of their units. Even if they spawn another runner to kill ours, we can easily scramble that runner.

They will probably do nothing or retreat. This aggressive defense still seems advantageous to us.
Why boost? Too many soldiers. We may need that extra wit.

RE: Turn 23 - terenceshiu2005 - 12-03-2013 04:59 PM

Yeah! No unit found. The outstanding unit should be on F1

[Image: hChUhXnl.jpg]
Turn sent. Will have 11 wits next turn.

[Image: 6VFDbfBl.jpg]