What type of leader are you?

[Yob]

I personally love the attack, give me some divisions and i will naturally attack. My best, has been winning the 1944, start date as Germany against the soviet union by the December 45, and having launched sea lion aswell.

Mainly because of, the nature of attack........ you dictate what is done, where they defend, where they fight, where they retreat......

 

[Derbiean]

Defensive usually, sometimes offensive and always abusive to those beneath me

 

[rafan]

I defend to conserve my manpower.
I will atack only after amasing strong
enought force to overhelm openent or when i will find
weakness in enemy lines.

Like an carnivore pattiently waiting for its prey to make mistake.

Ps: Pround member of: Defeted Germany with Poland on hard in HOI 3 club.

 

[Kaan141]

Attack until no manpower

 

[Antediluvian Monster]

I'm offensive, if not outright obnoxious.

 

[Kovax]

I consider myself an "opportunist". I will generally sit passively or quietly maneuver things in the background until I see (or can create) an opening, and then exploit it shamelessly. My preference is for "Strategy" rather than "Grand Strategy": making flanking attacks, encirclements, and overruns in one or two fairly localized operations, rather than micromanaging 100+ divisions scattered all around the globe. I also work at limiting casualties, both on my own side and to some degree even on the enemy's; the idea is to surround or overrun and force a surrender, and to secure the means of production or manpower in order to achieve the political aims of the country I'm playing, not to kill as many people as possible.

 

[jcd000]

I'm a big fan of static defence in advantageous terrain and schwerpunkt elsewhere.
As such i'm bad in defending large fronts but quite good at attacking a lot and keeping the opponent off balance. Encirclements and flankings are mandantory if i get a chance.

If i got the forces i really really like to divide an enemy army in parts

 

[GrafKeks]

I'm a highly aggressive leader prone to doing high risk high reward offensives. Generally fight battle where I pull far ahead of enemy in kill/loss but, I'm not afraid to throw units into suicide missions to secure an operational victory.

I am a gambler too, let the dice roll. Alea iacta est. Daddy needs a new pair of sneakers etc.

 

[sterrius]

Swarm strategist.

I usually play weak countrys so i need to actually reach my objectives fast as i can´t keep fighting.

So i stay put in my place giving indirect help until one day where the gates of hell are unleashed and cthulu rises from ry'leh to destroy mankind...or the allies at least.
1 year later im reminded by the US im a small IC country and put back in place ;P.

 

[GhostKiller01]

im the third....

a defensive land bunker wall
strategic dismantling of production structures of enemy
air superiority on the battlefield

4rth defensive general here, but I turn offensive late game

strong defensive positions,
air superiority on the battlefield,
bombing runs on the enemy,
espionage tactics to reduce the enemy war machine,

Main tactic in any grand strategy game is: continuous buildup of production facilities until there's no more room for improvement and massive research prioritization , even if my economy suffers due to it.
Early game: keep a small compact very efficient and powerful force
Mid game: when someone attacks, hold the enemy until I can unleash the military hounds
Late game: the military will not be leashed again!!!

 

[mursolini]

Flexible.

There is no prefered strategy, there is one, that is favoured by enviroment and resources.

 

[Lither]

Fast. Will throttle navy to bring as much mobility to army as possible.
Almost entirely cavalry army in the early game, switching over to mot.
A motorised infantry division is worth three foot infantry in my books.
Light armour until medium travels as fast as said mot.
Paratroopers behind lines to support mobile assaults
The attack, in my books, is always the superior to the defence. My objective is to quickly cause the enemy to lose enough men and materiel that they cannot sustain operations, then use aggressive movements, encirclements and, yes, run the risk of overextension, to keep my enemy off balance and ensure they cannot seize the initiative.

 

[CocoCincinnati]

I play defensive whenever possible. I also prefer quality over quantity so I prioritize research and upgrades over anyting else.

 

[theolor]

Its kinda sad how many people are deffensive

Why? I find it the most fun. I like to wear the enemy out and then push their carcass out of the way as I move into their land.

 

[LiamRiordan]

Isolate and destroy. I like to use lure them in with a gap in my lines, and flank with my mobile forces whilst I pound them with my Close Air Support.

The mental image of 400 Stukas dive bombing a retreating division or ten is just... Well, cue the Valkyries

 

[9pmg5665]

Typically offensive a the start with a build up of units and supplies, or if I start losing battles, I turn to guerrilla tactics to preserve the ruins of an army while taking minimal losses (even if minimal gains taken.). Breaking their armies to bits and then using spare units, while still overpowering their units, to take any major land points I'd like.

 

[MarcoRossolini]

I'm of the Soviet line of thought.
I want tons of stuff, because if I screw up then it's not the end of the world. I want to be quick and aggressive. I want to be able to take advantage of opportunities and if I'm on the defence then I'll hold on with my fingernails if need be. I want to get up close and personal, sitting back and shooting from afar gives the enemy time to react and is for cowards and fascists. I will happily pile as much artillery and tanks into as small a space as possible to absolutely pulverise the anything that stands in my way. Sudden new threat? just pulverise it with everything that can see it and move on. Following a plan and stopping at objectives doesn't suit me, unless I have specific orders from above. I'd rather continue to exploit, even if, or despite, it results in the loss of the majority of my forces,
Of course, that's the plan anyway. If I don't have enough forces, or experience or knowledge of game mechanics, then I'm defeated horribly. But, in a complete opposite (I hope) to the way I am IRL, I love being really aggressive when the time comes.

 

[Secret Master]

What kind of leader I think I am:

What kind of leader I actually am:

 

[Hagen67483]

Queen of the Battlefield. Just building as much "last Arguments of Kings" as possible.

 

[Razor]

I consider myself an "opportunist". I will generally sit passively or quietly maneuver things in the background until I see (or can create) an opening, and then exploit it shamelessly. My preference is for "Strategy" rather than "Grand Strategy": making flanking attacks, encirclements, and overruns in one or two fairly localized operations, rather than micromanaging 100+ divisions scattered all around the globe. I also work at limiting casualties, both on my own side and to some degree even on the enemy's; the idea is to surround or overrun and force a surrender, and to secure the means of production or manpower in order to achieve the political aims of the country I'm playing, not to kill as many people as possible.

+1