Attack Move - Ban or Bang?

[MatDaymond]

• Contrary to what Heart and Miguel claim, I find it pretty clear the tests from Andae and T-West confirm crossbows can't consistently move faster by abusing the attack move.
• Attack move works more efficiently than stop and patrol because units have no delay. D3rp showed this pretty clearly.

However using attack move instead of focus fire allows units to move, not at a faster speed, but rather more efficiently. This is what I think T-West was refering to as "movement advatange", or being able to "glide past melee units" as T90 said. So I recorded a couple of clips comparing one with another where I found the following:

1. Repeating the first test many times, I found ranged units consistently hit and run more efficiently with attack move rather than focus fire when chased (they survive for a significantly longer distance).
2. Doing the secendo test, I found that when ranged units are blocked or surrounded and then the attack move is used, occasionally some of them won't attack but rather move slipping away from whatever is blocking them. In this sense attack move works substantially different than focus fire, where all units always shoot.
   
   
3. Finally, I strongly believe and assert that units move and regroup "more efficiently" with attack move, reason why 1) is true, reason why they chase other ranged units more efficiently as Heart showed in the clips and, along with 2), reason why they can avoid being surrounded.

Check my clip comparing attack move and focus fire here:

Attack move vs Focus Fire.mp4

drive.google.com

Of course "more efficiently" does have not per se a very precise meaning which you can test, but I think you can still agree with statement 3) if you watch the clips I recorded and where I try to show it. I find it clear units regroup less in wierd ways nor walk back and forth. I also encourage anyone to try the same tests zoomed in and at slow speed (I didn't want to make a too long video).

Finally as a side note, I have recently reported a bugged feature when moving after focus firing (for intially out of range units) which doesn't happen for attack move.

Unexpected unit pathing (moving in opposite direction)

▶ GAME INFORMATION GAME BUILD #: 101.101.59165.0 8211018 GAME PLATFORM: Steam OPERATING SYSTEM: Windows 7 ▶ ISSUE EXPERIENCED Ranged units move in the opposite direction to which they were tasked if they had been previously tasked to attack and chase an enemy unit. Tipically, they move...

forums.ageofempires.com

So indeed units move differently depending on the attack instruction they had previously recieved.

 

[KolyaKrasotkin]

Errr... this has literally been the case since forever.

Definitely not in my pleb ELO range of 1200+.

View attachment 199089
I agree crossbows are too op and too easy to play. The top 5 civs in the game aren't franks and 4 civs with good matchups vs franks+ no arbalest, not at all.

"Stats last updated: 27/10/2021 at 00:36 UTC" 11

 

[Snizl]

so? this statitisc is so useless. franks and huns are the most played civs for low level and beginners. most of the aoe players won't use crossbows like the top 10% do. So your post sadly doenst make any sense just pulling useless random facts to support your opinion. without using 1 minutes to think about it.

1650+ which is like what? top 3% of players?
sure xbow are strong, if well played possibly even OP, but nowhere near as domenating as some people claim and a non issue for almost everyone that plays the game.



""Stats last updated: 27/10/2021 at 00:36 UTC" 11" there has been no major update since then and i doubt the way people play has drastically changed either. but yeah its sad this site wont be maintained anymore, it was an amazing ressource.

 

[bMyers]

Attack move certainly makes archer move faster. I noticed this in my first games of DE when my archer could not run away from the enemy archer as they could in voobly. Also when using it vs knights its very unfair. Also it makes galleys move faster too. But also the fact there are not as many ponds in de affects the strength of xbow as well.

 

[Memeluke]

See? xbows are so OP, you don't even get to arbalest before winning!

the chad bulgarian pickers who abuse archer attack move so hard they close the game in feudal age every time

 

[T-West]

Finally as a side note, I have recently reported a bugged feature when moving after focus firing (for intially out of range units) which doesn't happen for attack move.

Yeah, that happens to me too. Even happened a couple of times when I selected a Scout chasing a Monk and changed the attack stance from Aggressive to Stand Ground (so he didn't start chasing Spearmen after killing the Monk). The Scout just turned around and ran backwards.

There also seem to be bugs with attack move, sometimes I'll issue an order and the Archers don't attack immediately. I'm not sure how to reproduce that consistently.

 

[KolyaKrasotkin]

there has been no major update since then and i doubt the way people play has drastically changed either.

x-bow usage in low to mid elo range has changed, imo.

 

[phiupan]

Dodging ballistics seems to be being ignored so far - that’s under the same category of using mechanics in ways they shouldn’t work

If you change direction after the shot you should dodge an arrow with balistics. The issue might be the speed boost in changing formations then

 

[Memeluke]

x-bow usage in low to mid elo range has changed, imo.

bullshit

 

[IncredulousFox]

Why does discussing xbow performance at low elo even matter when discussing if attack move is bugged. Low elo players do not have good micro/use attack move in a way that fixing such a bug (if there is one) would even matter for their performance. If they did--they wouldnt be low elo! This whole discussion is clearly focused on the top 3% of players.

Hell im 1600 and my micro is terrible and i should probably start learning to use attack move and formation splitting.

 

[SouFire]

I am surprised of those claiming that attack move isn't broken but it is more efficient lol

It's broken, it certainly gives faster fire rate, cause it regroups faster and the reload time is shorter than using patrol or manually targeting and lets not talk about stop command, also it is getting the regroup speed formation when moving at certain angles so to the eye and normal unit speed they are going faster, not that they got cobracar speed or that they can sustain it, they are just getting that little boost on key moments.

 

[Loris]

View attachment 199089
I agree crossbows are too op and too easy to play. The top 5 civs in the game aren't franks and 4 civs with good matchups vs franks+ no arbalest, not at all.

"Im going to show u why attack move is not broken cherrypicking random outofdata percentage based on ppl who cant use the attack move"

 

[Memeluke]

read my nickname loris...

 

[Loris]

Melee pathing as said earlier is the first reason why attack move is broken

 

[kalpit00]

Yoooooo attack move is broken 11 i never used it before, that is never learnt the rhytm (move-move-attack move, wait till fire, move-move- attack move, repeat)

I legit went 5-0 by picking archer civs and im more of a macro oriented cavalry siege player, never used to win games with pure archers before and i destroyed some 16-17xx guys by simply outmicroing. is this what it feels like to be liereyy?

Update : I also used the gliding move vs knights, and got so much more value with my ranged units than i ever used to get before. It works with CAs as well once I figured out the fire delay difference, all the while in the same game

 

[_Raiden_]

All of the tests are pretty interesting but it doesn't change reality. Play at any level above 2k+ and it's xbow/attack move abuse every game. You might get a switch up of kts here and there but 90% of the games are xbow/attack move abuse. I'd love to see how good these 2k+ micro without Attack Move. The amount of time you have to spend target firing/patrol is substantial. Not only that but you will have to target fire weaker units instead of even distribution of arrows. So if two archers are weak, both are killed with Attack move. If you target fire/patrol only 1 will be killed. Seems pretty obvious to me and those who can't see the issues as presented by other top/pro players simply want an easier way to micro their units.

 

[Tocaraca]

I'd love to see how good these 2k+ micro without Attack Move. The amount of time you have to spend target firing/patrol is substantial.

Before DE, the standard was stop micro. Stop micro is now glitched with DE and is not a viable option. Attack move micro is essentially the replacement. If attack move is removed or made no longer a micro possibility, then the only option in order to not render xbow play completely useless is to fix stop micro.

Play at any level above 2k+ and it's xbow/attack move abuse every game

I've been playing against 2k players recently and this just isn't true. Out of 12 of my few games vs 19xx and 2k players, 7 of them involved knights, and 5 of those games involved the knights winning against xbows (except 1 which was Mongol steppe lancers instead of knights, because Biry is crazy). Obviously a low sample size, but it lines up with what I have seen of 2k+ gameplay on Twitch as well. I will be generous and say that xbow play is like 60% of games and knight play is 40%. In the last KotD we saw plenty of knights as well.

 

[_Raiden_]

I’m well aware of how the game was played before DE. Stop micro is nowhere near comparable to Attack Move. Furthermore, 12 games is not a viable source. You also must not compare ranked games to tournament games as Civ Drafts are involved. So yes going xbows with Lithuanians doesn’t make sense. You play to each civ strength. Whether it’s dark,fuedle,castle or imp. The majority of top 10 aoe2 players are asking for this to be fixed. It’s not a coincidence.

 

[Lokalo]

I’m well aware of how the game was played before DE. Stop micro is nowhere near comparable to Attack Move. Furthermore, 12 games is not a viable source. You also must not compare ranked games to tournament games as Civ Drafts are involved. So yes going xbows with Lithuanians doesn’t make sense. You play to each civ strength. Whether it’s dark,fuedle,castle or imp. The majority of top 10 aoe2 players are asking for this to be fixed. It’s not a coincidence.

Yeah, but if that would be so OP as some of you try to say even those civs would play xbow, because why not? Why it doesn't make sense to go xbow with franks for example? Is just knights still do much better, so they might be op, but knights are still viable option, is just dumb to try telling otherwise

 

[Tocaraca]

Furthermore, 12 games is not a viable source

Obviously a low sample size, but it lines up with what I have seen of 2k+ gameplay on Twitch as well.

I also watch spectate lots of 2k games. Knights are not that uncommon.
The top 5 civs are not all xbow civs. Mayans and Chinese are not OP because they are xbow civs, they are OP because of their economies. Same with Vikings (and Vikings aren't even top tier, they are just really really good). Britons are an exception because their xbows perform much better against their counters also stomp other xbows. The other best civs are Aztecs (which are primarily played with eagles, not xbows), Franks (which are a knight civ), Huns (which are a knight and CA civ, very rarely played with heavy xbow aside from just a few in early castle age), Lithuanians (which are a knight/eskirm civ), and Mongols (which play with knights/camels just as much as with xbows). Portuguese, Italians, Koreans, and Bohemians are xbow civs but they are not frequently played on open maps in ladder games OR tournament games, or do they have a high winrate. Considering how overpowered xbows are, you would expect those civs to be in the top half of all civs, whereas all of the mediocre cavalry civs like Berbers, Bulgarians, Burgundians, Franks, Khmer, Lithuanians should all be mid/low tier, right?

 

[_Raiden_]

Just for reference Semi Finals of KOTD Lierey vs Vinch. Azt vs Poles,Lierey goes full xbow into arbalast. Fixing attack move will result in a bigger skill gap between actual micro intensive players and macro players. But yeah…you got it guys. I sincerely hope Attack Move is fixed. It’s a cheap imitation of what is actually required to micro units in AoE2 hence why almost all of the top 10 are asking this to be fixed. And I am sharing my experience from coming back after 7 years and playing at least 200 games against 2k+. Not by speculation or silly questions. Cheers

 

[I_Sniper_]

I do not want to start any drama, but it took 2 months to remove "animation cancel" for AoE4.

Attack move bug is still there since how much time for AoE2?

Just joking, I stopped playing aoe2 because of this stupid thing, I will love the game again if they fix it.

I kinda love some pros that start to be against this, no one was complaining when it was only pro player that were abusing it :D (Which is normal, because you are losing vs weaker players because of this. That's the opposite of skill for an RTS in my opinion..)

 

[aoeplayer]

x-bow usage in low to mid elo range has changed, imo.

 

[Lokalo]

Isn't that a quite clear indication mayans need a nerf(both pick rate and win ratio)? Although in my opinion it doesn't show much of knight or xbow thing, all those civs have great eco. Can we have bit longer list of this, not just top5?

 

[BugA_the_Great]

Very nice and informative topic, thank you all.

Melee pathing as said earlier is the first reason why attack move is broken

It seems so to me as well.

For a possibly more clear example, let's just forget both archers and the "attack move" for a second. Instead, just order a large group of knights attack a moving ram - what happens is that _only a couple_ of knights take turns in hitting _only the rear part_ of the ram, getting stuck between each other in the meantime, and never attempting to get in front of the ram, surrounding it as they would if the ram was standing still (which they should be able to do no matter the ram moving, as they move much faster).

Now, when moving ram is replaced with a group of moving archers (crossbows) _keeping the formation_, essentially only a few knights do the damage (only to the rear of the archer formation), all the rest just trailing behind - while all the ranged units are still able to attack at once just fine. This is hugely unbalanced.

It almost feels like melee units need something that would make their pathing behave the same as researching "ballistics" does for the arrows - making melee units go not where the target unit _is now_, but where it _will be_ (where it is going). I guess some smarter target switching would be required, too (as unlike arrows, melee units can't all cause damage to the same target, simply because they can't all reach it at the same time). That would allow knights in the rear of the knight formation to move forward and attack archers at the middle/front of the archer formation, and while they're all still moving, too.

One side effect would probably be that knights would soon encircle the archers, causing maximum damage - but that is expected, and as it should be (I would think). Archers should still be allowed to (try to) path trough the knights as much as possible (and hope to keep the formation tight), but the knights should still be able to outrun and engage them (all archers at the formation boundaries, not just the rear ones), also attempting to block archer movement.

There's a place for archer player searching for map "choke points" where knights won't be able to engage all at once (encircle the archers, like in the woods or between the buildings), but it makes no sense for the choke point to be archers moving in formation alone, in plain open field, knights getting stuck in each other's behinds...