Front-Line Rush

[|DMD| (Geico)]

I don't there is a thread like this, so start this off.

I am currently using a frontline rush as my set in Rev. I get a lot of diverse comments when I play. People surrendering right away, calling me a n00b bomber, from other people complaining I am ruining the game, to others that have no problem with the form. I just wanted to hear everyone's opinion in this thread:


WHAT DO YOU THINK OF FRONT-LINE RUSHES?

[deleter]

easy to beat, with defult setup front line rush is weak

[Bottle]

As with any formation, it beats some formations and loses to others.

Since it has no cleric, anything that can outlast it and maintain its own cleric will beat it, although it won't find it easy. Similarly, anything with more durability will beat it with ease. If you don't get first turn, you often find yourself taking 3 lots of 27 damage from a DSM, and if you don't use a cleric in your frontline rush then that's quite nasty.

On the other hand, if it comes up against a form that it can clerickill and quake first 2 turns, it's got a big chance of winning.

However much we don't like it, the game has become even more rock-paper-scissors formation-wise than it used to be. If you use a rock, you'll get scissors moaning at you, but paper really won't mind. As with any other formation.

[endless]

Well said bottle, As for me i dont really care what form you use on rev. I usually get jumped by people with front line rushes all the time.

Which is a good thing, Since i can develop a form to destroy it. Personally i use a 2 DMW form, And its killer.

Unless they say what type of game first, your fine.. just remember that 99% of the n00bs on rev use that form. And us Vets are looking at that.

[Noda]

well, i think theres alot of different kinds of front line rushes though. it would be best if u posted it.

if its just a bomb, then well thats what it is. and wat bottle said.

if its a melle front line then it may be different.

imguessing ur just using a no cleric front line dsm and pyro rush though. i think there fine, but they dont have any back up strat, u either kill them in the beggining...or lose

[Bottle]

No cleric front line pyro rushes are the most pointless thing ever. I beat a 2-pyro, DSM, dragon, 4-witch, wisp one-sided bomb with my grey on Legends. It even had same side and first turn, and I killed the DSM second to last out of all the mages.

A frontline melee rush is much more dangerous.

[Noda]

i concur.

but, the one thing a front line melee rush is completely destroyed by...is a front line bomb.

oh, and by front line bomb, i meant more on the lines of just dsm and pyro, mabey a witch, but prolly no need.

front line melee rushes are legit though. as are anyform.

i mean, u have to expect to have someone mad if u win due to luck, and it just so happens that these kinds of forms do rely more on luck, so its a normal by-product

[~8ball~]

I use a frontline rush.I like it a little bit but i want a new setup i think my frontline rush is a bit week. But in my frontline rush i dont use a DSM.

[Xenon]

I am not a fond user of front line rushes. If I rush then I will use a more spread out rush with maybe 2-3 units on the front line including maybe; dsm, pyro, wisp, dual scouts, ga or a mud. This normally depends on what I feel like using. I mainly turtle so I can't really give advice on this.

[Match Strike]

Well, I can't remember who it was, but I played a two pyro (including dsm) form on Rev a while back, and it was an excellent game. I don't remember the detais, except that he was very skilled with it. It's just that most people who use that kind of set do it because they can't be bothered to learn to use a form strategically.

At the opposite end of the rushing spectrum is something like allstar's rush; 3 knights, mud, wisp or GA, dragon, and cleric. These rushes can get lucky of course, but they rely much more on technique, since there are only two real "rush units" excluding scouts and dragon.

[Lonely Tylenol]

It's just that most people who use that kind of set do it because they can't be bothered to learn to use a form strategically.

Match Strike just described it in a better way than I would have. Most people just use the DSM or GA as a rush unit for quick kills, because they don't take the time to learn more complex strategies with the units.

At the opposite end of the rushing spectrum is something like allstar's rush; 3 knights, mud, wisp or GA, dragon, and cleric. These rushes can get lucky of course, but they rely much more on technique, since there are only two real "rush units" excluding scouts and dragon.

Also true. Don't believe he uses a GA though, just the Wisp, and he doesn't even use that... :p

[Match Strike]

Right, allstar doesn't, but some rushers with simialar styles do.

[Realist]

I've used a frontline rush before. I guess some people consider them nooby just because they are easy to create (sort of a myth btw--creating a superb frontline is not simple). I win with it around 15% less than with my anti. Like other types of rushes, and like Bottle said, a whole lot depends on whether you're in position to get an early cleric kill and a few mudquakes. Without that, your formation is very attackable and doesn't really have any easy way to retreat, so a more conservative, less forward form can take you out if you don't claim the advantage early on.

[dragonmasta009]

all depends on the units u use

[Match Strike]

all depends on the units u use
Um, no. Well, yes, in the sense that a furgon is probably innapropriate for a frontline rush, but no, in the sense that it's where you PUT the units that matters.

[bloodymoon]

an anti i think wins against front line rushes, 3 knights will pick everyone off. dsm no problem to kill. but i dont anti and some times front line rushes are good against my set.

[Match Strike]

Well, my non-anti rushing friend, anti's are precisely what a front line rush is good against. A mele rush, with units placed a bit more easily, that uses a cleric, is what they're bad against. But of course, there are exceptions to every rule. I've beaten plenty of front line rushes with my anti, and been beat using a cleric-protecting melee rush while playing against a front line rush.

[Realist]

If amby + mud is within striking distance of cleric: Frontline > Anti
If only one of the above is within striking distance of cleric: About equal
If neither: Anti > Frontline

Of course it's more complicated than that, but not too much more complicated.

[Wizzy`]

I usually frontline rush, and I've only lost like 4 games with it.

[Noda]

i gotta say, i dont think anti's are that weak to any of those things. I mean, the only times i have fealt at a disadvantage was once agains som,eomne who had my pyro anti, but on the side of mine, and all the times where i face a front line rush with the stragling wisp ga or muddy ga.

but saying that, i think ive only lost to those once(the front line thing)

what really beats anti's are symetrical rushes that allow for the user to do a good old school gang up on the one side.

double cleric also seems to work very well against anti's

[Gypsy]

The whole point of using an anti is to play rushes so don't use one unless you know you are running into a rush....real turtles tend to massacre them.

[KBHoleN1]

The whole point of using an anti is to play rushes so don't use one unless you know you are running into a rush....real turtles tend to massacre them.
And since about 3 of us go around using turts in freestyle games, I think an anti is a safe bet in most cases, going by your logic. But it depends on the type of rush you face, as already mentioned. Personally, I am trying to encourage anti forms, so when I (being one of those 3 I mentioned) use my turt form, I can massacre about half the lobby :bigsmile: .

But seriously, I can stop most frontline rushes with my normal turt, as long as I don't get flamed first turn. Even a GA/wisp or GA/mud combo is easy to overcome, if the rusher doesn't have a cleric. The problem with frontliners is that even if you don't know what you're doing, you can mess around and drop your units in the perfect place, without even meaning to, and beat a much better player. Granted, this doesn't happen often, but when you gamble sometimes you win big.

[wolf-boy]

I like fighting the frontline forms, especially with no cleric, it's good fun for my muddy :)

[Gypsy]

Were you countin me in those 3? ;) I just think this whole situation adds more mental games to tao because you just don't know what to expect for sure unless you set rules before hand and then again there are probably people like PEPE here.

[Lonely Tylenol]

If amby + mud is within striking distance of cleric: Frontline > Anti
If only one of the above is within striking distance of cleric: About equal
If neither: Anti > Frontline

I disagree... If your opponent has to move the Golem Ambusher in order to hit the Cleric (E.G. isn't directly 6 spaces ahead of the Cleric), then you heal, allow him to Mud Quake, and 2x Knight + Dragon the GA, thus killing it before it can get off a second attack even if your opponent heals. Your opponent will get two Mud Quakes on you, but unless both of them are from two spaces away, your Cleric will live with 1 HP left (24 - 20 + 12 - [10 + 5]). Freeze the Mud and heal off the Mud Quake damage--even by this point, if your Cleric dies, the Mud will be terminated before it can get off another Mud Quake, and your units will all be in good condition to take down incoming units.

Even if your opponent gets right side and first turn with a GA/Mud combination, you can still fight him off and even keep your Cleric intact in the process. Difficult, true, but far from impossible.

Sadly enough, the biggest imposing threat in this situation becomes the Scout, but unless your opponent can pick off the Cleric before you even get the GA, you could get a Scout/GA/Mud in exchange for your Cleric anyway, which may put you at a severe advantage if you have a Frost Golem (which you pretty much need for such a situation to apply anyway).

[|DMD| (Geico)]

Wow! This got alot of hits! It's good to hear everyoe's voice!

Well, I personality like frontline rushes because it can consist of strubity, power, and long-ranges! I can usually take out the cleric on both sides within two moves, and then i have powered-pyros to weaken the units... the Muddy to kill the weak! The scouts, and GA are there for units far away, and I stick a knight or two for re-enforcements, and end game!

[Kyir]

see, the reason alot of us hate/dislike frontlines is becuase of that cleric in 2 turns, IMO it unbalances the game

[FryLock]

I generally don't have a problem beating frontline rushes, but by NO stretch of the imagination do I enjoy playing against one.

As Botts said, it really just comes down to who gets lucky side or 1st turn.

Now, that said, I'm sure there are a few skilled players out there who have built solid and fluid frontline forms and use them well. But the majority, perhaps even the vast majority of frontliners use that form because they are too dense to build anything else. I still take pride in creating forms that flow from offense to defense depending on the situation...not forms that just go crashing on in, hoping to kill the cleric early and then get more blocks than the other guy.

I'm slightly more tolerant of melee frontlines (even though they are often harder to win against) but only slightly.

I really don't have much respect for frontline forms. As I said, this is because the vast majority of users do it because it is easy, not because they've actually taken the time to figure the game out.

Although, what cracks me up is when a frontline rusher with a mage or 2 winds up complaining about luck - they got wrong side, or not enough blocks, or whatever. :rolleyes:

[Lonely Tylenol]

I generally don't have a problem beating frontline rushes, but by NO stretch of the imagination do I enjoy playing against one.

As Botts said, it really just comes down to who gets lucky side or 1st turn.

Now, that said, I'm sure there are a few skilled players out there who have built solid and fluid frontline forms and use them well. But the majority, perhaps even the vast majority of frontliners use that form because they are too dense to build anything else. I still take pride in creating forms that flow from offense to defense depending on the situation...not forms that just go crashing on in, hoping to kill the cleric early and then get more blocks than the other guy.

I'm slightly more tolerant of melee frontlines (even though they are often harder to win against) but only slightly.

I really don't have much respect for frontline forms. As I said, this is because the vast majority of users do it because it is easy, not because they've actually taken the time to figure the game out.

Although, what cracks me up is when a frontline rusher with a mage or 2 winds up complaining about luck - they got wrong side, or not enough blocks, or whatever. :rolleyes:

I don't mind melee frontlines at all, actually. They aren't as favorable as other formations in my eyes, but they are less luck-reliant and more skill-reliant due to the fact that same-side and first turn have less of a Cleric-killing effect. One of my old clan members (Apocalypse) created a very good melee front-liner and used it well, and the formation has actually circulated a bit within clan. Even after he stopped playing, people kept using it. Gave me a heck of a run with it too. :)

[Realist]

I disagree... If your opponent has to move the Golem Ambusher in order to hit the Cleric

As I said..."If amby + mud is within striking distance of cleric"...of course if the amby is a few spaces away it's quite beatable. But if amby and mud is on the same side and within striking distance, you are at a very significant disadvantage. That doesn't mean certain loss. I'd rather play a clericless frontline with amby/mud on wrong side than an opposite side turtle or a more conservative, clericed rush with amby/mud on wrong side.

EDIT: OK, I misunderstood what you were saying, I get it now. Yes, I know how to beat a moving amby; but I've never actually been able to accomplish it because:

1. Opponent usually has scouts which can mess stuff up. This is especially true of frontlines
2. Mud usually will be able to hit from 2 spaces away both times; or even hit cleric directly.
3. If they have a wisp too, they can wisp your units and you have to let it stay so you can hit the amby more; thus dealing a large amount of damage for your units and for what...to save your cleric and let it heal once more? Even if they don't have a wisp, they can hit your other units while you're facing the amby...

I've never once found it advantageous to kill the amby to save my cleric.

By the way, to whoever said that antis are only good against rushes; as long as your anti has an amby and a mud you have the advantage against same side turtles and similar forms.

[Warcow]

Alright, for starters I DO use a frontline rush when I do freestyle.

However, it has a few key differences that I think makes it slightly less noobish.

First off, I don't use a Dsm, and I don't bomb at all.

Second, I use a Frost golem.

Third, no matter where you are on the board, I can get to you quickly and properly.

I used to feel that all front line rushes were exactly the same, until I decided I had better start trying them to get ready for Mith's freestyle rounds. Now, my first few games I did alright, lost some, won some. Then, as I started seeing errors in my unit positioning, it slowly adapted to something more than just a frontline rush. Each unit now has a key positioning that allows me to strike certain positions while compensating for other weaknesses. Even with second turn and an ambusher directly infront of my cleric, or a first turn dsm, I rarely lose.

The biggest difference is that since I have no non physical units except the wisp, when my luck goes sour, so do my results.

EDIT* LT, your solution for beating an ambusher directly infront of your cleric only works if your opponent is an idiot.

[Lonely Tylenol]

EDIT* LT, your solution for beating an ambusher directly infront of your cleric only works if your opponent is an idiot.

Or if your opponent's Scouts are on the other side of the field or are in conservative positions. I have beaten top players with this in mind when either of these is the case.

EDIT: In fact, dare I say it, it only DOESN'T apply if your opponent's Scouts are placed in the middle three panels on the front line, or the one directly behind the middle panel. In any other positioning, either the Frost or the Cleric cannot be reached. :)

I've never once found it advantageous to kill the amby to save my cleric.

I used this against a good player recently, and killed a Mud, Wisp, and GA before he got my Cleric, froze his Scout, and killed his Cleric shortly after; in exchange, I gave one Scout and my Cleric. My Cleric lived to heal four times more than I expected, but what was really important was what I put him through just to kill a 24-HP unit. :)

I'll leave his name out of this discussion, but that was how I managed to come up with this analysis: Two in-game scenarios against freestylers in Armageddon considered to be among the top, the first being The Big Kahuna (whose name I will disclose because he ended up winning in the end), whose Scouts were placed conservatively and got the first-turn/right-side GA/Mud combo, and the second having his Scout on the other end of the field, which I won. Both times I used the scenario; the first time, I killed a Scout, GA and Mud in exchange for my Cleric and one of my Scouts; I kept command of the game until the very last unit, then screwed it up. The other I won by a margin of 5-3, with basically the exact same scenario, sans the screw-up.

If you'd like a game on Rev, I can use the GA/Mud frontline, and you can try counter it. Problem with that is clan constraints... It seems rather stupid to put stats on the line just to test a theory. :huh: I'm not concerned with mine of course, since 950 is piteous in Rev...

[Realist]

If you'd like a game on Rev, I can use the GA/Mud frontline, and you can try counter it. Problem with that is clan constraints... It seems rather stupid to put stats on the line just to test a theory. :huh:

That makes no sense. You're the one who thinks an anti has the advantage against same side mud/GA's; let's fight my frontline vs. your anit with mud on your side and ga 1 space from being able to attack your cler; my turn first. I'll even put my scouts on the opposite side of the frontline if you'd like.

(I have an unrated account I can use)

[Bottle]

I'd agree. You spend a minimum of 3 turns killing the amby, and further time healing twice to restore the cleric to above 18 HP. In this time, a scout can move from almost any space on the board to get into range for the shot on cleric, frost, whichever you prefer.

[Lonely Tylenol]

That makes no sense. You're the one who thinks an anti has the advantage against same side mud/GA's; let's fight my frontline vs. your anit with mud on your side and ga 1 space from being able to attack your cler; my turn first. I'll even put my scouts on the opposite side of the frontline if you'd like.

(I have an unrated account I can use)

That works, but I wanted you to try doing it yourself. Compare strategies and such.

Anywho...

Meet on Rev then? :)

[the bird]

i never got the hang of rushing. turtle is the way to go. :)

[Realist]

Ok, I won using the conditions imposed earlier; not by a lot, but significantly. It is theoeritcally possible to do what LT says, but I don't think it has all that much practical usage.

[Lonely Tylenol]

I lost. Two units remaining on the field each time. The first game I had the Mud placed wrong, and I couldn't go as planned; the second we had the proper conditions in place, and although I did a lot better in handling the GA/Mud combo, he just plain beat me.

I figured if he expended all his range units in the Cleric-kill attempt, my Frost would sweep the rest.... But he tackled the frost as well, eliminating that possibility.

My theories and experiences in prior battles didn't hold water in a trial match [or two] vs. Realist. Oh well...

[Wayfaerer]

I don't mind melee frontlines at all, actually. They aren't as favorable as other formations in my eyes, but they are less luck-reliant and more skill-reliant
They rely on blockable attacks almost completely (luck). And I don't see how a luckily placed scout assault on a cleric requires more skill than a DSM doing the same thing. :huh:

[Warcow]

They rely on blockable attacks almost completely (luck). And I don't see how a luckily placed scout assault on a cleric requires more skill than a DSM doing the same thing. :huh:

Because scouts can be easily blocked with a furgon, so you have to manage them carefully.

A DSM if placed properly just waltzes in, boom dead cleric. Same with a GA.

[Lonely Tylenol]

They rely on blockable attacks almost completely (luck). And I don't see how a luckily placed scout assault on a cleric requires more skill than a DSM doing the same thing. :huh:

Try a frontline rush that doesn't use Scouts for Cleric kill... :)

[Wayfaerer]

A DSM can't be trapped by shrubs? I would think freeing it would be more of a hassle since even a 5 damage mudquake by you can result in it's demise. Also, almost nobody uses a furgon in a freestyle game. Even less would actually shrub on the first turn.

Try a frontline rush that doesn't use Scouts for Cleric kill... :)
I have, although that still doesn't explain why physical attacks requires less luck.

[Lonely Tylenol]

I have, although that still doesn't explain why physical attacks requires less luck.

They require luck, but unlike Cleric-kill rushes involving a GA/Mud/Wisp or DSM bomb, they don't require much more luck than any other setup that employs high-blocking units (including the Scouts in turtles and Knights/Scouts in anti-rushes).

[Wayfaerer]

I find myself 'bombing' with my scouts rather than my DSM in almost every freestyle game I play.

It sounds like you're overestimating the skill needed to use a scout effectively (very little). Sure it makes you sound elite, but in reality they are the most easily abused and versatile unit in the game. They can hit practically any target with little effort, and with two at your disposal there is little consequence for sending one to its doom. I think everyone just disregards this because the low damage looks soooo 'tactical' compared to a deadly DSM roasting or something of that sort.

I'm not defending mindless bombers, just the unit they give such a bad name.

[Lonely Tylenol]

I find myself 'bombing' with my scouts rather than my DSM in almost every freestyle game I play.

It sounds like you're overestimating the skill needed to use a scout effectively (very little). Sure it makes you sound elite, but in reality they are the most easily abused and versatile unit in the game. They can hit practically any target with little efford, and with two at your disposal there is little consequence for sending one to its doom. I think everyone just disregards this because the low damage looks soooo 'tactical' compared to a deadly DSM roasting or something of that sort.

I'm not defending mindless bombers, just the unit they give such a bad name.

The DSM itself isn't bad. I'm not arguing that it is. I've seen people use strategic bombs or even just a single DSM with a LW as a deterrent. (And used it well, I might add.) But a frontline DSM bomb is bad.

In order to keep a Scout alive AND useful in a gold game, you do need either skill or luck, there is no avoiding that. This is certainly more of an issue in grey than in gold, but it is still an issue.

[Wayfaerer]

In order to keep a Scout alive AND useful in a gold game, you do need either skill or luck, there is no avoiding that.
Same with any unit, I still don't get your arguement though.

[Lonely Tylenol]

Same with any unit, I still don't get your arguement though.

That was my point. :)

EDIT: I forgot somewhere along the way... Give me a minute to think...

[Wayfaerer]

So why are physical attacking units more tactical than mages? :confused:

[monkus]

So why are physical attacking units more tactical than mages? :confused:

Because with mages, you just stick em somewhere, and hope you get right side and first turn. If you have your DSM right, and you get first turn, then you automatically kill cleric (unless they're paranoid and blocked that path off), which is a significant amount of damage. Or, you could blast and run. With physical units, it requires more tactics, because the large game doesn't revolve around luck.

Furthermore, while physical units have more blocking, mages are more often saved by blocks, and blocks with mages more often shift entire games.

[Wayfaerer]

Because with mages, you just stick em somewhere, and hope you get right side and first turn. If you have your DSM right, and you get first turn, then you automatically kill cleric (unless they're paranoid and blocked that path off), which is a significant amount of damage. Or, you could blast and run. With physical units, it requires more tactics, because the large game doesn't revolve around luck.

Furthermore, while physical units have more blocking, mages are more often saved by blocks, and blocks with mages more often shift entire games.

You can use physical units just as recklessly as your DSM example (Scouts and ambushers almost always get the cleric kill; both physical), and usually end up more sucessful. Besides, isn't getting your cleric on the safe side of their form equally as lucky as them getting their preferred side?

You're just giving units the characteristics of the nubs that use them most, when really any unit can be used strategically, or awfully. Just think of all the nubs that think they're good because they use a furgon, when really all they do is shrub themselves to death. Not much tactic in that http://jconserv.net/swforums/images/smiles/icon_cool.gif

[Lonely Tylenol]

You can use physical units just as recklessly as your DSM example (Scouts and ambushers almost always get the cleric kill; both physical), and usually end up more sucessful. Besides, isn't getting your cleric on the safe side of their form equally as lucky as them getting their preferred side?

You're just giving units the characteristics of the nubs that use them most, when really any unit can be used strategically. Just think of all the nubs that think they're good because they use a furgon, when really all they do is shrub themselves to death. Not much tactic in that http://jconserv.net/swforums/images/smiles/icon_cool.gif

What about the fact that with an unblockable unit, you have to prepare only for the placement of the unit and attack, whereas with a blockable unit you have to prepare for the placement of the unit and attack, plus facing of the unit you attack, to minimize blocking?

Additionally, with a close-range unit, the placement of the unit is key, because sometimes the most probable attack is the most dangerous. Since the unit puts itself in danger by attacking, you have to be extra careful with it. On the other hand, the Dragonspeaker Mage and other units have a higher range and don't have to worry about the unit blocking the attack, which makes hit-and-run tactics more favorable and creates less problems with putting the DSM in direct danger than with that of a melee unit.

[Wayfaerer]

The DSM is also always in danger, where-as a retreating Knight or Scout can usually just waltz back to safety whenever they please.

You're confusing risk with strategy anyways, that has no relevance to any of my posts. You can still sacrafice a physical attacker just as easily and 'untactically' as a mage to get whatever job you need done, like throwing a scout or ambusher away to kill a cleric.

[Bottle]

I'm with wuffers here, physical units often rely on luck even more than mages. Who hasn't won a knight vs. knight endgame thanks to blocks when they were lower on HP at the start of the endgame? Is the ambusher not simply a 50-50 weapon? If a scout side blocks and the enemy cleric is still alive, how do you save your own cleric without putting your units in an awkward position to block all LOS?

Formation and blocking are of such importance nowadays that a slight difference between how much luck mages need (to be kept away from wisps and LWs) and physical units need (right side) is almost irrelevant.

On a side note, I'd like to point out that my grey turtle containing a frost and mud drop has beaten several same-side wisp/mud/ambusher/DSM with dragon/knights/scout backup on Legends. I'm increasingly of the opinion that Moose's "Ambusher was designed with 1 scout in mind" idea is true.

[Lonely Tylenol]

I'm with wuffers here, physical units often rely on luck even more than mages. Who hasn't won a knight vs. knight endgame thanks to blocks when they were lower on HP at the start of the endgame? Is the ambusher not simply a 50-50 weapon? If a scout side blocks and the enemy cleric is still alive, how do you save your own cleric without putting your units in an awkward position to block all LOS?

Formation and blocking are of such importance nowadays that a slight difference between how much luck mages need (to be kept away from wisps and LWs) and physical units need (right side) is almost irrelevant.

On a side note, I'd like to point out that my grey turtle containing a frost and mud drop has beaten several same-side wisp/mud/ambusher/DSM with dragon/knights/scout backup on Legends. I'm increasingly of the opinion that Moose's "Ambusher was designed with 1 scout in mind" idea is true.

The strategic uses I'm thinking of are talking about the need to prepare for the worst. When blocking becomes a serious element in the game, you have to assume the worst and make up for it. Unblockables have it slightly easier, because you don't have to worry about flanking the enemy unit for the best shot at killing it... Your highest priority is keeping the unit alive long enough to attack again, which is an issue with melee units anyway.

When you play with blockables, your kill-shot opportunities are very limited, and you have to play with future moves in mind, both to attack the unit in a way that you can follow up for the kill, and for the melee unit in question, which (assuming we're talking close-range unit) has to be put in the direct line of fire of several enemy units in order to follow through on the attack, to prevent that units' death. The risk analysis and counter-measures that become necessary in close-range combat in TAO imply more strategy than almost any possible bomb-use strategies around.

As the saying goes, luck favors the prepared mind.

[|DMD| (Geico)]

Just to note:

I just broke 1000 w/ a front-line only. What was dissaponting was i got the last few stats to 1000 when Forest_Archer Surrendered rigt as the game began.

He also called me a n00b =/

[Forest_Archer]

Man, that Forest_Archer is so horrible!

I didn't intend on playing you, I just felt like seeing what your set was.

It turned out to be a bomb, which was disappointing. No bomber deserves 1000+ stats.

I hope ya like the stats, dude. Rock on... ;)

[bludhoundz]

At the opposite end of the rushing spectrum is something like allstar's rush; 3 knights, mud, wisp or GA, dragon, and cleric. These rushes can get lucky of course, but they rely much more on technique, since there are only two real "rush units" excluding scouts and dragon.

I disagree slightly..

If a formation has 3 knights, thats 3 units with high blocking percentages. In a frontline rush, there usually are not 3 knights..while it 'depends' more on luck, it gets less. The knights will block more often than any other piece. This is why I hate anti'ing..because its all blockable pieces vs. all blockable pieces essentially.

In one of those games, luck ruins it entirely. Thats why I like to throw in an occassional spellcaster or wisp..

Edit: Wayf beat me to it..

They rely on blockable attacks almost completely (luck). And I don't see how a luckily placed scout assault on a cleric requires more skill than a DSM doing the same thing. :huh:

[Noda]

i think i only use my knights in one out of every 10 or so games(besides end game when im up)

as long as u know your damage charts its very easy to spend almost an entire game without doing blockable shots.

anoything thing u can do, is take alot of blockable shots(this is way is more fun hehe) since i believe the blocking system is self containable to a game if u do many blocking shots it will come out to proper percentages in the end.

[Match Strike]

Here's how I see it:

Any form can be lucky.

[iownu4money]

i don't like front line attackers but there easy to kill and ur not ruining the game by doing ur own setup

[KBHoleN1]

I like turtling in freestyle games. I was on a nice winning streak, against a good set of rushes that I worked my ass off to beat. Jumped by a frontline, no cleric bomb. Wisp sameside, 2 pyros on frontline, dsm and drag in back. I had no chance, the entire game. The form would have crumbled to any decent knight rush, he had no strength up front. From the beginning of the game to the end he had more choices than he probably realized. He couldn't have made a move that didn't cripple me. The form wasn't that great, but combine sameside with first turn and a frontline bomb, I had no chance. That is how it goes with frontline rushes, you kill one guy, get killed by the next. I don't see why you would make a form that is so vulnerable to so many things.