Originally Posted by
Persain
again i'd go back to its not like im saying your running 25 feary warriors, obviously you can be successful with tact. But i call it garbage because again any situation where your saying "oh look at how strong it is" i can show you that slightly tweaking your setup away from tact and thus the kd level strategy to go along w/out using tact would be beneficial.
@Uhm hoi, your example #2 i didnt address sry, and its a bit early for my posts to go into a war long explanation of how that doesn't work out long term, but the simple explanation is you cant wait out every wave on all your provs, some have to open up and will drop. That "Strategy" would highlight the importance of MS if your talking about sitting army in for 2 hours every 12 (or 1/6 of your time is eating ms leets in) or at LEAST be easily countered by having 1/3 of my wave +2 hours their hits in 1 wave. boom my attackers are now in 2 pockets of hitting (that can be re-adusted using -2hours later) such that you cant sneak in hits anymore.
@NighT....you got lucky they were waving in such a tight wave, and it seems VERY unlikely to me that you had 5 attackers who simply couldnt have massacred using -hours to do the same thing running non tact. If your 5 guys had to have tact AND -hours to get those massacres in congrats, u found a use. However, planing a kd level strategy requiring the enemy to have synced armies and needing to use tact and -hours massacres isn't going to be very successful long term against multiple opponents, and i'd argue that is a bad way to design a kd.
Also u wanna see how a human tact setup works compared to a setup designed elsewhere look at our war v warseekers last age. They were/are by no means "bad" they beat CR for example(who had a similar setup to us but went dwarf tact instead of heretic), but a setup designed to not run tact V their human tacts allowed us to build 17 unbreakable by ~ min time and take a HUGE chunck of their land in what turned out to be a pretty one sided fight.