Attack / Defense

[Louis de la Ferte Ste Colombe]

http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/rolleyes.gif

Different persons seem to have different point of view on the whole Attack / Defense thing when choosing a team, and on how it shall relate to behaviour on the field.

Do you change your behaviour depending on which side of the field you play, or is it not important for you and you play the same way in any case (ie, you walk to meet your ennemy)?

Personnaly, it does not matter. Depending on what the battlefield look like I'll move to different position, but I won't care much about attack / defense and what I am 'supposed' to do.

The only instance I can think of when I'd play according to Attack / Defense is on Flattohill maps where attack starts uphill...

I really dislike hearing about attack / defense after the first assault, once people have regrouped... If I got less troops of less quality, I am not going to attack, whether I am attacking or defending.
And if as a superior defender, you don't take your responsabilty to finish the game, don't be surprised if I withdraw and leave you the field...

Louis,

[ichi]

Gah Louis Gah

I do change my behavior depending on which side I am on and what the terrain is. In SP large battles it makes a big difference due to the way you manage reinforcements.

In MP, when defending a hill I usually bring more spears and missiles, when attacking uphill I bring more swords and cav. This usually means that I choose different factions att/def.

It also depends a lot on your teammates. If you with guys who automatically get into defense mode then it is harder to exploit enemy weaknesses when they appear. Attackers have the advantage of deciding when the fight is and where they will focus. I think it is important to remember that defense doesnt automatically equal reactive.

On a flat/steppe map the terms attack and defend are useless.


Quote[/b] ]I really dislike hearing about attack / defense after the first assault, once people have regrouped... If I got less troops of less quality, I am not going to attack, whether I am attacking or defending.
And if as a superior defender, you don't take your responsabilty to finish the game, don't be surprised if I withdraw and leave you the field...

After the first round it is not uncommon to see the 'defender' retreat to the biggest hill even tho they have more guys. I have even had 'defenders' tell me that it was my responsibility to attack them, up a steep hill, even tho it was 1 on 3. This was really cheesy IMHO.

ichi

[Kongamato]

I will usually obey the attack/defense classifications, but that only goes so far. If I'm on defense on a Carcano-style map and there are things to gain from advancing, I'm going to advance and ask the center and reserve guys to advance, too. Also, I wont attack if it is going to be pointless and there are other options. If I'm faced with a huge hill, I prefer to stay just out of enemy range and help my allies elsewhere.

[Cheetah]

Gah Louis Gah

Chaaaaarrggeeeeeeeeeeeee http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/ht_charge.gif

http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

Yes, some defenders have some kind of defending mind set, and they won't attack even if they have the best opportunity to do so. On the top of it defending is boring, so I always pick the attacking side. The additional benefit is that I don't have to argue with team mates whether to attack or not. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-idea.gif

http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/ht_bow.gif

[Sulla]

All depends on situation. I try to attack most of the time. But if im on defense, ill wait for the enemy to make decisions, they are bound to make mistakes. If I see myself in a good position to attack while on defense http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-speechless.gif I will take the initiative. About the allies talk, if you choose your allies wisely, you wont have to worry about the debate ;). Also, never forget about counterattack. For example you see a weakened enemy attacking you there is nothing wrong about charging in, and let 3 or 4 of your units help your neighbour by riding into the enemy's flank or rear http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-2thumbsup.gif

Anyway, One time I was in big trouble in a 3 v 3 and I asked one of my allies (one I didnt choose http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif ) to http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-help.gif . I even went so Far to say PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE, but didnt help much, while I routed of the field I asked him, why didnt you http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-help.gif, and he said, one that knows how to fight doesnt need http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-help.gif......... http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-wall.gif Tell that to enemy cavalry http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-jester.gif

Also yesterday I played a 4 v 4 in the desert. The defenders were camping on a big fat hill, and had 50% armoured units. It was clear to me they didnt do there http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-book2.gif So me and a clanm8 decided it was better to wait around for a bit, doing a bit of arrow fighting/pav skirmishing (they had pavise Xbows.....) and w8 out. The comments we heard were http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-zzz.gif and attack me please. I say, If your on Defend, you bring armoured units and see your enemy has a light army and w8s around, what you gonna do??? O sure, w8 around untill they decide you are tired enuff http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-wall.gif http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-wall.gif http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-wall.gif Naturaly we went for a http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/cheers.gif and when we came back caused the biggest byzantine infantry/var guard chainrout we ever saw http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-stunned.gif Guess what half of our enemys did. They quit the battle when troops started routing, Blaming us for a lame game http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-jester.gif

Anyway, what im trying to say is, its all in the situation and decisions you make. I know asking "attack me" doesnt help http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif

regards Sulla, Kenchikukaclan

[The Witch-King]

Reminds me of a battle I played some months ago, I believe it was a 4v4. I was playing on the defending side but decided to attack my opponent (don't know why, probably one of those escalating battles, you know the type: Attacker sends 1 cav, defender sends 1 cav, attacker sends another cav to reinforce, defender sends another cav to reinforce, attacker sends some spears to back up the cav, defender sends some swords to engage the spears and before you know it both armies are charging in http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif ). Anyway, my opponent was breaking and I sat behind my computer screen with a faint smile on my lips, secure in the knowledge that victory was mine http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/tongue.gif , when suddenly I noticed some enemy cav from the guy to my right. No problemo, I thought, so I send some troops to deal with them. Then more cav appeared.....and then his infantry appeared and then more cav appeared, but they were not his, but from the enemy guy on the FAR right. And I was like " WTF are troops from the guy on the far right doing here?" And sure enough, both enemy armies on my right were on the move and began dogpiling on me. Then I noticed my two allies, who were also on my right flank, hadn't moved one inch while their direct opponents had packed up, left their position and slammed into my right flank with their combined forces.

Needless to say my reaction was something like: "WTF are you guys doing? Attack them, attack" Unfortunately it was too late for me and I was routed. It was then that I decided to ask my allies why they hadn't done anything. "You didn't tell us to move."

DOOOOOH http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wacko.gif http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-wall.gif

Seriously, I didn't know whether to laugh or cry. I probably should have kept an eye on the other opponents but seriously, two of my allies just sat there while their direct opponents exposed their flanks to them and doubled me. I wonder if these things really happened in the Middle Ages

Allied General 1: Hmmm, our noble ally is being doubled by our direct opponents, you know, the ones were supposed to engage. Shouldn't we start moving or something?"

Allied General 2: Nah, my armour itches when I move, I'm sure he'll be alright."

[Brutal DLX]

I don't care, it is dependent on situation. On defend, if I am facing a superior player and from a quick overlook know that I don't have good chances, I try to set up in an advantageous position and be reactive.
On attack I always try to make a coordinated move with my allies, if there is none, I will start skirmishing and fight my opponent on my own or help others as appropriate.
Both attack and defense can be challenging and I usually choose on a random basis.

Since I am not in a clan, I often end up with allies I don't know, and it is difficult to get some teamplay going, and like others before mentioned, I had troubles with allies on defense not aiding me when there is an obvious chance to inflict some serious damage on a careless attacker. While a denial may be ok from their point of view, one should expect at least a reasonabe explanation instead of little or no answer to one's request. At the very least, after the battle is finished.

[Tempiic]

I do not care really.... what is more important in influencing my army setup and my playstyle is which of the 4 initial starting positions I get and who are surrounding me directly (both ally as enemy)

[Kas]

I prefer attacking

[AMPage]

I do care, but most of the time there's nothing i can do about it so it dosn't matter if i care or not. :)

I like to attack when i'm against a weaker team and defend when i have the weaker team. When the teams are even it dosn't matter, but i do like attacking over defending :)

[tootee]

it doesnt matter. if attacking means the one to first launch the charge, then its not a matter whether you are the 'attacker' or 'defender', but rather that by doing so it gives you the advantage.

also, imo, often many makes the mistake that a request for reinforcement means it must come... and that by not doing so its the ally fault. often, its pretty usual when one sees only his own tactic but not the overall, or that of his allies. so many will blame that the ally is a newbie. sometimes it the case, sometime its not. a good general makes sure he has a commitment from ally that his flank is watched before his assault, and not to panic for reinforcement. if one thinks the ally is new, one's strategy must include this factor in, and not to assume that reinforcement will come on the fly.

also in the event of a mis-coordination, it may be wise that instead of wasting the cav, the ally keep his army intact in his offence/defence. its a battfield decision. it doesnt mean a moral superiority or rightness anyway for either side. all one should do is to review and rethink how the battle could be conducted better.. and not complain.

[Sulla]

Wise words from Tootee...., and I mean that but what if your pavs rushed and you respond. You know how these things go
B4 you know it your drawn into a fight you dont want. Your ally is about 200 yards away, with a fresh army (16 unit). He isnt even pavshooting his direct enemy. His enemy decides to engage me with about 3 cavalry. At this moment in the battle Im not in the mood for negotiation Tootee :). I just say help, and anyone with a bit of sense will send it or at least hold of the enemy cavalry he knows I cant counter, and not give me "Someone who knows how to fight doesnt need help" http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-wall.gif Anyway, I tried to talk to him b4 game started, but some people dont think they need there allies in a 3 v 3 :P

I know that some have different tactics, but in order to win you must work together. You know this as well

regards Sulla http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-help.gif Clankenchikuka

[Nigel]

I usually try to act my part. At least at the start of the game. I do it less for myself but mainly because I think the host who set up the battle this way should get what he bargained for.

All that is - as said - at least at the start of the battle. After the first clash, attack/defence usually goes out of the window for me and I try to act as best as the situation demands.

I will also change this if the initial situation demands it to make a good battle. In one 2v2 we and the opponents started sitting on opposite hills well out of shooting distance (we were defence). Who is to attack now http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-inquisitive.gif ?? I decided to say "you are the Attackers, but we come down from the hill to fight you in the valley". I just prefer a fun battle over a boring victory http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif


As for "Someone who knows how to fight doesnt need help" thas really is lame. Why someone with that attitude would play as a team at all is beyond me. He should stick to 1v1.

I usually try to chat to my allies before the fight, agree on a strategy if possible or at least say, "lets stay close together". The more talk, the better coordination, the more fun in any case.

With all that the question of attack/defence is only relevant at the start of the battles. Later it is as the situation demands http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-juggle.gif

[Brutal DLX]

Quote[/b] (tootee @ Jan. 26 2004,15:00)]also, imo, often many makes the mistake that a request for reinforcement means it must come... and that by not doing so its the ally fault. often, its pretty usual when one sees only his own tactic but not the overall, or that of his allies. so many will blame that the ally is a newbie. sometimes it the case, sometime its not. a good general makes sure he has a commitment from ally that his flank is watched before his assault, and not to panic for reinforcement. if one thinks the ally is new, one's strategy must include this factor in, and not to assume that reinforcement will come on the fly.

also in the event of a mis-coordination, it may be wise that instead of wasting the cav, the ally keep his army intact in his offence/defence. its a battfield decision. it doesnt mean a moral superiority or rightness anyway for either side. all one should do is to review and rethink how the battle could be conducted better.. and not complain.
While what you say is true and should be the basis for any tactical evaluation, it is missing the point. One's decision to engage may be false, one should not count on an ally to help when taking action that has not been discussed before, one should not assume allies think in the same way, especially if you don't know how experienced he is.
But what is important is to actually discuss and talk when there is time during the battle, or after it's been concluded.
I often fail to see that, most players just don't respond during the battle, or just leave after. If they would talk more, it would improve their teamplay and decision making much faster than learning it the hard way by doing countless battles, making the same mistakes over and over again.

[Mithrandir]

I prefer defence, depends on the map&allies though.

I usually use my standard tactic, camp on the highest hill, let my allies get slaughtered, boast about being the last person of my team to be alive, retreat to the red zones and laugh at my allies for being dead.

[Brutal DLX]

Yeah, I heard elves do that a lot.

[Mithrandir]

Bah, whats your online name ? http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/angry.gif

[Louis de la Ferte Ste Colombe]

Quote[/b] (Mithrandir @ Jan. 27 2004,06:20)]I usually use my standard tactic, camp on the highest hill, let my allies get slaughtered, boast about being the last person of my team to be alive, retreat to the red zones and laugh at my allies for being dead.
In the meantime, Smurfs only weapons are; throwing hazelnuts, hiding in wood and giving mushrooms...

Speak about unbalance factions... Smurfs, just like elves, shall be able to retreat in the redzone and laugh at their dead allies Life is so unfair for Smurfs

Louis;

Alternative thinking; are elves like smurfs that went evil?

[Mithrandir]

Elves evil ?

whats your online name ? http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/angry.gif


D'oh I already know http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

[Brutal DLX]

Quote[/b] (Mithrandir @ Jan. 28 2004,19:24)]Bah, whats your online name ? http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/angry.gif
Why? You want to demonstrate your Elven tactics? When we played before you didn't use them, which is why I'm surprised to learn you aren't the honourable Elf I thought you were http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

If you want a match allies or 1v1, no problem, but I don't play frequently anymore, thus we would need to find a suitable date. Also be prepared for 2min+ loading times as my HD is going bad despite recent defrags.

[Nikodil]

It's important to distinguish between strategic attack/defence and tactical attack/defence. The side you choose when joining the game is on the strategical level. It has little to do with tactics. As a rule defence is always the stronger form of fighting. But sometimes strategic defence is best done with attack tactics, in one form or other. And note that strategic attacks can only be combined with tactical "defence" if you take lots of artillery/missile, and force you opponent into attack.

So as you might guess, Yes, i'm pretty firm about the destinction between attack and defence.

[Major Robert Dump]

It really depends on communication between allies and who your allies are. It also depends on if there is room on the map to flank and skirmish, or if its one whenre everyone just has to line up and engage the other line.

I like to attack rather than defend, because it gives me the initiative and allows for more manuevering. I don't, however, like to attack against poor odds when allies don't back me up because then it is in vain. Sometimes I assumed they would be there even though it wasn't discussed, and other times ppl say they will be there but move like a turtle. I am guilty of this as well. Communication is very important, and sometimes when buddies and friends play they assume the their pals will come through for them while their pals may have a plan of their own.

This is yet another reason the game needs its own chat window for the joined game. Its freaking impossible to chat with allies in a window 5 lines tall with 130 people in the foyer going at it. Simply impossible. And since most of us like to vary our armies quite a bit, its not prudent to assume that allie X will just bring his typical army.

[Ja'chyra]

In one 4v4 game the host chose a hilly map and put himself on defence, a little bit off I thought. The map came out as the defenders camped on two hills with 2 on each hill. At this point we're, the attackers, starting to think this is a bit of a no winner. We persevere and three of us attack the hill on the left while the fourth blocks any help from the right. The army on the left was packed so closely together that when the first unit routed the rest of the defenders followed them off the map. Leaving some light cav to see them off we then turned in time to see our ally being attacked by the army on the left. At this point the defenders are now attacking uphill trying to help their already defeated allies and we gladly charge downhill and rout all but the last few units stubbornly holding the right hand hill top. It was then an easy task to encircle and rout them.

In a 1v1 early game, I am defending as Russians against the Turks. I hold my position as the enemy trudge towards me, but, as the Turk army is archer heavy, about 7 units, I don't stand for the usual archer battle but take the fight to him. My inf easily hold his line with fewer units leaving the rest to flank.

Moral? http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/confused.gif

Never eat yellow snow http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-curtain.gif or whether you attack or defend depends not on you starting position, but on how events pan out during the battle.

Anyway, my longest ever post http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/bigthumb.gif , have fun whatever you do http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-smile.gif

[Sjakihata]

voted yes, I try to be on the attacking team.

[AqConsul]

I just love Def I usually just leave if I cant play Def (j/k). I am only good at it because it is wat my clan usually does.

[Tomisama]

My vote was no, I don’t care.

To my simple little brain, it doesn’t make any sense

Not in Last Man Standing

Unless you're in a castle, what are you defending?

Even if you are, if you attack and defeat your enemy outside the castle, don't you still win?

LMS is not a turf war, it is a survival war

You’re going to stand there and allow yourself to be attacked, and in some cases demand that you be attacked, because you are on the south end of the map?

Or you’re going to attack an impossible situation, when you know you should hold out and test your enemy’s nerve (and resolve to stay on that hill). Just because you started at the north end of the map?

http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-inquisitive.gif

[Sulla]

Sometimes thats the way it works Tomi, people keep to there attack and/or defense strategy whatever happens

Its part of the game, thats the way it is ;)

You can take advantage of it though, get a missile heavy army. :). Or a very strong army and wipe them off the map, that sure feels good http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-2thumbsup.gif http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/tongue.gif