Tsarren writes:
>you've lost your sword for some reason) was, "assuming two opponents of
>equal skill, is there ever an adavantage to attacking first?"
>Anyone care to discuss the question, on any scale?
Sure.
As a fencer, well, yes, there is. Attacking allows you to frame the
nature of the conflict, forcing your opponent into a specific set of
responses (a largish set, but still smaller than those available when
neither is attacking). It also allows the possibility of a a mistake
that leads to the immediate end of the conflict (ie, a hit).
Admitedly, at the same time, it commits a fair amount of energy to a
single direction, and that energy can assuredly be turned against
you...but since it's also something your opponent needs to deal with,
the balance is on your side, assuming you have or can establish an
initial advantage at the start of your attack.
--
Joshua Kronengold (mneme@(io.com, labcats.org)) |\ _,,,--,,_ ,)
--^-- "Get your mind right and you can make a stick /,`.-'`' -, ;-;;'
/\\ your wand and the sky your hat and a puddle |,4- ) )-,_ ) /\
/-\\\ your magic..." -- Granny Weatherwax '---''(_/--' (_/-'