Jump to content
Server Maintenance - January 18, 6:00 CET (5:00 UTC) Read more... ×
Server Maintenance - January 18, 6:00 CET (5:00 UTC) Read more... ×
Arwiden

Two point tactics on EU server

30 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Players
13 posts
I am a player from the CIS server, played more than 60+ fights on the euro server (10 tier - zao, Monata, etc) and noticed a strong difference between our servers.
 
1. At the beginning of the battle, players choose two points and completely leave one of the directions
"B and C pls"
VlKoPLK.png
BTpVXp3.png
vWkLhYf.png
 
2. Mostly, players do not retreat and do not change the flank.
In a winning battle with a reserve on points, players do not retreat, thereby giving a chance to win the enemy team.
 
for example, here the green team lost, because it did not guess to start a retreat in order to take the attacking players to the fire bag.
wqoQcjA.png
Bad picture quality
 
3. Often, players gather in a small space and shoot diagonally.
SrSQzKB.png
 
0TjtQsx.png
 
 
Or meet nose to nose in one direction.
 
SJNxM5L.png
 
On the CIS server we play differently, we evenly distribute the players between the directions and we try to cover the directions at any cost.
 
You will almost never see Yamato, who alone will go to the point in the middle of a fight, only if without a point capture there will be a loss.
And even more rarely, you will see three Yamato who travel to point A on Hot Spot.
I will say more, I have never seen such a thing on a CIS server.
 
I do not write this in order to somehow insult the European players, I just wonder the reason for this tactic.
Why do players refuse to protect one of the directions?
 
p.s. apologize for bad english.
 
p.p.s.for moderators | If possible, move the topic to the correct section, I do not have rights for this.
and give me rights to answer :)
I do not have 50 fights on this account.
  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[CATS]
Players
14,634 posts
10,869 battles

Defeat enemy in detail --> defeat enemy in battle.

By focussing forces you get local superiority in forces. Basic tactic since tactics were invented. Does not work well on all maps (not split maps for example), but works on most maps with random teams.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[OP]
Beta Tester
294 posts
2,766 battles

Interesting that you see a difference. I have been playing on NA for a couple of years and on EU for 7 months now. 

I noticed that EU has a better understanding of the game than the people on NA, but I linked that to the American culture. I think most play the game to enjoy the ships (cinematic?), where EU is more competitive driven.

 

Your observation I don’t know. Distributing evenly doesn’t really make sense, because it takes time. You just go to the outside cap with the biggest force. The small forces scout the other caps and try to take the cap or delay the enemy push.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[ADRIA]
Players
4,180 posts
6,766 battles
1 hour ago, Arwiden said:

2. Mostly, players do not retreat and do not change the flank.

:Smile_veryhappy::Smile_veryhappy::Smile_veryhappy:

 

Get to tier 10.

 

10 ships going down one flank. Bottom tier DD gets spotted. At least 10 of thsoe 10 ships run away across the map to the other flank

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
13 posts
1 hour ago, wilkatis_LV said:

:Smile_veryhappy::Smile_veryhappy::Smile_veryhappy:

 

Get to tier 10.

 

 

already, i have a press acc.

 

Quote

10 ships going down one flank. Bottom tier DD gets spotted. At least 10 of thsoe 10 ships run away across the map to the other flank

I told how to play on CIS server,  "Grow where you are planted" - so it was very unusual for me to see a completely different tactic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SSA]
Players
512 posts
16,228 battles
16 minutes ago, Arwiden said:

so it was very unusual for me to see a completely different tactic.

Tactics ? In randoms ? You must be new here.

Getting back to seriousness though, i don't think most ppl pay attention to the distribution towards the caps

but rather 1) follow where the mass ships that spawned closest move, leading to an increase in lemmingtrains.

or 2) just move towards their standart flank (with the specific spawn) on the map, which could be anywhere.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
72 posts
12,717 battles

Personally I prefer the tactic of focusing on 2 caps to bring concentrated firepower and quickly overwhelm the opposition on one side of the map. All going well this will mean that then you have a strong position to either defend or continue pushing as a group. 

 

In random battles where you cannot be sure of your teammates this can be extremely helpful. 

 

I would say that on the EU server we don't appear to be good at adapting to changing situations, it's very rare to see teams communicate a revised plan if things go wrong. Retreating is a bit all or nothing situation either suddenly all the team run away whilst not discussing it and usually end up trapped in a corner, or a team won't retreat at all. Instead preferring to go down whilst attempting to bow tank and do as much damage as possible. I'm not sure what the reason for that is, but I am curious to learn more about the tactics used on SEA 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
13 posts
9 hours ago, rnat said:

Tactics ? In randoms ? You must be new here.

Getting back to seriousness though, i don't think most ppl pay attention to the distribution towards the caps

but rather 1) follow where the mass ships that spawned closest move, leading to an increase in lemmingtrains.

or 2) just move towards their standart flank (with the specific spawn) on the map, which could be anywhere.

Spoiler

vWkLhYf.png&key=90a1202f01b68de4692eb65b

VlKoPLK.png&key=e17f481ad00bb07b54b12e03

This is only a part of examples, in reality - they try to discuss tactics in every battle.
The problem is that it is incorrect.
Playing two points is unprofitable, even if everything is done correctly. Because opponents can also play two points, but the other two.

 

As I said, on the CIS server, players try to keep all directions. The movement is not circular, but rather horizontal. If point A is lost, there will be a retreat toward B. If point C is captured, then there will also be a move toward B.

Why chase the enemy if you have two points and you just have to wait until the enemy arrives and then they can be met in a favorable position?

Who comes to the point, they kill him first.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
13 posts
8 hours ago, lovelacebeer said:

 

I would say that on the EU server we don't appear to be good at adapting to changing situations, it's very rare to see teams communicate a revised plan if things go wrong. 

I do not claim that everyone on the CIS server discusses tactics. We discuss it even less than you.
Maybe that's why we are not going to the ball, and act more independently.

 

In this case, the battles are more unpredictable than yours. This I can say with all responsibility.

And I like this gameplay more, because there is space for personal skill.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
13 posts
1 hour ago, Monalie said:

image.png.f8622776deb98fdce1a045140b5a49d5.png

 

You killed Flamuu:cap_cool:

This is a screenshot from his stream.

I wanted to compare his game with my own and noted that everything is the same there.

same lemming train

oPYe0TG.png

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[CATS]
Players
14,634 posts
10,869 battles
2 hours ago, Arwiden said:
  Hide contents

vWkLhYf.png&key=90a1202f01b68de4692eb65b

VlKoPLK.png&key=e17f481ad00bb07b54b12e03

This is only a part of examples, in reality - they try to discuss tactics in every battle.
The problem is that it is incorrect.
Playing two points is unprofitable, even if everything is done correctly. Because opponents can also play two points, but the other two.

It is the dominant strategy on most maps.

 

3v2 pronged attack:

  • 1/3 of your fleet have no targets and therefore cannot use their firepower
  • 2/3 of your fleet are outnumbered

Guess how this turns out... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
13 posts
47 minutes ago, ColonelPete said:

It is the dominant strategy on most maps.

 

3v2 pronged attack:

  • 1/3 of your fleet have no targets and therefore cannot use their firepower
  • 2/3 of your fleet are outnumbered

Guess how this turns out..

ynmLZp4.png

 

Here is the battle on our server.
At each point there is a grouping of ships, and wherever you start moving, you will be shot at the direct side of the ship.

each point covers the destroyer.

 

3HGNvGL.png

 

 

another fight

4yR1PT8.png

 

 

the red ones on point C would be happy to attack, but demoin shoots them at the side, and the battleships are waiting for them on top.

on the one hand, greens are in the minority, but trying to grab a point is too expensive.

bdhkDbR.png

 

as a result, greens win, because who goes ahead, he risks more.

there helped aviation plus I shot from the center.

 

jiCsxIO.png

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[CATS]
Players
14,634 posts
10,869 battles

As I said, it does not work well on split maps like Two Brother or Shatter.

 

And individual battles are individual battles. Success of tactics depend on playerskill. What works in one battle, fails completly in the next.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
13 posts
2 minutes ago, ColonelPete said:

As I said, it does not work well on split maps like Two Brother or Shatter.

 

And individuel battles are individuel battles. Success of tactics depend on playerskill. What works in one battle, fails completly in the next.

 

I have a lot of statistics from the CIS region.
We almost never go in one direction, or only on two points.

 

If there is an attack in one direction, it is met with crossfire.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[CATS]
Players
14,634 posts
10,869 battles

One direction is usually the wrong tactic, so no surprise.

Three directions spreads your forces too thin on most maps.

And on many maps one part of the map is isolated from the rest of the map and therefore cannot support other parts of your team or get support. Going there isolates your forces.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
13 posts
8 minutes ago, ColonelPete said:

One direction is usually the wrong tactic, so no surprise.

Three directions spreads your forces too thin on most maps.

And on many maps one part of the map is isolated from the rest of the map and therefore cannot support other parts of your team or get support. Going there isolates your forces.

RQlO8XP.png

 

Nevertheless, the euro server was constantly trying to play leaving point A or C

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[CATS]
Players
14,634 posts
10,869 battles
10 minutes ago, Arwiden said:

RQlO8XP.png

 

Nevertheless, the euro server was constantly trying to play leaving point A or C

Before the change, most of the ships spawned at A+B and it made sense to focus there.

Now spawns are more equal with a focus on C. This usually allows to focus on B+C.

Both caps can be easily covered, while A is a bit isolated. 

B+C can easily defend against a push from A.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[DAVY]
Players
301 posts
8,176 battles

One can always post pictures of battles and speculate as to the reasons why one side won. it doesn't necessarily reveal a tactical pattern. We would have to be in the very same battle to really see, what's going on. The smallest things can make a difference. Even a perfect tactical approach will fail, if the individual skills of its participants are significantly lower than that of their opponents.

In your example on Shatter, I immediately look at A and wonder what kept the red Roon and Shima from contesting A. C with it's big island in the center is often like an epicenter map, where both teams send a DD and contest it for an eternity, before one side gets the upper hand and pushes through the center line. There are CVs and that has a great influence on which DDs are spotted and taken out early, which again is a decisive advantage. I don't see any peculiarities in terms of an EU-server pattern. But then again I never played on the russian server.

 

That whole approach of focussing two caps out of three, is a basic rule of WoWs primary school. It is the attempt of the community to get a minimum of strategic thinking into the thick skulls of many new players. It keeps them from yoloing right at the start so it has it's merits. The next lesson is to not blindly focus two caps. That is when many players already drop out of school and just do the same tactical thing over and over, not even wondering, why it doesn't work. Too put it simple, the two out of three caps is just sticking to an old rule for unwillingness to reflect the current situation.

 

As @ColonelPetealready said, some maps (Two Brothers, Shatter, Strait, North(ern Lights), Estuary, ...) are better played not going to one side only. If your team only has one or two DDs, it is reasonable to focus your efforts on two caps. Even then you may find the ignored cap is completely abandoned even by the opposing team and easily grab it with a stealthy cruiser - Trap I am looking at you.

I get a bad feeling when I am in a team with 3 DDs or more and they still want to focus two caps. Generally though it depends on so many other factors. That Warrior's Path map just posted: You get crossfired at the middle cap. Still worth a try, if no radar cruisers are present. CVs focussing a certain area can invite DDs to go to another cap.

 

I personally would say, you should always make an effort to get as many caps as reasonably possible. That needs some thinking and adaption and we on the EU-server obviously are not smarter or dumber than anywhere else in the the world, so we struggle to get some sense into our teams.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
13 posts
5 minutes ago, ColonelPete said:

B+C can easily defend against a push from A.

 

I disagree with you. Point A will be captured, and all forces will be thrown on B. The team will turn around and return to B, on its side.

Point B will be blocked; if you try to capture it, you will be shot with crossfire.

 

8JoeIti.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[CATS]
Players
14,634 posts
10,869 battles

When the enemy will go ABC and your team goes BC, you will get BC.

You will get no crossfire at B from A. After capping you do not need to stay in B.

Your forces in C should be able to push the enemy from C, because of numerical superiority. That allows you to cover B from three sides (North, South, East).

Enemy forces at A will now push towards B, but are forced to bridge the gap between AB without cover.

Enemy forces pushed from BC are either badly beaten or have to retreat without cover.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SCRUB]
Players
7,294 posts
9,510 battles

Name of the game is the same: map control.

 

Might be EU players on average like to think of themselves as tacticians, but in the end it either comes down to establishing map control or more usually pushing through the caps needlessly into the enemy spawn and getting kited to death whereas the enemy just circles around and captures the flags behind their yoloing backs because the "kill all" mentality kicked into overdrive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
13 posts
19 minutes ago, HMS_Kilinowski said:

In your example on Shatter, I immediately look at A and wonder what kept the red Roon and Shima from contesting A

 

That's was me

m42Bu55.jpg

 

31 minutes ago, HMS_Kilinowski said:

. I don't see any peculiarities in terms of an EU-server pattern.

 

It is difficult to describe in words and show on screen.

 

There are differences, and quite significant.

for example, the green team on point C lost very quickly.

They did not take a position for protection, for some reason the battleship went to the point.

No one went to the 10th line, which had to be done immediately.

Both teams went on the attack and that's how it ended.

 

aklS1pu.png

 

Compare it with our server

The red team captured a point, but they were shot from a distance.

 

UkBrjUw.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[DAVY]
Players
301 posts
8,176 battles
40 minutes ago, Arwiden said:

 

That's was me

m42Bu55.jpg

 

And if that red Roon and Kurfürst had some skill, they should have sent your radar-Mino to the bottom. instead they probably shot that Ibuki and didn't land a single hit. Tactics or skill?

40 minutes ago, Arwiden said:

It is difficult to describe in words and show on screen.

 

There are differences, and quite significant.

for example, the green team on point C lost very quickly.

They did not take a position for protection, for some reason the battleship went to the point.

 

[...]

 

Compare it with our server

The red team captured a point, but they were shot from a distance.

Again, there is a thousand things that can make the difference. The Missouri overextends as he moves around the island and gets focussed and burned down. That Harugumo is just another player who has seen the shiny reviews and sits in smoke waiting for others to spot for him, so he can rain down fire. I speculate a lot, I can only see what is visible on the screenshots. These decisions, e.g. going on the 10-line, are not made by the team, random teams don't talk much. The decision is an individual one of the player suited for that role. In your example that decision rests with the Zao, he should go wide on C. He doesn't, when don't know his motives. Maybe there was a sound reason. An isolated Zao with hydro on 10-line in a game with a CV is very vulnerable and with 3-4 targets in range to burn down, I would not risk my Zao in that situation on the 10-line. The Missouri stays close to the cap for its radar. The FdG is a brawler and not very effective creating long range crossfire. That Massachusetts with his limited range is practically out of the game and risking torps from B.

 

There is so much going on here. You can attribute some of it to differences in mentality on different regional servers. That would be a sentiment, an impression. I would not go as far as saying it's a fact. Once someone has a theory he is looking for verification and it might blind his judgement. Just think of it as a group of individualists. Which player would have made which choice differently, had he been from another region?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×