2 Team Fighting
Posted: 16 Mar 2013, 15:55
So I've just started last few months to get into 2 Tm games. Since 2006 I've only played about a month or 2 a year and before that pretty much only FFA Gimble CTF. I'm still learning the dynamics of 2 Tm play and I am really digging it. The different strategies involved the team work ect. There are a few things I have noticed and I have had people complain to me about. I see people have 2 sort of main fighting styles. Some people charge in and push and dont stop until they are dead or the enemy is. Relying mostly on speed, fast clicking and trying to overwhelm the enemy force and relying mostly on their melee. This is what seems to be the most popular tactic. Others which I fall more in this category take a slower approach relying more on artillery and more deliberately picking the enemy apart. Using melee as body guards for artillery or to finish the enemy off once the enemy artillery is killed or severely weakened. Sort of like the difference between Mike Tyson and Muhammad Ali boxing styles.
I think both ways are appropriate at the right times on the right maps. For example Grilling Grounds. Every game I have been in the team that relies on and keeps it as an artillery battle wins. Ive seen people try to be very aggressive and try to attack in a more Rushy style and they lose. Barbarian Valley is like this also. Lmoth especially on both of these maps.
Other maps a more Rushy melee style works better. So I am not saying one is superior over the other I think it is more situational dependent, terrain, available units ect. It seems to me that a lot of people dont consider anything else other than charging and rushing no matter the situation.
What I have noticed and have had people complain to me that I am doing something wrong when to me it is them. Is I think some people need to know when to back off and stop pushing. I have had instances where I am fighting along side someone we come across an enemy group. The person I'm with (to me it seems) just charges in with guns blazing. Not even considering that the enemy group is larger or has high ground, or a puss advantage anything. Or they start pushing an enemy group that has artillery the enemy group retreats up a hill. My teammate never slows their attack even if they are now taking heavy loses from artillery cause the enemy has moved to higher ground.
It also seems to me that sometimes these players dont look at or compare the units they have vs the enemy group they are facing. What I mean is this. The force a teammate and I have is 8 Bowmen 2 Duffs 2 Ghols with puss and 8 Warrs. The enemy group is 5 Bowmen 12 Warrs 2 Duffs and 4 Ghols. Fairly even as far as unit number and points but they have a melee advanatge. The way I see it (unless time is really short and we have to take a flag or something) There is no reason that we should just charge that enemy group. We have a Bowmen advantage and can pick them apart by standing our ground and just moving close enough for our Bowmen to work. Once we take out their Bowmen our Bowmen can focus and keep pressure on their Duffs and our Duffs can go to work on the enemy melee. Our melee may not need to fight at all. They were just there to deter the enemy from charging or protect our artillery if they do charge (Body Guards). So we could win that fight with minimal damage to ourselves. Thats the way I see it.
Many times though in that situation I will have a teammate. We have an even split of those same units. They just totally charge in there throwing everything they have at the enemy group. To me that seems at best fool hearty at worst suicide even if we win that we are going to take heavy loses. So if I'm thinking about it like I do and my teammate charges in and I dont and they get decimated they complain to me for not pushing with them. I'm thinking why? Why would you charge like that? There was no need to we could have taken a more deliberate approach and picked them apart or forced them to charge us. Which would give us an advantage since we are in a more defensive position.
Or I see in a similar situation but we have a unit advantage. We have 8 Bows 12 Warrs 2 Duffs 2 Ghols and the enemy group is 5 Bows 8 Warrs 2 Duffs 4 Ghols. In this situation we have a melee and artillery advantage so with Player skill pretty even we should be able to win this by charging. Still though why? Even if we can just charge them and take them out we are going to take loses and damage. In this situation I see even more reason to take a more deliberate approach and use our artillery to break the enemy down. It will take longer but we could take that enemy group out with minimal damage to ourselves if we just slow down and let the Bowmen work to take out the enemy Bowmen so our Duffs can go to work more effectively on the enemy melee and we could win that with minimal damage and minimal use of our own melee.
Another thing I see a lot is people attacking much larger enemy groups than the group they are with. For example 2 Players come in contact with an enemy group at a river crossing or any other place that isnt a totally open flat battle ground. Even if the group they are in is quite a bit smaller than the enemy group and the chances of them winning are slim they still attack totally aggressively. I dont see this as a good idea most of the time if you have any other choice. Here is why and here is what it seems to me some people arent thinking about. If the group you are in represents 20% of your teams army and you come in contact with an enemy group that represent 30-40% of the enemies army. First of all unless you get really lucky or are just way better than the Players that have the enemy group you are going to lose. Second of all attacking is not always the best idea. What I mean is. If the terrain allows like a water crossing or you have a hill or any terrain advantage there is no need to attack if you can just hold that enemy force in place. Here is why if your group is 20% of your total army you have 80% of your army elsewhere on the battlefield. If you are standing off with an enemy group that is 35% of the enemies total army they have 65% of their army elsewhere on the battlefield. This gives the rest of your teammates a 15% advantage somewhere else. So with that unit advantage your teammates should be able to win the fights they are in. All you have to do is keep that enemy group you are facing off with busy until the rest of your team having a unit advantage wins their fights and can then close on the enemy group you are standing off with and you all attack them together. At the least if you are in a good defensible position if that larger enemy group does charge and attack you should be in position to take out a larger % of their units than the % your group is. You have 20% in a good defensible position (hill or other side of a bottleneck like a river crossing). You are attacked by 35% you may take out that whole force or take them down to be only 5-10% of their total army. Since you have a terrain advantage. This still gives the rest of your team a % advantage. The way I see it if you can just hold a larger enemy group in one spot you are in effect taking them out of the fight for a while and giving the rest of your team an advantage. So that later they can help you attack the group you have been standing off with and now you have the % advantage.
Like I said these are somethings I have noticed and I know there are times to be uber aggressive and just charge but I dont think it should be the default tactic it seems to be for so many people. It seems some people are like rabid dogs as soon as they see an enemy they just charge at them and attack not considering anything else. I think before someone charges in with everything they have, they should think about it first and consider maybe they could slow down and take that enemy out a little more systematically and deliberately with less damage to themselves and that attacking is not always the best option sometimes holding an enemy force in place is better than attacking them right away. Also if you started a charge and things start turning ugly for you and your losing you can retreat and regroup in a more defensible position and force your enemy to attack you. We all know its hard to beat someone that has a hill advantage or other terrain advantage.
These are somethings I have noticed and how it seems to me. I would like to hear what some of the rest of you thought.
I think both ways are appropriate at the right times on the right maps. For example Grilling Grounds. Every game I have been in the team that relies on and keeps it as an artillery battle wins. Ive seen people try to be very aggressive and try to attack in a more Rushy style and they lose. Barbarian Valley is like this also. Lmoth especially on both of these maps.
Other maps a more Rushy melee style works better. So I am not saying one is superior over the other I think it is more situational dependent, terrain, available units ect. It seems to me that a lot of people dont consider anything else other than charging and rushing no matter the situation.
What I have noticed and have had people complain to me that I am doing something wrong when to me it is them. Is I think some people need to know when to back off and stop pushing. I have had instances where I am fighting along side someone we come across an enemy group. The person I'm with (to me it seems) just charges in with guns blazing. Not even considering that the enemy group is larger or has high ground, or a puss advantage anything. Or they start pushing an enemy group that has artillery the enemy group retreats up a hill. My teammate never slows their attack even if they are now taking heavy loses from artillery cause the enemy has moved to higher ground.
It also seems to me that sometimes these players dont look at or compare the units they have vs the enemy group they are facing. What I mean is this. The force a teammate and I have is 8 Bowmen 2 Duffs 2 Ghols with puss and 8 Warrs. The enemy group is 5 Bowmen 12 Warrs 2 Duffs and 4 Ghols. Fairly even as far as unit number and points but they have a melee advanatge. The way I see it (unless time is really short and we have to take a flag or something) There is no reason that we should just charge that enemy group. We have a Bowmen advantage and can pick them apart by standing our ground and just moving close enough for our Bowmen to work. Once we take out their Bowmen our Bowmen can focus and keep pressure on their Duffs and our Duffs can go to work on the enemy melee. Our melee may not need to fight at all. They were just there to deter the enemy from charging or protect our artillery if they do charge (Body Guards). So we could win that fight with minimal damage to ourselves. Thats the way I see it.
Many times though in that situation I will have a teammate. We have an even split of those same units. They just totally charge in there throwing everything they have at the enemy group. To me that seems at best fool hearty at worst suicide even if we win that we are going to take heavy loses. So if I'm thinking about it like I do and my teammate charges in and I dont and they get decimated they complain to me for not pushing with them. I'm thinking why? Why would you charge like that? There was no need to we could have taken a more deliberate approach and picked them apart or forced them to charge us. Which would give us an advantage since we are in a more defensive position.
Or I see in a similar situation but we have a unit advantage. We have 8 Bows 12 Warrs 2 Duffs 2 Ghols and the enemy group is 5 Bows 8 Warrs 2 Duffs 4 Ghols. In this situation we have a melee and artillery advantage so with Player skill pretty even we should be able to win this by charging. Still though why? Even if we can just charge them and take them out we are going to take loses and damage. In this situation I see even more reason to take a more deliberate approach and use our artillery to break the enemy down. It will take longer but we could take that enemy group out with minimal damage to ourselves if we just slow down and let the Bowmen work to take out the enemy Bowmen so our Duffs can go to work more effectively on the enemy melee and we could win that with minimal damage and minimal use of our own melee.
Another thing I see a lot is people attacking much larger enemy groups than the group they are with. For example 2 Players come in contact with an enemy group at a river crossing or any other place that isnt a totally open flat battle ground. Even if the group they are in is quite a bit smaller than the enemy group and the chances of them winning are slim they still attack totally aggressively. I dont see this as a good idea most of the time if you have any other choice. Here is why and here is what it seems to me some people arent thinking about. If the group you are in represents 20% of your teams army and you come in contact with an enemy group that represent 30-40% of the enemies army. First of all unless you get really lucky or are just way better than the Players that have the enemy group you are going to lose. Second of all attacking is not always the best idea. What I mean is. If the terrain allows like a water crossing or you have a hill or any terrain advantage there is no need to attack if you can just hold that enemy force in place. Here is why if your group is 20% of your total army you have 80% of your army elsewhere on the battlefield. If you are standing off with an enemy group that is 35% of the enemies total army they have 65% of their army elsewhere on the battlefield. This gives the rest of your teammates a 15% advantage somewhere else. So with that unit advantage your teammates should be able to win the fights they are in. All you have to do is keep that enemy group you are facing off with busy until the rest of your team having a unit advantage wins their fights and can then close on the enemy group you are standing off with and you all attack them together. At the least if you are in a good defensible position if that larger enemy group does charge and attack you should be in position to take out a larger % of their units than the % your group is. You have 20% in a good defensible position (hill or other side of a bottleneck like a river crossing). You are attacked by 35% you may take out that whole force or take them down to be only 5-10% of their total army. Since you have a terrain advantage. This still gives the rest of your team a % advantage. The way I see it if you can just hold a larger enemy group in one spot you are in effect taking them out of the fight for a while and giving the rest of your team an advantage. So that later they can help you attack the group you have been standing off with and now you have the % advantage.
Like I said these are somethings I have noticed and I know there are times to be uber aggressive and just charge but I dont think it should be the default tactic it seems to be for so many people. It seems some people are like rabid dogs as soon as they see an enemy they just charge at them and attack not considering anything else. I think before someone charges in with everything they have, they should think about it first and consider maybe they could slow down and take that enemy out a little more systematically and deliberately with less damage to themselves and that attacking is not always the best option sometimes holding an enemy force in place is better than attacking them right away. Also if you started a charge and things start turning ugly for you and your losing you can retreat and regroup in a more defensible position and force your enemy to attack you. We all know its hard to beat someone that has a hill advantage or other terrain advantage.
These are somethings I have noticed and how it seems to me. I would like to hear what some of the rest of you thought.
