AznWhopper Posted May 10, 2008 Report Share Posted May 10, 2008 Aggressive, Planned, and Cautious. What exactly is the differences between the three, and when should each be used? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fredginator Posted May 10, 2008 Report Share Posted May 10, 2008 I'm not sure, but I think it has to do with the size of the force you are using, if you have twice the troops and twice the tanks that your enemy has, then you can use aggressive attack, if your force is smaller then use planned, and if your force is a lot smaller, you should use cautious. but as I already said, I'm not sure Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azaghul Posted May 10, 2008 Report Share Posted May 10, 2008 More aggressive attacks will cause more casualties on both sides. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AznWhopper Posted May 10, 2008 Author Report Share Posted May 10, 2008 I know that, but then it leaves standard, planned, and cautious attacks without a purpose. So i want to know how the other 3 factor into winning battles. I think it might be just referring to the number of casualties on both sides. Aggressive being the most, and cautious being the least. I don't know, which is why I ask for clarification Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LJ Scott Posted May 10, 2008 Report Share Posted May 10, 2008 You use Cautious, Planned and Standard based on the odds of victory, depending on what your attempting to do. I.e. if you want to anarchy them use aggressive everytime. If you want to just raid someone use cautious/planned. Similarly if you want to prolong a war since your target isn't buying troops, then use cautious/planned again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AznWhopper Posted May 11, 2008 Author Report Share Posted May 11, 2008 so there is no difference between cautious and planned? and how about standard? Is that like a mix of aggressive, and cautious/planned? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ElCid Posted May 11, 2008 Report Share Posted May 11, 2008 (edited) Cautious results in equal, but very low casualties. Use this in tech raids, or if you are defending. Planned results in high casualties for the enemy if you have the advantage. Planned is best if you are moderately stronger than your enemy. Aggressive is only used when you have a HUGE advantage over your enemy. Cautious and planned are very different. Edited May 11, 2008 by ElCid Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AznWhopper Posted May 11, 2008 Author Report Share Posted May 11, 2008 Uhhh, well, that's basically the opposite of what I've been told can anyone confirm it? Or perhaps a moderator or something? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mitchh Posted May 11, 2008 Report Share Posted May 11, 2008 what has been said is correct Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DustyCloud Posted May 12, 2008 Report Share Posted May 12, 2008 ElCid has the right idea, except on aggresive. Aggresive is a good thing to use during ZI raids. It's used to kill the most troops, but it will result in you losing a lot of your troops as well. Standard is really only useful if you and your opponent are equally matched in terms of strength. And even then, it's not too useful. I personally never use it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Noob Cake Posted May 13, 2008 Report Share Posted May 13, 2008 Each level only causes a modifier to be applied to causalities on both sides. They have nothing to do with combat outcome, or there is no scenario where one type of attack is better than the other as suggested by some posters. The % are not released thus will not be disclosed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.