Dont get Defensive! Why the hell not?

[Baron Jukaga]

I am a born again Defensive slider whore. You know what you can do with that +1 shock? I don't care cause I'm lovin the +1 siege. It's almost an exploit how much better it is. Granted, I may lose a few more battles now, but not once, I say again not once have I lost a city to an enemy siege since I went over. (Except for the instant rebel siege nothin you can do about that) Even when people have 1 or 2 CRTs on me I always have more than enough time to evict the transgressors or succesfully take 3 of their cities, while the minimal fort they're sieging still has +2!

The cat is out of the bag, anyone keeping this to themselves run!, cause the secret is out. Combined with quantity, Defensive is.... insane.


Any dissent from my opinion will result in terrible, terrible things.

 

[swilhelm73]

Originally posted by Baron Jukaga

Any dissent from my opinion will result in terrible, terrible things.

I officially dissent. Not because I want to complain about your strat - but really just because I want to see what your idea of terrible, terrible things is.

Seriously though, I find once I hit the midgame I am taking many forts by assault...so the shock and morale are more important...

 

[Baron Jukaga]

Re: Re: Dont get Defensive! Why the hell not?

Originally posted by swilhelm73


I officially dissent. Not because I want to complain about your strat - but really just because I want to see what your idea of terrible, terrible things is.

Seriously though, I find once I hit the midgame I am taking many forts by assault...so the shock and morale are more important...

<Rubs hands together evily, cackles>

Two men will be knocking on your door soon. They will escort you to a car. Once the car reaches it's destination, you will find out.


Yes, morale and crappy shock are a problem. However, by mid, end-game cannons are very powerful and cheap when you go defensive. Combined with quantity and a dash of land if you like, the sheer numbers of troops and cannon you can raise is staggering. Morale be damned at that point. I feel like a soulless Soviet Marshal, directing the Human Mass to terrible loss... but it works.

 

[Castellon]

I don't think it would work very well agaist a human player though!

 

[unmerged(9994)]

Does the -1 siege if you go offensive have any real effect?

 

[unmerged(3999)]

Originally posted by Eddie Teach
Does the -1 siege if you go offensive have any real effect?

None whatsoever. It doesn't even affect the siege ratings of your historical leaders.

 

[Baron Jukaga]

Anyone know if the Siege rating affects assaults in any way?

 

[Baron Jukaga]

Originally posted by Castellon
I don't think it would work very well agaist a human player though!

Don't be so sure... The numbers one can call up in my scenario easily compensates for a measly 2 shock points. (assuming a offensive/quality and a defensive/quantity) With double or triple the amount of troops, the defensive/quantity army will have much higher shock and fire ratings than your foe. Morale can be a problem, but again numbers compensate in the long term. And the cannons, the sheer hordes of cannons...

 

[swilhelm73]

IRC, the -1 siege rating will reduce the base score of your forts. So a min fort in the plains would start with a score of 0, not 1. Feel free to test it out...

 

[Baron Jukaga]

Originally posted by swilhelm73
IRC, the -1 siege rating will reduce the base score of your forts. So a min fort in the plains would start with a score of 0, not 1. Feel free to test it out...

I think yer right about that one, it seems to hash with my personal experiences.

 

[Nikolai II]

Originally posted by Baron Jukaga


Don't be so sure... The numbers one can call up in my scenario easily compensates for a measly 2 shock points. (assuming a offensive/quality and a defensive/quantity) With double or triple the amount of troops, the defensive/quantity army will have much higher shock and fire ratings than your foe. Morale can be a problem, but again numbers compensate in the long term. And the cannons, the sheer hordes of cannons...

Manpower won't differ, since human opponents with offensive=10 will still have quality=1 just like you.

Paying 2/3 for cannons and their upkeep is tasty enough, though, and I think I would strive towards oq:01, since by the time you get there, morale from sliders is a non-issue.

 

[Castellon]

Originally posted by Baron Jukaga


Don't be so sure... The numbers one can call up in my scenario easily compensates for a measly 2 shock points. (assuming a offensive/quality and a defensive/quantity) With double or triple the amount of troops, the defensive/quantity army will have much higher shock and fire ratings than your foe. Morale can be a problem, but again numbers compensate in the long term. And the cannons, the sheer hordes of cannons...

A human would have just as many troops but with higher leader values for shock and fire. So they can kill off your armies, and cover each province so you cannot build any troops, then take as long as they want sieging your provinces.

 

[Norgesvenn]

Originally posted by Nikolai II


Paying 2/3 for cannons and their upkeep is tasty enough, though, and I think I would strive towards oq:01, since by the time you get there, morale from sliders is a non-issue.

Exactly. The max defensive is very, very useful, particularly for countries with no siege specialists (like that Bureau of France). And when you balance this with Free subjects and top quality, you can conquer and conquer, rendering manpower less important as well. Mmmm.... defensive doctrine... *drool*

 

[Carolus Rex]

I always go defensive. I just love to first send in my cavalry hordes, then the little guys with the guns come in and take care of the cities.
Muahahahahah(tm)!

 

[Owen]

Originally posted by Castellon


A human would have just as many troops but with higher leader values for shock and fire. So they can kill off your armies, and cover each province so you cannot build any troops, then take as long as they want sieging your provinces.

I'm with Castellon on this one. You'd have to make sure you're naval though so you can blockade everything once you do cover/siege everything. The offensive quantity player is also be able to rack up war score with a few large field armies in any case, and be able to keep refilling them.

Ah, and I've just seen a man with more than 1000posts advocating full defensive and quality. I would like to know quite how this can be made to work at all against anyone with more than about 4 provinces or so. I think a ratio of manpower of 2.8 and a difference of 2 in shock would make an immediate difference unless you start with a much bigger military and cover everything quick. Or was is a joke Norgesvenn?

 

[BiB]

There's a lot of players who only consider singleplayer games, and not multiplayer ones. U can get by just fine with full quality and defensive in SP ...

 

[Owen]

But wouldn't they do better if their manpower was 2.8 times as much?

I thought quality was worthwhile for some nations until I tried to carry out a "vassalisation war" as Russia against a huge Austria and found that fire+1 was insufficient to make up for their tech advantage and having to fight in their provinces. If quality wasn't the best way for a mid-game Russia who had colonised all of Siberia, then who would it be the best way for?

 

[BiB]

Never said it was the best, it isn't, just said that it works. Russia is the obvious quantity nation though so quality should be ill suited there. If u play as England (1492) and be a colonial trader quality will do just fine.

 

[Owen]

Yes, this is all true. I had been working on the assumption that Russia's large manpower pool could be turned to quality and still produce 1000s of troops. It still wasn't enough, perhaps unsurprisingly, now I think about it.

As you say it is a SP vs MP issue.

Perhaps I ought to get an internet connection that isn't made out of two yoghurt pots and a piece of string so I can play MP.

 

[Prince Eugene]

Full defensive and quantity can easily be slaughtered by quantity and full offensive. They can make just as many troops as you (well it depends on what nations) and slaughter you on the field. If they cover all of your provinces then it is over no matter how long it takes them to take the provinces.