Melee + Ranged Combat Tactics

[Polobo]

Since ranged attack killing does not result in the attacker moving onto the tile occupied by the defender in many cases it would be best, given the option, to have a ranged unit perform the final attack on an enemy so that the defensive line is not forced to extend into the possible middle of the enemy line. Given the option of using a ranged or melee unit you would still have the option post-combat to move the melee unit into the gap. The no-counter aspect of ranged makes this even more desirable since the killing blow would not cause any damage to the attacker.

The downside is that you may need three attacks instead of two to kill a single unit assuming that you generally have better melee damage capability compared to ranged attack capabilities.

I Welcome and will myself consider the effects of this on combat formation when the time presents itself.

Note: Keep in mind you cannot capture a city now using just archers but must bring alone some form of melee unit. Or, more importantly, if you lose your last melee unit attacking a city it will not matter how many ranged units you have - other than to maintain the siege (while taking full damage from the city) while reinforcements arrive.

 

[Ahriman]

The downside is that

It also means you suffer more damage. If I shoot your unit, then attack it melee, you are heavily damaged for the melee fight and inflict little damage.
But if I attack in melee, then shoot it, your unit is uninjured at the start of the melee fight, and does its full damage.

Because you don't suffer any counter-damage from ranged attacks units, you generally want to use your ranged attacks to soften the enemy first before you attack them in melee.

 

[Schuesseled]

Agreed, unless you can kill it with just ranged attacks, its usually a good idea to attack with ranged first.

 

[civzombie]

attack with ranged first, then attack with a melee unit having the charge promotion (+25% vs. injured units!)

 

[Ramanag]

You can also maintain the line by using mounted units. Unless I am mistaken, they can still mvoe after attacking.

 

[Schuesseled]

or give you r melee units blitz so they can move back.

 

[Polobo]

I guess the best case for incurring the extra damage would be during a flanking attack where the weakened unit would remaining in defensive terrain and not adjacent to any units.

O - open tile
T - target enemy unit
X - enemy unit
M - friendly unit (melee)
A - friendly unit (archer)

OTX
MMO
AAO

Attacking target T I would suggest using the left melee unit first then one or both archers. If it ends up taking 3 attacks to kill T the right melee unit is still holding the line and, unlike using the melee unit last, the other enemy unit does not get an attack against a recently moved and damaged unit.

The main risk/reward would be whether you think the two archers could kill either unit on their own in which case you would not even need to move the melee unit. If they did not, however, you'd either have to use and move a melee unit into the enemy line or risk that unit withdrawing and healing.

 

[RD-BH]

I guess the best case for incurring the extra damage would be during a flanking attack where the weakened unit would remaining in defensive terrain and not adjacent to any units.

O - open tile
T - target enemy unit
X - enemy unit
M - friendly unit (melee)
A - friendly unit (archer)

OTX
MMO
AAO

Attacking target T I would suggest using the left melee unit first then one or both archers. If it ends up taking 3 attacks to kill T the right melee unit is still holding the line and, unlike using the melee unit last, the other enemy unit does not get an attack against a recently moved and damaged unit.

The main risk/reward would be whether you think the two archers could kill either unit on their own in which case you would not even need to move the melee unit. If they did not, however, you'd either have to use and move a melee unit into the enemy line or risk that unit withdrawing and healing.

If this is a defensive position ...
... why open up the melee line by attacking?
... why attack with archers, which could result in xp for the target?

Letting the target attack ...
... melee xp if they survive attack
... clean up weakened target with archers if they don't
... disaster? move reserve forces into breach

 

[Polobo]

The example is inteded to show a possible attack sequence; not attacking kinda defeats the purpose of the example.

If attacking whether the target gets XP is irrelevant IF it is going to die on your turn anyway. Agreed that softening up a unit so that you can kill it the next turn is somewhat risky since they could gain a promotion on their turn.

The point isn't to consider every possible combat option but simply show what I meant by desiring not to have a killing melee unit enter the defeated unit's tile when another unit is present that could kill it.

 

[RD-BH]

POI You did call it a 'defensive' line.
If this line is offensive, I would think advancing the line is preferable to remaining static.
... (especially if you have reserve forces in place)
That being said:
... Soften target with archers and finish with left melee.
... Forward line faces the remaining unit (flanking intact).
... Any exposure of archers would be
... ... from an extended range unit that could flank the ZoC.

 

[Polobo]

A line is a line; there is no concept of offensive or defensive when both sides are stationary. I carelessly used the term in the OP but meant to imply that you want the melee-line to remain in defenseable positions.

I also later mentioned "defensive terrain" such that the left attacker is currently on a hill but the left defender (T) is on flatland; by moving onto the flatland and ending the turn you open yourself up to attack by the unit already in play and possibly any reinforcements. If there are no reinforcements you are pretty much assured a victory the next turn and you can move the left attacker off the hill to flank the right enemy while your archers and the right attacker finish off the right enemy; meanwhile your right unit has been dug-in for another turn in order to withstand the attack by the right attacker.

 

[RD-BH]

I apologize. I have misunderstood your scenario.
I do think there is a significant difference between an offensive line and a defensive one.
Defensive:
... Blocking approach to city/resource.
... In own territory for healing options.
... A breach in this line could be costly.
Offensive:
... Pushing into an enemy territory.
... Healing is more restricted; damage needs minimalized.
... Pushing forward toward long-term target preferable to enemy entrenching/healing.
... A breach is not as costly; reserves should be 'on approach'.

 

[Polobo]

I agree fully with the strategic value and general use of offensive and defensive lines but I guess I am focusing more on tactics and even an offensively oriented strategic line may want to entrench and become defensively oriented tactically for a few turns to take advantage of a temporay situation and benefical terrain.

 

[Horserush]

I agree fully with the strategic value and general use of offensive and defensive lines but I guess I am focusing more on tactics and even an offensively oriented strategic line may want to entrench and become defensively oriented tactically for a few turns to take advantage of a temporay situation and benefical terrain.

Yes I think so too, for instance you might be better off just having your melee units fortify on the front line for an extra turn while your ranged units finish off the units they damaged earlier. Assuming your opponent doesn't have any reserves coming into play this could be valid and a safer way to inch into enemy territory.

However, you also deprive your melee units of the XP that they might need for the final push into the city proper. It depends on your specific goals for the units in question I suppose.

 

[Polobo]

A unfortified unit caught on flatland in enemy territory will have very little time to enjoy the benefits of their promotion.

 

[RD-BH]

That unfortified unit can bear the loss better than the defender moving out of position.
If you are pressing offensively with archers you should already have negated the -33% penalty.
Consider picket/skirmish lines to maximize advantages.