Who Is the Attacker?

[fred zeppelin]

It would be helpful is the combat report would have some clear visual indication of which side is the attacker. You know, of course, if you plotted you own attack, but sometimes the enemy does the same thing and it would be nice to see, at a glance, who is being treated as the attacker and who as the defender in the battle.

Perhaps it's already there in some of the data, but I haven't been able to find it.

Thanks..

[Reiryc]

are you talking about the after battle report that pops up on the screen?

If so, there are big icons at the top right of each that show a symbol for the attacking side and defending side. Occasionally they both are attacking, both defending, etc

[ATTACH]30742[/ATTACH]

[Templer]

Maybe I don't get you right.
But signs are already on the combat report, the postures signs.

[ATTACH]30743[/ATTACH]

[Reiryc]

Maybe I don't get you right.
But signs are already on the combat report, the postures signs.

[ATTACH]30743[/ATTACH]

You're boxes are better than mine!

[fred zeppelin]

Doh! I read those as their stances, not necessarily their orders. But, of course, I see it now.

Never mind.

[Templer]

You're boxes are better than mine!

I was posting so many images to this forum these days, so I know now how to use the 'paint' software.

[Reiryc]

haha... Im just lazy... grab the mouse, make something like a circle or square and voila! done

[Templer]

Now someone explain to me how a battle could occur when both are in a defensive posture!?

[ATTACH]30744[/ATTACH]

[Reiryc]

Once side could be moving through an area in a defensive posture and encountered units who were defending the area?

[Ace]

That is the stance of the commanding officer. He can be in defensive posture, while some Corps was in offensive and started the battle, which moves us back to the post no 1. In this rare occasion, you cannot see who was the attacker, maybe both were

[Templer]

That is the stance of the commanding officer. He can be in defensive posture, while some Corps was in offensive and started the battle, which moves us back to the post no 1. In this rare occasion, you cannot see who was the attacker, maybe both were

So the question arises, what sense does it make then to display the postures?

[Ace]

From it you usually know who is the attacker.

[fred zeppelin]

That is the stance of the commanding officer. He can be in defensive posture, while some Corps was in offensive and started the battle, which moves us back to the post no 1. In this rare occasion, you cannot see who was the attacker, maybe both were

Then maybe I caved too quickly. I understood the symbols to be as you describe - the stance.

Seems like it we shouldn't have to guess who was attacking and who defending. With all the data presented, that ought to be one thing that's apparent.

I suppose once you get into entrenchments, you can decipher it from looking at who received those benefits, though I've seen reports where it appears both sides did.

[lycortas2]

Not that this is a great way to know, but at the bottom of the battle screen is a list of orders. There is one list of orders for the defender and a different list for the attacker. That will let you know when the stances do not help.