The last 4



That is why I left it out - it's too variable and it could be misunderstood and actually make things harder for a noob. But you're right, on the smaller maps and with fewer players it tends to be a good idea to hold back a couple of hundred points.

IMO one of the biggest mistakes that one can make in a team game on multiplayer..

Failure to communicate and co-ordinate.

Hm I find it ironic how I break half of those and win, but then I do have a rather uncommon operational concept.

_________________

We need more missilez code for the missilez god.
Praslovan:
"Tactical Ikalugin inbound on this position in 10... 9..."

Applies to any team multiplayer game i guess.

_________________

For what reason?

as things in groups of two use cover more effectivly than a group of 4

Because you're giving the enemy a chance to one-click target your four tanks, you're never hitting the enemy's side armour and you are always one big target for artillery--plus one very juicy flank.

If you have 16-20 units of the same type (BMP 1P) it matters not.

_________________

We need more missilez code for the missilez god.
Praslovan:
"Tactical Ikalugin inbound on this position in 10... 9..."

nice work.

the only thing I wanna say is , I think noobs should try rush. In our culture, we value Active Attack and disvalue Squatee. It may be nooby rush at the beginning, but, people will learn and when they grow up, they will know that, for the good players, the one who knows rush is the winner and the champion.

Nice attempt at justification, but I don't thing any general would approve anyone sending in infantry and their transports in the open to die in the hope that a few will reach their destination.

At least, tha's not how it's supposed to work.

_________________
"Rocks are OP. Paper is fine" signed: Scissors

My Youtube Channel