Let's take a look at our last game to illustrate what I'm talking about. Phungkyjams was Defender, Occam's Spork was Primary Attacker, and I was an Attacker.
Occam's Spork placed his Stations (black oval) fairly close to Phungkyjams' Perimeter but clustered the majority of his squad around his Stations. This is good for maintaining control but isn't going to draw the Defender out of their position.
I tried two different tactics with my Station placement. I used the Rook Maneuver for my Orange station (orange square). I was running a majority melee-based squad so I needed most of the Defender's squad in front of me so I could execute a wave attack against it. Phungkyjams took the bait on that one and captured it when placing one of his final two Frames.
My second gambit was to place my Blue station (blue pentagon) in an undefended position at the far end of the battlefield from my squad. The rational behind this was to draw one of Phungkyjams' Frames out and away from the scrum that was sure to happen in the middle of the battlefield. This would be one less Frame for me to deal with once my forces crossed the Perimeter and it would also possibly delay that Frame's engagement with any other forces on the table. Yes, I would lose points if it was captured but that was a risk I was willing to take. Phungkyjams didn't bite on this lure at the start but he did make a late game play for the Station. This just shifted the timing of the force reduction from early to late game.
So, the next time you're playing and you're an Attacker, think of what benefits your Station placement can give you.
No comments:
Post a Comment