Attack or Defend?

I'm aware that the answer to this question will vary depending on gametype etc, but generally do you consider it better to be an attacking/proactive player, or a defensive/reactive player?

From the very start of a game do you think it's better to immediately attack and conquer territories/regions or is it better to defend what you have and wait for any weaknesses or opportunities to appear?

Like I said, i'm aware people have different strategies for capitals v deathmatch, just want to see if the higher-ranked/higher skilled players are more aggresive or not in their gameplay.

Thanks

Well this depends on the game mode to the extent that I can't really give you a good answer. But generally my rule of thumb is the more players, the less i attack.

I can say that the attacker has the statistical advantage so you should attack more than defend in 2 player games.

Also, if you have many players in a game and you attack some, you're almost guaranteed to lose men which might cause you to fall behind the rest. But if you don't attack, others might leave you alone and fight amongst themselves, and then you're ahead without doing anything.

I say in the begining, you should defend and rack up your armies. UNLESS its a 1v1 game. I just attack in 1v1 games. Later in the game, start to attack more, but i say dont attack in the begining.

Yes, in 1v1 games you should attack anywhere you have the attackers advantage.

In all other games, remember that when you attack someone else, you will both lose troops, and therefore the other players will gain from your attack.

That said, if you can take a region without losing too much, you should probably do so.

I defend at first, but also don't try to take regions unless its australia. Taking regions make you a target. In 1 vs 1, I usually defend first and then attack, but Vexers note is that if you lose 2 first time stop immediately don't keep attacking.