Quote:
Originally Posted by lokken
From watching Ascendancy's military operation, changing up tactics, deliberately ****ing over prelaunch attackers and using nailed on trusted people for attacks that really mattered pretty much made spying a pretty futile activity.
One because you couldn't possibly work out where the **** our attacks were going to turn up and two because when well executed, it's planetarion play to a standard where your spies don't mean shit.
|
Agreed with the "****ing over PL attackers" bit, but most of the time I personally did that was either due to leaks or when waves had already started to appear.
The "using trusted attackers" bit I hope all competent alliances use for major attacks (although I can see why lots can't trust enough members to use it)
The "you couldn't possible work out where the **** our attacks were going to turn up" bit makes no sense though as a relay of the attack channel (ohshitiforgotthename) would tell you exactly that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by lokken
Add on the fact that if you are up against competent BC's that are pretty much totally against crashing and use scans to calc a worst case scenario what is a prelaunched defence going to achieve if it even happens after that? Not much beyond a recall and a longer recall ETA for the defenders, which runs the risk of you being on the back foot later on.
|
The slight edge that PL def provides in wars can't be seen in most wars (eg. Apprime v Eurph) but can be the "straw that broke the snowman's back" in many cases where it is a very close call.
Quote:
Originally Posted by lokken
I am sorry to bore people with the idea of "play solid
planetarion" but I feel it needed to be said!
|
Far easier said than done. Whilst in theory it is easy to play "solid planetarion", in practice it isn't as easy. Since you know what I'm talking about; it's similar to applying the "reasonable man" test. Not too difficult to theorise but hard to apply.