The objective of the Guide is to break out the likelihood of winning most common battles in MPT (Multiplayer Tournment).

An overall guide to MPT can be found at https://steamhost.cn/steamcommunity_com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=1669107567

Stats are as follow:
Warrior, Jaguar Warrior, Chasqui Scout: 1 attack, 1 defense
Spearman, Enkidu Warrior, Impi: 1 attack, 2 defense
Archer: 2 attack, 1 defense
Swordsman: 3 attack, 2 defense
Immortals: 4 attack, 2 defense

For the sake of simplicity, bombard damage is ignored.

Most stats assumed flat terrain (grassland, plains, desert, marsh or jungle) - which is not always the case. Hills, Forests and Jungle bring additional defensive points.

Should you play aggressively and try to attack with your warrior an enemy city guarded by a single warrior?

3 hp warrior vs. 3 hp warrior, fortified in city. 36% chance of winning.
If accross river: 29%.

Conclusion: You will kill your enemy once every 3 games you try it. Totally worth it!

Should you defend with one spearman or two warriors, against an invading veteran archer?

4 hp archer vs. two 3 hp warrior, fortified in city: 47% chance of winning
4 hp archer vs. one 3 hp spearman, fortified in city: 51% chance of winning.

Conclusion: Having two warriors instead of one spearman not only gives you a higher chance of winning the battle, but also grants you one extra turn (as the archer will need two turns to kill both warriors vs. one turn to kill the spearman.

When trying to rush, should you make barracks first or only regular warriors?

3 hp warrior vs. 3 hp warrior, fortified in city. 36% chance of winning.
4 hp warrior vs. two 3 hp warriors, fortified in city: 13% chance of winning.

4 hp warrior vs. 3 hp warrior, fortified in city: 51% chance of winning

Conclusion: If the plan is to kill an enemy early on 1 vs 1 battles, getting more warriors will improve your chances of finding enemies and test your luck.

If your enemy have two warriors fortified in capital, your veteran warrior win only get a kill once every 8 games! ouch!

But on the other side... if you do get a veteran warrior to face a single regular warrior, you go from 1 win every 3 tries to one every 2!

How many veteran Jaguars is enough to kill a city with 2 defending warriors? How about 5? What if it has one Spearman?

You should get a kill in 3 out of 4 games if you use 3 veteran jaguars vs. two reg warriors fortified in city, 8 Jaguars vs. 5 reg. warriors fortified in city, and additional 3 Jaguars if the city has a Spearman.

Generally speaking, if your enemy does not see / expect you, 8 veteran Jaguars should be enough.

Should you try to counter attack invading veteran Warriors/Jaguars with warriors? How about with Archers?

3 hp warrior vs. 4 hp jaguar, not fortified: 30% chance of winning.
3 hp archer vs. 4 hp Jaguar, not fortified: 64% chance of winning.

Conclusion: Unless you have archers, you should not counter attack invading Jaguars.

Same question - but fighting 2 deffense units (Enkidus/Impis)?

3 hp warrior vs. 3 hp enkidus, not fortified: 18% chance of winning.
3 hp archer vs. 3 hp enkidus, not fortified: 45% chance of winning.
4 hp archer vs. 3 hp enkidus, not fortified: 61% chance of winning.

Conclusion: If you have veteran archers, you should counter attack the invading Enkidus. Otherwise, you are better off just covering your tiles (remember that archers cost 2x more than a single enkidu, you don't want a 50/50 win ratio on those!)

I see a 1 HP impi in a hill. Should I attack it with my regular warrior? What if its in a mountain?

3 hp warrior vs. 1 hp impi, fortified in hill: 53% chance of winning.
3 hp warrior vs. 1 hp impi, fortified in mountain: 45% chance of winning.

Conclusion: You should win each battle about half the times you try. It may be worth it depending on the benefit you see of controlling that tile.

When being invaded by Swordsman, should you try to counter attack with warriors and archers or let them attack your city?

4 hp swordsman vs. 3 hp warrior(or archer), fortified in city: 92% chance of winning.
4 hp swordsman vs. 3 hp spearman, fortified in city: 82% chance of winning.
4 hp swordsman vs. 3 hp warrior, fortified in city behind walls: 70% chance of winning.
4 hp swordsman vs. 3 hp spearman, fortified in city behind walls: 55% chance of winning.

3 hp archer vs. 4 hp swordsman, not fortified: 30% chance of winning.
3 hp warrior vs. 4 hp swordsman, not fortified: 9% chance of winning.

Conclusion: If your city has walls, you should never attack with warriors: use them for defense. If the city does not have walls, then it doesn't really matter - you'll lose 9 out of 10 battles either attacking or defending. Ouch!

If you have Archers but no walls... Then you should always attack the invading swordsman before it can attacks you. If you do have walls, then you have the same odds attacking and defending - you should lose about 2/3 of the combats... So if we factor in the bombard damage, the conclusion is that you're better off defending behind walls

When being invaded by Immortals, should you try to counter attack with warriors and archers or let them attack your city, with fortified warrior? What if you have fortified spearman? Does anything chance when we add walls?

4 hp immortal vs. 3 hp warrior, fortified in city: 96% chance of winning.
4 hp immortal vs. 3 hp spearman, fortified in city: 82% chance of winning.
4 hp immortal vs. 3 hp warrior, fortified in city behind walls: 92% chance of winning.
4 hp immortal vs. 3 hp spearman, fortified in city behind walls: 69% chance of winning.

3 hp archer vs. 4 hp immortal, not fortified: 30% chance of winning.
3 hp warrior vs. 4 hp immortal, not fortified: 9% chance of winning.

Conclusion: Against Immortals, generally speaking you will always have better odds of winning if you counter attack with warriors and archers. You should not, however, counter attack with Enkidus/Spearman/Impis.

If you are using Immortals, considering bringing Spearsmen and Archers (for defensive bombard) so that the decision to counter attack your stack is not obvious.