Am I just playing wrong?

    This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our Cookie Policy.

    • Am I just playing wrong?

      I am extremely confused as to whether or not I'm just playing wrong. So a couple games ago I was doing 100p as Alberta, like usual. I did my usual start of research militia, infantry, armored cars, and light tanks on day one. I thought I was fine but then I noticed Saskatchewan attacking my plains. I was surprised because not only was this a day one attack, it was an insanely early day one attack, they had nothing built, they had no troop production, this dude wanted to beat me with his starting army. I easily defended and my only troops produced at this point were militia, that's how early this attack was. I think think everything is fine and start producing tanks, but wait, near day two British Columbia attacks me and gets my city. If you don't know, Alberta has a city that not only borders BC but has a road going into them. At this point I could've defended but I just left, since as commintern this early on I'm at a defensive disadvantage against allies. They weren't even in a coalition, I'm so confused why they attacks this early, both have bots bordering them. So my question is, am I playing too slowly? I started a new game yesterday and did my usual start, but I look around and by the start of day two, most bots were taken over and some player v player wars were already started. I was planning to make what I considered an early attack, but I wanted a good army, but I look to my south and Colorado has taken a quarter of Northwest US. I'm so confused, Montana is uncontested and Colorado went for the player. How about Ontario taking both Manitoba and Quebec ON DAY ONE! I don't know if this is evidence of miltiaccounting or gold usage, I'm just so confused.

    • Often you can easily attack bots on day one. A few risky (or skillful) players may attack on day 1 if they are good at using terrain bonuses. Axis (I'm not sure on the stats but it's worth checking) doctrine countries could probably also as they have superior units.

      In this case, the players may have just agreed to both attack you and that is also feasible. I doubt that you play too slow just you were shocked by how sudden these guys attacked.

    • The idea of an early attack is that your enemy has the same crap army as you. If you concentrate your army in 2, maybe 3 stacks, while your target has all one's, you're going to cut through him like butter. Most bots have just one city, and a player has five, so there's quite a prize to gain as well. I usually aim to attack some neighbor on day 1 myself.

      Then there's some noobs who rush all their one's as-is at the nearest neighbor. It's really a trolling thing, they don't care about their nation and will go inactive on day 2, they just derive some sort of weird pleasure from doing this. It's not a bad thing to happen to you, you can easily fend off all these weak attacks and afterwards his nation is empty and open for annexation by you.
      When the fake daddies are curtailed, we have failed. When their roller coaster tolerance is obliterated, their education funds are taken by Kazakhstani phishers, and their candy bars distributed between the Botswana youth gangs, we have succeeded.
      - BIG DADDY.

    • Onandonandomnom wrote:

      I am extremely confused as to whether or not I'm just playing wrong. So a couple games ago I was doing 100p as Alberta, like usual. I did my usual start of research militia, infantry, armored cars, and light tanks on day one. I thought I was fine but then I noticed Saskatchewan attacking my plains. I was surprised because not only was this a day one attack, it was an insanely early day one attack, they had nothing built, they had no troop production, this dude wanted to beat me with his starting army. I easily defended and my only troops produced at this point were militia, that's how early this attack was. I think think everything is fine and start producing tanks, but wait, near day two British Columbia attacks me and gets my city. If you don't know, Alberta has a city that not only borders BC but has a road going into them. At this point I could've defended but I just left, since as commintern this early on I'm at a defensive disadvantage against allies. They weren't even in a coalition, I'm so confused why they attacks this early, both have bots bordering them. So my question is, am I playing too slowly? I started a new game yesterday and did my usual start, but I look around and by the start of day two, most bots were taken over and some player v player wars were already started. I was planning to make what I considered an early attack, but I wanted a good army, but I look to my south and Colorado has taken a quarter of Northwest US. I'm so confused, Montana is uncontested and Colorado went for the player. How about Ontario taking both Manitoba and Quebec ON DAY ONE! I don't know if this is evidence of miltiaccounting or gold usage, I'm just so confused.
      i attacked germany as france in europe road to war in the 1st min and surprisingly won with in 2 days. dont try this in historic world war tho.
      “ To command is to serve, nothing more and nothing less.”


      For support ticket click here

      forum rank list(the better one)

      join my discord server>discord.gg/nbydn7sEaS

      :00010166:

    • There are different viable strategies. The one you describe is the blitz, the one Rokossovski talks about is a hedgehog.

      Which strategy works better is situational and should also fit to your play style.

      To sum up, there isn't necessarily anything wrong with your research and build. But perhaps you are not doing reconaisance enough? You have a starting fighter. Use it to scout all your neighbours. There isn't much else to do on day 1 anyway.