-MM- Slaughtering Tutti Thread (war)

[DeletedUser]

Woot you go -MM- You noble those damn good players that focus on internalling and barbs' I know it must be a great challenge for you :icon_cool:. That is what your saying right? :icon_twisted:

Seeing as most of [T] and MoM are doing the exact same thing as Tutti, it should mean that at least half this world shouldn't pose as a great challenge according to your sarcastic conclusion. You must be overlooking the fact that even if the tribe is not focussed on a war, there are still some that will try and fight and some that will defend their villages (for example, some of T's south). All those enemy villages still need effort and co-ordination to be nobled out.

 

[DeletedUser100410]

Another thing is that in this game is easier to defend than to attack.

You need less skill and less time to be succesful at defending than attacking. That is why imho many ppl choose the easy way of nobling barbs, internals or inactive dead accounts

 

[DeletedUser84667]

Defending real takes more skill than attacking, especially if you are and account purely based on a massive frontline. If you think attacking takes more skill, you have never had to really defend before.

 

[DeletedUser]

That wasn't the situation posed though. Defending takes more skill and effort if you are under attack by a great number of people.

Orsio was a general statement. Under the same conditions, defending is easier than attacking. I'm inclined to agree.

 

[scarlet ash]

Another thing is that in this game is easier to defend than to attack.

You need less skill and less time to be succesful at defending than attacking. That is why imho many ppl choose the easy way of nobling barbs, internals or inactive dead accounts

I find it much easier to attack than defend normally and I wouldn't consider myself bad at either, wouldn't go out with a huge ego and claim to be the best as that isn't true and would be being pretty ignorant to claim as well as setting myself up for a big fall publicly if/when I am rimmed. but I generally I find attacking to be less difficult. Defending is very easy yes when its a border of players fighting and you have plenty of troops behind you in distance to defend with and prestack with but overall, to survive an OP, mass incomings and numerous players hitting is much much much harder than that of attacking.

You say less time to be successful at defending. It is very much the opposite of that when being OP'd or on a front line against very active, decent players where waves of attacks come almost instantly after the next. When attacking just remember times to be on at and stay on to see the landings but there is very little pressure to be on unlike defending.

 

[DeletedUser]

Another thing is that in this game is easier to defend than to attack.

You need less skill and less time to be succesful at defending than attacking. That is why imho many ppl choose the easy way of nobling barbs, internals or inactive dead accounts

Im sorry but I must agree with Ash here. Anyone can sit back, 30 fields from the frontline, and launch nukes and nobles repeatedly. Very few here can sort through 15k incomings, find the trains, and choose the most effective method of defending them all. It might be easier to defend if you have a huge backline to stack from, but thats not even really defending at that point, its jut stacking. Anyone who thinks that defending is EASY has never had to actually defend themselves. When you attack, you are not afraid to sleep; Nuff said.

 

[DeletedUser95593]

Im sorry but I must agree with Ash here. Anyone can sit back, 30 fields from the frontline, and launch nukes and nobles repeatedly. Very few here can sort through 15k incomings, find the trains, and choose the most effective method of defending them all. It might be easier to defend if you have a huge backline to stack from, but thats not even really defending at that point, its jut stacking. Anyone who thinks that defending is EASY has never had to actually defend themselves. When you attack, you are not afraid to sleep; Nuff said.

Yeah but what active and skilled player is going to be nobled by someone who sits back and launches nobles and nukes from 30 fields repeatedly?

It is easier to defend than it is to attack someone that is just as good if not a better player than you and be successful.

Generally speaking defending 1v1 is easy. If your being attacked by multiple players hypothetically you have a tribe to back you up who can sit and stack you. Defending isnt just stopping the first wave then giving up straight away, it is about surviving the long haul. If you have those players behind you then you don't need to waste hours on the game and be worried about losing villages whilst you sleep.

but I generally I find attacking to be less difficult.

If your attacking barbs/inactives/rubbish players. Attacking mohua was a pain in the ass. As I'm sure Kingtiger was for MoM.

 

[scarlet ash]

If your attacking barbs/inactives/rubbish players. Attacking mohua was a pain in the ass. As I'm sure Kingtiger was for MoM.

Im not saying your opponent cant be hard to attack, but I still think it was probably harder for mohua to defend than you to attack. Though Im sure mohua did get stacked by others :L.

 

[DeletedUser]

Im not saying your opponent cant be hard to attack, but I still think it was probably harder for mohua to defend than you to attack. Though Im sure mohua did get stacked by others :L.

Stacking is the only relief in defending, but attacking has the same effect when a tribe fakes for you, or randomly nukes. Each aspect has its hard parts and easy parts. Though I will say one thing, dump 15 hours a day into defending an account and as long as you have basic defending skills, you should be fine. Do the same with attacking, and it might end up going either way still, as it factors in the skill of the defending player. You have much more control over defending that you do attacking, but that does not inherently mean that one is easier than the other.

 

[DeletedUser]

From a pure numbers standpoint, defending is easier than attacking, as Choco has already stated. Simply due to the fact that defensive strength compounds. Theoretically in an even fight, tribe vs tribe or player vs player, if there are 10,000 villages attacking you, you will have 10,000 villages worth of defense, etc etc.

In the heat of any given tribal operation, of course the defender may find themselves facing odds that they or their tribe are not prepared to match for whatever reason. In this scenario defending is much harder, not because it is more difficult, but because somewhere along the line somebody messed up and you are being outnumbered for whatever reason.

All that aside, I'm pretty sure that Orsio's main underlying point is that is is easier to be a defensive oriented player as opposed to an offensive player over the long term. This is absolutely true, as an offensive player has to constantly be finding new targets and launching nukes more regularly as well as regularly facing opposition both offensively and defensively. Defensive play is generally lazier overall, and even moreso when under attack because you naturally have more defense to draw on, even should your tribe fail you.

 

[DeletedUser100410]

. Anyone can sit back, 30 fields from the frontline, and launch nukes and nobles repeatedly. . Anyone who thinks that defending is EASY has never had to actually defend themselves. When you attack, you are not afraid to sleep; Nuff said.

Well, any mediumm skilled defender would easily kill all your nobles if u pretend to noble him from 30 fields away.

Believe me, i know what is to attack in this game and i know what is to defend. 630 million ODA and 250 million ODD do not prove it but give you a hint that i have been tested.

Ofc if u are one player alone against a tribe sending 15k attacks per day, it will be hard to tag the trains coming but on 1v1 level defending is way easier than attacking an active player.

I dont think a skilled attacker will ever succeed against an active defender, unless they ganbang him, which usually happens.

 

[oheinen66]

send 100 trains 5 hours before the land time within vague minute...even active defenders shit themselves when they see that

 

[DeletedUser]

I've been on both sides of the fence, and I agree with what Zurtle has written really. It's much easier to play the defending play style over the long term, but when it comes down to the heat of the battle, I think defending is much harder. Generally because once a side gets started with good momentum, they go for a good time against a few players. Take what W2V/MM do; keep up the pressure and keep attacking. Generally, in those cases, the other tribes are on the theoretical back-foot, and most of the time, the players on the frontline see a lot of firepower. Tribal Wars is hardly ever played on an even playing field; people want to win and they will exploit any and all advantages to help themselves to that end. Even in even sized ish fights, a lot of the time, the big defenders/targets will be handling more than the support their tribe can provide, plus it takes time to get support to the front whereas the defender will be constantly under attack. Most of the support, if it does get there for a side, is in offensive relief.

It's really situational and circumstantial though.