British VC, Gren and Early TP play
British VC, Gren and Early TP play
I've been getting back into the game (I'm a sergeant of about 40% wr) and the last few games I've been playing (all 1v1) I seem to have been finding a reasonable amount of success (for me) by using an early TP British strategy. The basic idea is to build one manor (or two with extra wood maps), a TP asap (even if this means a little woodchopping, e.g. 25 wood) and then shipping 3vill, VC, 700w. From this point forward it depends if it is a water map or not, i.e. whether or not schooners is getting involved, but either way the intended "destination" is to ship improved grenades. This will then either lead to drawing the game out (I am somewhat better the longer games go on) or winning with a gren supported attack. If the game goes longer, grens build towards 150+ siege really quickly (it's 100 in colonial).
Basically, then, I was wondering whether or not there's some kernel of real viability here. It's helped I haven't really been pressured in the early colonial period... and to be honest in several of these games it seemed like the opponent was not doing things right (e.g. no land military but several frigates, not building vills constantly)... and the water boom (RE patch) has been slower than I remember/not as well executed as I used to do it (part of this was forgetting which decks I should be choosing/badly made ones, e.g. no rendering plant, but again 44% wins) so there's that. It should also be noted I am not an aggressively minded player, and I like to turtle with my 13 outposts (walls aren't my thing).
Basically, then, I was wondering whether or not there's some kernel of real viability here. It's helped I haven't really been pressured in the early colonial period... and to be honest in several of these games it seemed like the opponent was not doing things right (e.g. no land military but several frigates, not building vills constantly)... and the water boom (RE patch) has been slower than I remember/not as well executed as I used to do it (part of this was forgetting which decks I should be choosing/badly made ones, e.g. no rendering plant, but again 44% wins) so there's that. It should also be noted I am not an aggressively minded player, and I like to turtle with my 13 outposts (walls aren't my thing).
Re: British VC, Gren and Early TP play
Booming and making grenadiers seems to be one of the worst combinations. By booming you also leave your opponent free to do as he wishes (e.g. get a strong army) so when you finally attack with your grenadiers your opponent is much more likely to have an army to counter your grenadiers. Also, if you're going for both VC and schooners (and walls), you should probably skip 3 settlers.
Pay more attention to detail.
-
- Ninja
- Posts: 14364
- Joined: Mar 26, 2015
Re: British VC, Gren and Early TP play
First off - play how you have fun.
Now, generally brits only go for the early tp off 300w crate start and they build it firsts then chop the 35 for a manor. You might be able to get away with it on a 200w start if you quickly scout an 85+ wood treasure.
Now, generally you should make musks instead of greens. Better all around but and can defend against early cab raids. No reason you can't add grens later though I suppose.
Otherwise the 3v VC card order is pretty good.
Now, generally brits only go for the early tp off 300w crate start and they build it firsts then chop the 35 for a manor. You might be able to get away with it on a 200w start if you quickly scout an 85+ wood treasure.
Now, generally you should make musks instead of greens. Better all around but and can defend against early cab raids. No reason you can't add grens later though I suppose.
Otherwise the 3v VC card order is pretty good.
Re: British VC, Gren and Early TP play
As they say it is not best to build grenaders but if you find it fun do it and you can win games as you do so. I bet aizamk can beat any pr <30 by grenaders; so if you want to improve instead of sticking same boring builds play more carefully and think what you can optimize while playing. For example think how many wood VC saves; what are alternatives, and if it is avaible that game etc. You may try to hide your grenaders on the side of the map, and siege enemy TC when you have scouted what your enemy has; for your strategy you may lure enemy army by raiding with hussars; and then sieging with grens.
Re: British VC, Gren and Early TP play
Water + VC seems very bad for me, because you can't invest wood on both or that means you won't be able to build army before long. Indeed in water map sometimes you can afford it when your opponent invest on water aswell, but anyway you are very likely to loose either land or water if your opponent plays well.
Then as the other said, gre is generally not a very good unit, especially in this situation. Moreover, think that you will probably need anti-cav with them, so a rax. It means that compared to lb+anticav you will pay for a fundry which means 300w=3 selters +36w with your VC.
Then as the other said, gre is generally not a very good unit, especially in this situation. Moreover, think that you will probably need anti-cav with them, so a rax. It means that compared to lb+anticav you will pay for a fundry which means 300w=3 selters +36w with your VC.
Re: British VC, Gren and Early TP play
If you can't prevent your opponent from aging up, grenades become useless then. So VC boom+grenade is a bad combination.
Grenades are useful in age 2. But skirm/falconet kill them easily.
Grenades are useful in age 2. But skirm/falconet kill them easily.
Re: British VC, Gren and Early TP play
grenades, bestierieorieosjtiorios, skins, gons, curr, mosk, yabosame, tamagochi
GRENADIERS, BESTEIROS
GRENADIERS, BESTEIROS
Re: British VC, Gren and Early TP play
fei123456 wrote:If you can't prevent your opponent from aging up, grenades become useless then. So VC boom+grenade is a bad combination.
Grenades are useful in age 2. But skirm/falconet kill them easily.
They really don't.
I feel like people missed the bit where I mentioned turtling. I'm not trying to use grens alone or trying to attack with a great timing. I'm more interested in, and actually able to, executing a sort of plan where a failed enemy attack becomes their destruction as grenadiers with improved grenades cut through all buildings as though they're butter (even forts). Grens would need substantially better unit attack or even greater resistance to work as anti-unit military or armies of nothing but strelets. They're for buildings, and that's how I use them.
I have tried to fight Industrial in colonial, though, and that's a lot harder. But fortress? Manageable. Outposts in sufficient quantity and good spacing require the artillery to attack the outposts, which allows a long bow mass with hussars to engage. The trouble is when you have to deal with problem units like urumi, cuirassier etc.
However, bearing in mind the original purpose of the thread, it seems the reason it often does not work has at least much to do with being a poor idea as it does my limited skills.
Re: British VC, Gren and Early TP play
The thing is, the grenadier undertaking is pretty costly — they require effectively at least two cards in a crucial stage of the game, they're produced from expensive artillery foundries, and it's not like you can realistically lay down another one of these to enhance their production. Moreover, defeating enemy army is simply more essential to winning the match altogether, buildings don't pose such a threat regardless. Grenadiers are very situational in terms of battling other land troops, they're pretty much only effective against heavy infantry, which is not even present in the Fortress Age.
Re: British VC, Gren and Early TP play
I think the real problem is that grens just aren't good units, generally speaking.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 24 guests