Play Now Login Create Account
illyriad
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Holy Heck!!!
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

Topic ClosedHoly Heck!!!

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <123
Author
Kumomoto View Drop Down
Postmaster General
Postmaster General


Joined: 19 Oct 2009
Status: Offline
Points: 2224
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18 Jan 2012 at 18:42
I defended successfully against 5 of these attacks.
Back to Top
Createure View Drop Down
Postmaster General
Postmaster General
Avatar

Joined: 07 Apr 2010
Location: uk
Status: Offline
Points: 1191
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18 Jan 2012 at 18:50
That Torshavn battle report was much better than my one I posted earlier, despite me using more suitable troops.

Think the answer lies in that his margin of victory was much smaller than mine - hence a much greater proportion of the total casualties received was laid onto his crimson dawn reinforcements.

Seems kinda strange that the best ratios of losses were achievable with the smallest margin of victory.... guess this is another thing we know and love about the Illy combat system. (what's a sarcasm??) Thumbs Up
Back to Top
Silverlake View Drop Down
Forum Warrior
Forum Warrior
Avatar

Joined: 15 Oct 2011
Status: Offline
Points: 417
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18 Jan 2012 at 19:09
Originally posted by Createure Createure wrote:

Sadly I didn't quite cling on to victory at the top of B League but I was beaten by a very dedicated and deserving player.

Thank you Creature
Back to Top
jordigui View Drop Down
Wordsmith
Wordsmith


Joined: 20 Jun 2010
Status: Offline
Points: 157
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18 Jan 2012 at 20:12
Thanks Creature! I knew I was not using the most suitable troop from a cost-effective point of view. But I wanted them to be fast (so no range ones) and I also had to build them so I was looking for more defense per time of production (so t2 before t1).
Back to Top
Daefis View Drop Down
Wordsmith
Wordsmith


Joined: 05 Aug 2011
Location: London
Status: Offline
Points: 128
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18 Jan 2012 at 20:29
Faced 10 of those attacks last night. Survived 9 but it was wholesale slaughter lol....
Back to Top
KillerPoodle View Drop Down
Postmaster General
Postmaster General
Avatar

Joined: 23 Feb 2010
Status: Offline
Points: 1849
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18 Jan 2012 at 20:31
Originally posted by jordigui jordigui wrote:

Thanks Creature! I knew I was not using the most suitable troop from a cost-effective point of view. But I wanted them to be fast (so no range ones) and I also had to build them so I was looking for more defense per time of production (so t2 before t1).


FYI - the underlying type for the battle square was plains so your Cav had a terrain bonus which probably helped.
"This is a bad idea and we shouldn't do it." - endorsement by HM

"a little name-calling is a positive thing." - Rill
Back to Top
jordigui View Drop Down
Wordsmith
Wordsmith


Joined: 20 Jun 2010
Status: Offline
Points: 157
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18 Jan 2012 at 21:48
 I know, I was doing some maths before ;)
 With the terrain bonus, t2 cavs were a bit better deffensively than t2 ranged. But comparing the defense value per cost of production (or upkeep), t2 ranged are better
Back to Top
JimJams View Drop Down
Forum Warrior
Forum Warrior
Avatar

Joined: 20 Sep 2011
Location: Italy
Status: Offline
Points: 496
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19 Jan 2012 at 15:08
Originally posted by jordigui jordigui wrote:

 I know, I was doing some maths before ;)
 With the terrain bonus, t2 cavs were a bit better deffensively than t2 ranged. But comparing the defense value per cost of production (or upkeep), t2 ranged are better

I don't have at hand attackers attributes, but if attackers were mainly cavalry then T2 cavs on plain would be a little better than T2 ranged even considering the upkeep. Anyway, those battle's results are interesting to analyze.
Back to Top
Arian View Drop Down
Wordsmith
Wordsmith
Avatar

Joined: 11 Nov 2011
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Points: 139
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 20 Jan 2012 at 00:29
As a newbie to the game and someone who was only peripherally involved in the tourney I am gathering that the grand finale of it involved having to move troops extremely quickly or to have left them in place previously.

Therefore it seems to me that the ending was skewed to reward players who had either just left troops on a stone and may not have even been on line, or those whose geographical placement was sufficiently close to be able to get to a stone on time.

Whichever way it went it seems unfair to those players who put time and effort in for a month but were unlucky enough to not be on line at 6am for 30 mins or who didn't have stones right next door. 

Perhaps some mention in the tournament rankings of those players who were in the top five of their respective leagues until the finale might go some way to congratulate those players for all their hard work, without detracting from the players who did succeed in the finale?

And congratulations to those that did of course Beer Smile
'Do you want ice with that?'
Back to Top
invictusa View Drop Down
Forum Warrior
Forum Warrior
Avatar

Joined: 16 Dec 2011
Status: Offline
Points: 480
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 10 Feb 2012 at 00:18
Wait a minute! Did the Gm's just summon a bunch of monsters in one turn?!  Thats against the rules isnt it?!?!
...and miles to go before I sleep.
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <123
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 11.10
Copyright ©2001-2017 Web Wiz Ltd.