Home Players ask Players

We need new Moderators!


ModeratorWe are always on the lookout for talented people to join the team. That means you! If you think you could help us organise and inform the community while entertaining everyone then apply. We need people to help out on the forum, behind the scenes with announcements, on Discord and on our other Social Media channels.


If this is something you think might be of interest to you, HERE

defense troops used as offensive troops

ulfgarrulfgarr Posts: 1
edited 05.03.2013 in Players ask Players
can defense troops be used in the offense in attack
Post edited by ulfgarr on
ulfgarr @ usa 1
«134

Comments

  • xJadetsssxxJadetsssx Posts: 5,983
    edited 20.01.2013
    Yes, but they will die easily, and their loot is terrible.
    TD7ircx.png
    Does this looks like the face of mercy?

    Lurking the forums since 2011.
    xJadetsssx @ Ɩ ǝsɹǝʌıun
  • irreverenceirreverence Posts: 39
    edited 26.01.2013
    yes you can use them as offensive weapons. If used correctly you can limit your troop losses. But will have to contend with lower loot possibility and also slower troop travel to objective. To counter those 2 deficiencies you can mix in offensive troops with high loot rating in with the defensive troops or to follow in after the defensive troops on another wave. As to their travel speed this can be compensated by simply paying for mounts, but if the distance of travel is to attack a nearby rbc then the travel speed to time difference isnt that significant. But, keep in mind defensive tool affect both offensive and defensive troops equally. If you want to determine when it is worth using defensive troops pay attention to what your attacking and their stats by clicking on the information button beside each troop portrait or just to search the forum and copy the stats into an excel spreadsheet and then calculate how best to attack.
    irreverence @ usa 1
  • xJadetsssxxJadetsssx Posts: 5,983
    edited 26.01.2013
    yes you can use them as offensive weapons. If used correctly you can limit your troop losses. But will have to contend with lower loot possibility and also slower troop travel to objective. To counter those 2 deficiencies you can mix in offensive troops with high loot rating in with the defensive troops or to follow in after the defensive troops on another wave. As to their travel speed this can be compensated by simply paying for mounts, but if the distance of travel is to attack a nearby rbc then the travel speed to time difference isnt that significant. But, keep in mind defensive tool affect both offensive and defensive troops equally. If you want to determine when it is worth using defensive troops pay attention to what your attacking and their stats by clicking on the information button beside each troop portrait or just to search the forum and copy the stats into an excel spreadsheet and then calculate how best to attack.

    Half of that is not actually true, if you send defenders your losses will be most likely increased and not decreased if you aren't careful, defenders are actually faster than attackers, sending defenders don't counter any sort of "weakness" the defender player can have since they are actually defenders and not attackers.
    TD7ircx.png
    Does this looks like the face of mercy?

    Lurking the forums since 2011.
    xJadetsssx @ Ɩ ǝsɹǝʌıun
  • Eric768 (US1)Eric768 (US1) US1 Posts: 7,183
    edited 26.01.2013
    xJadetsssx wrote: »
    Half of that is not actually true, if you send defenders your losses will be most likely increased and not decreased if you aren't careful, defenders are actually faster than attackers, sending defenders don't counter any sort of "weakness" the defender player can have since they are actually defenders and not attackers.

    What he said. Defenders used for defending, attackers for attacking. Yes they could be used as attackers, but as Jade specified, it would most likely lead to higher losses.
    Proud to have been one of the longest serving members on USA1
    Advocate of speaking up regarding mental health and seeking help
    ***Currently Retired from playing GGE***

    Rest well Jason; a fantastic player and an even greater person. Gone but not forgotten.
  • irreverenceirreverence Posts: 39
    edited 27.01.2013
    I really dont understand your conjectures, when the reason in using defensive units as offensive weapons is to primarily counter the enemy ap strengths with defensive capabilities. Which will tip the battle in your favor, in the absence of any defensive tools for the sake of simple comparative analysis. That is why each troop type has stats that has to be considered to decide when defensive troops can be used as offensive forces. Which is why I have a spreadsheet made to map out each troop types strength and weakness, that considers troop composition. So you can have a better gauge as to how to attack defenses. It goes to the simple train of thought if you can exploit defenses cause of deficiencies. Why wouldnt you? Even with the use of defensive troops, if it gives you that advantage. Like I said before use a spreadsheet, the numbers dont lie and will help in making better decisions. Don't think I can make it any simpler to understand.
    yes you can use them as offensive weapons. If used correctly you can limit your troop losses.

    Dont understand how that sentence could be misconstrued considering it was only the second sentence in my statement. If it was correctly read the first time then the assertion would be correct, if details were correctly disseminated.
    irreverence @ usa 1
  • xJadetsssxxJadetsssx Posts: 5,983
    edited 27.01.2013
    I really dont understand your conjectures, when the reason in using defensive units as offensive weapons is to primarily counter the enemy ap strengths with defensive capabilities. Which will tip the battle in your favor, in the absence of any defensive tools for the sake of simple comparative analysis. That is why each troop type has stats that has to be considered to decide when defensive troops can be used as offensive forces. Which is why I have a spreadsheet made to map out each troop types strength and weakness, that considers troop composition. So you can have a better gauge as to how to attack defenses. It goes to the simple train of thought if you can exploit defenses cause of deficiencies. Why wouldnt you? Even with the use of defensive troops, if it gives you that advantage. Like I said before use a spreadsheet, the numbers dont lie and will help in making better decisions. Don't think I can make it any simpler to understand.



    Dont understand how that sentence could be misconstrued considering it was only the second sentence in my statement. If it was correctly read the first time then the assertion would be correct, if details were correctly disseminated.

    You really need to "re-think" the battle system or something, sending defenders will cause more casualties, even if you use them "correctly" they will NEVER reduce casualties when you are attacking except when you use them as martyrs but they aren't actually fighting they are just using up tools, and you can do the same with attacker soldiers.

    Again, half of that is not true.

    We are talking about attacking, and you said...

    (when the reasons in using defense units as offensive weapons is to counter enemy AP [which should mean attack power] with defensive capabilites)

    That is completely false, if you are attacking, the units use ATTACK power, if you are defending units use DEFENSE power, I don't see how (if you are attacking) using defenders will help you in anything, even if the opponent is using Attackers to defend they still use the defense power to defense, and if you use defenders to attack the defenders even if they are attacker type soldiers, you will not get any advantages or better results, it is more likely that it will lead you to lose a battle if you use a lot of them, what you said above only applies if you are the defender.
    TD7ircx.png
    Does this looks like the face of mercy?

    Lurking the forums since 2011.
    xJadetsssx @ Ɩ ǝsɹǝʌıun
  • J.I. Joe2J.I. Joe2 Posts: 563
    edited 27.01.2013
    There are only two cases I can think of using defensive soldiers to lessen troop loss when attacking:

    The first being for lower levels when only normal spearmen and normal crossbowmen are available to you as offensive soldiers, where the lower level player would include swordsmen to strengthen his attack. Decent attack power at that stage, and can be used in defense as well against meele as against range.

    The second being in the last waves of capture-attacks, but that's not so much to strengthen the attack itself, but rather to ensure defenders are already on site to defend once the capture-attack has landed.

    One may also wish to capture free villages quickly with defenders, as they tend to have the fastest marching speed available, and even though their attack power is fairly weak, they still dominate against farmers quite easily.
    J.I. Joe @ International 1
    Valhalla family

    Who's Online
  • Matt PattonMatt Patton Posts: 206
    edited 27.01.2013
    swordmen are basically both also if you want to get rid of old defenders this is a great way send in pikemen and bowman replace with archers and swordmen
    Matt Patton @ usa 1
  • The Epic DudeThe Epic Dude Posts: 555
    edited 27.01.2013
    swordmen are basically both also if you want to get rid of old defenders this is a great way send in pikemen and bowman replace with archers and swordmen

    Swordsman arent really usefull in atk or defense
    IM a noob.



    Dont ask me anything



    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • xJadetsssxxJadetsssx Posts: 5,983
    edited 27.01.2013
    Swordsman arent really usefull in atk or defense

    When attacking they may have a "special function", you can use them as quick and cheap martyrs, but for fighting they are awful.
    TD7ircx.png
    Does this looks like the face of mercy?

    Lurking the forums since 2011.
    xJadetsssx @ Ɩ ǝsɹǝʌıun
  • Matt PattonMatt Patton Posts: 206
    edited 27.01.2013
    depends on your barrack level if you can't build a lvl 4 barrack
    they are basically human mantlets which are pricey
    the mace men start getting slaughtered after lvl 7
    with sword you can push on to lvl 8 or 9
    Matt Patton @ usa 1
  • The Epic DudeThe Epic Dude Posts: 555
    edited 27.01.2013
    No offense but im talking about only lvl 5 barracks
    IM a noob.



    Dont ask me anything



    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • irreverenceirreverence Posts: 39
    edited 27.01.2013
    That is completely false, if you are attacking, the units use ATTACK power, if you are defending units use DEFENSE power, I don't see how (if you are attacking) using defenders will help you in anything -xJadetsssx

    Wow the wrong in that statement is an abhorrent supposition that would be called out for what it is useless noise.

    It is hard to believe that when looking at the stats of each troop the differences in their defensive abilities is not recognized and whatever conjecture is used to ignore this will just be a waste of time and effort. So to simplify this for the sake of this discussion is to the benefit of all. To which I will be referring strictly to the troops acquired from the barracks. Each troop type has attack attributes that are intrinsically tied to their assigned weaponary. Which is bowman, crossbowman, archers and others that use ranged weapons. Attack with ranged weapons and will deal ranged damage, without a sudden change in the attack ability/role, to the point where they will suddenly become meleers. Conversely melee type/role troops will also deal damage specific to their role and will not deviate.
    That is the basis for why defense attributes are diametrically opposed to offensive capabilities and the sole reason why there are 2 different categories for defensive attributes, specifically ranged defense and melee defense.
    [If we can not agree up to this point then you really need to stop reading and start another thread.]

    Directly to the point of a simplified example
    crossbowman
    ranged ap 39
    melee def 20
    ranged def 7

    Bowman
    ranged ap 23
    melee def 9
    ranged def 42

    If the crossbowman was defending (without/negated wall, tools, gates or defensive bonuses), you can attack with a bowman. On the basis that the ranged AP of the crossbowman 39< 42 ranged defense of the bowman, moreover the AP of the bowman 23>7 ranged defense of the crossbowman.

    Which make me wonder what wasnt I clear about the first time around or my response to your supposition.
    I really dont understand your conjectures, when the reason in using defensive units as offensive weapons is to primarily counter the enemy ap strengths with defensive capabilities. Which will tip the battle in your favor, in the absence of any defensive tools for the sake of simple comparative analysis. That is why each troop type has stats that has to be considered to decide when defensive troops can be used as offensive forces. Which is why I have a spreadsheet made to map out each troop types strength and weakness, that considers troop composition. So you can have a better gauge as to how to attack defenses. It goes to the simple train of thought if you can exploit defenses cause of deficiencies. Why wouldnt you? Even with the use of defensive troops, if it gives you that advantage. Like I said before use a spreadsheet, the numbers dont lie and will help in making better decisions. Don't think I can make it any simpler to understand.
    yes you can use them as offensive weapons. If used correctly you can limit your troop losses.

    Dont understand how that sentence could be misconstrued considering it was only the second sentence in my statement. If it was correctly read the first time then the assertion would be correct, if details were correctly disseminated.

    before you start replying with a vague response that my responses are half true, for the sake of this discussion and to retain clarity. Specify the truths and falsifications.
    irreverence @ usa 1
  • UltimateJhonUltimateJhon Posts: 767
    edited 27.01.2013
    lol i got atatcked with 600 bowmen and spears so i moved 200 veteran spears and veteran bowmen out because i thought he was using KG or veterans but i was wrong :( i could of won lol
    General of Greek empire.

    I own the fire sparta league , to join ask me , we stick together we die together.
  • HelmlerHelmler Posts: 978
    edited 27.01.2013
    Wow the wrong in that statement is an abhorrent supposition that would be called out for what it is useless noise.

    A bit like all of your posts here then? It's a bit pointless giving advice to people on attacking players who have attacking troops in defense from a lv1/2 barracks when you have lv5 barracks. I'm not sure why you would be attacking such a low level player anyway, at higher levels the chance of attacking someone your level who has those troops in almost zero and sending any type of defender in attack would result in massive losses on your part. So it's completely disingenuous to suggest that defensive troops can be used as valid attackers.
    Helmler @ WWW 1 Rayo McQueen @ WWW2

    Proud Member of Black~Rose~Fire (in spirit if not body)
  • irreverenceirreverence Posts: 39
    edited 27.01.2013
    Great another reader that reads the last comment on the thread and thinks they can grasp what has been discussed so far. Especially when I went through the pains to present what was stated as a simplified example, to state the case and point the importance of identifying the stats of the defenders. I do apologize if I have offended your delicate sensibilities by my use of a simplified example to clarify the importance of assessing defensive attributes and exploiting defensive deficiencies. But, to rule out the possibility of using defenders as an offensive option, for the sole reason that defenders defend and attackers attack is the basis of ignorance that is just noise in the conversation.

    Now if people are construing what I am saying, the possibility of using defensive units in offenses as the template of attacking every defense.

    Should really read this thread from the top. Or let me be simple and clear, It goes to the simple train of thought, if you can exploit defenses cause of deficiencies. Why wouldnt you? Even with the use of defensive troops, if it gives you that advantage. Like I said before use a spreadsheet, the numbers dont lie and will help in making better decisions. Don't think I can make it any simpler to understand.

    If entertaining this possibility of using defensive troops as an offensive option will turn your world upside down and shatter your reality then dont read on since it will only cause further more anguish. Where if we follow this line of thought and expand this further to existing proof of the importance of stats : 1 long bowman attacking 50 kingsguard scouts and winning as presented by Empire-Guide(Intro-Tools)Humper2 responding to jade

    So if I am disingenuous in saying it is valid to entertain the use of defensive units offensively, with the understanding that conditions exists that will allow this to happen. Then yeah I am that bastard, so deal with it.
    irreverence @ usa 1
  • HelmlerHelmler Posts: 978
    edited 27.01.2013
    Wow, 1 longbowman killing 50 KG ranged troops, presumably with the use of mantlets. The chance of that happening in the game? Almost 0.

    I did read your posts, not just the last comment, but people seem to have enough problems with attacks anyway, given some of the stupid attacks I have seen sent in this game, so I feel you are confusing the issue by suggesting people should consider using defenders in attack. Not that the situation might not arise when it would be a valid idea, however slim the chance, but even in this situation it would still be better to send attackers so it's immaterial.
    Helmler @ WWW 1 Rayo McQueen @ WWW2

    Proud Member of Black~Rose~Fire (in spirit if not body)
  • irreverenceirreverence Posts: 39
    edited 27.01.2013
    I did read your posts, not just the last comment, but people seem to have enough problems with attacks anyway, given some of the stupid attacks I have seen sent in this game, so I feel you are confusing the issue by suggesting people should consider using defenders in attack. Not that the situation might not arise when it would be a valid idea, however slim the chance, but even in this situation it would still be better to send attackers so it's immaterial.

    So I guess you missed the title and the question of this thread helmler, that was put up by the OP Original query posted by OP Thanks for coming out helmler.

    My answer is YES, which can be best assessed with the help with a spreadsheet (stats do not lie) to assure the conditions are in your favor.

    Not sure how much simpler I can answer the question.
    irreverence @ usa 1
  • Ante55Ante55 Posts: 1,156
    edited 27.01.2013
    Wait wait wait.

    You stated that 1 crossbowman defending with 7 ranged defense will loose to a bowman with 23 ranged power.
    What is your point that defenders are sometimes useful?
    Ante55 @ skn 1 "Really you are actually reading this?!" ?(

    Need info about RBCs? Click on this Link!
    http://deathorgloryalliance.blogspot.in/

    Watch my new idea of a new event! Click on this link ! http://en.board.goodgamestudios.com/empire/showthread.php?59572-New-Event-The-Conquest-of-Forlarn-Valley&highlight=forlarn

    Also please use the search function!
  • HelmlerHelmler Posts: 978
    edited 27.01.2013
    If you read my post properly irreverence you would notice that I didn't deny that you can, technically, use a defensive troop in attack. However it is always better to use offensive troops, and saying that you can use defenders might confuse the poor player who asked the original question.

    If we take the simplified example you use then we see that it is better to use the crossbowman in attack against other crossbowmen than it is a bowman, as they have higher ranged AP against the ranged def:

    Crossbowman - Ranged AP 39 - Melee Def 20 - Ranged Def 7
    Bowman - Ranged AP 23 - Melee Def 9 - Ranged Def 42

    So it's always better to use the attacking troop than the defensive troop in attack and therefore confusing the issue to say otherwise.
    Helmler @ WWW 1 Rayo McQueen @ WWW2

    Proud Member of Black~Rose~Fire (in spirit if not body)
Sign In to comment.