Unread postby Psystorm » January 14th, 2009, 8:42 am
Well, yeah, that's pretty much how I play computer strategy games too (although I suck at playing another human). But in a tabletop wargame, where you both start with roughly equivalent forces and no more are coming, I prefer to dictate the flow of the battle by being able to concentrate my entire force to strike at a time and place of my choosing. Also, a lot of players are only used to their opponents either setting up a gunline or come charging straight at them, and when suddenly they have three or four pretty tough things come barrelling out of the woods to their flank at them it unnerves a lot of them. Of course, when you meet a player who's not only not unnerved by it, but has plans to counter it, it can get a little ugly, particularly since fast armies, especially shooty ones, usually don't have the numbers (apart from the horde versions) or the durability for a war of attrition, so you really need to hit one portion with everything you've got and try to roll them up along the flank. That or hit'n'fade, which, while risky, if it works can be extremely irritating for your opponent, as they've lost a decent portion of their forces for no significant losses from your force. Although even 'not significant' losses can really add up, as you've probably got no better than a third of their model count.
If you can manage it, it's all the better to also set up a firebase with some heavy artillery to reach out and touch someone, and use one to beat the enemy towards the other. Either they attack your arty and troops in hard cover, taking a pounding all the way and risking your mobile strike force coming up their butt, or they spend half the game chasing down your mobile force/s (it's sometimes more effective to split them) while your firebase is plinking away at them, one unit at a time. It's good if your firebase has some capability to redeploy too, both for new firelanes and to keep an enemy off them that vital extra turn for the cavalry (sometimes literally) to arrive.
Unfortunately, while that's the ideal, I can't seem to operate a split firebase/mobile force effectively yet - although I'm a lot better at it than I was. I seem to be best with an entirely mobile force, whether that means putting all the infantry in APC/IFVs/Chariots or just getting fast infantry that loses little effectiveness on the move, like Gun Mages or jump pack troops. I'm going to start my warmachine career with an as-mobile-as-I-can army - which, luckily, certain builds of Cygnar seem to be capable of doing - and then, slowly, begin to phase in 'static' units, until I can run anything from a purely mobile army to a purely static, blow-big-chunks-out-of-them-from-extreme-range force. I reckon learning the other extreme will make me a better player, even if I don't use those skills that often.
...That, and I want to try, just once, an army that could have the 1812 Overture as it's theme song, as opposed to my normal forces, which are a lot more 'Ride of the Valkyries'-esque. Who knows, I may even get to like it as much I do my current playstyle.
And I'm rambling, especially considering I've written this thing in between helping people with DVD players and computers. Heck, I probably contradicted myself three or four times up there, so I'm just going to post and be done with it. Need to get back to watching those Battlestar Galactica DVDs I got for Christmas and seen barely any of yet.
.
That man is officially the greatest human being who has ever lived. I couldn't get passed 100. 
