Results 1 to 15 of 15

Thread: Bounce or CQ

  1. #1
    Newbie
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Posts
    9

    Bounce or CQ

    I wonder what is more effective in a war when you deal with opponents you cannot break. And you deal with a province with high wpa and tpa so other methods of decreasing defense do not work.

    Say the opponent has 100k defense
    All attackers have 80k offense
    Is it more effective to send 16 gens with 5k or let 1 person conquest with 80k offense?

    What method kills more defense? And do you have relatively more deaths with bounces or conquests?
    Can you plague someone with bounces or conquests?
    Do both methods increase GBP?

  2. #2
    Forum Fanatic khronosschoty's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    2,379
    bounce kills more defense if you use something like learn attack. Conquest takes land which can cause overpopulation and maybe from that you end up killing more. Its really very case by case specific which is better. If you can only get one conquest off than likely a mass bounce wave of some kind would be better in theory.
    #magi

  3. #3
    Forum Addict RattleHead's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    1,233
    My understanding is that Conquest has reduced kills for the defender (increased for attacker?)... so it isnt the best for bringing defence down per se, but if everyone is at 80k conquest might still be a good option until they become breakable.

    That leads to bouncing. This may be outdated but the idea here is that Raze ignores some gains factors in war, so it can buff the amount of kills vs a trad march.

    In all attacks the amount of units killed is related to the proportion of off sent:def ... so sending a small amount will kill much less than a large army who still doesn't win. I am not sure if breaking your 80k into 4 stacks would be better or not, though, to be honest. Likely it would come out about even.

    In my experience raze bouncing kills more defence, but if you have everyone sitting at 80k def, rather than starting at 80k and dropping away... conquest seems like it could be feasible for a one-off at least... I think long-term you would run into offence sustainability issues if you had to conquest down several provinces... conquest does also have reduced gains as well, so the gains could leave some susceptible to chaining if they ahve few acres incoming.

    GBP rating is determined by % of land take from the province, so it would be less GBP/hit due to reduced gains, but also reduced kills on the enemy(and increased on your attacking units?).

    Plague, I believe, needs a successful attack to spread on offence(so bounce and conquest dont work), but you can pick it up if you bounce on an Undead.



    From what I have been able to work out if you sent enough offence for a full trad march, but on a conquest, you end up with ~54% gains ... Pretty sure this is linear, so 80% would get you ~43%... This can be overcome to some extent with Orc (+20%), WH (+5%), & Godspeed (+10%, also has less casualties and faster attack times [more gains]), for; 0.43*1.2*1.05*1.1 = 0.59 = ~60% of base gains, or ~7.2% of target acres

  4. #4
    Forum Fanatic khronosschoty's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    2,379
    correct raze bounce is the way to go, if you bounce someone outside of your nw range,, but some times learn bounce is good if your in NW range.
    #magi

  5. #5
    Strategy Moderator
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    1,224
    Raze bounce should kill the most defense, however you need to consider the situation. If a raze bounce wave will allow you to break the target with some attackers that same wave, then that is probably the way to go. If you won't be able to break that same wave, then you need to consider the target's economy and hospitals effect.

    If the target has high hospitals effect, then the troop trade off probably isn't very favorable and if they have a lot of peasants they can probably train enough (including with aid) to rebuild much of their defense prior to your next wave. In a situation like that, raze bouncing probably loses you the war. If the target has high peasants, cq is a good way to keep their pop space and therefore peasants down. This keeps their econ in check and minimizes the long term threat they pose. As long as their economy is low, you should be able to focus on winning the fight against the others and come back for the unbreakable later. When you do that later you can either better afford to bounce their defense down, or to just cq them until they overpop.

  6. #6
    Forum Addict Bo To's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Posts
    1,211
    Just to point out one more thing: when you do raze bounce you don't have incoming land if you do it with full off strength. Don't forget that. Conq might give you less land and high off losses but you aren't sitting duck and it's unlikely that you are going to be ambushed(the target wants to keep as much def as possible).

  7. #7
    Strategy Moderator
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    4,157
    Raze boucning is typically the way to go as the attacker has increased losses on conquest and doesn't get spec credits. If u start conquest waving your offense is gonna drop like a stone if u have to do more than 2-3 waves. What you wanna do is razebounce while u chain as attackers to zero def, till the target is breakable and u have a backup target thats fat so u can conquest+0 def target for good incoming.

    Conquest IS however very viable if you can generally do any of the following
    1. can conquest down the enemy in 1 wave of your attackers
    2. only 1-2 target that "need to drop" (i.e. conqeusting down a high threat unbreakable attacker vrs 3-4-5 t/ms that need to drop)
    3. have the economy/spec credits to retrain lost offense (most viable using old undeads with -75% offlosses+hosptials)
    4. can overpop.....typically requires 5+ hits in <3 hours into someone who has <2-3 ppa.
    5. no on in your kd is landfat, so the target can not LL.



    For what its worth i disagree with
    Quote Originally Posted by AquaSeaFoam View Post
    If you won't be able to break that same wave, then you need to consider the target's economy and hospitals effect.

    If the target has high hospitals effect, then the troop trade off probably isn't very favorable and if they have a lot of peasants they can probably train enough (including with aid) to rebuild much of their defense prior to your next wave. In a situation like that, raze bouncing probably loses you the war. If the target has high peasants, cq is a good way to keep their pop space and therefore peasants down. This keeps their econ in check and minimizes the long term threat they pose.
    i would rather raze bounce someone with high peasents than conquest them down. This is becuase high peasants typically means "lots of hits to drop." Lots of hits means lots of conquests w/out any overpop and you just have more offensive losses compared to their def losses. In contrast if raze boucing (even into high hospitals) your total losses compared to theirs wont add up since your spreading your losses accross 5-10-15 attackers while you focus all their losses on 1 guy. Even if it takes 2-3-4+ waves to bounce down your enemy the ratio of your own kds "max mod off"-to-target-def will sustain much better than if you conquested.

    If via conquest your only goal is to limit their econ via conquest and are just "lowering their peasants" its unlikely your doing enough damage fast enough to really matter. Losing 1-2 ppa via a conquest on one target wont really make a difference if they can get aid and still have the pop space to train and wpa/runes to LL "some" of the damage back.
    Last edited by Persain; 13-12-2017 at 09:12.

  8. #8
    Post Fiend newatthis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    259
    I like doing bounce raze than CQ and use left minimum off to get incoming land. CQ hurts my offense than raze bounce

  9. #9
    Strategy Moderator
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    1,224
    Quote Originally Posted by Persain View Post
    i would rather raze bounce someone with high peasents than conquest them down. This is becuase high peasants typically means "lots of hits to drop." Lots of hits means lots of conquests w/out any overpop and you just have more offensive losses compared to their def losses. In contrast if raze boucing (even into high hospitals) your total losses compared to theirs wont add up since your spreading your losses accross 5-10-15 attackers while you focus all their losses on 1 guy. Even if it takes 2-3-4+ waves to bounce down your enemy the ratio of your own kds "max mod off"-to-target-def will sustain much better than if you conquested.

    If via conquest your only goal is to limit their econ via conquest and are just "lowering their peasants" its unlikely your doing enough damage fast enough to really matter. Losing 1-2 ppa via a conquest on one target wont really make a difference if they can get aid and still have the pop space to train and wpa/runes to LL "some" of the damage back.
    Sending spare offense on raze bounces over 2-3-4+ waves at a target with high hospital effect and high peasants is a good way to empower the target of those bounces to have a greater effect on the war than they otherwise could have. At minimum, you need to do an analysis of what you can kill per wave vs what they can re-train per wave. Spreading losses across multiple attackers doesn't make it good. If a target has infinity defense, the last thing you want to do is trade some of his defense for some of your offense. I stand by my statement that you need to consider their hospital effect and their econ and retrain ability before committing to bounces on an unbreakable.

    The biggest long term threat from unbreakables is their peasants. If the opponent has unbreakables with high peasants and you don't, then you will likely lose the war unless you can correct that situation. If you can fb/kidnap them, then you should do that. If you can't, then cq is often a viable option to remove peasants. Bounces can work in some circumstances, but you need to do proper accounting to ensure you can actually take the province down following bounces or you just hurt yourself more than them by helping the unbreakable expand his influence in the war.

  10. #10
    Strategy Moderator
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    4,157
    I follow the logic ASF. Though i disagree that the threat is peasants its peasents + kd attrition coupled with the off v def spread on the top end of the kd.

    Conquest is such a high offensive attrition attack that it rarely will pay off if all your doing is lowering the peasent count of the enemy. It makes it even worse when your offensive attrition is going to be focused on your attackers top end as conquest dont really come from the 200 acre 60k off guy but the 1000 acre 80k off guy. If you were to spread the losses across 10+ attackers you may end up spending more military to bounce down (assuming high hospitals can be swamped in) but if droping 60k to 40k and that 40k is still 100% usable in 3-4 taps your seting yourself up to be able sustain your top 3-4 attackers on 80k and line up full breaks (and possible addtional bounce waves) which have something like twice the base land gains/hit.

  11. #11
    Newbie
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Posts
    9
    Thanks for all the replies. We eventually decided to do a small bounce wave just to see the results. The same moment though, our opponent decided to mass FB/kidnap. We lost half our peasants and our income advantage in the process. They pumped their last attacker left to 200 dpa, (a dwarf who kept his army home from that moment on) and decided to build max forts on all provinces with good defense. While we had double their offense, they suddenly had twice our defense. Since we couldn't deal with their rogues effectively we decided to WD while we were ahead in land- and honor gained.

    Next time we will start with bounces earlier, even if it is only to keep the pressure on their T/M's.

  12. #12
    Postaholic DonJuan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Posts
    870
    conquest...raze bounces are so lame for the typical war kd

    maybe a top war KD wants to micro-manage losses or whatnot...but at least during chains I rather look for provinces to break for land and go for overpop (bigger picture)

    i.e. Trad marches with spare on chained provs or try to conquest and advance the bigger chain further
    "Respect the one who defends his land with bravery; Honor the price he pays to fufill his duty."
    -DonJuan, The Legendary KaMiKaZe King

    The Tactical Technical Institute | WhatsApp +16264286874 | SC2/D3 BattleNet: DonJuan5420 | PSN: DonJuan5420

    Age 54: #1 Land KD (HaLL of Heroes)
    Age 54: #1 NW KD (HaLL of Heroes)



  13. #13
    Strategy Moderator
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    1,224
    Quote Originally Posted by NEUCRAYZHO View Post
    Thanks for all the replies. We eventually decided to do a small bounce wave just to see the results. The same moment though, our opponent decided to mass FB/kidnap. We lost half our peasants and our income advantage in the process. They pumped their last attacker left to 200 dpa, (a dwarf who kept his army home from that moment on) and decided to build max forts on all provinces with good defense. While we had double their offense, they suddenly had twice our defense. Since we couldn't deal with their rogues effectively we decided to WD while we were ahead in land- and honor gained.

    Next time we will start with bounces earlier, even if it is only to keep the pressure on their T/M's.
    Better luck next time.

    +1 for ASF and -1 for Persain.

  14. #14
    Veteran
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    626
    In fairness, from the description given it sounds like it wouldn't have made any difference to the outcome at that point whether they bounced or conquested.

  15. #15
    Strategy Moderator
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    4,157
    Quote Originally Posted by AquaSeaFoam View Post
    Better luck next time.

    +1 for ASF and -1 for Persain.
    reported for harassment ;)


    On a side note, i would only bounce when 2/3 of the enemy kd is on 0 def so what happened to him shouldnt happen in my example lol

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •