Post by Leon Silverblood on May 22, 2009 18:27:52 GMT -5
If I may put my two cents in...
I agree with Vito and I like this outline. To state the obvious, the limitation of the zombah is not his HP, but his AP. Stringing them out decreases mob effectiveness by allowing them to bring fewer attackers to bear on the same number of targets, i.e., buildings. This isn't quite the same as merely moving to a new building, but in terms of withstanding a siege, the two tactics work well in tandem and also allow x number of humans to withstand more zeds than otherwise.
While I'll be the first to say that this is NOT a game of Risk, some or many of that game's fundamentals can definitely be applied here, as you so aptly pointed out. Specifically where mob counter-strategy (dealing with armies in the hundreds that have built up in one territory and attempt to seize a continent and/or victory late in the game, often referred to as "bubble" armies), paced and deliberate expansion as opposed to hyper-aggressive expansion, etc, are concerned.
To take the long view, a human victory in this game, or at least a reversal of the current state of zombie dominance, would undeniably and only come through organization, as you said. I'd love a ninja magic trick, and I think you're holding out on us(!), but neither that nor any new tactic or approach is going to change anything as much as survivor coordination. Historically, such innovations (tactical, technological) are of short-lived use to their originators since they are not exclusive for long, and the world (or, in a microcosm, Malton) remains in/returns to the same state of ascent/decline/stasis.
The survivors' degree of success in Malton is a direct guage of the degree of cooperation among them.
That said, my own vague suggestion follows:
An organized group must lay claim to and hold a block or group of blocks of it's choice, begin recruiting, maintaining a high degree of organization or at LEAST cooperation (and so communication, real-time if possible). After it has reached a predetermined manpower quota, the harman critical mass, it must expand, secure the new territory, set and meet a new quota. Intermingled in this process is an ongoing recruitment and constant sharp strategic & logistical eye on territories in contention as well as those upcoming, for obvious reasons. If this were adhered to by several groups across Malton simultaneously...see our aforementioned 'string them out' theorems.
The zeds still need enough of reason to want to fight us in the first place otherwise the whole idea is moot.
Thanks to our undead fiends for being so intent on spreading barhah- there is no need to pick a fight if we want one. All we have to do is secure an area and expand. Either the very existence of security there will bring zed wrath down upon us or the expansion will.
sighs.
You ok, harrison?
I agree with Vito and I like this outline. To state the obvious, the limitation of the zombah is not his HP, but his AP. Stringing them out decreases mob effectiveness by allowing them to bring fewer attackers to bear on the same number of targets, i.e., buildings. This isn't quite the same as merely moving to a new building, but in terms of withstanding a siege, the two tactics work well in tandem and also allow x number of humans to withstand more zeds than otherwise.
While I'll be the first to say that this is NOT a game of Risk, some or many of that game's fundamentals can definitely be applied here, as you so aptly pointed out. Specifically where mob counter-strategy (dealing with armies in the hundreds that have built up in one territory and attempt to seize a continent and/or victory late in the game, often referred to as "bubble" armies), paced and deliberate expansion as opposed to hyper-aggressive expansion, etc, are concerned.
To take the long view, a human victory in this game, or at least a reversal of the current state of zombie dominance, would undeniably and only come through organization, as you said. I'd love a ninja magic trick, and I think you're holding out on us(!), but neither that nor any new tactic or approach is going to change anything as much as survivor coordination. Historically, such innovations (tactical, technological) are of short-lived use to their originators since they are not exclusive for long, and the world (or, in a microcosm, Malton) remains in/returns to the same state of ascent/decline/stasis.
The survivors' degree of success in Malton is a direct guage of the degree of cooperation among them.
That said, my own vague suggestion follows:
An organized group must lay claim to and hold a block or group of blocks of it's choice, begin recruiting, maintaining a high degree of organization or at LEAST cooperation (and so communication, real-time if possible). After it has reached a predetermined manpower quota, the harman critical mass, it must expand, secure the new territory, set and meet a new quota. Intermingled in this process is an ongoing recruitment and constant sharp strategic & logistical eye on territories in contention as well as those upcoming, for obvious reasons. If this were adhered to by several groups across Malton simultaneously...see our aforementioned 'string them out' theorems.
Thanks to our undead fiends for being so intent on spreading barhah- there is no need to pick a fight if we want one. All we have to do is secure an area and expand. Either the very existence of security there will bring zed wrath down upon us or the expansion will.
You ok, harrison?
