Why is attack always the better tactic?

[Tellius]

Hi,

I was just wondering why attack always yields better results than defense.

I did some experimenting, my last experiment went like this. The Carthaginians are invading my territory. I have a stack of 12 right next to them, in a forest tile. If I attack the Carthaginians now (they are in the open), I destroy them and only loose two units myself. If on the other hand I do nothing and wait for the Carthaginians' turn, they attack me, I get a 25% terrain defense bonus and still loose 8 units. This things seems to be consistent.

I was just wondering why this is so. Is it because the attacking stack gets the first shot, and this makes up for this pretty big difference in outcome, is it because the game sets up my units in a different way when I'm being attacked, or is it something else completely?

I'm rushing my AE game to test if things are the same for AE.

Just curious here;-)

T.

[Ekmek]

it maybe that attack values are higher than defense values.

or maybe in the code there is a modifier for difficulty setting (if not maybe there should be)

Thats my best guess

[HuangShang]

Terrain bonus should go both ways. From my experience, units in a stack do indeed line up differently. Attackers are centered while attacking, and defenders are centered while defending. I don't know how this will give a huge 6 unit difference, or even if your army had both attackers and defenders, but the attacking side should have greater attack, but less defense. I've always thought that the defender had the advantage, because their center line would hold out longer while the attackers had a much better chance if they should fall into the center later. Of course the units in the stack are very important, say if you had some pikeman and they had a minority of knights, you would want to attack so the pikeman can cut through the knights. Some times battle results have completely baffled me though, battles can be difficult to judge.

[Tellius]

Hi,

All good and well, but the 'defending stack' itself attacks (or should I say counterattacks) after having defended itself against the first 'strike' of the enemy, so when making up my armies, I aim for a good attacking value overall. If the game lines up all my defending units in the center if I'm being attacked, that's a good thing for the blows it will receive, but a bad thing for the counterattacks, it'll take longer for the attacking enemy to suffer casualties.

T.

[Maquiladora]

How many times did you run the test Tellius? Were any of your or the AI's units fortified? All the tests I've done show it's about right with what the manual and the text files say. It's unbalanced (defensive terrain being weak, flanking overpowered) that for sure, but it's usually the right outcome with whats known about combat.

I know in AoM many units have different hit points which can twist a result without you noticing sometimes, because all the units in the unmodified game had the same 10hp so the result was only reliant on the basic stats (attack/defence/range/armor/firepower).

Also the attacker gets an attack bonus from defensive terrain which can be confusing when you expect a terrain defence bonus only. To quote the readme:

Example 3: Terrain Bonus, as displayed in the Battle View, shows a big bonus but I still didn’t win. Why?

Answer: Only the Terrain Bonus for the defender is displayed, however the attacker also gets a bonus computed. Mountains have a greater advantage over plains. If a defender is in the mountains, they will likely survive an attack from units charging from the plains (everything else being equal). Likewise, units storming from the mountains to vanquish a similar army in flatlands will normally win (everything else being equal). Bonus levels for units attacking or defending across identical territory (both armies starting in plains or mountains) are nullified.

[Tellius]

Maquiladora,

Just so that I'm sure I understand you perfectly - let's take my example.

1. When the computer calculates the Carthaginians' turn, they move in from the plains into the forest to attack my units. They get the first shot but they get no terrain bonus from this, then my units defend but do get the terrain bonus. Right so far?
2. My units now get a shot at the enemy, they now do not get the terrain bonus (since they are counterattacking) but the Carthaginians - although being the attacker in general terms - do get this bonus? Right?

If this is so, I think removing this terrain bonus for the attacking stack would be welcome. It would make the game more 'realistic'. No special need though to give the defending units the terrain bonus when they are counterattacking, this makes sense as it works right now. Would it be possible in AE? Are there more people inclined to think this is a good change?

T.

[Maquiladora]

Originally posted by Tellius
Maquiladora,

Just so that I'm sure I understand you perfectly - let's take my example.

1. When the computer calculates the Carthaginians' turn, they move in from the plains into the forest to attack my units. They get the first shot but they get no terrain bonus from this, then my units defend but do get the terrain bonus. Right so far?

Yes.

2. My units now get a shot at the enemy, they now do not get the terrain bonus (since they are counterattacking)

As far as I know thats right, the counterattacking defender doesn't use it's terrain defence bonus in counter-attack.

but the Carthaginians - although being the attacker in general terms - do get this bonus? Right?

No the Carth wouldn't get an attack bonus because they're not attacking from superior defensive terrain to the defender. In this case they attacked from plains (+0% defence) to forest (+25% defence).

If this is so, I think removing this terrain bonus for the attacking stack would be welcome. It would make the game more 'realistic'. No special need though to give the defending units the terrain bonus when they are counterattacking, this makes sense as it works right now. Would it be possible in AE? Are there more people inclined to think this is a good change?

I think it would certainly be more intuitive not to give the attacker a bonus based on terrain it moves from.

Either that or make the battle odds clearer to the player.

[Tellius]

Hi,

No the Carth wouldn't get an attack bonus because they're not attacking from superior defensive terrain to the defender. In this case they attacked from plains (+0% defence) to forest (+25% defence).

Ah, but, if the Carthaginians were the attacking force, and they were attacking from, say, mountains, into forest (where my stack is), they would get the defece bonus from mountains each time my units were counterattacking (and the Carthaginians were on the defending side, even though in general terms, they were the attacking force). This way, an eb and flow of attack and counterattack would be simulated.

Never knew that. I always thought only the defence bonus of the terrain being invaded would go only to the defending stack. This will come in handy in the future.

Thanks

T.

[Maquiladora]

Originally posted by Tellius

Ah, but, if the Carthaginians were the attacking force, and they were attacking from, say, mountains, into forest (where my stack is), they would get the defece bonus from mountains each time my units were counterattacking (and the Carthaginians were on the defending side, even though in general terms, they were the attacking force).

No.

I look at it this way; once Carthage charges down from the mountains, they no longer get the mountain defence bonus, but they do get higher attack values from charging from higher ground.

If Carthage attacked from mountains into forest the mountain bonus would only apply to Carthage attack values in the Carthage attack phase of each round of the battle. Once they're defending your counterattack they're effectively on +0% defence bonus land.

The same way that you would get the forest defence bonus applied only when you're defending in each round of the battle. And when you counterattack, you're attacking with +0% attack bonus (unless you're defending from a city with a building like Ballista Towers in).

At least that's how I'm assuming it all works...

[Tellius]

Hi,

Thanks for clarifying this Maquiladora, it'll come in handy in the future. I just now looked up the readme. In most games, the readme only contains info on special hardware configurations and their possible troubles, so I never bothered to read the readme, but that obviously turned out to be a mistake in this case;-)

Now back to AOM, I will never choose the hardest setting for barbarians anymore, I have now 127, that's right, 127 barbarian units attacking me from all directions (turn 456, so not even the Dark Age event which is supposed to be the hard one as far as barbarians are concerned)
I have no trouble intercepting those bastards, but there is so much damage I just don't have enough PW to repair, so I'm stuck with many 10, 11 or 12 stacks but they are so badly damaged I can't send them out to meet the barbs.

T.

[Maquiladora]

The PW repair code is excellent. It really changes the whole game, because you need a good economy to sustain your wars. In the unmodified game it's sweet when you get surviving units on 1 hit point that can heal fully for free, but in AoM it can be a pain in the butt, especially if you need some tile improvements too.