4 ms·

I don't propose taking a city, waiting for recuperation, and then attacking an opponent. I propose taking a city, then soon taking another, then another, then

I don't propose taking a city, waiting for recuperation, and then attacking an opponent. I propose taking a city, then soon taking another, then another, then another. Basically moving along an exponential growth curve. If you get lucky and no one attacks you during that period, you stand a very good chance of winning. Even if someone does attack you, the rapid regen from all your cities gives you a fighting chance. This strategy works especially well if you discover a lot of cities in your region during the early game. The problem with attacking an enemy is that it's easy to get into a war of attrition where you both fall behind other players.

spintin 3y ago
I think it's important to emphasize that you won't win against random luck without the rush strategy: - If you begin in a corner (best) or side (ok), you can win if the side opposite to the one you are rushing towards does not rush you. If you begin in the center there is no way to win. - To rush wait until ~17 because then you'll fill a full run before your lands get 2, enabling a second rush if the first fails. If you win against one player before 50 seconds the chances get exponentially higher to win. Beat 2 in the first 100 seconds and you probably have 90% chance of steamrolling the entire board.