Is there any reason to take a weak country?

Except giving yourself a handicap?

Ive spectated a few dozen games and i see a pretty consistent pattern where people rush to choose india/china/germany/UK and other "tier one" nations.

I almost never see someone pick a small country like latvia, cambodia, ireland...

It doesn't seem like theres any reason to pick a weaker country? I mean, why start as bangladesh when you can start as india with 1k+ income from the start and dozens of infantry to take nearby cities? Actually i can't figure out why India is so powerful compared to the other countries that got broken up...

And i dont get eurasia games with less than 6 people...all that happens is two people take china/india, ally with each other, build up in peace while everyone else in europe are fighting each other, then wipe out the survivors with ease.

One time i joined a game room, the only two people there were india/china (week 2), and india was repeatedly telling china to only send the ally request when someone joins the game. Apparently he didnt realise a spectator had joined and could read everything he said...

If you are playing a world game with tons of players, picking a small country won't be so bad because you are given extra reinforcements to get you closer to the big countries, this means you will still be able to expand and will have large amount of cash.

but yeah, generally you will be safe picking countries with a fair amount of reinfrocements.

protip: india is useless, if you play it as gw you have 100 inf that are useless to you, and you will run out of money.
india can only really be played as imperialist, any other strategy and you will most likely run out of money and get your ass handed to you.

and yeah allyfagging is an issue in this game, i do think there should be penalties for it.

Kirjoittanut nonames, 18.05.2012 at 17:18

If you are playing a world game with tons of players, picking a small country won't be so bad because you are given extra reinforcements to get you closer to the big countries, this means you will still be able to expand and will have large amount of cash.

People wondered why I pick Jamaica in world games... This is the reason. (+ only paying 500 money for it is beast)

Ukraine is the obvious example though

With afterwind's compensation system for the reinforcements in each city, every country can be considered good if played well and under proper terms.

How does the reinforcement system work really? Last time i started i as a sweden, i didnt get much more reinforcements (if any) and the ones at start which i got weren't sufficient to help me take on a tier 1 country.

Also how does india run out of money? I just tried the tutorial, +878 gold at start? And you are within attacking distance of burma, pakistan and china. Ive seen some guy in the beginner room with india before, he allows infinite latejoining, starts as india, and conquers most of the world by spamming air transports and using his starting infantry to quickly conquer most of china and south east asia/middle east Anyone who is is silly enough to join cant keep up and dies within a month.

The one time i saw someone do well with a small country was in a very large game and he deliberately started in africa while everyone was in europe or asia. So he had a few months to build up without any threats at all..

It depends on how many troops the other players have. so if someone takes india, even players in germany or turey will gain extra reinforcements.

granted everyone still won't start on the same reinforcements, but countries with lower reinfrocements will have something to balance it out


also: your india scenario, he was alone, a compentent player in europe or asia would slow him down. it's also very easy to run out of cash if you are air transporting units around because of their huge upkeep, and he would of been losing money fast, while asia and europe would have tons of money and would be able to out spam him.

Afterwind dont have "Weak Countries" in a normal game.
A little country is an advantage in money, and extra in first spawn of trops.
Only the position makes bad a country, for example Belgium, Netherlands and Luxembourg, They are bad just for France, Germany and UK close, making it insecure.

Kirjoittanut raetahcodeupon, 19.05.2012 at 09:59

Afterwind dont have "Weak Countries" in a normal game.
A little country is an advantage in money, and extra in first spawn of trops.
Only the position makes bad a country, for example Belgium, Netherlands and Luxembourg, They are bad just for France, Germany and UK close, making it insecure.

... unless you start with 50k initial credit.

I would like to see someone beat india as bangladesh (assuming equal skills)

You get unit boosts and then you can expand better than others

You dont get the same amount of reinforcements that others have, nor do you have the economy to pay for those reinforcements...and the boost appears to be one time only.

Kirjoittanut Question, 20.05.2012 at 07:06

You dont get the same amount of reinforcements that others have, nor do you have the economy to pay for those reinforcements...and the boost appears to be one time only.

This "boost" is to get you started if you joined the game a little late. It's expected that with these extra 30 units or so, you'll get some decent countries so your income stays green.

Ireland is god tier.

You go straight for UK and then take the cities w/militia and send your army to france the germany while using militia to take the cities.

Kirjoittanut tophat, 18.05.2012 at 20:10

With afterwind's compensation system for the reinforcements in each city, every country can be considered good if played well and under proper terms.

Echoing TopHats specifically, and others, with added considerations:

1. If you're "poor" and on the periphery you're less likely to be targeted. You're perceived as less of an immediate threat, and the resources (time, lost-opportunity for SP, troops) that would need to be expended to get to you may not be deemed by your potential enemy to be worth it.

2. If your home country isn't as great as an economic prize as others, it is a less-appetizing target than others, and as the same cost/benefit calculation from above comes into play.

3. The longer you last (in game weeks) the greater the probability you will win -- there's no other single calculation that trumps this maxim -- no one wins who doesn't last to the final week.

That being said:

1. It is not uncommon for a poor, peripheral country to gain some SP from an ally win, but it is uncommon for such a country to dominate and win large amounts of SP. Where the latter occurs, the player would be more likely to have won from a more traditional choice.

2. Not *every* AW player consciously plays for maximization of SP, at all times -- some suffer from an informational deficit, some get mad at being attacked by a small country.

3. Depending on the circumstances, whether by tactical doctrine or personal preference, some may prefer to knock out marginal players in a coalition before taking out the larger enemy.

GW is the main reason.

Kirjoittanut tophat, 18.05.2012 at 20:10

With afterwind's compensation system for the reinforcements in each city, every country can be considered good if played well and under proper terms.

Except Hawaii. Never Hawaii.

Kirjoittanut goodnames679, 27.05.2012 at 01:13

Kirjoittanut tophat, 18.05.2012 at 20:10

With afterwind's compensation system for the reinforcements in each city, every country can be considered good if played well and under proper terms.

Except Hawaii. Never Hawaii.

Unless its a 50k game and your PD while just sitting there spamming Infantry and not getting noticed.