• Dear forum reader,
    To actively participate in our forum discussions or to start your own threads, in addition to your game account, you need a forum account. You can
    REGISTER HERE!
    Please ensure a translation into English is provided if your post is not in English and to respect your fellow players when posting.
  • We are looking for you!
    Always wanted to join our Support or Forum Team? We are looking for enthusiastic moderators!
    Take a look at our recruitment page for more information and how you can apply:
    Apply
  • Forum Contests

    Won't you join us for out latest contest?
    You can check out the newest one here.

Small guild in a 1000LP game - setup for more VP on Volcano map

Morb

Private
If you're a small guild in a 1000LP game trying to survive, your focus is to make the most out of your fights. This simple setup will allow you to increase the efficiency of your fights. Every map is different, but the basic idea remains the same - going for 4th ring sectors that are adjacent to 3rd ring sector/s with 1 building slot.

Sectors B and C are the "money makers" as they are low POI for top guilds and require 2 adjacent sectors controlled by an opponent to be taken with a 20% fights. While being "guarded" by D from the outside, by controlling B and C guild generates 20% fights towards D.

Scenario 1
You're guild no 2. This scenario benefits you more than guild no1. You take control over B and C. A serves as a buffer zone against attacks from guild no1 from A to B. When you have B and C, your goal is to hold A. If guild no1 decides to go for B, you can close A, giving extra 4 hours protection against guild no1. If guild no1 wants to have 20% fights towards B, they will need to control A and D.
Other guilds, if they want to generate 20% fights towards B, need to control A and D as well. This makes B and C a low point of interest for bigger guilds. Who wants to go for 40% fights and increase attrition twice as fast, right?
While controlling B and C, your guild is generating constant 20% fights towards D.
C in this case is like a fortress.
While B and C don't generate much VP, guild no1 theoretically should have control over them for a much longer time, making them a high value target for a small guild when trying to survive in a 1000lp game. At least this increases the probability of such a scenario.

Scenario 2
You're guild no1. Well, this setup benefits you only if guild no2 is less active and unable to take C in a fast fashion. But if guild no2 is not one of the big guns, your goal is to control B and C and retake C whenever it is opened. Especially if you're both going for P5 as B, C and D are double the worth as you're not allowing the opponent to take these sectors in the race for P5.

To generate more VP, you build command posts. To put obstacles in the way of other guild, you can destroy a building right before the sector is taken. Some say it's unethical. I say - if the mechanics are there and it benefits your guild, go for it! For a small guild it's all about creating opportunities, increasing the probability of success and making the most out of your fights.

gbg.png
 
Top