I see the context of your reply (two one stacks before the restack). If you don't intend to connect, or are not successful, you want the right stack killed. If you connect, you have two stacks that can be killed, but that is a bigger job for your opponents. And one is more easily defended.

Because the starter guide is directed at BRAND NEW players, it does give advice to avoid multiple bases.

I do mention on rare occasions it is worthwhile to have multiple - but those are rare - and again, it's not a beginner concept.

The times its SMART to have 2 bases is when you are either making MASSIVE cuts on enemies (especially on peninsulas where you can 3v2 someone early, have to deal with 2 islands, but be crippling someones early expansion (and inevitable expansion out of the peninsula)

or, another time it is useful is when there's a likelihood that you can actually link up these bases. Example: You 4v3 someone (far from your main cluster of lands).. why? cuz they have a 3 stack in the middle of 1's and killing the 3 cripples their offense for a few turns - losing doesnt hurt you too much since you'll lose an island, etc.

yay for Grun's long posts...

Yes Grun, I've already said it may be applicable in some cases. However, it's definitively not something to use as a 'rule' or to do a majority of the time.

I mean heck, the very first thing I said was: Bringing big stacks together is a good idea in theory at certain times, but is highly situational.

As much as kdice hinges on the luck of the rolls the real skill the separates the basic noob from the good player is the ability to read the board from the start and have an idea of how the game is going to progress.

On the typical 2.5k game with 7 regular familiar players you can almost always predict the first 3-4 rounds if you assume a 75% success rate on advantaged attacks and no retarded 5v3 or 4v2 first round losses. Once you see that you can do your best to try and ruin that perceived notion of how the game should progress and use the confusion to shape the game more favorably to you. This can me winning with an average start or getting a good ally early if you have a weak start helping to ensure a better finish. This is what the best of the best were able to do and what some player, most retired, are considered legends.

Most of the player guides, monte's excluded, focus on how best to take advantage of the system assuming you are only relying on your luck and your skill alone and focus on how to play the game under these conditions. If you focus on following part or all of any of Grunvagr, Wishbone or XC's guides you should expect some increase in overall finish as these guides all contain good advice and only vary based on the type of player each is.

To be great one most move beyond strict adherence to someone else's principles and develop a style that first you feel comfortable with and second is a good idea. The easiest way to fail is play in a manner you don't feel comfortable with, if you are passive embrace it and vise versa if you are aggressive. To succeed you must believe that you are playing the best you can play and that failures are only due to bad luck or better play by someone else.

To the greats that are gone, we miss you, to those that are still around you enjoy killing you. Luck is only the beginning.

/pointless, inane, incoherant rant.

Double Post FTW.

Vermont speaks truth in that any strategium is going to have some drawbacks or flaws given the situation.

Almost all the rules that are found in these player guides though are good ideas in a majority of situations though. If you understand the logic behind the rule you can find the times to ignore and the times to embrace it though.

MadHatSam: Makes me think of Rush Limbaugh and Operation Chaos.

Sam's comments make reference to seven "familiar" players and 2.5 k tables. At lower tables there is less familiarity. Also, at 2.5k tables, place is relatively more important than dom, leading to more reliance on diplomacy, chaos, and flags, while at lower tables the math is more important.

Some of Wishbone's rules are suspect, being based as they are on superstition. What might be expected of someone who calls himself Wishbone.

Strategium FTW.

Nah skrum, dom matters more at the higher tables at least to me. Wish's rules may be suspect on logic grounds but when he tries he always does well so....

XC's and Grun's guides hold very well for lower tables as politics aren't involved, but you do run into more random play which means having a basic set of rules that you play by will be advantageous when players are less likely to make the best move as you will find yourself with a more solid base more often then not.

I concur with Sam. Many players at the lower tables either don't know how dom works, or don't really care as much. Much of the play at 2500 or 10k is about maximizing dom points.