Defense is "better" than attack in the sense that it directly reduces incoming damage, while attack is just one of the factors that determine that damage, which in turn depends on many other factors. But I wouldn't prioritize defense when playing as Barbarians in the arena. :)

However, for me, defense is a higher priority than offense, and I prefer shields over blades, and I like Tacticus more than Crag :rolleyes:

What if we calculate the percentage increase in overall attack? That is, convert it into additional HP damage and calculate how many percent in absolute terms the attack adds?
In general, defense turns out to be better when the percentages of attack and defense are equal. Let me explain. Suppose the attack increase is 30% of the normal value. The incoming damage is also reduced by 30%. It seems that attack and defense compensate each other, but let's calculate: Normal attack 100 HP + 30% bonus = 130 HP. 130 HP - 30% (reduction of direct damage) = 91!!!!!! But it was 100 without the attack bonus!
Therefore, the attack bonus in a battle with defense should be higher!
Something like that...

Yesterday, I tried a rush tactic with Stronghold against a 200% AI. I was watching on which weeks I could build Behemoths. The maps were large, with an underground and no water. Out of 10 games, I managed to build them on week 3 in 5 games, on week 2 in 3 games, and on week 1 in 2 games!
The AI couldn't counter it. The advantages are very fast territory capture and a rapid increase in the hero's level. A large number of Behemoths and Rocs at the beginning of the game. Next time, I will try a fast development strategy. From Stronghold, I will take Rocs and Behemoths. The rest of the troops will be from other, nearby castles...