Why anyone would question the effectiveness of the shock and awe of a chem rush FS?
I mean, i really don't understand the mathematics or anything.
I was told by some of the best war gurus in the game that Chems first rules,but i thought they were st00pid..so...wassup?

It's about hitting before they buy SDI as opposed to hitting before they buy turrets/troops.

The quicker you get kills, the quicker you can move on.

Thanks for the explanation...

It is called readiness. If you use missiles for readiness, you can potentially put out more attacks. I am not saying one is right or wrong, but that is at least a reason.

Wars are won and lost on total attacks done. Using missiles to regain readiness lets you put out a ton more standard types of attacks. Someone who fires all his chems the GS's vs someone who balances it, will do about 2/3 to half the total hits. And hence total kills. This does not matter much after the first couple days where missiles run out however. But every country killed now is one you don't have to break down while he is ready later.

best answer ever

K4F wins the prize!

I like prizes!

As for Chem FS's pros and cons. If I were to do one, it would be because I would be worried about too many of the targets getting SDI before you run outta chems. Con is if they didn't all max their SDI within a day (The surviving countries that is) You cost yourself about an increase 10-20% of the kills you could have gotten in the long run (3 days or so).

s long as there are targets to SR

readiness dont become a factor

was this really necessary?

There are lots of things you can do to regain readiness, but you want to minimise the amount of stuff you have to do to regain it, so you can maximise your hits.

On a non tyranny I would say a Chem FS would be a good strategy. With a tyranny, I say it would be a lot less efficient then you could be.

if the enemy has crap spies than chem FS isnt a bad strategy at all. quicker kills and the ablity to move on....also drops HPK, and since HPK is a HUGE factor in deciding the outcome of a war...advantage chem FS

It is tedious to argue with someone whom logic does not effect.

Im not even sure what your point is.

HPK means nothing other then on paper.
A high HPK is bad when it is a product of someone walling, or poor target selection.
But using 50 chems to kill a sdi'less person instantly today vs 50 chems to kill a sdi'less person slightly slower makes no difference in terms of real combat during an FS.

Using spy attacks should be done without a doubt, but unless the entire opposition has no spies, you will max out your spy targets pretty fast.

This game requires a balance, killing is about efficiency. Itll come back at you sooner or later.

There seems to be a missing factor in all of your equations...
Why would you not destroy the countries(in order)
The most turns:$$+stock
The most active:$$+stock
The dummies with no sdi:$$ +stock?

You forget it is an FS, most turns implies least active. Most active cannot be determined by anything other then total turns used, and that doesnt even mean war active.

And stock doesnt mean a whole lot when market is crashing and their spal is 10.

If I were to FS Pan at the moment you would have here would be my target priority.

First BR and GS targets, I would target equal NW targets (equal in NW to MY killers) as a priority. The easier to break the better, but no matter the break ideal.

I would then have a list of chem targets and SR targets to get readiness from. Its priority would obviously be based on stock.

I would probably ignore lots of the top countries that had good SDI admittedly.

The idea behind the FS in this case would be to kill as many countries as you can to minimise the amount of turns that could be used against you. With Tyrannies just firing off chems first decreases total potential kills. Hence bad.

The secondary consideration would have been to kill countries that can jump up high fast.. but since they dont have SPAL troop quantities mean little. Also since pretty much any country in Pan other then the farms can break any country in IMP killing breakers first is a losing proposition.

k4f gave the same fluffing answer I did...lol

that is because you, ozzite, are one of k4f multies

nah, just one of K4F's students, and, there r many around this game....heh...heh...heh...heh

you let them live long enough to question it?