Play Now Login Create Account
illyriad
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - MAJOR RELEASE 22APR12
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

Topic ClosedMAJOR RELEASE 22APR12

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 2627282930 31>
Author
 Rating: Topic Rating: 2 Votes, Average 5.00  Topic Search Topic Search  Topic Options Topic Options
Ander View Drop Down
Postmaster General
Postmaster General
Avatar

Joined: 24 Apr 2011
Status: Offline
Points: 1269
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 24 May 2012 at 21:00
Originally posted by Createure Createure wrote:

In fact I'm tempted to change my usual rant from "Orcs are underpowered" to "Elves are way overpowered". Angry

+1 to this. Though I secretly like it because of having many elf friends :P

There are plenty of +3% spear production sovereignty terrains in the map. (deserts, frozen wastes).  An orc could be producing kobolds with 8% bonus per level on 20 squares in certain terrains ..A +320% production speed with mere level 2 sovereignty. These squares are mostly 0 food though.

There are some forested regions where 2% archer production sovereignty are available, good for elves. 2% cavalry production bonus squares are rare in comparison, but they are worth settling near for the additional food bonus (6 and 7). 


Back to Top
invictusa View Drop Down
Forum Warrior
Forum Warrior
Avatar

Joined: 16 Dec 2011
Status: Offline
Points: 488
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 24 May 2012 at 22:32
Originally posted by Ander Ander wrote:

An orc could be producing kobolds with 8% bonus per level on 20 squares in certain terrains ..A +320% production speed with mere level 2 sovereignty. These squares are mostly 0 food though.

Derp! 
I must be reading that wrong.
+8% Spear unit production p/h per level of Training Ground?  /me Prepares to exodus his orcer half.

Originally posted by Ander Ander wrote:

 2% cavalry production bonus squares are rare in comparison
:D
...and miles to go before I sleep.
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: 24 May 2012 at 22:52
ye go an live out in the wastes to make good use of those +3% bonuses LOL

have fun with that -_-

EDIT: Looking around those +3% spear bonuses in the wastes just now it is clearly just the devs idea of trolling anyone who likes to train spears... i.e "HAHA we know spear units have ridiculously high production time/unit strengths and we're rubbing it in with vast swathes of unusable great sov area"

reEDIT: ok so someone with a brand new account could tenaril themselves into the middle of a 10x10 block of +3% bonuses with a nice 3-7-5-5-5 distribution or whatever it is new cities start out with... I think... apart from that the area is utterly useless.


Edited by Createure - 24 May 2012 at 23:04
Back to Top
Salararius View Drop Down
Postmaster
Postmaster
Avatar

Joined: 26 Sep 2011
Location: USA
Status: Offline
Points: 519
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 25 May 2012 at 03:11
Originally posted by HonoredMule HonoredMule wrote:

I don't think human nature is that easily fooled.  Send your resources in 70 separate shipments and at least 60 of them will get through--more likely ~68 of them.  So unless the occupation is trivially weak, just ignoring it is fine.  And unless there's evidence of incoming thieves, I believe most people would do nothing anyway, not even trying to move resources.

I know plenty of people make a career of it, but thieving is a fool's errand with the cards stacked in the defender's favor no matter how you approach it.  Case in point:  I regularly sell all excess resources above stockpile levels I can consume in roughly one month of constant overdrive production.  My resulting gold stockpiles vastly exceed any amount that thieves or attackers could significantly dent even with several successful strikes.  The attacker, however, is guaranteed to lose 800 thieves to my Runemaster-enhanced rune, and has a strong chance of losing the rest to defensive thieves and any military attacks to wall-enhanced reinforcements.  I'd rather be me any day, and moving resources is the last thing I'd do.

And when I was much smaller?  I didn't have much worth stealing anyway, having to use it all as I acquired it.

Blockading should have been a major asset in alliance conflicts as one could blockade the financial capital's incoming tax vans.  But the chance of capture is still too low and there's no special benefit to having alliance gold anyway so few alliances even collect taxes.  And it should have been a good way to suppress incoming support.  But still...too much gets through and allows besieged cities to rebuild against damages to extend survival time, while the captured basic resources have little value to the blockading party.

Ehem, but you're ranked 37.  Which is really quite awesome but represents the top 0.02%.  To me (someone over 10x further down the ladder) I'd say you are an extreme example from the outside margin (the good side though).  I'm pretty confident that it would take someone way smarter than me more than 5 min to come up with a plan of attack even if I could match your resources.

I would never say anyone in the top 0.02% was wrong but if you were smaller and you were using all your resources and you were human then you would not be cranking out knights after your initial assault on the orc and we come back full circle to initial advantage orc if he can get you to attack (assuming you are human, which you are not).  If the orc is stealing resources and throwing up blockades and you need every last resource because you're running a JIT economy (like you actually were when smaller) then you are probably feeling the pinch and it's hurting your production and you'll want to do something about that.  Back to human nature for the other 99.98%.  Sure, your smarter than that, but we are talking about a real threat with the real possibility of doing damage and most people aren't in the 0.02% for a reason.

I would like to point out that using the same example (your account) the end game (again, people at the 0.02% level) comes down to who cranks out the most combat power (attack or defense) over time regardless of resources.  The unit that has the highest value in that category is always going to be the human knight and this unit excels in plains combat.  With 7 of your 10 cities in plains any human player of equal size will be hitting you with knights doing 10% more damage than your marshals will do hitting the humans.  The exceptional elven range unit gives no initial advantage in that situation (on plains and behind lvl 20 walls elven archers are outmatched by human knights by almost 17% on an upkeep gold vs. upkeep gold comparison) and any initial advantage of building phalanx over pikeman (do you have phalanx) will rapidly disappear in plains combat.  An orc player enjoys the same T2 cav unit as the elf but with much better initial defensive units vs. the T2 cav (it will last longer).  Why so many cities in the elven version of an Achilles heel?  If I was your size, human and attacking you one on one (which I would never do) I'd send small (1,000 to 5,000) forces of knights at your elven plains cities and keep a large force of pikeman at mine.  Eventually, whatever forces we would have would transition to 100% marshals and knights (can't make anything else and keep up after combat starts) as our other troops were destroyed.  The humans would break through to the elven cities faster than the elf would get to the human.  Those forces of 5,000 knights would grow to 20,000+ and take 3 mil resources and gold per attack (the elves will eventually break through too but will not be able to steal as much because of their lesser capacity).  That would eventually ruin the elf's ability to build anything and siege and city destruction becomes possible in all 7 plains cities.  Then the human would have an economic advantage and could clean up the last three cities by sheer numbers.  Of course, this is not a game of pure military strategy, it's a game of human nature and your networking skills, alliances and super smarts will undoubtedly play a much greater role at that stage than the pure military action.

Obviously all this is just opinion ("paper warrior").  I'm throwing out ideas and thoughts for people to pick apart and if people don't bite against the blockades/thieves and the blockades/thieves do not net significant resources from the defenders then those ideas don't help the orc.  I have no specific numbers for either to evaluate how effective they are from a purely gold in/military damage out perspective.  The orc still has an advantage over the elf if the elf builds cities on the plains.  Both are at a disadvantage to the human with cities on the plains.  As a general rule, plains cities have the best food values and these give economic advantages that turn into military advantages but there are ways around that in other terrains.  It can get too complex for me.  Way too complicated to evaluate everything so I'll just stick to trying to show some ways some races have some advantages.  I'm not trying to prove any one race is better than any other because I think there are a lot of variables and it boils down to how smart you play the race you chose vs how stupid the other guy is.  Orc have real advantages.  I really do not understand why as an elf you would put 70% of your cities in the plains.  That combination doesn't make sense to me (although it makes more sense than dwarves) and I hope you'll be so gracious as to explain.
Back to Top
Rill View Drop Down
Postmaster General
Postmaster General
Avatar
Player Council - Geographer

Joined: 17 Jun 2011
Location: California
Status: Offline
Points: 6817
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 25 May 2012 at 03:21
It's all about the food, Salarius.  Plains are basically the only place you're going to find 7-food squares that provide decent amounts of other resources.  The bonus from having 2 extra food squares far outweighs any defensive value from placing a city in forest or mountains.  But then you're a reasonably intelligent player and know that, so I'm a bit puzzled about why you are posing the question.

In any case, all of this is an argument for mixed-race alliances in which each race produces units at which they excel.  Dwarven infantry attacking buildings and forests, Orc spears defending the same, elven trueshot attacking or defending mountains, human cavalry dominating plains.  Get an alliance together in which all are doing what they do best, and that alliance will be a force to be reckoned with.
Back to Top
invictusa View Drop Down
Forum Warrior
Forum Warrior
Avatar

Joined: 16 Dec 2011
Status: Offline
Points: 488
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 25 May 2012 at 03:40
Originally posted by Rill Rill wrote:

Plains are basically the only place you're going to find 7-food squares that provide decent amounts of other resources.

Nah.
Depending on the region, Jungle tiles provide decent amounts of other resources as well.

Edit: Yes I know.  Less than 25.  The secondary resource buildings will make up for it though.  The main drawback to epic jungle cities is the lack of respectable sovs and the rarity of good commander training NPCs.


Edited by invictusa - 25 May 2012 at 03:43
...and miles to go before I sleep.
Back to Top
dunnoob View Drop Down
Postmaster
Postmaster
Avatar

Joined: 10 Dec 2011
Location: Elijal
Status: Offline
Points: 800
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 25 May 2012 at 08:18
Originally posted by invictusa invictusa wrote:

 Jungle tiles provide decent amounts of other resources as well.

Edit: Yes I know.  Less than 25.  The secondary resource buildings will make up for it though.  The main drawback to epic jungle cities is the lack of respectable sovs and the rarity of good commander training NPCs.
So far my test of a 7-6-4-4-2 jungle village (23 plots, 2 quarries) is no complete disaster, but I still like the 6-5-3-4-4 layout (22 plots, 3 pits) better.  There are enough critters in Elijal, only cav training is tricky (but also okay with a nearby desert).   The potential sov is boring, how many +2% bows and +1% books will one dwarf use?  Hopefully trade v2 introduces some precious resources in jungles and deserts soon™.Ying Yang
Back to Top
Quackers View Drop Down
Forum Warrior
Forum Warrior
Avatar

Joined: 19 Nov 2011
Location: Jeff City
Status: Offline
Points: 435
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 25 May 2012 at 21:59
Originally posted by Rill Rill wrote:

It's all about the food, Salarius.  Plains are basically the only place you're going to find 7-food squares that provide decent amounts of other resources.  The bonus from having 2 extra food squares far outweighs any defensive value from placing a city in forest or mountains.  But then you're a reasonably intelligent player and know that, so I'm a bit puzzled about why you are posing the question.

In any case, all of this is an argument for mixed-race alliances in which each race produces units at which they excel.  Dwarven infantry attacking buildings and forests, Orc spears defending the same, elven trueshot attacking or defending mountains, human cavalry dominating plains.  Get an alliance together in which all are doing what they do best, and that alliance will be a force to be reckoned with.


After the math, I still think a 5 food city is better then a city on plains. It is why I moved all my cities to mountains. If you build your town just right; specialize it down to the last level (means not just shot everything up to level 20 because you can), increases taxes to the right tax rate for you pop, manage your population so you can get the best tax for your gold, and force people to fight on the right type of terrain...then your set.

Its all about location, population, taxation, and determination. A 5 food city can be just as good, if not better, then a 7 food city. :)
Back to Top
Salararius View Drop Down
Postmaster
Postmaster
Avatar

Joined: 26 Sep 2011
Location: USA
Status: Offline
Points: 519
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 25 May 2012 at 23:12
Originally posted by Rill Rill wrote:

It's all about the food, Salarius.  Plains are basically the only place you're going to find 7-food squares that provide decent amounts of other resources.  The bonus from having 2 extra food squares far outweighs any defensive value from placing a city in forest or mountains.  But then you're a reasonably intelligent player and know that, so I'm a bit puzzled about why you are posing the question.

In any case, all of this is an argument for mixed-race alliances in which each race produces units at which they excel.  Dwarven infantry attacking buildings and forests, Orc spears defending the same, elven trueshot attacking or defending mountains, human cavalry dominating plains.  Get an alliance together in which all are doing what they do best, and that alliance will be a force to be reckoned with.
Question was why build elf cities on a plain.  Elves best unit doesn't excel on plains or vs. strongest plains attack (cav).  Who would attack an elf on a plain with swordsmen?  What elf would build bows to defend on plains?  If you are not defending swordsmen, then you are likely defending cav.  Elves have the 2nd best cav defense but as HM says, long term it's not defense that matters it's attack production (it could be defense production, but defense production lags horribly on plains).  If you were an elf and you were in jungle (for example) you could have 6 food squares and your phalanx production with city wall buffs could outpace attack sword production.  Obviously an elf city on a mountain or large hill would be near impregnable with bows but then you wouldn't have a food 7 or six.  You might still have decent size with sov though.  Regardless, on plains humans win in offense production and elves are tied for 2nd with orcs.  But orcs have better defense production on plains (even though all defense production lags offense production on plains even factoring in city walls).

Sorry for the complex answer.  The question should have been "if you are going to build on plains, why choose elves"?  Another question is, "if you've already chosen an elf, why not build your cities to their strengths"?  If food trumps all else, then everyone should be a human or orc because those two have strengths in the plains.  Humans offensive and orcs defensive with the offensive ultimately being the greater of the two.
Back to Top
Kumomoto View Drop Down
Postmaster General
Postmaster General


Joined: 19 Oct 2009
Status: Offline
Points: 2224
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 26 May 2012 at 00:52
The point that many folks in this thread are missing is that the best offensive units (Knights and Stalwarts) are actually the best defensive units in the way that counts the most (killing siege armies). Most people completely overlook this because they don't experience protracted wars with lots of sieges...
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 2627282930 31>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

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