Tactics In Rebellion

[Lebarronn90]

Like To See Where People Stand On This

[wormie]

If you are playing against another human player, you should set the guide lines before you start, so that each player gets the maximum amount of enjoyment while playing. Now if you are playing against the computer and you want to turn every Imperial planet to space dust than do so

[Trejiuvanat]

You should agree first when playing against a human, against the idea you can do whatever you want. I'm against suncrushing, basically because it destroys valuable resources I'll use later.

I tend to conquer everything before killing the enemy.

[AndyHalfelf]

You should agree first when playing against a human, against the idea you can do whatever you want. I'm against suncrushing, basically because it destroys valuable resources I'll use later.

I tend to conquer everything before killing the enemy.

 

 

That is exactly my point of view too, why destroy valuable resources when you can need them later?

[Trejiuvanat]

That's why I hardly use Death Star's to destroy planets...

[Jahled]

Invading and then scrapping is a crap tactic. I dread to think what nonsense goes on in multiplayer games. Call me a sad git, but isn't main reason why we keep playing this game because we get to build massive fleets, name each ship, assign characters commands, etc? What fun can there be if your game consists of your opponent, who has the tempory upper hand, goes around desolating everything? Yawn! I'd quit the game quicker than my cat senses me opening a tin of his food; we enjoy Rebellion because it allows us to be part of something epic! Not some sad conquer and deleate kind of crap!

 

Now i'm curious, who out there has got a genuine game story of a truely long-lasted multiplayer game....kind of thing....

[Trejiuvanat]

Well said, Jahled...

[Lebarronn90]

To me assault and scrap is simply attacking your enemy. It accomplishes so much. You get the refined materials and I always need them because I pour so much into defences, you capture enemy characters, and you reduce your opponents maintenence points to me thats the most important part of the game. keep them on the defensive don't let the enemy breathe for if you do he'll be breathing down your neck.

 

as far as suncrushing goes i think since apparently it is a game flaw it should not be used. there are other game flaws granted such as espionage abort and i am fine with that but suncrushing was never meant to happen. Only a death star can destroy a planet making it basically unlivable and even those are more trouble than they are worth but thats a different topic altogether

[BoShek]

To me it is simple: When you play against an opponent you use every trick in the book as long as you didn´t agree on any limitations.

 

This won´t necessarily lead to a nice game, but a very competitive one.

 

If you want something else try to find an agreement before the game.

 

Assault and scrap may be a tactic that destroys the flair of the game but I feel it has a much overlooked advantage: it sure speeds up the game. The one game I played so far (against Lebarronn90) was decided after a mere 3 hours. (of very hectic gaming)

 

I´m looking forward to having a long, slow, epic game one time but I know it´ll be hard to find the time.

 

Now: Who´ll explain the term "suncrushing" to me?

[Lebarronn90]

Hey Boshek,

 

Ok here goes this is suncrushing:

 

by using general bombardment, not military targets and not civilian targets but GENERAL bombardment you destroy energy and raw materials. making it impossible to build ANYTHING on that planet again no mines no refineries no shields no nothing. It also does not take much to achieve 2 escort carriers with fighters that have decent bombardment (for the rebels its the y wing for the imps its the tie bomber) and an admiral on board in maybe 5 shots probably less you now have a planet that still exists you can put people and troops on it but you can build nothing on that palanet ever again unless by some miracle new energy sources are found which is a rare occurence. it is some type of game flaw that was never meant to be there and some people feel its not right to use it I tend to agree. Sun crushing is also know as Total Warfare, scorched earth and energy killing.

[AceRogue1]

do we know for sure that suncrushing is a bug in the game, cuz i doubt it is, it seems a fine tactic to me

itll force the person gettign suncrushed to do something, rather than just sitting on their arse whil they amass a huge fleet

simple solution is to build shields i guess, unless its a massive armada that can take down at least 2 Gencore 2s

put in laser batteries might persuade them NOT to bombard, but it depends on the player

o and i use suncrushing in game, when the whole sector is against me, but i dont want to take over the sector just yet

[Guest Scathane]

it is some type of game flaw that was never meant to be there

How on Earth do you know that?

 

P.S. - I'm for using every trick in the book.

[Bill]

Do what you have to do, when you have the chance, blow the heck out of them.

[BoShek]

Hey Boshek,

 

Ok here goes this is suncrushing:

 

by using general bombardment, not military targets and not civilian targets but GENERAL bombardment you destroy energy and raw materials. making it impossible to build ANYTHING on that planet again no mines no refineries no shields no nothing. It also does not take much to achieve 2 escort carriers with fighters that have decent bombardment (for the rebels its the y wing for the imps its the tie bomber) and an admiral on board in maybe 5 shots probably less you now have a planet that still exists you can put people and troops on it but you can build nothing on that palanet ever again unless by some miracle new energy sources are found which is a rare occurence. it is some type of game flaw that was never meant to be there and some people feel its not right to use it I tend to agree. Sun crushing is also know as Total Warfare, scorched earth and energy killing.

 

Aha, so I take it, suncrushing is different from "assault and scrap" only in terms of desructivity (desctructiveness ? destructtonomy ?? aw,heck ). So the question basically is: What kind of game do you want?

 

I guess there´s no use complaining if you didn´t agree to limit certain tactics.

[Lebarronn90]

You know maybe I am wrong and it is not a flaw in the game. I was saying that because there is no mention of it in the manual. In there it simply said general bombardment was just that general bombardment. Someone here told me it was a flaw but I don't remember who and since it was not told in the manual I assumed that person was right. I used to utilize it always figuring a planet that cannot be rebuilt on is one less I have to worry about but I used to get put down so bad by my opponents on the zone like I had committed a crime, and some of those people could get downright nasty. I guess war is war anything goes but I am now curious. Did lucasarts put it in there on purpose(ability to destroy energy) but decide not to say anything in the manual or is it indeed a game flaw hmmmmmmmmm

[dude21]

our first network game was such agame where everyone just bombard the enemy into hell and at the end we both had just one sector remaining

That was an intresting game but at the end ther was no fun than other games where we used rules.

Everyone can do what he wants but I prefer the ruled game with no civilian bombardment, no invade and scrap, no destroy with the DS.

Just sabotage civillian Targets is alowed and thats enough because a good team destroyes a whole system in 100 days

[masterjojobinks]

there are other game flaws granted such as espionage abort and i am fine with that

 

I am currious, what espoionage abort has to do with anything I am unaware of any bug with this. Please enlighten me

[Ragnar]

I'm not sure what he means, but in our games Lebaron does have a tendancy to spy on my empty (completely scrapped) planets. The trick is that since there's nothing there, the chance of success is very high. You can even operate from orbit since there's no saboteurs near.

 

Do this, say, 30 times in 30 days and you get a pretty good picture of what your opponent is up to by those additional information reports. It's not very accurate, but you can get very usefull information in this way and more importantly, your opponent has no way of knowing you have this information.

 

He could mean something else, but I think that's it.