Crossroad dilemma - tell me what you do

Let's let's imagine the map is perfectly splitted in two between you and your opponent, who's owning the center VP isn't important in this scenario. In fact there are 2 scenarios I'd like to expose.

1st scenario
As North player, you're owning all the points north to the center VP and the middle point facing you're opponent's fuel.

2nd scenario
As North player, you're owning all the points north to the center VP and the middle point facing your own fuel.

For each of those scenario, what would be, in your opinion, best value to harass. Opponent's fuel point or the 2 or 3 south points facing your fuel. (depending on the scenario)

South player, i don't know why, but south side always give you better position. Maybe it because when you in south, upper part of your screen don't closed by UI menu and it makes reaction on enemy units much easier.

It always depends where the enemy isn't - attack the sectors that give you the biggest ressource advantages while costing the least to capture (in other words the least defended). If your enemy just had to retreat or is playing very defensive on a single spot you can try to split up and take multiple sectors at once or scout multiple sectors for resisitance and follow up with light vehicles, tanks or artillery on positions where the enemy dug in.

In general 3 or 2 normal sectors are easy to take and faster to cap and decap and on corssroads are near the cutoff for the natural fuel but they are harder to hold and defend for you. Denying ressource can be way more valuable then gaining ressources if you just brought out your light vehicle or other units worth of rushing and it might be a clever idea to play on rather low tech for a time (as long as you can keep your enemy on a similar tech level).

My thoughts:
Having middle vp matters a lot actually, it gives you a lot of extra sight. You know what is in the central vp building. Is there an mg in there? No? Get one of your own in there and you get great control. Yes? How to flank it then?
You know your opponent has a lot in the middle? Attack his fuel, and send one squad to the 3 points on the west. Opponent will focus the attack on his fuel, get some of his troops there but probably won't care too much about the points on the left. If he does get a squad there, then you can send a squad through the middle to flank the mg in the building and get it out.

If your opponent has a lot on the right side and on the left side, just go to his cutoff through the middle. This way he wont get resources from the right and he will have to rotate which gives you the opportunity to easily get his fuel. From the mid you can also easily get cutoffs on the left in case he got a hold of your fuel.

Hope this helps a bit, really depends on the situation tbh tho, but attacking cutoffs is often better than directly attacking an opponents fuel.

Tbh i'd hit the smaller points instead of the fuel, due to how crossroads is set up you have a shitload of smaller points that give you tons of resources, (Those two points+road point gives you basically what a fuel point gives with with a bunch of muni to go with it) It means you can outpace your opponent pretty quickly.

My thoughts:
Having middle vp matters a lot actually, it gives you a lot of extra sight. You know what is in the central vp building. Is there an mg in there? No? Get one of your own in there and you get great control. Yes? How to flank it then?
You know your opponent has a lot in the middle? Attack his fuel, and send one squad to the 3 points on the west. Opponent will focus the attack on his fuel, get some of his troops there but probably won't care too much about the points on the left. If he does get a squad there, then you can send a squad through the middle to flank the mg in the building and get it out.

If your opponent has a lot on the right side and on the left side, just go to his cutoff through the middle. This way he wont get resources from the right and he will have to rotate which gives you the opportunity to easily get his fuel. From the mid you can also easily get cutoffs on the left in case he got a hold of your fuel.

Hope this helps a bit, really depends on the situation tbh tho, but attacking cutoffs is often better than directly attacking an opponents fuel.

I understand what you say but I'm only talking about the best value you can get from those scenarios, much more what OrangePest is talking about.

Center VP being excluded is a matter to reduce the number of scenarios, of course center VP matters on a game and having it or not may change your strategy.

You're a much better player than me but I disagree that cutoff matter more than the fuel point itself. I'll say this is true in COH but not so much in COH2. Of course cutting your opponent is valuable but not always as much as we think during the game. There are a lot of parameters around it, but I'll say that in general if you can't cutoff your opponent for more than a minute and can't decap his other points, the value isn't so important.

Personally I've been disappointed various times by harassing my opponent fuel on Crossroad (and this is why I open this topic), taking it and the middle point connecting it to my side weren't enough to take the fuel lead. I've been reviewing my replays and see that at the end I was only able to gain 2 or 3 fuel more per minutes than my opponent, also because of course he is also active and harassing me. But even in the case of keeping my fuel and disconnecting his fuel, I had the feeling that the value wasn't enough for the investment.
So lately, I decided to change my strategy and focus more on the 3 points facing my fuel, trying to always being active at capping it and saw from it better results in term of fuel advantage.
The CONS for this strategy is the VP control since usually when you manage to push off your opponent from his own fuel you're also able to cap the VP next to it.

But that's just my perception and I'm interested to read others.

If you are north on Crossroads, attacking the East side fuel is slightly safer due to the retreat path. But as people have said, attack where you can win the fight is most important. Just pointing out the importance of where you push and retreat.

South player, i don't know why, but south side always give you better position. Maybe it because when you in south, upper part of your screen don't closed by UI menu and it makes reaction on enemy units much easier.

A lot of people mention this, but it's a fallacy.

Imagine the area of your screen taken up by the UI is just gone, it doesn't exist and the UI that took it up is gone also. You have no UI getting in the way; it's all screen, just a smaller one.

In this case, both players have to move the camera the same distance to both be centred on the same unit (provided both players started the same distance away from the unit) and both players would have the same visibility around that unit and both players would see any units entering the visible area at the same time, be it from the bottom or top.

Now replace the UI and that viewable area of the screen is still the same size and still does not disadvantage either player. The only time the UI at the bottom of the screen has an effect is if the player tilts the camera, most don't, but if a player DOES tilt the camera is likely they will rotate it also to face the enemy.

Provided neither player rotates or tilts the camera, being north or south on a map has literally no quantifiable effect on player performance outside of preference and perception.

Attack from your own fuel zone and harass the opponents cutoffs. Cutting off opponents sectors is always a good choice and definitely better than the rush to opponents fuel, because it is expected to be protected.

I understand what you say but I'm only talking about the best value you can get from those scenarios, much more what OrangePest is talking about.

Center VP being excluded is a matter to reduce the number of scenarios, of course center VP matters on a game and having it or not may change your strategy.

You're a much better player than me but I disagree that cutoff matter more than the fuel point itself. I'll say this is true in COH but not so much in COH2. Of course cutting your opponent is valuable but not always as much as we think during the game. There are a lot of parameters around it, but I'll say that in general if you can't cutoff your opponent for more than a minute and can't decap his other points, the value isn't so important.

Personally I've been disappointed various times by harassing my opponent fuel on Crossroad (and this is why I open this topic), taking it and the middle point connecting it to my side weren't enough to take the fuel lead. I've been reviewing my replays and see that at the end I was only able to gain 2 or 3 fuel more per minutes than my opponent, also because of course he is also active and harassing me. But even in the case of keeping my fuel and disconnecting his fuel, I had the feeling that the value wasn't enough for the investment.
So lately, I decided to change my strategy and focus more on the 3 points facing my fuel, trying to always being active at capping it and saw from it better results in term of fuel advantage.
The CONS for this strategy is the VP control since usually when you manage to push off your opponent from his own fuel you're also able to cap the VP next to it.

But that's just my perception and I'm interested to read others.

You have some good points , i'm the kindof player that wants it all. So i wont make a choice ill just do it all , which often causes me to lose yep