And this is why I wish we had replays. I don't actually think we are disagreeing with each other here - I just don't think you understand what I'm getting at. That's why I wish I could show you, rather than having to write it all out. In any case I'll edit the main post at some point to be more clear.
Transitive is very diplomatic, but the fact is that Zechnophobe is completely right - once you have committed to battle you shouldn't be dancing.. But the problem is that being right about that doesn't actually have anything to do with my original post.
Remember when I said the this was about positioning? I'm not talking about the actual fight
. For the part where you are actually fighting then yes, having one guy tank or both offer support to the besieged ally is a good idea. And no, when you are committed you don't want to start running unless it's clear your team is going to lose and you can get everbody out. I'm not sure where stuns come into it for you - if you are tossing out stuns without committing to battle then you are just wasting mana...
You don't dance when you are truly fighting. When two teams are dancing no one is getting damage from anything but peripherals and range spells, and you want to preserve most of your mana for the actual fight. That doesn't occur until one or both teams decides to commit to battle. Until then everyone stays just out of attack range. Once commitment occurs then you don't back off until you are dying or they are, but again, that's not really what we are talking about...
The point of dancing is to try and draw your opponents out of position, to get them to over-extend so that when you do commit you have multiple DGs with strong damage focus on one opponent without allowing them the same. If your opponents are exposed enough you can continue to attack, if they recover you can disengage, but either way the dance is what leads up to it, not the object itself...
It's the equivalent of two 17th century warships maneuvering for position. Both want to fire a broadside on their enemy without being exposed to a return broadside. So the ships tack and weave until one makes a mistake and the other has best position (turned with all main guns brought to bear, with the enemy ship angled so that it can't return fire with main guns). Actually firing just confirms what everyone with a brain already knows: the ship with superior position has won.
No good captain really wants to be side-to-side with an equally strong enemy vessel exchanging wave after wave of cannonfire. Even if you "win" - your ship could be sinking and most of your men will be dead.
Just like good ol Sun Tzu says, "to win one hundred victories in one hundred battles is not the acme of skill. To subdue the enemy without fighting is the acme of skill,"
and the best way to do that in the game I'm playing is described above. If you are playing a different game I'd love to get together sometime and figure out where they overlap
2. You can become over-extended when you run away. The most frustrating experience I had recently was trying to get an allied Erebus to stop running so I could shield him and we could kill the enemy Reg chasing him. He bypassed two sets of towers and was a couple of hits from dying by the time I finally got him to stop - and live to kill his pursuer.
This is especially true if fighting a demigod which has slow effects or is simply faster than you. While he chases you he does damage while you do not do damage if you run away. Had you stayed you might have killed him instead of dying yourself.
Example would be spit UB vs Ice TB in low level range < 4.
It's why I get frustrated seeing someone engage with a Maim Reg midmap and then turn to run with less than half health. You'd do better to simply teleport out, every time. Oh, and please stop letting him kite you directly over 6 mines.