The beast explains 1 nation armies. The flaws. the benifits.

[wilderbeast]

Ok... Welcome one and all to the analysis of 1-nation armies. What is a 1-nation army? In short it is when a player fortifies 1 particular country with ALL the men on the map that they can.

Is this a good idea?

Following advice stems from this game: http://www.conquerclub.com/game.php?game=902057

When the game begins. Not all of us are fortunate enough to start with an entire bonus protected by a wall of neutrals. So what is the main aspect for the opening rounds?

Varying on who you play, you will find most of the top players or elites will target just your countries in the opening rounds, ignoring neutrals whenever possible. This is to play off the advantage of 1 man per 3 countries held. If he can bring you from 14 down to 11 before you move, you are dealing with 3 guys next round instead of 4... They are setting the pace because not only do they force you to work with less, they force you to retake that same ammount from them before their next round (or they get the extra man from gaining 3 territories at your expense)

This considered, early on you want to make your opponent waste his men taking your countries, leaving 1s is not a good idea early on if it can be avoided.


That said... who can resist the larger number on one of their countries bordering an ennemy's "3"? I know the beast cant! So then what do we do?

Well first things first, accumulating a larger army is nice, but dont overdo yourself... look for areas on the map that your opponent has no direct access to... for instance if you have 3 areas lined up and your opponent only borders 1... you can transfer men from the "protected" areas behind your first or 2nd "3"... in short, if you want to raise an army look for men that your opponent would have to go out of his way to attack.

2ndly... Does Size matter? This is an ongoing debate and while My girlfriend says that without a doubt size matters... Its how you play the round that counts. Look ahead to the next round. Instead of one large army of 22-23 men, I recommend using either 2 lesser armies of 10s or 12s or depending on how concentrated your opponent's men are... 3 armies of 7 or 8.

Why Wilderbeast? Why do this? You are looking to put the pressure on your opponent the next round. In the above game, my opponent put all his men A european country. So what did I do when I had SA? I used my 5 men and added them to my 3 on japan taking out 6 of his "1s" in asia. think about that 6 ones is the equivalent of 2 men. SA was worth 2 men. This is what my opponent was setting his armies up for, he was going to take 9 of my men out in europe, 3 neutrals in Africa and 10 of my men in SA to get a bonus of 2 men. And before he would have a chance at it, I took 6 countries of his 1s so even if I lost it, I would still get a decent man count. (although I would have to consider the men lost when I would lose the continent.

He failed miserably. He got to brazil with 5 men left and when he attacked venezuela he lost 2 men, he was at 3 vs 1 on venezuela, peru and argentina.

I used the next round to take all of europe and put 3 men on each country... the rest of the game advanced like so.

All my opponent's 1s were useless to him, when he would get 3 each round he would have 4 men at any location to attack with, at most locations on the map my countries had 3s.

Where did he go wrong?

If he had split his armies into 2 or 3 smaller units he would have some better map coverage, were I to run into some bad dice, he could add his 4 men onto any army of 10 and advance in any direction of the map where I was weak... when he put all his men on 1... As long as I avoided that 1 area that round I could attack anywhere without consequence.

So to wrap this up. Larger armies are great... but dont shoot yourself in the foot to get them. in the early rounds give yourself options for the next round. Who knows, your 2 or 3 gatherings may intimidate your opponent into massing too many of HIS armies together, in which case you would be in prime position to rip off some of HIS 1s and take a lead in the game.


There is 1 exception to this rule... not so much an exception as an understanding of the risk and managing the consequences at a later date. If you feel you can take a certain area WITHOUT A DOUBT and it would be worth your while to hold (often this situation is found in no limit games) Then you could justify putting all your men on 1 area so that you could take the area you plan on holding and then scatter your defenses effectively, this must be done at the right time however because as above mentioned, you will be vulnerable that 1 round to your opponent who will have a field day with your 1s.

Any questions or comments?

[flashleg8]

Enjoyed your post. very helpful. I don't play one vs one much so I appreciated the strategy advice.

My one comment would be about your logic re: the fortification of SA vs the chance to strike some of your opponents "1's" in Asia.

You are only partially correct to state that the capture of six 1's would offset the potential loss to SA. Yes, you would reduce your opponent reinforcements while boosting your own, but you will also need to garrison a troop to each of those territories when taking them. In a no cards game I find it is best to keep strike force for replying to threats, as reinforcements are harder to come by (I agree these should be divided not lumped into one super-army). By dissipating all your forces to capture territories for reinforcements you are not able to respond to any specific threat - admittedly in a 1 vs 1 ALL your opponents attacks are threats, but an attack to cut your lines of fortification or to surround "pockets of defenders" can be crucial to fight off.
Your strategy of attacking six 1's in Asia would require at least 6 troops to pull off. Realistically a force of 10 or above would be necessary. I would propose instead these 10 troops were used to solidify your current base in SA, or if as you suggested your opponent was well set to break it with his armies - dropping to a strategically placed location. Then the following turn using your next reinforcements to either destroy his standing armies or to advance into another bonus (that you have a chance of holding). If you use your tactic of attacking his weak (abandoned) territories, you are allowing him to dictate the play. He has already decided those territories are worthless and resigned to their loss. Any troops you deploy there will free up his troops to attack his primary objective (whatever that is) unopposed. You will have reduced your available fighting force to garrison territories that will be easily recaptured in the future. You may succeed in reducing his reinforcements for a turn or two, but eventually the dice will turn against you and you will not be able to capture enough 1s to offset the advances your opponent has made elsewhere. Of course there is also a limit to how many areas of the board your opponent feels he is so weak in he has to abandon so eventually you will run out of easily captured territories.