Goodgame Studios forum archives
Forum: empire-en
Board: [589] Strategy & Tactics Discussion
Topic: [323609] Is it worth sending attack troops as support?
[-323609] MrWackyGuy (GB1) [None] :: Nov. 20, 2016, 11:59 p.m.
It probably sounds like a silly question, but if someone in your alliance is getting attacked and you have tons of attack troops but not enough defence, would it be worth sending the attack troops as a last resort? I know most attack troops do way less damage when defending, but are they all just gonna die off and be a waste, or could they actually help a little bit?

There's also troops like the vet swordmen, which are super fast to train and have medium attack and defence I guess, but in all honestly who stacks up on them and if you've only got 30 minutes before an attack lands you're not gonna be able to train enough and send them off to support (even with +999% recruitment speed), trust me I've tried. Well almost 999% lol.
[4617200] Amnesiac Lapp (US1) [None] :: Nov. 21, 2016, 12:44 a.m.
MrWackyGuy (GB1) said:
It probably sounds like a silly question, but if someone in your alliance is getting attacked and you have tons of attack troops but not enough defence, would it be worth sending the attack troops as a last resort? I know most attack troops do way less damage when defending, but are they all just gonna die off and be a waste, or could they actually help a little bit?

There's also troops like the vet swordmen, which are super fast to train and have medium attack and defence I guess, but in all honestly who stacks up on them and if you've only got 30 minutes before an attack lands you're not gonna be able to train enough and send them off to support (even with +999% recruitment speed), trust me I've tried. Well almost 999% lol.
attacking troops(such as Knights of Kingsgaurd, Heavy Crossbows, etc); DO NOT SEND AS SUPPORT! YOU ARE ONLY GIVING YOUR ENEMY MORE GLORY XD

Defending troops(scout of kingsgaurd, halbeirder) etc: send.

Versatile troops(just as cultist bowmen, vet swordsmen): send!
[4617207] Graycat (US1) (Banned) [None] :: Nov. 21, 2016, 1:01 a.m.
MrWackyGuy (GB1) said:
It probably sounds like a silly question, but if someone in your alliance is getting attacked and you have tons of attack troops but not enough defence, would it be worth sending the attack troops as a last resort?
No

not at all
[4617215] Amnesiac Lapp (US1) [None] :: Nov. 21, 2016, 1:16 a.m.
Graycat (US1) said:
MrWackyGuy (GB1) said:
It probably sounds like a silly question, but if someone in your alliance is getting attacked and you have tons of attack troops but not enough defence, would it be worth sending the attack troops as a last resort?
No

not at all
exactly. your opponent is only going to gain more glory.
[4617232] Imperius (GB1) [GB1] :: Nov. 21, 2016, 2:20 a.m.
definitely not weird question to be honest 
[4617365] Wilson Wang (AU1) [None] :: Nov. 21, 2016, 8:12 a.m.
Send the attack troops to attack the enemy lol.

Teach them a lesson. ;)
[4617374] benjames (AU1) [AU1] :: Nov. 21, 2016, 8:56 a.m.
Its pointless unless you got massive numbers..... ratio about 10k defenders = 100k attackers lol
[4617510] MrWackyGuy (GB1) [None] :: Nov. 21, 2016, 2:25 p.m.
Yeah, I figured as much. But I was just asking in case there was some kind of weird tactic or something haha.
[4624641] Dalaran (AU1) [None] :: Dec. 1, 2016, 10:52 a.m.
So to answer your question truly under the hypothetical situation of last resort, unlike others where they didn't take that into account.

If you have a lot of attackers and your ally still needs a few extra defenders, I would send them off on defence, the combined power would help out as much as sending Spearmen and Macemen would help so go for it.
[4624653] benjames (AU1) [AU1] :: Dec. 1, 2016, 11:35 a.m.
Dalaran (AU1) said:
So to answer your question truly under the hypothetical situation of last resort, unlike others where they didn't take that into account.

If you have a lot of attackers and your ally still needs a few extra defenders, I would send them off on defence, the combined power would help out as much as sending Spearmen and Macemen would help so go for it.
Realistically thats not a good idea, for your level, it might be, but at lvl 70 level its just not practical.
[4624770] MrWackyGuy (GB1) [None] :: Dec. 1, 2016, 1:25 p.m.
Thanks for the advice. To be honest I think I'd rather send off my attack troops to an event or at least attack something. I was stupidly afk for the first few hours of the recent alliance tourny, and left my attack troops in my ops unprotected. I lost almost 7k attack (as well as loads of defense from attacks on my main). I'm still a bit annoyed about that. 

Like I said in another topic, I understand why people attack in the alliance tourny, on the whole I usually enjoy it, BUT, I don't understand why people think the tourny is an excuse to break the fair play rules. I got attacked multiple times in a close period (while already on fire) in the tourny. That would never usually happen, outside of the tourny. All fun and games though! 
[4626997] soup dragon (GB1) [GB1] :: Dec. 4, 2016, 9:31 p.m.
sending attackers to defend will increce defence strength a little. I would think this would mean that overall the defender took less losses and the attacker took more. If you lose the battle it just means you lose more men and the attacker gets more glory, but if you win in defence, it could mean you lose less men. It would also effect which men were lost. As some of your attackers used in defence die, that probably means less defenders die, so if you are short of defenders and high on attackers, it may preserve more of your defenders and so be worthwhile, but only if you win the battle.
[4627057] Amnesiac Lapp (US1) [None] :: Dec. 4, 2016, 11:28 p.m.
soup dragon (GB1) said:
sending attackers to defend will increce defence strength a little. I would think this would mean that overall the defender took less losses and the attacker took more. If you lose the battle it just means you lose more men and the attacker gets more glory, but if you win in defence, it could mean you lose less men. It would also effect which men were lost. As some of your attackers used in defence die, that probably means less defenders die, so if you are short of defenders and high on attackers, it may preserve more of your defenders and so be worthwhile, but only if you win the battle.
i dont think you understand. attackers drop like flees when defending. the attackers would plow straightthrough them and start chipping away at the defenders,so ultimately, your barely destroying any of the attackign army xD
[4627216] benjames (AU1) [AU1] :: Dec. 5, 2016, 12:18 p.m.
There is a reason we have "attackers" and "defenders". All i can say is use them the right way.
[4627805] Dalaran (AU1) [None] :: Dec. 6, 2016, 6:40 a.m.
Sending attackers as a support is like sending spearmen and bowmen except they are slower
[4627952] kojo123 (IN1) [IN1] :: Dec. 6, 2016, 11:12 a.m.
send veteran swordsman if u have but not other troops 
[4650023] A.M.17 (INT1) [INT1] :: Jan. 6, 2017, 1:17 p.m.
Only time its acceptable if if you send like 100 attackers to defend a 32 troop rv capture or something, but i cant imagine why you wouldn't have 20 real def troops to send instead.