The Official Arms Race! Strategy Guide.

[mibi]

=DIPLOMACY HAS FAILED...

No time to mince words, world orders must be destroyed.



The games works like this: Two opposing sides can only meet through the exchange of thermonuclear weapons.

When you first start, identify which country you are strongest in. If you have an equal number of armies on each, identify your strongest position.

If you are close to a president or launch code, take it, but don't be so weak that your opponent can sweep in and take it back.

You can certainly attempt to take out your opponent the old fashioned by maintaining armies in their country and trying to get bonuses to take them out from within. It is possible to win this way.

But to ensure success, eliminate your opponent from your country. This will force them to engage in an arms race, working their way up the missile. If you still have armies in their country, you can wreak havoc from within. If you have been expelled from their country, you must work your way up the missile. Make sure you have +2 bonuses AND have access to a spy. The spies will be your only lifeline in the event of a nuclear strike.

The spies can bombard the foreign president and launch code preventing a nuclear strike. This is your last resort, if you fail to avert a strike, its over. There have been no reports of a player surviving a nuclear strike. Also, spies can take out the scientists, which are often left unguarded. Keep this in mind. In fog-of-war games the spies are valuable in that they can see the president and launch code and gauge the likelihood of a nuclear attack.

Do not leave any armies on the nuclear launch territory, they reset to 15 neutrals at the start of the turn. Its use it or lose it once the button has been pressed.

Good luck, and post your strategies here.

[icedagger]

My favourite map at the moment.. can't disagree with anything you said.

Up for a 1v1 mibi?

[Incandenza]

There have been no reports of a player surviving a nuclear strike.

Game 2529119

Granted, it helped that he didn't really know what to do with his nuclear windfall, but still...

The sad thing is that after getting off to an unholy start (something like 30-2), I've lost 7 of my last 10 (and my points windfall along with it).

People are starting to get better at the map, and my dice are getting worse.

But the map is still one of the top 5 on the site.

[mibi]

There have been no reports of a player surviving a nuclear strike.

Game 2529119

Granted, it helped that he didn't really know what to do with his nuclear windfall, but still...

The sad thing is that after getting off to an unholy start (something like 30-2), I've lost 7 of my last 10 (and my points windfall along with it).

People are starting to get better at the map, and my dice are getting worse.

But the map is still one of the top 5 on the site.

yeah ive been losing alot too, especially in large standard games where one person can really screw the pooch for everyone else.

[Incandenza]

Was that a dig at me or hulmey?

[happy2seeyou]

I should have read this thread before playing with the devil....

[gdeangel]

Well, the new arm's race map has been getting quite a bit of buzz and is quite the rage. So after reading this thread, I decided to try it out. Two games and 70 +/- points later, I'm letting you have the real scoop. This map is an "equalizer" map. It is all dice and very little skill. It is great if you can average out against other players over many games, but if you play 1v1 pick up games, be prepared to take a beating.

At the start, you are looking at lots of neutrals and 3 attack units. Even if you draw first move, two 0-2 rolls, and you will have basically screwed the pooch. On the other hand, while the opponent is also playing with only 3 attack units to spread around, if you have a real gambler across the board who decides to roll a few 2-2 neutrals, and gets lucky with the dice, you've also got no coming back.

We know that, at least in theory, lucky streaks come in small doses. Bad and good. In large attacks, you should more or less get predictable outcomes. That's why maps like Age or Realms or Feudal work so well for the strategist who understands them - because you can build up to large enough dice to get out of cc's "streaky dice land" most of the time. But in this map, you start with a pittance and the opponent right up in your face. And all of 2-3 territories of rear guard in reserve, maybe, if you were lucky enough to get a balance drop. Mathematically, it is a map for gambling on the outliers. There is no way to build up force and get out of "streaky dice land" before you face the enemy. So this means everything will be riding on the first 1-2 turns of the "luck" wheel. If you don't fare to well in this short term phase, you will be shut out from attacks on your opponent, forced to bombard select targets with no way to reach many of the "continents" your opponent will have occupied. You might even have such a well thought out drop that you have nothing on one side of the map when you take your first move. But, and here's the real rub, even if you can somehow manage to bomb out every possible target of your enemy that is available, your enemy will still have enough "insulated" bonusable positions to run you out of the arms race. And what is the reward for the "arms race"... well, the 50 unit bonus is really nothing more than a free pass out of "streaky dice land" into the law of large numbers, where whoever gets there first will always win by attacking. 14 nuetrals between your oppoenent and Launch Imenent might seem like a lot, but when it's possible to hold 15+/- bonus in unassailable positions, the end will come faster than it looks.

So take my advice... if your thinking of trying this map 1v1, don't do it. This map might be ready for 4-6-8 players, but it needs serious rethinking for 1v1. You've got a much better chance of prevailing with a superior strategy playing Doodle.

[nagerous]

Are you serious? I think theres a lot of strategy on this map, depending on your drop. Theres a whole host of strategies to try out on it, like knowing when to bombard, build your nuke, take bunkers whilst still remembering to keep alive in the other man's country. Saying it has less strategy than doodle is just dumb.

[BENJIKAT IS DEAD]

There is obviously a lot more strategy than doodle - that was a ridiculous comment, but I DO agree with the fact that it is very dependent on early rolls - f I lose 3 of my first 4 rolls (i.e. my first 2 turns), and you win 3 out of those 4, then the vast majority of the time I am screwed (assuming both players roughly know what they are doing).

On Waterloo, I have lost 12 of my first 14 rolls before and still been able to claw my way back into the game in a way that this map doesn't allow.

[gdeangel]

I stand by my comment.

In doodle, the bonuses are small enough, and the drops unpredictable enough, that there is room to catch up by adapting your strategy. On this map, there are too many single territory continents, inevitably some of which will be blocked by neutrals and/or unassailable if you are unlucky enough to have a drop with 1-2 guys one a side and get knocked out on your first move.

These shortcoming could have been mitigated by better rules for the drop, different bombardment paths, and tweaking the bonus structure and neutral counts, but clearly the designers were oblivious to what makes good play on 1v1. If you don't believe me, look at the map-maker's history and see how the games are shaking out... losses to players 5 ranks below him... its just random and entirely dice dependent. So is doodle, but you at least have chances to claw back there.

[gdeangel]

Are you serious? I think theres a lot of strategy on this map, depending on your drop. Theres a whole host of strategies to try out on it, like knowing when to bombard, build your nuke, take bunkers whilst still remembering to keep alive in the other man's country. Saying it has less strategy than doodle is just dumb.

Um, it looks like all your games have been speed freestyle games...

[nagerous]

Are you serious? I think theres a lot of strategy on this map, depending on your drop. Theres a whole host of strategies to try out on it, like knowing when to bombard, build your nuke, take bunkers whilst still remembering to keep alive in the other man's country. Saying it has less strategy than doodle is just dumb.

Um, it looks like all your games have been speed freestyle games...

Think again, I've played doubles and quads on it too.

[gdeangel]

Are you serious? I think theres a lot of strategy on this map, depending on your drop. Theres a whole host of strategies to try out on it, like knowing when to bombard, build your nuke, take bunkers whilst still remembering to keep alive in the other man's country. Saying it has less strategy than doodle is just dumb.

Um, it looks like all your games have been speed freestyle games...

Think again, I've played doubles and quads on it too.

Like I said, Arms Race might work for 4-6-8 type games, but the comments I made above are strictly a 1v1 matter. Obviously I wasn't talking about 8 player quads on doodle!

[mibi]

I stand by my comment.

In doodle, the bonuses are small enough, and the drops unpredictable enough, that there is room to catch up by adapting your strategy. On this map, there are too many single territory continents, inevitably some of which will be blocked by neutrals and/or unassailable if you are unlucky enough to have a drop with 1-2 guys one a side and get knocked out on your first move.

These shortcoming could have been mitigated by better rules for the drop, different bombardment paths, and tweaking the bonus structure and neutral counts, but clearly the designers were oblivious to what makes good play on 1v1. If you don't believe me, look at the map-maker's history and see how the games are shaking out... losses to players 5 ranks below him... its just random and entirely dice dependent. So is doodle, but you at least have chances to claw back there.

lol,

you seem to be the expert having only played two games and beaten both times. sounds a bit like sour grapes. I have also played 5 1v1 games and one 3 of them. Its a small map and as with all small maps, if you get bad dice early there is less of a chance to comeback. Comparing it waterloo is absurd.

It plays just fine in 1v1 and it is quite obvious from your two losses that you haven't quite got a hang of it yet. I would be more than happy to mentor you in a few 1v1 games if you need some help.

[Visaoni]

There have been no reports of a player surviving a nuclear strike.

Game 2529119

Granted, it helped that he didn't really know what to do with his nuclear windfall, but still...

The sad thing is that after getting off to an unholy start (something like 30-2), I've lost 7 of my last 10 (and my points windfall along with it).

People are starting to get better at the map, and my dice are getting worse.

But the map is still one of the top 5 on the site.

It figures that if anybody could survive a nuke it would be you Incan. Have I ever told you before that you kind of remind me of a cockroach?

[gdeangel]

I stand by my comment.

In doodle, the bonuses are small enough, and the drops unpredictable enough, that there is room to catch up by adapting your strategy. On this map, there are too many single territory continents, inevitably some of which will be blocked by neutrals and/or unassailable if you are unlucky enough to have a drop with 1-2 guys one a side and get knocked out on your first move.

These shortcoming could have been mitigated by better rules for the drop, different bombardment paths, and tweaking the bonus structure and neutral counts, but clearly the designers were oblivious to what makes good play on 1v1. If you don't believe me, look at the map-maker's history and see how the games are shaking out... losses to players 5 ranks below him... its just random and entirely dice dependent. So is doodle, but you at least have chances to claw back there.

lol,

you seem to be the expert having only played two games and beaten both times. sounds a bit like sour grapes. I have also played 5 1v1 games and one 3 of them. Its a small map and as with all small maps, if you get bad dice early there is less of a chance to comeback. Comparing it waterloo is absurd.

It plays just fine in 1v1 and it is quite obvious from your two losses that you haven't quite got a hang of it yet. I would be more than happy to mentor you in a few 1v1 games if you need some help.

Too bad you don't understand what makes a good 1v1 game, or you could have set up your map a lot better ... big, small, if it's 99% luck, you might as well go to the craps table.

Since you obviously don't get it, let me help you out: staring units should be on oposite side of a country at least. Making all the bonuses neutral was a good start, but you've got to make them cumulative so that the downside is not linear, and so that bonus can be broken from a single position (remember, you've only given us very few armies to start with... ). You've got to put the infected neutrals to good use... Missle Lanuch is absolutely irrelevant given the size of the bonus you've got... infected neutrals on the president/premier & the launch code would be much better... or better yet, infected neutrals up the whole missle, so that you have to mass troops and make the run up the missile in one go.

But now I'm off topic - all I'm saying is anyone who plays this 1v1 in its current form, prepare to find yourself standing at the craps table.

[mibi]

I stand by my comment.

In doodle, the bonuses are small enough, and the drops unpredictable enough, that there is room to catch up by adapting your strategy. On this map, there are too many single territory continents, inevitably some of which will be blocked by neutrals and/or unassailable if you are unlucky enough to have a drop with 1-2 guys one a side and get knocked out on your first move.

These shortcoming could have been mitigated by better rules for the drop, different bombardment paths, and tweaking the bonus structure and neutral counts, but clearly the designers were oblivious to what makes good play on 1v1. If you don't believe me, look at the map-maker's history and see how the games are shaking out... losses to players 5 ranks below him... its just random and entirely dice dependent. So is doodle, but you at least have chances to claw back there.

lol,

you seem to be the expert having only played two games and beaten both times. sounds a bit like sour grapes. I have also played 5 1v1 games and one 3 of them. Its a small map and as with all small maps, if you get bad dice early there is less of a chance to comeback. Comparing it waterloo is absurd.

It plays just fine in 1v1 and it is quite obvious from your two losses that you haven't quite got a hang of it yet. I would be more than happy to mentor you in a few 1v1 games if you need some help.

Too bad you don't understand what makes a good 1v1 game, or you could have set up your map a lot better ... big, small, if it's 99% luck, you might as well go to the craps table.

Since you obviously don't get it, let me help you out: staring units should be on oposite side of a country at least. Making all the bonuses neutral was a good start, but you've got to make them cumulative so that the downside is not linear, and so that bonus can be broken from a single position (remember, you've only given us very few armies to start with... ). You've got to put the infected neutrals to good use... Missle Lanuch is absolutely irrelevant given the size of the bonus you've got... infected neutrals on the president/premier & the launch code would be much better... or better yet, infected neutrals up the whole missle, so that you have to mass troops and make the run up the missile in one go.

But now I'm off topic - all I'm saying is anyone who plays this 1v1 in its current form, prepare to find yourself standing at the craps table.

BENJIKAT IS DEAD has won over 70% of his 35 arms race 1v1 games... he must be the luckiest player ever! nagerous has won 75% of his 8 arms race 1v1 games.... send him to the craps table! No wait, Incandenza has won over 80% of his 36 arms race 1v1, he should buy a lotto ticket! Holy shit! rabbiton has won over 85% of his 27 arms race 1v1 games! He could make a fortune in Las Vegas!

Seriously though, you have only played two games. Keep rolling the dice on this map and you are bound to be as lucky as these other generals and brigadiers.

[icedagger]

I've won 15 out of my last 18 arms race 1v1s.. there's clearly more to it than Doodle Earth

[Incandenza]

Sure, as on ANY map, if you're getting raped by the dice, your chances of wining go down. But if you don't have a good plan, you could get great dice and still lose (I can't tell you how many times I've seen people take the silos in the first few turns). Besides, the whole key to risk is putting yourself in a position where you can use good dice to maximum advantage.

One of the nice things about arms race, as compared to almost every other map, is that it's impossible to drop a bonus. Sure, there's good drops and bad drops, but at the very least I know that the other guy isn't going to start his turn with 2 or 3 extra deployment armies. This actually mitigates somewhat the first-mover advantage inherent in sequential 1v1s.

And in terms of win%, at one point I was over 90%, until merz and mustapha mond and a couple of stripers knocked me off my perch somewhat.... still, 80+ ain't too shabby, and mibi's roll call of other top arms race players expose the inherent flaw in gd's argument.

[gdeangel]

Yes - you hit the nail on the head... the problem with the map in 1v1 is that you have no opportunity to put yourself in any position whatsoever. If you don't roll well on your first move, you are screwed. An unanswered +2 on this map is fatal, and that's it. There is no positioning up front. There are not many options open to you at the start of the game, and while that works for some maps - again, I'm thinking of the castle based maps - it only works if because the drop rules and bonus rules ensure parity on a 1v1 and give opportunity to average out a few rolls before the blood starts flowing AND give you generous starting complement of troops to one roll doesn't completely set you back.

Would anyone play feudal if half the territories had blocking 10's and the other half did not? It might be "balanced" on paper, but it would severely detract from the game. And yes, I probably lost my first two games on feudal, but it was obvious from the game play that you would at some point get to a set of decisions, rather than random dice rolls, that would determine the outcome of the game.

There is no balancing out of the ability to position vis a vie fortifications until you crack some territories, and a starting 6-3 attack is the land of nod. This would be an obvious risk if you look at the game structure, and it could have been (dare I say should have been) planned for. It's a pity because there are a lot of things I like about this map.

Now I'll give you the fact that playing the map adjacent or foggy (which is what Benjikat is playing 1v1) or speed/freestyle (which I mentioned in response to nafrageous) might change the ability to maneuver into a strategic advantage, but that's just using settings as a crutch. Again, it's such a shame to see a ground breaking map like this not configured to minimize the "random" starts you get on this site (both drop and dice)!

[mibi]

as stated proeviously, the better plays have managed to "cope" with the "randomness" to win ratios over 70%.

[AAFitz]

yeah.... umm I just played a dubs with mibi...

we had eliminated the other team from our territory... and we still each had territories in theirs.. but he attacked two of my guys and a neutral instead of keeping our presence there for an extra one deployment... then the other team of course was getting three times as many armies as us, and will of course beat us to the punch...

I of course saw this all along and warned every time.. but all along he assured all is fine, all is well.. i know what im doing...

You may want to view this as you take this advice...

[yeti_c]

yeah.... umm I just played a dubs with mibi...

we had eliminated the other team from our territory... and we still each had territories in theirs.. but he attacked two of my guys and a neutral instead of keeping our presence there for an extra one deployment... then the other team of course was getting three times as many armies as us, and will of course beat us to the punch...

I of course saw this all along and warned every time.. but all along he assured all is fine, all is well.. i know what im doing...

You may want to view this as you take this advice...

Nice work Mibi!!!

C.

[Incandenza]

So gd, if you're so convinced that the map is a glorified crapshoot, then why aren't you out there joining games with higher ranks, or challenging the top arms race players? After all, if it's 100% dice, then you're bound to win about half of the games, and that would be a nice little point profit for you.

[AAFitz]

2008-05-29 04:59:52 - AAFitz [team]: thanks for saving me... eye dropped this, and I didnt realize it in time
2008-05-29 17:50:54 - killerchris10: Good luck all
2008-05-30 16:17:15 - mibi: yes.... good luck... muhahaha
2008-05-31 14:48:41 - killerchris10: Somehow I think you enjoy this too much, green : )
2008-05-31 17:01:35 - mibi [team]: Fitz, im nunking these fools so I will be going through you.
2008-06-01 05:49:27 - AAFitz [team]: that last move gained nothing...blue will strip every one of them away
2008-06-02 13:02:32 - mibi [team]: i have no idea what they are doing, but we should have this wrapped up in a few.
2008-06-03 18:50:37 - AAFitz [team]: seriously... what the hell are you doing?
2008-06-03 18:51:57 - AAFitz [team]: seattle is the only way to kill them... your bonus is 6, and you killed two of mine, and a neutral...
2008-06-03 18:52:18 - AAFitz [team]: dont take this the wrong way... im seriously just perplexed
2008-06-04 06:46:30 - mibi [team]: lol
2008-06-04 06:46:52 - mibi [team]: its under control
2008-06-04 06:48:11 - mibi [team]: deploy and fortfy to my silo please
2008-06-04 19:30:06 - AAFitz [team]: umm its completely not under control.. personally i think you gave this away, but ill play along
2008-06-04 19:31:35 - AAFitz [team]: we had guys in the us and you let them die.. we could have attacked them straight out, and wore them down.. instead you atacked me and neutrals for no gain.. they will undoubtedly beat us to the punch...
2008-06-04 19:38:35 - Zemljanin: mibi, you've opened a tutorial thread for Battle for Iraq and disappeared
2008-06-04 19:38:53 - Zemljanin: There are questions...
2008-06-04 19:39:57 - mibi [team]: Fitz, we are in good hands. We are already way ahead of them.
2008-06-05 06:15:36 - mibi [team]: ok now i have to hold the pres andlaunch code which will be hard with both of those spies
2008-06-05 06:21:04 - mibi [team]: but blue has to make it all the way over to the launch code, or yellow over the the president, so they are split and have some ground to make up
2008-06-05 19:39:15 - AAFitz [team]: if you say so.. ill watch and certainly be impressed if this works..
2008-06-06 04:36:20 - mibi [team]: well horrible dice wont help...
2008-06-06 04:36:50 - mibi [team]: if you could deploy on moscow though, that would be great
2008-06-06 07:02:03 - AAFitz [team]: well, that was fun to watch... lol
2008-06-06 07:33:51 - mibi [team]: i said on moscow
2008-06-06 07:34:05 - mibi [team]: don't betray me comrad
2008-06-06 11:37:27 - mibi [team]: now to hold for a turn..... although they will spy attack me.... please deploy on which ever i have left, launch code or president.
2008-06-06 12:24:24 - mibi [team]: if you are left alive that is, blue may try to eliminate you conventionally.
2008-06-06 20:32:40 - AAFitz [team]: i dont care what you said... you ignored me all game, and we have no chance...
2008-06-06 20:34:04 - AAFitz [team]: we had them, and you gave it away in my opinion...
2008-06-07 11:03:15 - killerchris10: Good game red
2008-06-08 06:34:47 - mibi: nice move blue
2008-06-08 19:32:21 - killerchris10: Thanks
2008-06-09 13:11:48 - killerchris10: Good game green

yeah... good advice here...

this isnt as serious as it may seem... but I did want to call him out on this one.. Its fairly clear why