Startegy Suggestion- People's War

People's War was a strategy developed by communist leader Mao Zedong that aimed to create local support from the local population. The strategy was used to attack the enemy's interior by exhausting them through guerilla and conventional warfare.

In atWar there should be a strategy called "People's War" which gives people more reinforcements, creates stronger marines, infantry, and militia, makes marines, militia, and infantry cheaper, and weakens their tanks, bombers, and destroyers. Historically the PLA had no tanks or conventional warfare until the KMT retreated cities. The PLA were untrained at using conventional warfare but were formidable for overwhelming numbers and devotion.

My theory of this "People's War" includes:

+2 attack +0 defense +3 range -30 cost Militia
+1 attack +0 defense -3 range -10 cost Infantry
+2 attack -1 defense -3 range -40 cost Marines
-3 attack -2 defense -3 range +30 cost Tanks
-1 attack -1 defense -3 range +20 cost Bombers
+1 attack +0 defense -3 range +0 cost Helicopters
-2 attack -1 defense -3 range +20 cost Fighters
-1 attack +0 defense -3 range +10 cost Destroyer
+1 attack +1 defense -3 range -20 cost Submarine

But the advantage is that you also receive more troops:

Cities 1-2 reinforcements +1 reinforce
Cities 3-4 reinforcements +2 reinforce
Cities 5-6 reinforcements +3 reinforce
Cities 7+ reinforcements +4 reinforce

The advantage to this is that you get better power behind your defense units and stealth (except fighters) and you get larger reinforcements each turn to create large armies. Plus some units cost less. The disadvantage is that your conventional warfare is weakened as well as your main attack. This would also be a huge blow to your airforce excluding helicopters. The benefits balance this out.

This will easily become the new PD without movement loss and cheaper Marines, needs to be more unique and not overshadow other Strats

This is possibly the most overpowered strategy I have ever seen

Support the strategy

But without the reinforcement thing would make it unbalanced.

Try comparing it with GW/MoS and you'll see what I am talking about... +2 attack to marines at 120 cost can go no way with more reinforcements.

PD is only for defense. No army can go very far on an MoS style alone due to army shortages that are needed to negate incoming forces without losing your whole stealth advantage. GW is a bit in-conventional don't you think? This strategy is NOT overpowered. It is very inconvenient to use normal attack units and you need a larger army to charge into battle with infantry and militia. The marines are designed like partisans using this strategy which makes it fair with the defence bonuses of the militia and infantry. Please support this strategy. "People's War" ftw

OP strat is OP

UNbeateable strategy

Napisano od Htin, 25.06.2015 at 18:06

UNbeateable strategy

rush turn 3

It's an interesting idea of local resistance to an occupying force though. What if there was a way that when someone took a country from you this strategy would allow you to still build militia in any remaining cities not taken yet by the enemy. So for them to take the whole country would be very hard because of the people's resistance.

Napisano od Diedra, 25.06.2015 at 12:59

Napisano od Diedra, 25.06.2015 at 03:37

+2 attack +1 defence -20 cost Militia
+1 attack +1 defence -20 cost Infantry
+2 attack -1 defence -40 cost Marines

You've made some good points, but let me give you a little reference about why this is overpowered.

Imperialist Infantries: 30 cost, 3 attack, 7 defense.
Perfect Defense Infantries: 50 cost, 4 attack, 9 defense in cities.
People's war infantries: 30 cost, 5 attack, 8 defense in cities.

You have:

Infantries at IMP cost, with attack comparable to LB, and defense almost equal to GC. This, to a strategy that is not even infantry-related.

I'll give you examples for the rest of the units when you reply to this one...

Valid points you have given. Let us see the other side of the coin.

Imperialist Tanks: 90 cost, 7 attack, 4 defense
Perfect Defense Tanks: 120 cost, 7 attack, 4 defense
People's war Tanks: 150 cost, 5 attack, 2 defense

Now we notice here that you can still use your main attack a.k.a tanks in the IMP and PD effectively but the People's war downgrades your main attack a.k.a tanks to WWII status which is very ineffective. True that the PW infantries are a little strong so I have revised my idea a little to better suit militia.

----

Napisano od Diedra, 25.06.2015 at 22:04

Valid points you have given. Let us see the other side of the coin.

Imperialist Tanks: 90 cost, 7 attack, 4 defense
Perfect Defense Tanks: 120 cost, 7 attack, 4 defense
People's war Tanks: 150 cost, 5 attack, 2 defense

Now we notice here that you can still use your main attack a.k.a tanks in the IMP and PD effectively but the People's war downgrades your main attack a.k.a tanks to WWII status which is very ineffective. True that the PW infantries are a little strong so I have revised my idea a little to better suit militia.

----

Why would you use some tanks when you get marines. They have same attack as RA tanks for the price of PD tanks. So it would be better in attack than PD. Even the infs are better in attack than PD + Cost same price as imp..

Good Idea but the execution of it is fucked up lol

No support we dont need another PD/GW strat

Napisano od Diedra, 25.06.2015 at 22:04

Valid points you have given. Let us see the other side of the coin.

Imperialist Tanks: 90 cost, 7 attack, 4 defense
Perfect Defense Tanks: 120 cost, 7 attack, 4 defense
People's war Tanks: 150 cost, 5 attack, 2 defense

Now we notice here that you can still use your main attack a.k.a tanks in the IMP and PD effectively but the People's war downgrades your main attack a.k.a tanks to WWII status which is very ineffective. True that the PW infantries are a little strong so I have revised my idea a little to better suit militia.

Why would you use Tanks when infantries are way more cost-efficient? 5 attack for 30 cost compared to 5 attack for 150 cost. Almost 3x the prize...

5 attack 30 cost unit is definitively not good ! You can exploit it pretty easy, for example, on Europe+.

I like the concept, but as everyone else said, too overpowered.

I can think of a way to make this strategy reasonably balanced while still capturing the feel of it.

How about a simple -40 cost to all units (free militia), with half range for all units except militia (3 range infantry, etc)?

That way you have an excellent static defense strategy that is horrible at anything but its speciality. I imagine India and other such high-reinforcement, low-income countries will be well suited for it.

Note how I said "reasonably balanced." I imagine that a few tweaks are still necessary to make my suggestion decent.

Would be too op, and would choke out GW. Would need several nerfs to be practical.

Napisano od Diedra, 25.06.2015 at 22:04

Valid points you have given. Let us see the other side of the coin.

Imperialist Tanks: 90 cost, 7 attack, 4 defense
Perfect Defense Tanks: 120 cost, 7 attack, 4 defense
People's war Tanks: 150 cost, 5 attack, 2 defense

With people's war units and extra reinforcements it would be too op. Your basically inclined to use infantry witch take no range defects and are essentially better than tanks, marines are overpowered and submarines in cost wise+ you could easily just spam out infantries. In game 2 infantry = over 1 tank in attack power, and 1 tank can kill 1 infantry with a bit of damage leftover, where as with your strategy, not only are you taking less costs but more reinforcements which means in games like ancient war, or world maps, you could easily beat any opponent with no effort as this strategy, which is not even truly matched against anything except RA tanks, and even then, no one in a balanced game will have the money to spam out tanks to beat Infantry better than PD infantry.

RA tanks : 90 cost, 9 attack, 5 defence
PW infantry: 30 cost, 5 attack, 8 defence in cities

^^^ this is the problem, where 1 PW infantry can kill a RA tank, and you can make 3 PW INfantries per RA Tank, + extra reinforcements.

It's a good idea. Basically make a unit that you can build in a city called a factory that costs -100 per turn to maintain which should give you more money. and give it a standard defense so that when attacked it dies.

Or maybe the strategy would basically enhance reinforcements by 10-50% (?) , while including some kind of nerf to a few units.
Could turn out to be a popular strategy for Europe games (and many others, possibly).

Should be extra effective against people using the imperialist strat.

Definitely OP, because all you have to do is spam militia. Which would cost 10 and have 5 Attack and 7 Defense.
No support until more balanced

Napisano od Diedra, 25.06.2015 at 03:37

People's War was a strategy developed by communist leader Mao Zedong that aimed to create local support from the local population. The strategy was used to attack the enemy's interior by exhausting them through guerilla and conventional warfare.

In atWar there should be a strategy called "People's War" which gives people more reinforcements, creates stronger marines, infantry, and militia, makes marines, militia, and infantry cheaper, and weakens their tanks, bombers, and destroyers. Historically the PLA had no tanks or conventional warfare until the KMT retreated cities. The PLA were untrained at using conventional warfare but were formidable for overwhelming numbers and devotion.

My theory of this "People's War" includes:

+2 attack +0 defense +3 range -30 cost Militia
+1 attack +0 defense -3 range -10 cost Infantry
+2 attack -1 defense -3 range -40 cost Marines
-3 attack -2 defense -3 range +30 cost Tanks
-1 attack -1 defense -3 range +20 cost Bombers
+1 attack +0 defense -3 range +0 cost Helicopters
-2 attack -1 defense -3 range +20 cost Fighters
-1 attack +0 defense -3 range +10 cost Destroyer
+1 attack +1 defense -3 range -20 cost Submarine

But the advantage is that you also receive more troops:

Cities 1-2 reinforcements +1 reinforce
Cities 3-4 reinforcements +2 reinforce
Cities 5-6 reinforcements +3 reinforce
Cities 7+ reinforcements +4 reinforce

The advantage to this is that you get better power behind your defense units and stealth (except fighters) and you get larger reinforcements each turn to create large armies. Plus some units cost less. The disadvantage is that your conventional warfare is weakened as well as your main attack. This would also be a huge blow to your airforce excluding helicopters. The benefits balance this out.

Range has been balanced out to make this strategy less overpowered. Militia now have 5 atk 5 def

----