Stagnation vs. Dynamic approach

Stagnation vs. Dynamic approach

When someone is fixated on a single objective or a node, it hurts. The sheer maths tell us that if 10 of their folks charge the Stables, the most they're defending with at their nodes is 5. And yet, instead of players picking up and heading out of an obviously losing battle, they'll stay. They'll die over, and over, and over again defending a lost cause. There was one occasion where digging in for the long haul actually succeeded, and yea, it is epic. However, the overwhelming amount of times, you'll lose. You need to just head out and grab another node, even if it's for the second or third time. Stagnation leads to inevitable defeat when you're behind the curve.

Dynamic Horde players often realise that ownership of the stables is taken for granted and as such they rush the Stables straightaway. This often causes Alliance players to employ the terrible strategy of digging in and defending the Stables, often against overwhelming or nigh impossible odds. The winning strategy in this situation is always to bet the Farm on the premise that a good offence was the Horde's best defence.

How many of us have heard of others using the same approach to budget hearings time and again to no success? How often are we told that "I'm too scared to ask for an increase since everyone else received a cut." Why are we reluctant to take on responsible risk?