People who leave 2s and 3s in Escalating

[72o]

Don't you hate them?

[MeDeFe]

Is this about ratings or number of troops on territories?

[Funkyterrance]

Don't you hate them?

Control freak?

[Chewie1]

So,etimes its a good tactic

[swimmerdude99]

Don't you hate them?

If NONE of their territories are 1s and they have 6+ territories then yes.

[rhp 1]

I guess the point can be made for your argument.. However, it does get a bit tiresome when people believe there is only one legit way to play a map on particular settings/map/# of players/etc.. that said, in the games that I assume you're talking about, yea.. I dislike them slightly.. and Swimmy's assessment is pretty much an accurate guideline...

[Timminz]

I hit 2's and 3's on principle.

[ManBungalow]

I think of leaving 2s/3s all over the board like anti-carpet bombing.

Cover the map with an inch deep layer of your troops and make a lot of noise.

But when a carpet and an anti-carpet collide, they annihilate and form a high-energy annoyed particle/CC user.

Hell, I've been known to do this even when I'm winning the game. And when it's not an escalating game.



Hey, maybe only AoG will actually understand the reference in the image. And even then, it's not funny.

[Metsfanmax]

Is this about ratings or number of troops on territories?

Does it matter?

[rhp 1]

Is this about ratings or number of troops on territories?

Does it matter?

depends.. most top players in esc game subscribe to the theory of leaving 1's and building stacks... this makes it easy for everyone to card and go for a kill and a run.. basically comes down to timing, luck, cards and being able to see multiple kills to run a board... perfectly legit strat, used by many...

[maxfaraday]

Yes.

[tzor]

Don't you hate them?

No, but it depends on what part of the game we are in. In the early part of the game I'm looking for "easy pickings" when you are only getting 3 troops a turn, a X on 1 is so much easier than an X on 2 to get that extra territory and card without loosing troops in the process. So I prefer 1's and look on those who have 2's and 3's as "wise" ... at least at that stage of the game.

I haven't done the math in the case of the large troop invasion. I suspect that it's a wash and not worth the bother.

But it's not worth hate over. I reserve that for the dice.

[Dukasaur]

Sometimes they're just being stupid, but other times there are legitimate strategic reasons for it.

[72o]

Most of the time they're just being stupid. I'm having an argument with one such logic-denier right now. He claims that "this is war" and "why should he help others", which is dumb. He claims my strategy is not smart and is too luck-dependent.

I mapranked he and I on 6,7, and 8 player escalating games. He is -156. I am +2466.

[Metsfanmax]

Most of the time they're just being stupid. I'm having an argument with one such logic-denier right now. He claims that "this is war" and "why should he help others", which is dumb. He claims my strategy is not smart and is too luck-dependent.

I mapranked he and I on 6,7, and 8 player escalating games. He is -156. I am +2466.

I too agree that engaging in an argument with someone who you feel is stupid is a productive use of time.