Should i attack?

[Conqistador]

I have this army (in the spoiler) ready to attack.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

The cities i need are under the power of isengard and are guarded by little amount of troops. Should i attack?
gimme some tips. Already destroyed the orcs of gundabad. I'm playing as eriador.

thanks in advance

ps: my first topic in this forum

edit: , i mistakenly attached one more pic... sorry!

[dannyalex]

Bring Gandalf with your army,i always look to have enough cavalry 6,8 or 10 units are ok for me the rest must be archers and infantry,always go gor 10 cavalry,5 archers and 5 infantry,Bandoras are great archers but you can only recruit them in your land

CHARGE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[mattgoby]

Bring Gandalf with your army,i always look to have enough cavalry 6,8 or 10 units are ok for me the rest must be archers and infantry,always go gor 10 cavalry,5 archers and 5 infantry,Bandoras are great archers but you can only recruit them in your land

CHARGE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

that is a rather nooby method of battles

[dannyalex]

that is a rather nooby method of battles

ok if this in "nooby strategy" why i won with easy way, isengard and gundabad, at very hard\very hard?

in my campaign isengard launch an army of assasins i count 8 of them!!they were all killed
by my assasins-killers

[Russian Gondor]

It depends if you feel that your stack will be able to take on 3 stacks of Isengard. They will literally swamp you. I would try to get 1 more stack.

[Rogal Dorn]

If you're only using one stack... yeah, gather some more troops first.

[Mikail Mengsk]

If you're only using one stack... yeah, gather some more troops first.

*

[zlatko_v89]

it depends how are you playing. if you are playing on easy go ahead, but on very hard get some extra units.

[Smokey Bacon]

how good are you at battles?

[IrishBlood]

im pretty sure this should be merged with the war stories thread....

[Harabec]

Now there's another thing I want you to remember. I don't want to get any messages saying that "we are holding our position." We're not holding anything. Let the Hun do that. We are advancing constantly and we're not interested in holding onto anything except the enemy. We're going to hold onto him by the nose and we're going to kick him in the ass. We're going to kick the hell out of him all the time and we're going to go through him like crap through a goose!
-General Patton

tl;dr - attack

[Mikail Mengsk]

Patton was largely overrated.

[Harabec]

Patton was largely overrated.

ummm, what?
Other than the bad decision to attack Metz head-on, where else did he flounder as a military commander?

Patton traveled father and faster capturing or killing more enemy soldiers in the France breakout than any other commander. Lets not forget his amazing feat of logistics when turning bout from a major engagement and racing north during a blizzard to relieve the 101st Airborne at Bastogne?

@topic- you will always be outnumbered, so attacking is kinda the only option
i try not to be worse off than 2:1, so you might need more units if you aren't used to getting heroic victories almost every battle
waiting for a break in the stack spam isn't very effective as the AI replaces lost units so fast

[Mikail Mengsk]

ummm, what?
Other than the bad decision to attack Metz head-on, where else did he flounder as a military commander?

Patton traveled father and faster capturing or killing more enemy soldiers in the France breakout than any other commander. Lets not forget his amazing feat of logistics when turning bout from a major engagement and racing north during a blizzard to relieve the 101st Airborne at Bastogne?

If we are talking about ALLIED commanders, he's pretty good among them. Bradley is a good choice too.

If we consider German and Soviet commanders, he is very very far under their level. Rommel, Von Manstein, Heinrici, Model, Rokossovsky, Konev, and others are way better.

[Varjon]

I guess it depends a lot how things are between Isengard and Rohan. If they are in war and Isengard is losing, go ahead and attack but if Isengard is owning Rohan you should gather more troops before you attack.

[Dardan Kastrioti]

I guess it depends a lot how things are between Isengard and Rohan. If they are in war and Isengard is losing, go ahead and attack but if Isengard is owning Rohan you should gather more troops before you attack.

But Isengard always owns Rohan

[Conqistador]

But Isengard always owns Rohan

it is what generally happens, but my spies reported that Isengard has few troops, the frontier cities are badly-guarded... in a blitz with this army i shoot that 2-3 isengard cities will fall.
The orcish soldiers in early game are little-armored, with an good amount of archers you inflict heavy casualties on them... the cavalry only charges in the back to rout the dirty orcs...
My army, as you see, counts with 3 cavalry, Gandalf is in Forodwaith spreading the northmen culture.

The main reason for me to attack is that Tharbad is one of the requirements to rebuilt Arnor and is under control of the black tower.

Rohan is being slowly pushed down, becoz an invasion of Mordor took Edoras and Isengard is taking advantage of the fact.

btw, i'm new to this mod, i'm playing on M/M and still good challenge imo.

[nhytgbvfeco2]

I guess it depends a lot how things are between Isengard and Rohan. If they are in war and Isengard is losing, go ahead and attack but if Isengard is owning Rohan you should gather more troops before you attack.

have you ever seen rohan defeat isengard on its own?i sure haven't.

[Santeri]

have you ever seen rohan defeat isengard on its own?i sure haven't.

Well, I have

[Varjon]

have you ever seen rohan defeat isengard on its own?i sure haven't.

As a matter of fact on my current Eriador campaign Rohan has almost defeated Isengard on their own since Isengard is at war only with Rohan. They have taken Isengard and Dunland and Isengard has only two or three regions between Rohan and sea.