Hietala
Grandmaster Knight
There is no doubt, that 99% of every M&B player always plays as a leader of a certain army. But there are different nuances in it, and in this thread I group these together and make it into a poll. So why is there a difference anyway? Because everyone plays according to his/her own preferances and style. That is obvious.
Every class has it positive sides, but it has also it's negative sides. And ofcourse players can make different nuances between those classes as well
A resume of the three main leader classes:
The Tactician
He wins battles using major and often 'complex' tactics, like flanking the enemy, catching them from both sides, trapping them, etc... Mostly uses a horse to have a better view of his men.
This is his main quality
His own security lies in the hands of his soldiers and of his own tactics. The tactician better never get scattered from the rest of the army, because he needs to micromanage it well, and have a quick overview in battle. Therefore the Tactician will mostly use his fighting abilities to kill enemies when they come too close, or to help his men breaking through the enemy front by killing that accidental key troop that might send whole of your army in confusing etc.
The tactician wins campains by acting carefully with his soldiers, and try to avoid as many losses using sheer tactics and insight. He also never counts on logistics and refilling his men during major campaigns.
The Fighter
He wins battles using his sheer brutal force and fighting skills (or archery skills if you're more into archery), supported by his soldiers that often are the same class as he is.
His own security is often safe foreas he uses his own power to keep the enemies away from him, and when in a hot sitution he is often supported by his men. The down part of this is that when he is caught in a good tactical movement of the enemy that he will suffer severe casualties. He tries to reduce these using his own force.
This is his main quality
The fighter wins campaigns through sheer brutal force and pounderings on the enemy. His campaigns are shorter than casual campaigns because he often suffers more losses than the other three types.
The Strategist
He wins battles the same as tacticians do, but on a lesser scale: the strategist made some 'calculations' before the battle, and after the previous of how many units he missed, or if he found necessairy to hire some mercenaries to fill the gaps.
His own security lies in the hands of his men and occasionally will kill an enemy in a cavalry charge, or when threatened by an enemy unit.
The strategist wins campaigns by making 'calculations' before each campaign, of how many units it will cost him, or how many units he will have to take with him at least, and how many units to replace the eventual dead ones.
This is his main quality
The Opportunist
He makes use of any situtation: A weakened lord with plenty of captives is patrolling alone around his castle, or an enemy lord just took a castle, garrisoned it with very few men and left, or just a battle between a non-hostile and a hostile lord, in which you could reap the benefits.
Every class has it positive sides, but it has also it's negative sides. And ofcourse players can make different nuances between those classes as well
A resume of the three main leader classes:
The Tactician
He wins battles using major and often 'complex' tactics, like flanking the enemy, catching them from both sides, trapping them, etc... Mostly uses a horse to have a better view of his men.
This is his main quality
His own security lies in the hands of his soldiers and of his own tactics. The tactician better never get scattered from the rest of the army, because he needs to micromanage it well, and have a quick overview in battle. Therefore the Tactician will mostly use his fighting abilities to kill enemies when they come too close, or to help his men breaking through the enemy front by killing that accidental key troop that might send whole of your army in confusing etc.
The tactician wins campains by acting carefully with his soldiers, and try to avoid as many losses using sheer tactics and insight. He also never counts on logistics and refilling his men during major campaigns.
The Fighter
He wins battles using his sheer brutal force and fighting skills (or archery skills if you're more into archery), supported by his soldiers that often are the same class as he is.
His own security is often safe foreas he uses his own power to keep the enemies away from him, and when in a hot sitution he is often supported by his men. The down part of this is that when he is caught in a good tactical movement of the enemy that he will suffer severe casualties. He tries to reduce these using his own force.
This is his main quality
The fighter wins campaigns through sheer brutal force and pounderings on the enemy. His campaigns are shorter than casual campaigns because he often suffers more losses than the other three types.
The Strategist
He wins battles the same as tacticians do, but on a lesser scale: the strategist made some 'calculations' before the battle, and after the previous of how many units he missed, or if he found necessairy to hire some mercenaries to fill the gaps.
His own security lies in the hands of his men and occasionally will kill an enemy in a cavalry charge, or when threatened by an enemy unit.
The strategist wins campaigns by making 'calculations' before each campaign, of how many units it will cost him, or how many units he will have to take with him at least, and how many units to replace the eventual dead ones.
This is his main quality
The Opportunist
He makes use of any situtation: A weakened lord with plenty of captives is patrolling alone around his castle, or an enemy lord just took a castle, garrisoned it with very few men and left, or just a battle between a non-hostile and a hostile lord, in which you could reap the benefits.
