attaking Vs Defending

[gaiusjulii]

I prefer to defend as an army commander. what about yourself?

[woad&fangs]

I like to lure the enemies into attacking me in the open field with a large portion of their troops. After winning a few of these epic defensive battle I mop up the weak enemy garrisons. I find I have a hard time keeping my formations together when attacking. Also, I rely a lot on archers in my games and they can't fire while they're moving.

[Rotc_Railey15]

My strategy (depending on the army) is to let them attack me first, waste their army, then I go on the offensive. Allows me to retrain troops and attack the enemy who have already lost most of the defending forces attacking me. This always works.

But, ive experianced that a good defence is an offense. Im playing Scythia and my horse archers have wiped out armies on the move. Thus leaving their settlements weaker so I can attack them. I prefer to fight them in the open cause seiges are suicidal w/ cavalry-based armies.

[bedlam28]

I've really found that you have to adjust your plans as you play each faction.
Those like Egypt and Greece really work well defensively, pressing your enemies into attacking you.
Horse archer factions such as the Selucids are great for hit and runs, attacking the enemies before they can get into a strong position to withstand you.
Romans are great as both defenders and attackers with their turtle style, yet typical roman brute force.
Germany and Britannia for me seemed much better attackers, taunt and hit.

Good luck gaiusjulii though I'm guessing by your nick that your focused on the Roman faction so far....

[professorspatula]

In STW and MTW, it paid to be on the defense. You could line up your troops, securing the high ground and thus have an incredible advantage. However with RTW, I find it's much easier to attack. Firstly - the AI on the defense is much more docile. They tend to sit and wait for you to attack which means if you have any onagers or artillery and long range missile troops, you get to do serious damage before the AI decides to do anything about it. Also the AI gives up it's high-ground advantage way too easily in RTW so even if they start on a hill, you can usually maneouvre and force them onto a downward slope which is absolute nonsense. The AI is also hopeless if they're on the defense and you have loads of horse archers and such. They won't really bother attacking your main force and spend all day chasing after your horse archers leaving them exhausted and easily beaten.

The only time it's better to be on the defense is bridge battles and sieges.

[gaiusjulii]

SOrry i was bit short when i started this thread. Anyways yes your right i am a total Roman or greek cities fiend. I love the phalanx warfare and also cos the roman in my eyes have it all from good cavalry(not the best) fantastic infantry and I think they are the best balanced. Anyways my style is lay seige to a city for one year and then let them come and sally out I love sallies on the defence as you have to really improvise and on the open field cos you can really dictate the pace of play. same with the Greeks they have a fantatic phalanx and the spartans kick arse even in front to front seasoned triarii and pricepes

[The Spartan (Returns)]

I usually just let the person come to me. Conserving my men's fatigue; I put my first line in guard mode, and the second line to support or flank the first line in regular.

If I have to attack however, I think about it slowly and attack if I know I can win.

[Nik00117]

Some situtions call for a defensive type of play. Maybe your commanding a small army and have to wait for your reserve forces or you'll loose a entire army.

Maybe you need to hurry up and killas much as possible before the enemy gets their reserve in.

IT all really depends, although I perfer offesnive.

[Cleon of Sparta]

As i prefer phalaxne based factions i prefer to defend. Put my main line in guard mode then take it off so they push forward and finish the enemy.

[Kings Hand]

Hey all,
While defending is usually the safest option, some of my favourite and most exciting battles are when u are forced to go on the offensive lest u be surrounded and annihilated, the britons and germans are particularly adept at this. Its cool when you end your turn alone in the darkened wilderness only to be attacked by 4 or 5 half or 3/4 stacks of angry germans, That usually requires some fancy footwork with both attacking and defending in the same battle, i love when that happens.
Another point is that if you play online you have to be comfortable in attack aswell as defence, cos 2 guys sitting in their starting poitions gets old fast, u must have the confidence to bring the fight to him if necessary. Ok hes getting all the advantages but it makes the victory all the sweeter when u crush him ;]

[gaiusjulii]

Although i am a defensive player i have recently been forced to go on the offensive espcially when playing the egyptians on bridge battles, They attack my force on a bridge and then just sit there so as King hand says i am forced from time to time to take the offensive, Its fun but a lot harder... I am really considering changing my stance on attacking

[icek]

i prefer to attack and use my artillery to the limits.

[SSJVegetaTrunks]

Although i am a defensive player i have recently been forced to go on the offensive espcially when playing the egyptians on bridge battles, They attack my force on a bridge and then just sit there so as King hand says i am forced from time to time to take the offensive, Its fun but a lot harder... I am really considering changing my stance on attacking

You could have just waited for time to run out.

[gaiusjulii]

You could have just waited for time to run out.

I could have however waiting 20mins on double speed is not really my thing i dont have the patience lol

G